Michelle Malkin says she voted for Libertarian Harry Browne in '96

[emazur]

I'm not a Malkin promoter, but she was a guest on this week's Financial Sense Newshour where she attacked both parties, and I post youtubes of people of people saying such things. After listening to that I decided to have a look at her website and found this:
"Bob Dole reminds me again why I voted for Harry Browne in 1996"
By Michelle Malkin • October 8, 2009 11:41 AM
http://michellemalkin.com/2009/10/08/bob-dole-reminds-me-again-why-i-voted-for-harry-brown-in-1996/

YouTube - Michelle Malkin: there's a statist alliance between both parties and Wall Street (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-o_iUDOElM)

[angelatc]

And then in 2004, she wrote a book called "In Defense of Internment: The Case for Racial Profiling in World War II and the War on Terror "

Apparently she wants financial freedom but not personal freedom.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

I'm not a Malkin promoter, but she was a guest on this week's Financial Sense Newshour where she attacked both parties, and I post youtubes of people of people saying such things. After listening to that I decided to have a look at her website and found this:
"Bob Dole reminds me again why I voted for Harry Browne in 1996"
By Michelle Malkin • October 8, 2009 11:41 AM
http://michellemalkin.com/2009/10/08/bob-dole-reminds-me-again-why-i-voted-for-harry-brown-in-1996/

YouTube - Michelle Malkin: there's a statist alliance between both parties and Wall Street (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-o_iUDOElM)

She's a Neo-Con through and through on foreign policy. On domestic policy, she's very puritanical, however, she does go after the corruptness and she is more free-market aligned more than most GOP (That isn't saying much)....She's a big Palin fan.

I give Malkin a 3/10.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

See here:

http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/10/the-spanish-language-panderfest-sprinkled-with-ron-pauls-blame-america-act-we-create-the-chavezes-of-the-world-we-create-the-castros-of-the-world/

See here:

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/01/02/rasmussen-a-gop-resurgence/

She hates Ron Paul and his supporters. If the GOP heads towards the Malkin's of the world, instead of the Paul's of the world, IE. Libertarian vice Fanatical War-Puritans, then everyone hop on board the LP train. We'll gladly take all of you guys! (Be forewarned: An-Cap > Constitutionalist) (hehe, had to do it ;))

[emazur]

See here:

She hates Ron Paul and his supporters.

Yeah, that's why I posted a :o as the icon for this thread. Maybe she'll come around though - did you see this Ann Coulter clip?

YouTube - Ann Coulter endorses Ron Paul in 2012 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPygNYXXQGk)

[catdd]

My memory is long and I don't forgive some things.

YouTube - Fox News tells more lies about Ron Paul (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9yOgLP7Lkw)

[rprprs]

bump (because more people need to be reminded of Malkin's despicable comments in the above video).:mad:

[angelatc]

..She's a big Palin fan.
.

What makes you say that?

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

What makes you say that?

Do you ever read her blog?

[angelatc]

Yeah, that's why I posted a :o as the icon for this thread. Maybe she'll come around though - did you see this Ann Coulter clip?

YouTube - Ann Coulter endorses Ron Paul in 2012 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPgNYXXQGk)

Ann Coulter once defended Paul during the primary cycle too. Malkin is even on record as agreeing with Paul on fiscal policy:
12:20pm Eastern. Ron Paul is on the floor blasting more debt, more appropriations, more spending, more credit in the market. That is what caused the problem. Ron Paul is right. There I said it. (http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/03/liveblogging-crap-sandwich-20-the-house-bailout-debate/) But she's still waaaaay off base on foreign policy, and has no interest in changing.

What gets me about her Browne vote is that it happened after the Towers were attacked the first time.

I used to post notes here when her registration was open thinking we could patiently educate her fans, but I don't think anybody took me up on it.

[anaconda]

And then in 2004, she wrote a book called "In Defense of Internment: The Case for Racial Profiling in World War II and the War on Terror "

Apparently she wants financial freedom but not personal freedom.

She is probably lying her ass off about voting libertarian just to look contemporary to the "town hall" movement that the necons are trying to cash in on. She has been a total nazi neocon. She is hereby relegated to the scrap heap and must never be allowed into the tent. She would turn on us at the first convenient opportunity. We have a very large tent but not quite that large..Hannity and Limbaugh can keep her company.

[angelatc]

She is probably lying her ass off about voting libertarian just to look contemporary to the "town hall" movement that the necons are trying to cash in on. She has been a total nazi neocon. She is relegated to the scrap heap and must never be allowed into the tent. She would turn on us at the first convenient opportunity.

No, she is very much an economic conservative, totally at odds with the Bush administrations spending habits. But she's also big on law-enforcement hero worship.

I don't know what the hell she is.

[devil21]

Not falling for this bullshit, sorry Michelle.

Every damn Fox News pundit will be a libertarian by 2012. I'll bet money on it. Well, except maybe O'Reilly. The slowly shrinking neocon base has to rally around someone.



I don't know what the hell she is.

An actress playing a role, maybe?

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Not falling for this bullshit, sorry Michelle.

Every damn Fox News pundit will be a libertarian by 2012. I'll bet money on it.

And I'll bet every single Fox News Pundit will disagree with 90% of what Mary Ruwart, Murray Rothbard, Karl Hess, Lew Rockwell, etc. had to say....:rolleyes:

[devil21]

And I'll bet every single Fox News Pundit will disagree with 90% of what Mary Ruwart, Murray Rothbard, Karl Hess, Lew Rockwell, etc. had to say....:rolleyes:

Sorry, I should have said "libertarian". I certainly didn't mean they will actually have a geniune conversion. It's all a well rehearsed, well planned and coordinated, and well executed show.

They know that the neocon angle is quickly being usurped by Obama (big spending, war, crapping on civil liberties, etc) so by 2012 they better have something else to offer. It will be a mix of libertarianism and fiscal conservatism. Uh yeah....Ron Paul, basically. But without the Ron Paul and therefore, without the honesty and integrity.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Sorry, I should have said "libertarian". I certainly didn't mean they will actually have a geniune conversion. It's all a well rehearsed, well planned and coordinated, and well executed show.

They know that the neocon angle is quickly being usurped by Obama (big spending, war, crapping on civil liberties, etc) so by 2012 they better have something else to offer. It will be a mix of libertarianism and fiscal conservatism. Uh yeah....Ron Paul, basically. But without the Ron Paul and therefore, without the honesty and integrity.

That's why I'm seriously doubting any national movement. We need to get the reigns of power in our localities and States. The States have far more power than trying to wrestle with the MSM and the entrenched establishment. I know it would be heaven if we could liberate the nation, but let's at least liberate some people.

We need more libertarians infiltrating GOP circles on the local level and running for State Senate / House, and Governorship. I'm seriously contemplating if I may do such a thing after I get out of the Military and graduate college....

[SimpleName]

In defense of internment? HOLY HELL! That is horrific. I don't care who she voted for or how free market minded she is. That is terrible. Anyone who supports that despicable act is evil. No one can in any way tell me what was done to the Japanese is humane, moral, logical, or legal. You can't judge a book by its cover, but there is no defense for ripping innocent Americans from their lives and property. NO DEFENSE! This has got my blood boiling. I didn't know she had no heart.

And to lighten the mood, what the heck was Gutfeld laughing at? Did he think she was kidding or does he really think the idea is silly? I figured he would have supported Paul.

[angelatc]

In defense of internment? HOLY HELL! That is horrific. I don't care who she voted for or how free market minded she is. That is terrible. Anyone who supports that despicable act is evil. No one can in any way tell me what was done to the Japanese is humane, moral, logical, or legal. l.

You might enjoy this: YouTube - Alex Jones Confronts Michelle Malkin at The DNC 1/3 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJPHyKEQP94)

[Liberty Rebellion]

I'm not a Malkin promoter, but she was a guest on this week's Financial Sense Newshour where she attacked both parties, and I post youtubes of people of people saying such things. After listening to that I decided to have a look at her website and found this:
"Bob Dole reminds me again why I voted for Harry Browne in 1996"
By Michelle Malkin • October 8, 2009 11:41 AM
http://michellemalkin.com/2009/10/08/bob-dole-reminds-me-again-why-i-voted-for-harry-brown-in-1996/

YouTube - Michelle Malkin: there's a statist alliance between both parties and Wall Street (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-o_iUDOElM)

And I voted for Gandhi after I slain an entire village. Guess that makes me a good guy?

[emazur]

And I voted for Gandhi after I slain an entire village. Guess that makes me a good guy?

I'm not saying she's one of the good guys or that anyone here should listen to her, I only came here to post the vid I uploaded in order to discredit the 2 party system (we already know its discredited, but many of the people we know don't, so you can spread this vid around to chip away at their old notions). I have no intention of following Malkin, I happened to come across her Harry Browne post somewhat by chance, and thought others here might find it interesting.

[angelatc]

I'm not saying she's one of the good guys or that anyone here should listen to her, I only came here to post the vid I uploaded in order to discredit the 2 party system (we already know its discredited, but many of the people we know don't, so you can spread this vid around to chip away at their old notions). I have no intention of following Malkin, I happened to come across her Harry Browne post somewhat by chance, and thought others here might find it interesting.

I do follow Malkin. She does some amazing investigative work on economic scandals.

[Endgame]

Don't forget what happened in 1999. Bush was elected on small government rhetoric.

Then look what he, and the conservative crowd did. Its hard to imagine, but before 2000, places like WorldNetDaily were full of libertarian writers.

Now I see the same shit being pulled. Its that simple. Don't fall for it twice in a decade.

[Southron]

That's why I'm seriously doubting any national movement. We need to get the reigns of power in our localities and States. The States have far more power than trying to wrestle with the MSM and the entrenched establishment. I know it would be heaven if we could liberate the nation, but let's at least liberate some people.

We need more libertarians infiltrating GOP circles on the local level and running for State Senate / House, and Governorship. I'm seriously contemplating if I may do such a thing after I get out of the Military and graduate college....

I agree completely. At this point any libertarian national utopia is a pipe dream. We can't use Leviathan to destroy Leviathan. Once these people get to Washington they are far to unaccountable. I believe states and the threat of secession are the ultimate tools for slaying this beast. Not that we shouldn't support people like Ron Paul when given the chance.

[t0rnado]

They think that foreign wars are a minor difference. Attack these idiots on their illogical, irrational interventionist policy bullshit.

[Austin]

And I voted for Gandhi after I slain an entire village. Guess that makes me a good guy?

I like this.

[angelatc]

They think that foreign wars are a minor difference. Attack these idiots on their illogical, irrational interventionist policy bullshit.

No, they don't think it's a minor difference. If it was a minor difference Ron Paul might have won the nomination.

No, foreign policy (American exceptionalism in particular) is taboo. Something that can't be discussed, something that the collective will not allow any deviation from.

History be damned.

[catdd]

No, they don't think it's a minor difference. If it was a minor difference Ron Paul might have won the nomination.

No, foreign policy (American exceptionalism in particular) is taboo. Something that can't be discussed, something that the collective will not allow any deviation from.

History be damned.


Do you think they are that scared or is it something else?

[tajitj]

Don't forget what happened in 1999. Bush was elected on small government rhetoric.

Then look what he, and the conservative crowd did. Its hard to imagine, but before 2000, places like WorldNetDaily were full of libertarian writers.

Now I see the same shit being pulled. Its that simple. Don't fall for it twice in a decade.

Very interesting, think people are blind to this.

"small govt" is just an issue to them like "gay marriage" something they think they can win on and not do anything about.

[angelatc]

Do you think they are that scared or is it something else?

I honestly have no idea. Scared of not constantly being at war? Maybe they're just evil incarnate.

[catdd]

It really baffles me. I spend a lot of time trying to talk sense to bikers on this subject but they seem to have settled into a hundred year war.

[angelatc]

Very interesting, think people are blind to this.

"small govt" is just an issue to them like "gay marriage" something they think they can win on and not do anything about.

Don't forget what happened in 2001. That instantly changed the opinion of millions of Americans.

Most people don't remember the Towers were bombed on Clinton's watch too, or that Bin Laden was also involved with that. Honestly, I vaguely remembered it, and it certainly wasn't the first thing that came to mind when I was watching the Towers burn and topple.

But Iraq? Where the hell did that come from, and why is it impossible for neocons to admit that Sadam had no WMDs, no Yellowcake....no nothing. Camels and stones.

[angelatc]

Do you ever read her blog?

I do. I have to admit I hadn't noticed it, but went back and googled it and you're absolutely right. She's got Sarah sickness.

Which I could almost understand, from Malkin's POV, if Palin had done anything to reduce the size of government. But she didn't.

[1836er]

It really baffles me. I spend a lot of time trying to talk sense to bikers on this subject but they seem to have settled into a hundred year war. Some kind of Crusade or something.

From talking to many (but certainly not all) of my "mainstream" conservative friends and acquaintances, I get the sense they've been frustrated with the whole war on "terrorism" thing for a while now in terms of how it's been defined, how it's been waged, and where/why it's been waged.

I'm not, of course, saying they're moving in the anti-war direction... it's just that many don't think our current "strategy" is going to do much to ultimately defeat the global Islamic totalitarian movement.

[legion]

This isn't a valid argument for anything Michelle, and if I remember correctly from his radio show he was not a fan of yours.

[1836er]

Ha. I just watched the Ann Coulter video from the first page... and I think her sentiments (which appeared to me only about 40% tongue-on-cheek) actually mesh with more Republican voters than we are sometimes willing to admit. I talked to many people last year who told me - and I don't think they were lying - that they pretty much agreed with Ron Paul on everything domestic and would have voted for him in the Republican primary had it not been for foreign policy.

Silver lining: Before long things will get SO BAD here on the home front that nobody will care about what's happening overseas anymore.

[SelfTaught]

Even if she did vote libertarian, she's been extremely partisan for the last decade or so.

Now, for your viewing pleasure, Michelle Malkin jumping on a trampoline and on the DDR (fast forward to 2:30, you'll want to skip the boring stuff).

YouTube - VENT Jump! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUjM59H3fYk)

[angelatc]

This isn't a valid argument for anything Michelle, and if I remember correctly from his radio show he was not a fan of yours.

I'm not sure what the second half means, but there absolutely is an argument for Malkin's fiscal reporting.

I'm sorry, but if I couldn't be bothered to read and listen to people who don't agree with me I'd still be hating all things liberal, most importantly the anti-war effort.

[angelatc]

Even if she did vote libertarian, she's been extremely partisan for the last decade or so.

Now, for your viewing pleasure, Michelle Malkin jumping on a trampoline and on the DDR (fast forward to 2:30, you'll want to skip the boring stuff).

YouTube - VENT Jump! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUjM59H3fk)

LOL! There's an avatar waiting to happen!

[legion]

I'm not sure what the second half means, but there absolutely is an argument for Malkin's fiscal reporting.

I'm sorry, but if I couldn't be bothered to read and listen to people who don't agree with me I'd still be hating all things liberal, most importantly the anti-war effort.

In Harry Browne's later life he had two radio shows which I faithfully listened to.

One was about politics, the other was about investment and finance.

Here are come quotes on Harry's site:

"Here are some examples of hate-Muslim tirades by public commentators such as Daniel Pipes, Ann Coulter, Paul Johnson . If these people were talking about Jews, instead of Muslims, they'd be ridden out of polite society on a spiked rail."

"Government is force. You expect that force to be used only against the guilty, but from the Drug War, the foreign wars, asset forfeiture, the Patriot Act, and other government activities, we have seen that it is used just as often against the innocent — people who have not intruded on anyone else's person or property.

Government is politics. Whenever you turn something over the to the government that was a financial, social, medical, military, or commercial matter, it's automatically transformed into a political issue — to be used by those with the most political influence, and that will never be you or I. Do you really trust Teddy Kennedy, Trent Lott, George Bush, or Tom Daschle to disregard politics just for this program?

You don’t control government. So no law will be written in the way you have in mind, it won't be administered in the way you have in mind, and it won't be adjudicated in the way you have in mind.

Every government program will soon be more expensive and more expansive than anything you had in mind when you proposed it. It will be applied in all sorts of ways you never dreamed of.

Power will always be misused. Give good people the power to do good and it will eventually be in the hands of bad people to do bad.

Government doesn't work. No government program delivers on the promises the politicians make for it. So why would you expect the next government program to be any different?

Government must be subject to absolute limits. Because politicians have every incentive to expand government, and with it their power, there must be absolute limits on government. The Constitution provides the obvious limits we must reimpose upon the federal government. Until the Constitution is enforced, we have no hope of containing the federal government."