Given the relative rarity of libertarians, both in the public eye and in general, most people’s judgment of libertarianism will be based on a very small sample – often a sample size of one. If the first libertarian someone meets is a smart, reasonable, decent person, they will come away with a positive impression and possibly a willingness to explore further. If the first libertarian someone meets is a wild-eyed lunatic, on the other hand, they could easily write off libertarianism as the ideology of wild-eyed lunatics.
The Paul candidacy presents a special case of the small-sample problem. For many people, Ron Paul is the first and only libertarian-identified candidate they’ve ever seen receive any serious media attention. As a result, they may assume other libertarians share all of his views. Many libertarians are wary of supporting Paul – even though they probably agree more with Paul than anyone else in the field – because they fear the public will assume that all libertarians are anti-immigrant gold-bug conspiracy theorists (and possible closet racists).
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Why NOT to give friends and relatives Ron Paul's book " Liberty Defined" as a gift...
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Given the relative rarity of libertarians, both in the public eye and in general, most people’s judgment of libertarianism will be based on a very small sample – often a sample size of one. If the first libertarian someone meets is a smart, reasonable, decent person, they will come away with a positive impression and possibly a willingness to explore further. If the first libertarian someone meets is a wild-eyed lunatic, on the other hand, they could easily write off libertarianism as the ideology of wild-eyed lunatics.
The Paul candidacy presents a special case of the small-sample problem. For many people, Ron Paul is the first and only libertarian-identified candidate they’ve ever seen receive any serious media attention. As a result, they may assume other libertarians share all of his views. Many libertarians are wary of supporting Paul – even though they probably agree more with Paul than anyone else in the field – because they fear the public will assume that all libertarians are anti-immigrant gold-bug conspiracy theorists (and possible closet racists).
true of any party/movement......show me who dances to this tune that comes from the status quo?
not Romney not Gingrich not Perry not Bachman
not a one.......
even is Ron Paul shoulders those beliefs of anti-abortion(which he actually means via FEDS, he wants the states to do their own laws), or if he has no african-american friends(which I highly doubt) the conversation will turn to to...'the government needs to stay out of our grey-matter realestate'.....
just like the occupiers/tea party, this to is part of same said conversation.....Obama himself is not evil nor was GW.....they are products of their generations and the machines/systems that grew them...
the conversation is growing of
what is liberty who gives me liberty where is liberty is our country's liberty in war is our country's liberty in wealth what is wealth what is rich what is poor
the liberty to actually think of these of ourselves without the 'political soundbites' of podium pucks is lacking.....they plug us in but when do we unplug ourselves?
liberty is lost in the gold rings in each of our noses that we get tethered with to the same plow for someone else.....we assume liberty comes from others via regulations/laws etc.....hence my post script.
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
true of any party/movement......show me who dances to this tune that comes from the status quo?
not Romney not Gingrich not Perry not Bachman
not a one.......
The difference is that we all know republicans from NeoCon's to middle of the roaders. We all know Democrats, from ultra liberal to middle of the roaders. But Libertarians??? RP is the only nationally recognized "self proclaimed" libertarian... so he defines the entire brand.
As I posted above: ~ "Given the relative rarity of libertarians, both in the public eye and in general, most people’s judgment of libertarianism will be based on a very small sample – often a sample size of one. If the first libertarian someone meets is a smart,reasonable, decent person, they will come away with a positive impression and possibly a willingness to explore further. If the first libertarian someone meets is a wild-eyed lunatic, on the other hand, they could easily write off libertarianism as the ideology of wild-eyed lunatics." ~
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
The difference is that we all know republicans from NeoCon's to middle of the roaders. We all know Democrats, from ultra liberal to middle of the roaders. But Libertarians??? RP is the only nationally recognized "self proclaimed" libertarian... so he defines the entire brand.
As I posted above: ~ "Given the relative rarity of libertarians, both in the public eye and in general, most people’s judgment of libertarianism will be based on a very small sample – often a sample size of one. If the first libertarian someone meets is a smart,reasonable, decent person, they will come away with a positive impression and possibly a willingness to explore further. If the first libertarian someone meets is a wild-eyed lunatic, on the other hand, they could easily write off libertarianism as the ideology of wild-eyed lunatics." ~
I don't disagree with that....what I do disagree with is that for the past 60 years the American brand has become our leaders choice of leading....I'm all for America....but America based on 2 parties that have left us in the muck we are in and the state sponsored educational system has turned us into zombies..... we have made the ladder we are angry at...... time for a new entree
Ron Paul is NOT perfect, NOT god, NOT a savior.....but he is a continuation of the conversation started via the tea party/occupy
even if he gets in to continue the conversation for 4 years OK......
nothing against Obama but his brand of change is the same as it ever was......he still rubs elbows and lives within the 1% of whom ever they are.....he was groomed for this position, America was ready for and african american president, next it will be an italian american......or a woman......
JMHO....we can keep the conversation going and reclaim our grey matter real estate......
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Paul Disowns Extremists’ Views but Doesn’t Disavow the Support
~ The American Free Press, which markets books like “The Invention of the Jewish People” and “March of the Titans: A History of the White Race,” is urging its subscribers to help it send hundreds of copies of Ron Paul’s collected speeches to voters in New Hampshire. The book, it promises, will “Help Dr. Ron Paul Win the G.O.P. Nomination in 2012!”
~Don Black, director of the white nationalist Web site Stormfront, said in an interview that several dozen of his members were volunteering for Mr. Paul’s presidential campaign, and a site forum titled “Why is Ron Paul such a favorite here?” has no fewer than 24 pages of comments. “I understand he wins many fans because his monetary policy would hurt Jews,” read one.
~Far-right groups like the Militia of Montana say they are rooting for Mr. Paul as a stalwart against government tyranny.
Ron Paul wants to feed at the Right Wing Extremist trough, and expects not get covered with Extremist slop.
The white supremacists, survivalists and anti-Zionists who have rallied behind Paul's candidacy have not exactly been warmly welcomed. “I wouldn’t be happy with that,” Mr. Paul said in an interview Friday when asked about getting help from volunteers with anti-Jewish or antiblack views. But he did not disavow their support. “If they want to endorse me, they’re endorsing what I do or say — it has nothing to do with endorsing what they say,” said Mr. Paul, who is now running strong in Iowa for the Republican nomination.
Is Ron Paul Responsible for His Supporters' Views? Jacob Sullum | December 26, 2011
In a front-page story about Ron Paul's popularity among disreputable right-wingers, The New York Times draws a Venn diagram of the libertarian movement:
The libertarian movement in American politics has long had two overlapping but distinct strains. One, backed to some degree by wealthy interests, is focused largely on economic freedom and dedicated to reducing taxes and regulation through smaller government. The other is more focused on personal liberty and constraints on government built into the Constitution, which at its extreme has helped fuel militant antigovernment sentiment.
Why does the Times think it is relevant to note that libertarians who focus on economic freedom are "backed to some degree by wealthy interests"? Isn't that true of pretty much every political movement and organization, including Marxism and the Democratic Party? The implication seems to be that defenders of economic freedom are carrying water for special interests, who are in it only for the money.
Weirdly, the Times locates the scary militants in the part of the libertarian movement that focuses on "personal liberty," which includes not only the rights explicitly protected by the Constitution (such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion, due process, and freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures) but also such unspecified rights as freedom to engage in consensual sexual relationships, to marry people of either sex, to bet on games of chance, and to ingest psychoactive substances (or even raw milk). So according to the Times, the right-wing extremists attracted to Paul are a tolerant, cosmopolitan group that nevertheless harbors odious views about blacks, Jews, and gay people. Also note that the Times, perhaps unintentionally, says the Constitution "at its extreme has helped fuel militant antigovernment sentiment." All the more reason to be wary of defending this radical document.
In short, the libertarian movement consists of two parts: 1) self-interested tycoons seeking low taxes and minimal regulation in the name of economic freedom and 2) crazy right-wingers who take the Constitution too seriously and worry about personal freedom. I always thought the distinguishing feature of libertarianism was defending both economic and personal liberty, based on the insight that they are two manifestations of the same thing. But what do I know? I did not realize that the rule of law was a concept invented by F.A. Hayek until the Times explained it to me.
The article's main complaint, as expressed in the headline, is that "Paul Disowns Extremists' Views but Doesn't Disavow the Support." That is remniscent of the position Paul took during his last bid for the Republican presidential nomination, when he declined to return donations from white supremacists on the grounds that using the money to promote liberty was better than giving it back to people who might use it to promote racism. "If people hold views that the candidate doesn't agree with," a campaign spokesman told Dave Weigel, "and they give to us, that's their loss." This time around Paul offers a similar rationale:
If they want to endorse me, they’re endorsing what I do or say. It has nothing to do with endorsing what they say....I'm always looking at converting people to look at liberty the way I do.
It surely is unfair to blame Paul for the opinions expressed by some of his supporters. “We understand that Paul is not a white nationalist," Stormfront's Don Black tells the Times, "but most of our people support him because of his stand on issues." Black likes Paul's views on the Federal Reserve, for instance. "I understand he wins many fans because his monetary policy would hurt Jews," he says. "Our board recognizes that most of the leaders involved in the Fed and the international banking system are Jews." Logically speaking, Black's anti-Semitism has no bearing on Paul's motives or the wisdom of his policy prescriptions. Does Paul nevertheless have a moral obligation to tell Black and likeminded supporters to f*** off? Or is it merely tactically wise to do so? Maybe neither. Discuss.
YUP! Ron Paul is open and willing to take the dollars of any Racist White Supremacy Group who is interested in buying influence. Paul will take donations from any group... no matter what their politics. Nazis, Anarchists, molesters... Paul is an equal opportunity influence presidential candidate.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
YUP! Ron Paul is open and willing to take the dollars of any Racist White Supremacy Group who is interested in buying influence. Paul will take donations from any group... no matter what their politics. Nazis, Anarchists, molesters... Paul is an equal opportunity influence presidential candidate.
Obama only takes that clean money from Goldman Sachs, MF Global, and Freddie and Fannie Mac. They only robbed the nation of BILLIONS and caused tens of thousands of people to lose their homes.
Box, show me a bill that Paul proposed or voted on that would have advanced any of the above mentioned agenda.
Quoted Text
On the Freddie and Fannie question, it as McCain said: Obama is No. 2 on the list, with $126,349, right after Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, who had $165,400.
According to Federal Election Commission figures compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, Goldman Sachs' political action committee and individual contributors who listed the company as their employer donated $994,795 during 2007 and 2008 to Obama's presidential campaign, the second-highest contribution from a company PAC and
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
WOW! That settles it then. Henry is vouching for this video that clearly shows Black People are are FOR Ron Paul!!!
I can't wait for election day!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Box, show me a bill that Paul proposed or voted on that would have advanced any of the above mentioned agenda.
Since I know of NO Legislation that Ron Paul has sponsored, or even voted for so I went to GovTrack to see how Patriot Paul voted... Dismal record.
The last 33 votes in Congress... RON PAUL DIDN'T BOTHER TO VOTE ON ANY OF THEM!
Govtrack.us
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
WOW! That settles it then. Henry is vouching for this video that clearly shows Black People are are FOR Ron Paul!!!
I can't wait for election day!
Like I posted a few pages ago Paul receives the most support from minorities out of any of the GOP candidates, seems many are waking up to the chainless slavery the left has kept them in for decades. Many understand it is not what entitlements they may receive instead of what laws and regulations were put in place that has plagued many black communities, many had hope for Obama but were quickly crushed when he did nothing. I still believe this election will be the lowest turnout in years for minorities, sad really so many lost any hope they once held.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
That proves it. He's a racist!!! Those organization contributed to his campaign for Paul NOT TO VOTE AT ALL.
No Cicero, this just proves that Ron Paul hasn't voted on the last 33 votes in congress.
It's Paul's own words in his newsletters that prove he's a racist.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Logged
OLITICS
Dismal record.
