Time Magazine Articles

[Matt Collins]

"Libertarians Rising."

No, that's not the title of a new libertarian outreach pamphlet.

It's an essay in the October 18 issue of TIME magazine -- written by no less
than Michael Kinsley, one of America's most respected and astute political
commentators.

Now Kinsley is no libertarian. He's a liberal. And that makes his essay all the
more significant.

Kinsley argues that two strong impulses are emerging in American politics:
libertarianism and communitarianism. Communitarians, Kinsley explains, "believe
that group responsibilities (to family, community, nation, the globe) should
trump individual rights."

He contrasts that to libertarianism, which stresses individual rights.

Which philosophy -- libertarianism or communitarianism -- will ultimately win
America's political debate?

"My money's on the libertarians," says the liberal Kinsley.

"People were shocked a couple of weeks ago when Ron Paul ... raised $5 million
from July through September, mostly on the Internet. Paul is a libertarian. In
fact, he was the Libertarian Party presidential candidate in 1988. The computer
revolution has bred a generation of smart loners, many of them rich and some of
them complacently Darwinian, convinced that they don't need society -- nor
should anyone else. They are going to be an increasingly powerful force in
politics."

Kinsley's article rehashes some silly and tired old falsehoods about
libertarians, like that one -- the notion that libertarians are "Darwinists" or
"loners... convinced that they don't need society" and so on.

But never mind that. Libertarians have ready answers to these fallacies -- and
no doubt Kinsley is already getting a fast education.

What's important is that this article, by one of America's leading political
writers, in one of America's most widely read news magazines, is yet another
striking example of how libertarian ideas are rapidly winning converts, being
taken seriously, and becoming a MAJOR part of the American political debate.
And that's great news indeed!

Oh, one more *delicious* irony.

You'll love this.

Kinsley crankily says libertarians are "earnest and impractical -- eager to
corner you with their plan for ... solving the traffic mess by privatizing
stoplights."

Well, in that very same issue of TIME, there's an excellent article entitled
"Who Really Owns the Roads?" And it's about -- yes -- the growing trend towards
privatizing highways.

And the article quotes "Bob Poole, director of transportation studies at the
Reason Foundation, a think tank."

Reason might be more precisely described as a *libertarian* think tank. And Bob
Poole has been a libertarian leader since the 1960s.

"Libertarians Rising" indeed!



http://theadvocates.org/liberator/vol-12-num-20.html

[Syren123]

Excellent rebuttal to that pompous article in that fish-rag TIME. What a weasel that Michael Kinsley is...such insinuating, surly remarks. Jerk. Glad someone intelligently dismembered that sniveling POS article.

[Nash]

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1678661,00.html

[Karsten]

Have any of the Time RP articles ended up in the print editions?

[Matt]

What is this communitarianism foolishness? Is that a real movement? It sounds like somebody trying to re-brand communism.

[Grandson of Liberty]

wow! what are the odds this is the cover story?

[Grandson of Liberty]

These threads got united, but I'm pretty sure they're about different articles.

[Diane]

Nice article, but I see they quoted wonderboy, Frank Luntz. Too bad Time doesn't know that since the Florida debate, Frank's whitey-tighties are showing.

[Matt]

AARGH! Fuck you Frank!

:D

[foofighter20x]

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1678661,00.html

:D :D :D LOL@ this:

Tuesday, both Paul and Tom Cruise were guests on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno. The actor went to Paul's dressing room to thank him for his work on a bill fighting the forced mental screening of grade-school kids. "Go. Go. Go. Go hard," Cruise said. Paul turned to an aide and asked, "What movies has he been in?"

[kylebrotherton]

They quoted Frank Luntz?

I guess they still haven't seen this video (http://youtube.com/watch?v=If9EWDB_zK4).

[Karsten]

They quoted Frank Luntz?

I guess they still haven't seen this video (http://youtube.com/watch?v=If9EWDB_zK4).

FU, Frank!

[fj45lvr]

The article really tries to push the envelope of Paul as being "abnormal" when the ACTUAL truth is that NORMAL=LIAR & CROOK.

The MSM will not give "credit where credit is due".

Frank Lutz is a piece of sh*t....he deperately needs to be flushed into the sewer with his "handlers".

Luntz states,

His supporters are the equivalent of crabgrass," says GOP consultant Frank Luntz. "It's not the grass you want, and it spreads faster than the real stuff. They just like him because he's the most anti-Establishment of all the candidates, the most likely to look at the camera during the debates and say, 'Hey, Washington, f____ you.'

TIME MAGAZINE and DUMBSH*T LUNTZ: D.C. has become HI-JACKED by VERMIN (you know the guys you stroke off for your INCOME) Did it ever occur to you that the people ("nerds" by your estimation) want LIBERTY????

Why don't they tell us all the "virtues" of the "ESTABLISHMENT"???

LUNTZ doesn't realize that PAUL and MY SUPPORT ARE NOT ABOUT "protest".....its about REAL IDEAS which have BEEN "hi-jacked"....

PAUL STANDS FOR SOMETHING(s)....NOT against anything and everything.....


This is WHAT DUNTZ and TIME Are soooo afraid of.....

[Zydeco]

I like how the author tried to paint people who dress in colonial outfits at Ron Paul rallies as "weird," or people suspicious of Halliburton and Blackwater the same way or people who want to say, "F you" to Washington as fringe.

I think most people reading this would think all those things are right on!

Fuck you, Frank!

[Karsten]

"Paul doesn't expect that he will win the nomination, and he has no interest in running as an independent again."

The first part blatantly false. He specifically said on Leno last night that he could win, and Leno didn't even disagree. Plus, he has ALWAYS said he is in it to win! I have never EVER heard him say that he doesn't expect to win the nomination!

[fj45lvr]

Wonder what the "connection" is between LUNTZ and Time???

This is of course the LUNTZ that has been hired by Ghouliani's campaign.

And how in the hell does Luntz even comment on PAUL when his "focus groups" don't exactly show anyone that there is ANY CRABGRASS in the lawn.

Watching rome burn will be such a lucid moment.

[Razmear]

I must have missed the bad article your talking about cuz the one on front page at:
http://www.time.com/time
is great.

eb

[fj45lvr]

I must have missed the bad article your talking about cuz the one on front page at:
http://www.time.com/time
is great.

eb


Page 2 of the article.


GREAT????

I am not a nerd.

Paul believes he has a chance to win.

Paul is not a "protest" candidate.


i find it so interesting that "smear" stories like this are found to be POSITIVE by paul supporters...


Tell me what about this story follows the line that your average Republican Grandma and Grandpa would read this and find PAUL as one of their own???

A constitution champion, best friend of the Taxpayer, pro gun rights, etc. and etc.

is not some kind of "nerd".....that is THE HEART AND SOUL of true Conservatism.....lets see TIME actually portray that "story" since they so meticulously like to spin some doosies.

[Zydeco]

"Paul doesn't expect that he will win the nomination, and he has no interest in running as an independent again."

The first part blatantly false. He specifically said on Leno last night that he could win, and Leno didn't even disagree. Plus, he has ALWAYS said he is in it to win! I have never EVER heard him say that he doesn't expect to win the nomination!

Yeah, complete propaganda. It's fascinating, isn't it? I don't think I've seen a single MSM piece that didn't go out of it's way to claim that, of course, this guy can't win! So Pravda-esque.

And so false! :D

[Thomas_Paine]

Guess we know how they'll spin November 5th! Perhaps they think it will scare us off. Where do they dredge up sleeze like Frank Luntz? The American people are going to be saying 'fuck your frank' alot more often for now on.

[James R]

We are currently (4AM CST) story #1 on the time website. Wow!

http://www.time.com/time

[JasonM]

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1678661,00.html

They decided to write about us. How lovely :D

[Anti Federalist]

His supporters are the equivalent of crabgrass," says GOP consultant Frank Luntz. "It's not the grass you want, and it spreads faster than the real stuff. They just like him because he's the most anti-Establishment of all the candidates, the most likely to look at the camera during the debates and say, 'Hey, Washington, f____ you.

You are part of that fetid beltway establishment, Duntz.

FUCK YOU FRANK!

[Zydeco]

I like the #2 article caption, describing Giuliani as "increasingly seen as the GOP frontrunner."

They forgot to finish the sentence: "...by corporate-owned shills in the corrupt media and polling industries, and no one else."

[iddo]

The TIME article is nice in general and good publicity, but do you think that it's worth trying to push for a retraction of "Paul doesn't expect that he will win the nomination" in the last paragraph, maybe it will increase the campaign credibility if we get a retraction for that?
I think the reporter just made up that line because it fit into his ending paragraph, so maybe if we can get someone from the official campaign to contact TIME and demand evidence or retraction, he will comply and write a correction (both online and in the next print edition) saying that it's an error and he meant to write the he personally doesn't expect Ron Paul to win the nomination.
I think that it's worth pushing for retraction only if this story is in the print edition of TIME magazine. Anyone knows if it is?

[Flirple]

It's always bittersweet isn't it ?(lol)

Anyways, pretty good article and not overtly unfair, we'll take it! Great exposure.

[TVMH]

Crabgrass, huh?

One characteristic about crabgrass that he forgot to mention is that you can never get rid of it...you can only hope to contain it.

I'm a zoysia-man myself.

What an idiot. He even LOOKS like an idiot.

And I mean that in the nicest way possible. :cool:

[literatim]

The TIME article is nice in general and good publicity, but do you think that it's worth trying to push for a retraction of "Paul doesn't expect that he will win the nomination" in the last paragraph, maybe it will increase the campaign credibility if we get a retraction for that?
I think the reporter just made up that line because it fit into his ending paragraph, so maybe if we can get someone from the official campaign to contact TIME and demand evidence or retraction, he will comply and write a correction (both online and in the next print edition) saying that it's an error and he meant to write the he personally doesn't expect Ron Paul to win the nomination.
I think that it's worth pushing for retraction only if this story is in the print edition of TIME magazine. Anyone knows if it is?

:mad: Time to contact TIME.

[Gimme Some Truth]

The article is merely saying Ron Paul is rising BUT only weird people support him.

Seems that they are trying to scare would-be RP supporters out of doing so. Being labeled "weird" or a "nerd" is more scary to the majority of people than lost liberties.

[ClayTrainor]

yea, they called us nerds way too many times...wtf is up with that.

they basically called every single one of us nerds... if you support ron paul you are a nerd according to time.

a good article overall, but they are trying to isolate us i think.

[DjLoTi]

Dude, I am a fly pimp. There is no way I'm a 'nerd'

[TVMH]

yea, they called us nerds way too many times...wtf is up with that.

they basically called every single one of us nerds... if you support ron paul you are a nerd according to time.

a good article overall, but they are trying to isolate us i think.

If you will recall, the nerds always get the last laugh...at least that's what happened in the "Revenge of the Nerds" movies.

[johngr]

I can't figure out why Darwinism is the ultimate evil when applied to racial politics or economics but not when it's used to deconstruct Christianity (of course, I'm an advocate of the former but not the latter).

[Nefertiti]

Ron Paul IS a nerd. What do you think-that all doctors are really Dr. McDreamy on Grey's Anatomy? Please.

I mean come on-no matter how right he is-you have to admit that we look really nerdy when we scream at the top of our lungs when he talks about the gold standard. I mean screaming at the top of one's lungs is usually reserved for the Sex Pistols, Tom Cruise, etc., lowbrow pop culture, not highbrow important ideas.

Embrace the nerdiness people! I would hazard a guess that nerds are more likely to vote than the average person anyway.

[Pride]

It's a disgusting article attacking the movement. Just more smear tactics from the controlled and biased main stream media.

[Nefertiti]

Self-identified nerds love Ron Paul:

http://ask.slashdot.org/pollBooth.pl?qid=1457&aid=-1

If you don't accept those stats as truth then all you non-nerds have to admit you are spammers.

[ConstitutionGal]

The article is merely saying Ron Paul is rising BUT only weird people support him.

Seems that they are trying to scare would-be RP supporters out of doing so. Being labeled "weird" or a "nerd" is more scary to the majority of people than lost liberties.

Actually, I prefer 'geek' to 'nerd' and let 'em bring on the labels in any case - I'll gladly wear a label if it will help get Ron Paul elected! Heck, I've been called worse by better than this putz!

[GeorgiaRPFan]

Oh, great.


There is a subset of Paul supporters who believe 9/11 was an inside job by the U.S. government. And there are anarchists as well: they've picked Nov. 5, Guy Fawkes Day, for a fund-raising drive.


Source: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1678661-2,00.html

[Pride]

It just completely angers and frustrates me that people take this kind of thing with a grain of salt. The media is controlled by the wrong people, but people here just won't admit it :confused::confused::confused:

[brumans]

Guess we know how they'll spin November 5th! Perhaps they think it will scare us off. Where do they dredge up sleeze like Frank Luntz? The American people are going to be saying 'fuck your frank' alot more often for now on.

It's probably because this fool contacted them and referenced it to V:
http://dailypaul.com/node/5185

[jesshwarren]

They say we are all unstable nerds. It pisses me off. If they can't say nothin bad about him they bash the supporters :(

[margomaps]

Stop disparaging nerds. Probably 1/3 or more of the posters on this forum consider nerdliness as part of their identity. Ron Paul is the #1 candidate for true nerds.

[pcosmar]

They say we are all unstable nerd

I am a very stable nerd.
Thank you.

[Brinck Slattery]

It's probably because this fool contacted them and referenced it to V:
http://dailypaul.com/node/5185

Whoever "Devils Advocate" is needs a good flogging. Ugh.

[bolidew]

Fu*k Frank Frank Luntz.

[MsDoodahs]

Dude, I am a fly pimp. There is no way I'm a 'nerd'

Dj, you GOTTA email THAT EXACT LINE to Time.

:D

[Mortikhi]

Well this nerd is laughing that Joel Stein didn't remove himself from google phonebook.

[Admin note- don't post personal contact info]

[mconder]

What is this communitarianism foolishness? Is that a real movement? It sounds like somebody trying to re-brand communism.

Hell yes it's a real movement. It's the antithesis of everything Libertarian, and I'd say it's the winning ideology today.

Everything you need to know about communitarianism here:

http://nord.twu.net/acl/

[Syren123]

The one posted today by Joel Stein? Typical. What other way was he gonna go? We're talking about a guy who appears on "We Are The 70s" on VH1 who writes for TIME. And btw...who is he calling a nerd? Has he looked in the mirror lately?

Guess he's trying to overcome the shame of his own innate nerdiness by casting aspersions on others and being a quasi-celebrity. And he's not even that good of a writer.

Whatever, Joel.

[syborius]

Controversial editorial

On January 24, 2006, the Los Angeles Times published a column by Stein under the headline "Warriors and Wusses" in which he wrote that it is a cop-out to oppose a war and yet claim to support the soldiers fighting it. "I don’t support our troops....When you volunteer for the U.S. military, you pretty much know you’re not going to be fending off invasions from Mexico and Canada. So you’re willingly signing up to be a fighting tool of American imperialism..." He prefaced his argument by stating that he does not support the troops in Iraq, in keeping with his views on the war. There was an immediate response—notably, Stein was the same day invited on The Hugh Hewitt Show, a conservative talk radio program that broadcasts from Los Angeles. Hewitt asked Stein questions about the breadth of his relationships and experiences with people in the military, his views on recent deployments, and how he acknowledges those on active duty—and also one who died on active duty.

Stein conceded a lack of personal relationships or interactions with military servicemen and women. Concerning Afghanistan, Stein indicated mixed feelings towards sending troops there and expressed doubt that invading the country had made Americans safer. As for other troop deployments, Stein acknowledged recent humanitarian interventions as being generally agreeable but expressed disapproval towards actions he felt station troops as a "police force." Stein stated that he honors the service of those who defend his country, but reiterated his view that he does not support troops in a military action he does not believe in, indicating that consenting to their involvement might only prolong their stay. He expressed sympathy for a U.S. Marine, cited by Hewitt, who died in Fallujah in 2004 and admiration for his bravery, but held that he felt there no purpose for his death. Concluding the talk, Hewitt asked if he would do it "over again," that is, write the column, and Stein said he would. Stein's Times column and subsequent chat with Hewitt were discussed nationally on talk radio and blogs.

[MS0453]

Oh, great.




Source: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1678661-2,00.html

The hilarious part about that anarchist statement is that he's probably pissed off a bunch of anarchists by saying they would/do support Ron Paul or partake in elections.

[BLS]

I'm a geek (somewhat).

And I'm definately unstable. :D

But I'm a motivated MotherF'er too, and I don't take criticism well either, so guys like Joel outta be wise about what they say.

[Mortikhi]

since we can post personal info, can I post the fact that joel stein didnt opt out of the google phonebook listing? :)

[Psyclone]

I didn't think the article was as bad as some people apparently think. I was the guy at the Ames rally wearing the three-corner hat and ringing the bell that he used as his primo example of a "weird Ron Paul follower" and even I'm not offended (indeed, I imagine I now join a fairly small group of people who have been explicitly called "weirdos" by Time magazine). Surely any publicity is good publicity at this point.

[MGreen]

Personally I think that's a rather poorly written article (it seems like the writer came to it with the intention of painting Paul as a boring, one-issue politician, whose supporters are nerds), but the more name recognition the better.

I also find the Luntz quote an incredibly stupid addition, not only because it's offensive to us supporters (again, the accusation that we're idiots who don't know what Paul really stands for, and he flat out says that no one should care about what we think), but because of the conflict of interest. If I was writing a story on Clinton's support, would I care what an old Obama employee and colleague has to say and classify it was an unbiased, "expert" opinion?

And yeah, when has Paul ever said he doesn't plan to win the Presidency?

Oh well, shake it off. They'll be declaring Paul Man of the Year in 2008. ;) Though if they have any sense, or if NH holds their primary in December, Paul should be one of the 100 influential people for this year.

[Malakai0]

What is this communitarianism foolishness? Is that a real movement? It sounds like somebody trying to re-brand communism.

That's exactly what it is btw. That article is a libertarian hit piece by a socialist. Who would have thought during the cold war that Time Magazine would praise socialism and put down liberty.

[Knightskye]

I have the magazine version. It's very similar. The caption underneath the title says: "Voters throng to hear longshot G.O.P. preach about Austrian Economics and the Gold Standard. Seriously."

And the end does say the LIE about Ron not expecting to win the nomination. He said on the Tonight Show that "there's a risk I could win," and that was about two weeks ago. A week after that his campaign got a $4.3 million boost, so I think he feels that risk increased.

They should've included the supposed "interview" they did with him. And why do they only have a small picture of him in the lower-right hand corner? The article before his is about Mitt Romney, and they have one whole side of a page for his face.

"TIME - in partnership with CNN." I guess Wolf Blitzer thinks we're nerds, too.