PDA

View Full Version : Ron Paul Roundup (12-06-07)




RSDavis
12-06-2007, 11:11 AM
http://laceylibertarian.us/wp-images/rPaulRev.jpg

Ron Paul Roundup (12-06-07)
by RS Davis (http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=194780914&blogID=335479663&Mytoken=A6AE7642-2E93-4B47-9D2D793849D21BBD30479427)


Hello Freedomphiles! Big Roundup today. Let's start with always amusing TMZ.com, the snarky gossip site that brought us the video of John Mayer berating Justin Long and yelling, "Ron Paul knows the Constitution!"

Well, they've picked up (http://wwww.tmz.com/2007/12/05/pimp-and-pros-pitch-paul-for-prez/) on The Bunny Ranch endorsement:

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tmz.com/media/2007/12/1205_ron_paul_ex_ap_.jpg
Hillary and Obama might court the unions and the NEA for their endorsement, Romney and Rudy the NRA and the Christian right, but only one candidate is truly getting whored-out in his campaign for president.

That, of course, is Ron Paul, the Libertarian GOP hopeful (and prohibitive underdog), who has procured the ass-istance of perhaps the most famous legal brothel in the world -- Northern Nevada's BunnyRanch -- and its proprietor, Dennis Hof. In fact, TMZ has obtained an appeal from Hof to American voters, which Hof hopes will, as he puts it, "lubricate Ron Paul's path to the White House."

The Cardinal Courier has a definite hit piece out on Paul, and they really need to be corrected. Please follow this link (http://www.cardinalcourieronline.com/media/storage/paper1247/news/2007/12/05/Viewpoint/Ron-Paul.Hijacks.Politics.And.Debate-3132488-page2.shtml):

I saw the debate. I watched every minute of it. I heard every answer. While the results were a mixed bag, I know one thing for certain: Ron Paul is a waste of my time and trivializes the entire debate process.

Paul has become quite popular with college kids. Somehow he's been anointed the candidate who speaks what Americans really believe and is representative of the college population zeitgeist....

...Ron Paul is the man who Rudy Giuliani went toe-to-toe with after Paul spewed 9/11 conspiracy theories at a past debate...

...The political process doesn't have to be boring. The political process doesn't have to dominated by the wealthy. But it has to be real. And it has to be grounded in logic and truth.

Someone like Ron Paul has every right to run for office and to campaign. When it takes away from real issues and the people who want to debate the real issues, though, is when I have a problem.

Rarely do I respond to these things myself, but this time, I could not resist:

Pot, this is kettle. You're black.

For someone who thinks people need to get educated on the candidates, you sure show a woeful ignorance of the positions of Ron Paul.

For example, how is the 9/11 Commission's findings that the attack on America was the result of blowback from decades of meddling in Middle Eastern politics a conspiracy theory?

And the absolute hubris on display in your attitude that only the things you care about are important, and everything else "takes away from real issues" is downright staggering.

I think you need to reassess your attitude, your information, and your reasoning skills.

- RS Davis
The Freedom Files

The Washington Post thinks (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/05/AR2007120502608.html?hpid=topnews)Paul has a shot in New Hampshire. They're talking about the massive, uncentralized support the campaign has in getting out the message:

Paul admitted how much his election prospects are outside his own control in a brief interview at a Manchester bar, where he stopped Saturday night to greet a raucous throng of supporters. "They've been out walking the streets all day, and we didn't plan it. We didn't plan the money-raising. It is in a sense a revolution, a grass-roots revolution in the best of its meaning," he said.

Asked if he hopes to exert more control over the effort as the primary nears, Paul demurred. "It's the way I want the markets to work, so the market of politics should work that way, too," he said.

He added with a chuckle: "The only thing that's going to close it down is some FEC ruling or something: 'That's too much freedom. We better abolish this spontaneity.' "

On LewRockwell.com, Anthony Gregory is commenting (http://www.lewrockwell.com/gregory/gregory151.html)on Ron Paul's huge support among young Americans:

Ron Paul has managed to do what no libertarian organization or electoral candidate ever has: Energize the masses of young Americans, all throughout the nation's college campuses, including its most leftist, and get them interested in the politics of freedom and peace.

How did this happen? For years, libertarians have struggled over how to appeal to the youth. I myself worried that as we lost the great libertarians now in their autumn years – the old-timers who knew Murray Rothbard and maybe even Mises, the venerable class of libertarian veterans who are our precious link to our radical past in the Vietnam era and all the way back to the Old Right – that there would be fewer enthusiastic and informed libertarians a generation from now than there are currently. My worries were largely subdued when I first visited Mises University and realized there were many young Austrians and radical libertarians being well trained to take the torch and continue the battle. But in terms of sheer numbers, I still had no idea how many young freedom-minded folks there were.

I don't think any of us knew. The Ron Paul Revolution has awakened me and many of my young libertarian friends to just how many of us there are in this world. This alone has been a great source for hope.

USADaily is talking about Iran and how, once again, Ron Paul was right while everyone else was wrong. Here's Dr Paul's words:

"I do not believe that [pre-emptive war] is part of the American tradition. We, in the past have always declared war in the defense of our liberties or [to] go to aid somebody.

"But now we have accepted the principle of preemptive war. We have rejected the just-war theory of Christianity. And now tonight, we hear that we're not even willing to remove from the table a pre-emptive nuclear strike, against a country that has done no harm to us directly and is no threat to our national security!

"We have to come to our senses about this issue of war and pre-emption. [We have to] go back to traditions and our Constitution, and defend our liberties and defend our rights, but not to think that we can change the world by force of arms and to start wars."

And here's what USADaily said (http://www.usadaily.com/article.cfm?articleID=188407):

Dr. Paul, who served in the air force Air Force for five years and is a veteran member of the House Foreign Relations Committee, has dealt with important global issues for decades. Paul's campaign was quick to note that according to media reports Mike Huckabee had not even heard about the NIE report when questioned by reporters Tuesday.

"The NIE report makes it clear: When it comes to Iran, Ron Paul was right and the other candidates have it wrong ," said Ron Paul 2008 spokesman Jesse Benton. "Dr. Paul has the understanding and experience to protect America's national security through peace and diplomacy."

Ron Paul will be speaking in Rock Hill, South Carolina on Saturday. The Herald Online reports (http://www.heraldonline.com/109/story/222439.html):

The Texas congressman will appear at 11 a.m. Saturday at the Freedom Center on East Main Street. Paul's visit may not generate quite the same level of excitement as the Bill Clinton rally there in October, but that Paul is campaigning here at all is noteworthy.

Eight months ago, Paul was a little-known member of the U.S. House making a longshot bid for the Republican nomination. He's still a longshot, but he has at least become part of the conversation.

"My feeling is it's going to be a packed house," said Kevin Smith of Fort Mill, a Paul campaign volunteer. "In fact, I'm concerned this place only seats 650 people. Once we get the word out, the supporter base out there is just huge. They come from everywhere."

The Post-Crescent is writing (http://www.postcrescent.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071206/APC0101/712060527/1979)about Paul's chances in Wisconsin:

Supporters are undeterred. Signs supporting Paul — many of them bearing only his name — have sprung up across the Fox Cities, some displayed by supporters while standing on overpasses in snowy, freezing weather.

That Paul has a relatively large following in Wisconsin is because Libertarian views here resonate a little more, Scattergood said.

"They just have a visceral reaction against the government," she said. "They see our involvement in global issues as just being completely wrong."

Robert F Hawes Jr wrote (http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/hawes2.html) a plea to Ron Paul supporters over on LewRockwell.com, reminding us all that the Ron Paul Revolution is not limited to the man himself. We must broaden our outlook:

Let the word go out through the Ron Paul revolution camp: vote for no congressman or senator who has supported the neoconservative big government, police-state agenda. Support only those candidates who will pledge (in writing, preferably) to support constitutional liberty at home and non-intervention abroad. And if there are no suitable candidates currently running in your area, work with other Ron Paul revolutionaries to recruit them. We can help one another with filing fees and publicity, just as surely as we have helped the Paul campaign to raise millions of dollars and to get the word out, and we don't have to hurt the Paul campaign in the process. Also, bear in mind that, while it would be ideal to see all of the bums thrown out, we don't necessarily have to achieve that in order to be effective. Even a few congressmen or one or two senators could block the passage of harmful legislation, or help ensure the passage of helpful legislation.

At the very least we could bring the sort of pressure to bear on Congress that we have been so effectively exerting against those who have been ridiculing Ron Paul and trying to exclude him from the process. A good place to start with this would be pressuring the United States Senate to reject the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act (S. 1959), which, if passed, will pave the way for the federal government to intimidate and ultimately silence pro-freedom organizations. Let's not let that happen. Let's band together to defeat this legislation, to repeal the PATRIOT ACT and other harmful laws that have already been passed, and to rein in George W. Bush before he starts posing for the cameras with his hand in his shirt. Let's bring the full weight of this movement's energy to bear on the enemies of freedom. If we can do this, we can not only begin to halt the march toward fascism, but we can convince many fence-sitters that Ron Paul and his revolution are for real, that we are not going away, that we are a force to be reckoned with, that we will not surrender our Republic without a struggle, and that we can win this election.

It's a great day to be a Ron Paul revolutionary, and there's nothing wrong with celebrating the successes we've seen lately. But let's not overlook the larger picture. Putting a good president in the White House is not enough to restore the Republic. Firing the captain of a mutinous ship is not going to turn it around if the crew is as mutinous as the captain. We need both a new captain and a new crew if we're going to plot a new course.

Now, let me tell you about The Cato Institute. I like them, and they are big proponents of liberty - a valuable asset - but they are Chicago School monetarists, their spiritual leader the late, great Milton Friedman. And Uncle Miltie had probably done more for the cause of liberty in the last 20 years than anyone. But it is a mixed bag. Milton Friedman was also the man who came up with the idea to withhold your taxes directly from your paycheck, paving the way for a massive expansion of the federal government.

Still, on the whole, he and Cato deserve our respect. (I must mention that two of my favorite libertarians are from Cato - Radley Balko and David Boaz).

At any rate, there is an article (http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=8828) on Cato about our man, written by Michael D Tanner, which "conceeds" that Paul has no chance, while being hopeful that the Revolution will live on:

Under the Bush administration, the Republican Party has increasingly drifted from its limited-government roots. Instead, it has come to be dominated by a new breed of "big-government conservatives" who believe in using an activist government to achieve conservative ends - even if it means increasing the size, cost and power of government, and limiting personal freedom in the process.

The difference in the two camps is as clear as the difference between Ronald Reagan's saying, "Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem," and George W. Bush's saying, "We have a responsibility that when somebody hurts, government has got to move..."

...when Ron Paul talks about returning to limited constitutional government, a great many Republican primary voters sit up and take notice. For voters hungering for a return to the party of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan rather than the party of George W. Bush, Paul's rhetoric is a breath of fresh air.

No, Rep. Paul is not likely to be our next president. But he is delivering a message that the other candidates would do well to heed. Is anyone listening?

And finally, on Freedom's Phoenix, Ernest Hancock wrote (http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Feature-Article.htm?Inf..027536)about his mom's country pie and Ron Paul:

And then there is Ron Paul. Lots and lots of people WANT him to be President--I mean genuinely want it, not because commercials told them to, or because of slick propaganda and advertising, but because, on their own, they can see the value of what he advocates. They like what he says, and they want what he wants: freedom. And those are the people now driving his campaign.

Day in and day out, all the status quo puppets who pass themselves off as pundits tell you who you SHOULD support. And many of them don't even bother to hide their utter contempt for the people's choice: Ron Paul. It's obvious that they find it disgusting that someone they DIDN'T push on you is getting any attention at all. They are perpetual advertisers for the status quo, and to them, for the lowly peasantry to come up with our own suggestion, is a slap in their faces.

Well, keep on slapping. My mom's country pie was better than anything I've ever seen advertised in a slick, expensive commercial. And Ron Paul is better than anyone the establishment would ever try to pawn off on you. While the various would-be tyrants kiss up to their fellow rich, influential megalomaniacs, in order to get the money to try to convince YOU to elect them, Ron Paul is pushed by the "peasantry," while being resisted by the establishment.

http://www.brendangates.com/forumlogo.jpg

karend
12-06-2007, 03:40 PM
Your blogs are awesome. Everyone needs to check them out! :D

philistineau
12-06-2007, 05:47 PM
I have no respect for The Cato Institute.

They have become an arm of the Neocons - betraying any liberterian values they once had.

MN Patriot
12-06-2007, 09:56 PM
>>> Milton Friedman was also the man who came up with the idea to withhold your taxes directly from your paycheck, paving the way for a massive expansion of the federal government.<<<<

I believe Mr. Friedman deeply regretted the payroll witholding plan in his later years. This is a case where he should have known better than to suggest something to promote the expansion of government.

Ron Paul should advocate the elimination of payroll witholding, require everyone to send a check in on April 15. That would be big first step in the Ron Paul Revolution. Even suggesting such a thing might open some eyes to how much government costs everyone.

Focus Liberty
12-07-2007, 03:24 AM
Love the roundup. Please keep writing.

RSDavis
12-07-2007, 10:19 AM
Your blogs are awesome. Everyone needs to check them out! :D

I agree. ;)

Thanks!

- Rick

RSDavis
12-07-2007, 10:24 AM
I have no respect for The Cato Institute.

They have become an arm of the Neocons - betraying any liberterian values they once had.

I still like Cato - they provide a good, loud libertarian voice. I don't think they're pro-war or anything like that. It's just that they're monetarists, Chicago School types, and I happen to be more of the anarcho-capitalist like you'd find in the Austrian School, represented by Lew Rockwell and the Mises Institute.

Really, though, I fall somewhere between. I don't think you can separate the micro from the macro like Cato and the Chicago Boys do, but I also don't think you can have private police, courts, and fire departments like the Austrians do.

It's funny how people call libertarianism a cult, because when you look deeply, there's a lot of room for disagreement among libertarians on many things.

- Rick

RSDavis
12-07-2007, 10:28 AM
>>> Milton Friedman was also the man who came up with the idea to withhold your taxes directly from your paycheck, paving the way for a massive expansion of the federal government.<<<<

I believe Mr. Friedman deeply regretted the payroll witholding plan in his later years. This is a case where he should have known better than to suggest something to promote the expansion of government.

Ron Paul should advocate the elimination of payroll witholding, require everyone to send a check in on April 15. That would be big first step in the Ron Paul Revolution. Even suggesting such a thing might open some eyes to how much government costs everyone.

Well, he's advocating an end to the income tax altogether, so the withholding would go away with it, but I get your greater point.

As to Friedmans role in the withholding, I am sure he regretted it, but he still had a hand in it. Don't get me wrong - I love Uncle Miltie and corresponded with his son for about a year through email - but like most human beings, he was a study in contradictions.

For instance - here's the thing David Friedman and I debated the most - the negative income tax (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_income_tax). It does nothing to remove the disincentive to work at the margins, making the opportunity costs of moving away from it prohibitively high. It would be no better than welfare - except a little more fair - in that it would still breed dependency on government and a disincentive to self-improvement.

Thanks for the comments!

- Rick

RSDavis
12-07-2007, 10:29 AM
Love the roundup. Please keep writing.

If you keep reading, I'll keep writing. (And if anyone knows anyone willing to PAY me to keep writing, that would be nice, too, haha...)

- Rick

MN Patriot
12-07-2007, 06:10 PM
Well, he's advocating an end to the income tax altogether, so the withholding would go away with it, but I get your greater point.
...

For instance - here's the thing David Friedman and I debated the most - the negative income tax (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_income_tax). It does nothing to remove the disincentive to work at the margins, making the opportunity costs of moving away from it prohibitively high. It would be no better than welfare - except a little more fair - in that it would still breed dependency on government and a disincentive to self-improvement.


I watched all of Milton Friedmans' Free to Choose videos, and was a little baffled with how his negative income tax fit in with free market economics. Great set of videos, though.

Yes, end the income tax!!! But how do we start? People always ask how to do it. I think the first step is to let people keep ALL their income, then pay one BIG check on April 15. If Ron would just SUGGEST doing that, it might make people think a little, it would personally affect everyone. Submit bills to do it from time to time for publicity, make the big government politicians uncomfortable with the entire idea.

RSDavis
12-07-2007, 06:24 PM
I watched all of Milton Friedmans' Free to Choose videos, and was a little baffled with how his negative income tax fit in with free market economics. Great set of videos, though.

Yes, end the income tax!!! But how do we start? People always ask how to do it. I think the first step is to let people keep ALL their income, then pay one BIG check on April 15. If Ron would just SUGGEST doing that, it might make people think a little, it would personally affect everyone. Submit bills to do it from time to time for publicity, make the big government politicians uncomfortable with the entire idea.

You know, I read the book, but I've never even seen a clip from the videos. I've always wanted to, though.

- R

rancher89
12-09-2007, 12:01 PM
I've not been reading your blogs, just discovered it and I'm working my way backward, thanks, good reading