Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 43

Thread: The Slow, Painful Death of Reason Magazine

  1. #1

    The Slow, Painful Death of Reason Magazine

    http://www.christophercantwell.com/2...ason-magazine/
    via
    http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com...-reason_7.html

    In the radical egalitarian left’s war of attrition on libertarian philosophy, another high value target has been lost. Reason Magazine was once the number one libertarian website on planet Earth. In their constant struggle to remain ahead of LewRockwell.com, they have made some compromises with enemy forces, and like others before them, this led to their infiltration and ultimate demise.


    Reason Magazine Has Fallen Into Enemy Hands

    Not that their website is down or anything. In fact, you can go and see exactly what I’m talking about right now. Check out the latest article “Libertarianism Is More Than Opposition To Force“. Obviously a direct response to Lew Rockwell’s piece “What Libertarianism Is, And Isn’t“. Which itself was a greater continuation of a larger discussion which I’m not too modest to think I played a role in starting.

    Now, Rockwell, like myself, and Tom Woods, and many others who actually understand and appreciate libertarian philosophy, we acknowledge that libertarianism is the non-aggression principle. That initiatory force and fraud are forbidden, and may be responded to with defensive force, while all else is permissible, and may not have force levied against it. Within this framework, there are a boundless number of possibilities. Peace, free trade, love in all its forms, and all the other wondrous things we all love about liberty. There are also a lot of possibilities that many of us may be uncomfortable with, like racism, homophobia, sexism, drug addiction, religious cults, and other non-violent things we ourselves may not choose to participate in.

    While this was once just called libertarianism, the radical egalitarian left wing entryists have dubbed it “thin libertarianism”, and now added to their list of attacks on it, the term “brutalism“. The egalitarians, they call themselves “thick libertarians” or “humanitarians” because they, just like their statist counterparts in the Democratic party, are just so filled with concern about a plethora of issues besides violence. To them, libertarianism must oppose issues like inequality, racism, sexism, and if you listen to them long enough, capitalism. To do anything less, would make you a racist, and you don’t want to be labeled a racist by the radical egalitarian left, do you?

    Now, Reason Magazine has been playing this game for quite awhile. They have been known to give Cathy Reisenwitz, and other feminists a platform, they recently supported OKCupid’s call to boycott FireFox (in favor of NSA spy weapons like IE and Chrome), and today, in their response to Rockwell, have made the case that libertarianism must oppose racism.

    The case being made will appeal to a lot of libertarians. The article’s author, Shelden Richman, makes the case that libertarianism is about individualism, and that since racism is a form of collectivism, libertarianism should oppose it.

    The freedom philosophy is intimately related to ethical, political, and methodological individualism. Therefore, the philosophy should be expected to detest any kind of collectivism — and particularly its “lowest, most crudely primitive form” — even in its nonviolent manifestations.

    Is Libertarianism About Individualism?

    I would make the case that it is not. Individualism is a tendency of libertarians, but it’s not some core tenet of the philosophy. In fact, there’s quite a bit of group mentality in libertarian circles. We join organizations, we oppose organizations. We identify ourselves as “libertarians” as “we” and as “us”. We identify our opposition as “them” and “they” and “the State”, “the left”, “the Republican and Democratic parties”, all of these terms are identifiers of groups.

    We do reject collectivism when it comes in the form of the State’s calls to sacrifice the rights of the individual in favor the greater good, but we oppose these calls because they initiate force.

    To oppose “collectivism” in all its forms would be to oppose the family, to oppose religion, to oppose Saint Patrick’s day, the Puerto Rican Day Parade, to oppose hierarchies in business, any group that existed to promote the advancement of ethnic minorities, or women, or homosexuals, to oppose really any sort of group identification whatsoever. While some libertarians may oppose any of these things, libertarianism, does not have any opinion on the matter. I for example, am an anarchist, and an atheist. It is necessary for me to say both things to describe my ideology, because my being an anarchist does not mean I reject the notion of a deity, they are inherently separate things. I do oppose religion, that is because I am an atheist, not because my libertarianism requires the rejection of this collectivism.

    Libertarianism is blind to gender and race. If a group of people wish to associate with each other because they have the same skin color, that is the business of those people. Libertarianism has no more to say about this than if they want to associate with each other because they share the same religious ideology, business interests, taste in entertainment, or any other choice they may make.

    Surely, the radical egalitarian leftists should be able to understand this. Their economically illiterate friends want to go off and live in communes when the State has been done away with. This is a very severe form of collectivism. Does libertarianism oppose this? No. Does Austrian economics? Yes. It is irrational to think that they will live in a prosperous society if they attempt to do away with property rights, but so long as they aren’t harming anybody not party to that agreement, we all think they should be left to succeed or fail on their own merit. Austrian economics has become very popular among libertarians because it is rational and helps undermine the State, that does not mean every libertarian understands economics, or that they must in order to be a libertarian.

    A Potential for Violence

    The second part of his case is that racism has a potential for violence that libertarians cannot ignore.

    In its denial of dignity to individuals merely by virtue of their membership in a racial group , there is a potential for violence implicit in racism that is too strong for libertarians to ignore.

    The same could be said again for religion, or drugs, or poverty, or even love, and ironically enough, this so called “anti-racism” folks like Reason Magazine have been promoting. Let’s not forget that the civil war and many other State inflicted wounds have been carried out under the guise of stopping oppression. If Shelden Richman is concerned that racism may lead to violence, I would suggest he take notice that in present day, a lot more violence is carried out in the name of stopping racism than in the name of promoting it. Lots of things come with a potential for extreme violence, and it’s sort of the whole entire point of libertarianism to not give into knee jerk reactions and start prosecuting pre-crime.

    By the same logic that says racism is a precursor to violence so racism must be forbidden, we can say that racism is a precursor to violence so the races must be segregated. Libertarianism proposes neither, nor should it. Libertarianism addresses the problem of initiatory violence with the solution of defensive violence. It does not need to predict that racism leads to violence and forbid racism any more than it predicts that heroin addicts have a tendency to steal and forbid heroin.

    Race Wars

    The next leap Richman makes is that allowing racism to go unopposed will lead to some sort of a race war.


    Even in a culture where racial “places” have long been established by custom and require no coercive enforcement, members of a rising generation will sooner or later defiantly reject their assigned place and demand equality of authority. What happens then? It takes little imagination to envision members of the dominant race — even if they have professed a “thin” libertarianism to that point — turning to physical force to protect their “way of life.”

    “Thin libertarianism” addresses this, initiatory violence is forbidden. If people use violence against one another, we’re already opposed to this. Forced integration on the other hand has already lead to a great deal of racially motivated violence. If people want to be separate from one another, then letting them be separate prevents violence. This is a straw man, and besides the same could be said of wealth or any number of other things. If people rise up and “demand” equality of wealth, then what? Does libertarianism need to oppose the accumulation of capital to prevent this from happening? No. The idea is patently ridiculous.

    This Is All Rather Pointless Anyway.

    I still have yet to see any of these left sympathetic folks point out a single openly racist libertarian that they are so opposed to. The fact of the matter is, there aren’t any, at least not of any significant prominence. What the left calls racism and bigotry, really stem from three things.
    1. Demographic disparities that exist for countless reasons aside from skin color or gender or sexual preference
    2. Harmless humor and observations about things in society
    3. Opposition to State imposed integration policies and the propaganda that promotes them.

    I am not a racist for noticing a pattern developing with Asian drivers and making a joke about that, or for noticing that Martin Luthor King was a black liberal and to celebrate him people take a day off from work. I am not a sexist for saying that women get a little crazy around their periods, or that the presence of women in certain situations can be an unwelcome distraction to men. I am not a homophobe because I oppose leftist bully tactics against Brendan Eich. Trying to associate these kinds of things with bigotry on par with race wars and slavery is just plain ridiculous, and does harm to our far more important efforts to rid the world of initiatory force, leaving folks like myself with the very unpleasant task of standing up for that which we all detest.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Ron Paul agrees that racism is an ugly form of collectivism that should be opposed,though not through the use of force. Am I missing something? I agree reason makes a lot of concessions and am not a huge supporter tho they do make some great articles on occasion but I dunno if this is a good example of something really bad?
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
    "You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
    "When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q

    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  4. #3
    What's wrong with giving feminists a platform?

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Matthew5 View Post
    What's wrong with giving feminists a platform?
    From the OP:

    "Now, Reason Magazine has been playing this game for quite awhile. They have been known to give Cathy Reisenwitz, and other feminists a platform, they recently supported OKCupid’s call to boycott FireFox (in favor of NSA spy weapons like IE and Chrome), and today, in their response to Rockwell, have made the case that libertarianism must oppose racism."


    Also,what is wrong with supporting anybody's right to boycott any product or service for any reason under the sun?

    I read the linked article (luv FFF,got their little booklet for many years,might have to resubscribe to support them} and unless I missed it,the word must never appears in it.

    The article was posted yesterday and there were 212 comments to it,so if they are dying,it is indeed a slow death.
    Inspired by US Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, this site is dedicated to facilitating grassroots initiatives that aim to restore a sovereign limited constitutional Republic based on the rule of law, states' rights and individual rights. We seek to enshrine the original intent of our Founders to foster respect for private property, seek justice, provide opportunity, and to secure individual liberty for ourselves and our posterity.


    A police state is a small price to pay for living in the freest country on earth.

  6. #5
    Reason is green with envy that Ron Paul and by extension Lew Rockwell, Gary North and others are having more success promoting libertarianism than they ever could, and it eats them up inside.

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by sgt150 View Post
    Reason is green with envy that Ron Paul and by extension Lew Rockwell, Gary North and others are having more success promoting libertarianism than they ever could, and it eats them up inside.
    Nonsense.

    Who The Hell Is Robert Wenzel From EconomicPolicyJournal.com Really?


    http://chrislbecker.com/2013/04/15/w...al-com-really/

  8. #7
    Even if Reason is not the top libertarian site, I bet they still get more traffic now than they did before 2008, and that they owe that to Ron Paul.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    Even if Reason is not the top libertarian site, I bet they still get more traffic now than they did before 2008.
    Probably, on the coattails of the Ron Paul movement that they tried to destroy.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    And the circular firing squad continues...
    "And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat

    "It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire

  12. #10
    Reason really annoys me in some ways. They are not always ideologically clear. And really it seems less a "libertarian" publication than an "old-Right" publication. But it isn't terrible. And in general it is far better than other news alternatives.

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by sgt150 View Post
    Reason is green with envy that Ron Paul and by extension Lew Rockwell, Gary North and others are having more success promoting libertarianism than they ever could, and it eats them up inside.
    Thank you.

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by William R View Post
    Nonsense.

    Who The Hell Is Robert Wenzel From EconomicPolicyJournal.com Really?


    http://chrislbecker.com/2013/04/15/w...al-com-really/
    of course attack the man when you can't his views! So what if he doesn't use his state-assigned name?!

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by sgt150 View Post
    Probably, on the coattails of the Ron Paul movement that they tried to destroy.
    This. $#@! them and people who are too dumb to see what they have done.

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by PierzStyx View Post
    Reason really annoys me in some ways. They are not always ideologically clear. And really it seems less a "libertarian" publication than an "old-Right" publication. But it isn't terrible. And in general it is far better than other news alternatives.
    Their bread and butter is to not be ideologically clear.

  17. #15
    Martin Luther King was a black conservative Republican (as opposed to the then openly racist conservative Democrats), and a civil rights advocate. Stereotype fail in a paragraph where he was trying to defend stereotypes. chuckle.

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by green73 View Post
    of course attack the man when you can't his views! So what if he doesn't use his state-assigned name?!
    Where did I attack his views.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by William R View Post
    Where did I attack his views.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	facepalm-card.jpg 
Views:	0 
Size:	15.3 KB 
ID:	2273

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by green73 View Post
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	facepalm-card.jpg 
Views:	0 
Size:	15.3 KB 
ID:	2273
    Again, where did I attack his views? I just want to know who this clown is?? He hates Rand Paul??

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by William R View Post
    Again, where did I attack his views? I just want to know who this clown is?? He hates Rand Paul??
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	facepalm-card.jpg 
Views:	0 
Size:	15.3 KB 
ID:	2274

  23. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by sgt150 View Post
    Reason is green with envy that Ron Paul and by extension Lew Rockwell, Gary North and others are having more success promoting libertarianism than they ever could, and it eats them up inside.
    Really? It seems more like Paul, Rockwell and North are having pretty glaring issues with marketing. I see a lot more people reading and appreciating libertarian articles from Reason, Cathy Reisenwitz and other "leftists" than I do from Lew Rockwell's site. I haven't heard a peep out of Ron other than his opinion on the Crimea situation, which was plagued with rather poor rhetoric and led to a big backlash on that issue... let us not forget the Ron Paul Channel's relative silence (seems like yet another marketing blunder to me), and I have no idea what North is doing.

    As for the article, this is another case of people trying to narrow and limit definitions and the direction of discourse within the libertarian movement. The broader, Hayekian definition of coercion works a lot better when trying to understand what makes some sections of society have a vastly different experience from others. People like Cantwell say in one breath that a free society would be a great situation for minorities, but then they'll say that the experiences that minorities have within a dominant framework are not worthy of attention. This shutdown of discourse means that we have now lost a great opportunity to prove how a free society could deal with bigotry. Now we have lost out on a way to sell libertarianism to a great number of people. And some of these folks wonder why libertarians have such an image problem. The core of the philosophy doesn't change at all, but people are turned off by what they're seeing from the periphery. I'd also like to point out once again that literally no one can say "Libertarianism is about the NAP and nothing else", because the NAP by itself does not imply that it cannot be combined with other theories. This is more succinctly stated as: No one can be only a thin libertarian. Every libertarian is by default both a thin and thick libertarian.

    Mises also seems to imply the process by which a market is created is more complex than most of his so-called disciples would have you believe:
    The market is a process, actuated by the interplay of the actions of the various individuals cooperating under the division of labor. The forces determining the- continuously changing- state of the market are the value judgments of these individuals and their actions as directed by value judgments.
    This suggests that oppression is more than just a state-perpetuated problem. Is it the state that gives individuals their value judgments, or is it something else? I'd say, as Mises also seems to, that the issue is more complicated than the state on one side and everyone else on the other. Those evil discussions of "privilege" that every rightist libertarian seems to despise actually help in understanding where individuals' judgments of value come from. Privilege (boogity, boogity, evil "leftist" scareword alert) is about understanding that we all have blinders on, because humans are naturally limited by their own experiences and their perceptions of both their and other people's experiences.
    Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just and that his justice cannot sleep forever. Thomas Jefferson

  24. #21
    Whatever. You're not gonna live to see a free society and Reason just like LRC is a net positive for the long road towards freedom.

  25. #22
    Really? It seems more like Paul, Rockwell and North are having pretty glaring issues with marketing. I see a lot more people reading and appreciating libertarian articles from Reason, Cathy Reisenwitz and other "leftists" than I do from Lew Rockwell's site. I haven't heard a peep out of Ron other than his opinion on the Crimea situation, which was plagued with rather poor rhetoric and led to a big backlash on that issue... let us not forget the Ron Paul Channel's relative silence (seems like yet another marketing blunder to me), and I have no idea what North is doing.
    Do you really believe that Cathy Reisenwitz (whoever the $#@! that is) carries as much weight and is as well-read in the liberty movement as Lew Rockwell and Gary North? If so, your perspective is skewed. And the only 'big backlash' about Ron's Crimea comments were from the liberaltarians and the neocon asskissers who are desperate to co-opt the movement with leftist rhetoric and other garbage.
    Last edited by NewRightLibertarian; 04-08-2014 at 11:04 AM.

  26. #23
    Reason does have some left libertarian contributers that I could see paleo libertarians taking issue with but Sheldon Richman is as good as they come. I'll take one Richman over 10 Wenzels any day of the week.
    Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne,--
    Yet that scaffold sways the future, and, behind the dim unknown,
    Standeth God within the shadow, keeping watch above his own.
    ‫‬‫‬

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by axiomata View Post
    Reason does have some left libertarian contributers that I could see paleo libertarians taking issue with but Sheldon Richman is as good as they come. I'll take one Richman over 10 Wenzels any day of the week.
    Sheldon Richman is usually good, but even he's been writing nonsense lately:

    http://fff.org/explore-freedom/artic...ibertarianism/

    There seems to be a concerted effort to split the libertarian movement into factions for no good reason.
    Last edited by NewRightLibertarian; 04-08-2014 at 11:51 AM.



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by sgt150 View Post
    Do you really believe that Cathy Reisenwitz (whoever the $#@! that is) carries as much weight and is as well-read in the liberty movement as Lew Rockwell and Gary North? If so, your perspective is skewed. And the only 'big backlash' about Ron's Crimea comments were from the liberaltarians and the neocon asskissers who are desperate to co-opt the movement with leftist rhetoric and other garbage.
    The backlash also came from people who recognized that the Crimea thing couldn't just be boiled down to a simple matter of self-determination, as some Miseans framed it, due to the history of the region. I'd say that's far from being a "liberaltarian" or a "neocon asskisser" (lol). It's a simple reminder that things are rarely as simple as some people make them out to be (while still calling for the US to do nothing about it).

    Yes, among people of my demographic (the college-aged), the Reason contingent is decidedly more popular. Cathy was just on Fox Biz last night - she's a rising star. I rarely, if ever, see Rockwell articles being shared on social media, and I snoop a lot of libertarian groups (inb4 cries of "Fedbook, therefore not relevant"). Most SFL and YAL chapters where I live prefer Reason, Reisenwitz, C4SS, et al. to Rockwell. If you've ever met Rockwell in person, it's quite easy to see why he isn't exactly a marketing genius. I have a feeling the Rockwell crowd has more of a hold in the South because of the relative proximity of the Mises Institute, but in other parts of the country? I'm not so sure.

    Btw, Sheldon Richman has always been more leftist in his outlook. Not sure what time frame you're referencing in your last post, but it's not like he's suddenly had a change of heart.
    Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just and that his justice cannot sleep forever. Thomas Jefferson

  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by CaptUSA View Post
    And the circular firing squad continues...

    Yep.

  31. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Rothbardian Girl View Post
    Yes, among people of my demographic (the college-aged), the Reason contingent is decidedly more popular. Cathy was just on Fox Biz last night - she's a rising star. I rarely, if ever, see Rockwell articles being shared on social media, and I snoop a lot of libertarian groups (inb4 cries of "Fedbook, therefore not relevant"). Most SFL and YAL chapters where I live prefer Reason, Reisenwitz, C4SS, et al. to Rockwell. If you've ever met Rockwell in person, it's quite easy to see why he isn't exactly a marketing genius. I have a feeling the Rockwell crowd has more of a hold in the South because of the relative proximity of the Mises Institute, but in other parts of the country? I'm not so sure.
    If she's a 'rising star,' our movement is $#@!ed. The strategy of letting just about anyone masquerade as a libertarian in order to create a 'big tent' is about the most idiotic one imaginable.

    And it's not a 'marketing problem' to refuse to produce drivel in order to draw in the lowest common denominator of fools to your website. Here's a pro-Bobby Jindal article from the main page of Reason right now. It might draw in some neocon eyeballs, but how exactly does publishing trash like this promote liberty? - http://reason.com/archives/2014/04/0...e-republican-p

    Real thought provoking stuff there
    Last edited by NewRightLibertarian; 04-08-2014 at 05:44 PM.

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by sgt150 View Post
    If she's a 'rising star,' our movement is $#@!ed. The strategy of letting just about anyone masquerade as a libertarian in order to create a 'big tent' is about the most idiotic one imaginable.

    And it's not a 'marketing problem' to refuse to produce drivel in order to draw in the lowest common denominator of fools to your website. Here's a pro-Bobby Jindal article from the main page of Reason right now. It might draw in some neocon eyeballs, but how exactly does publishing trash like this promote liberty? - http://reason.com/archives/2014/04/0...e-republican-p

    Real thought provoking stuff there
    In a movement that values critical thinking, it might be more useful overall for publications not to become echo chambers. Posting controversial stuff gets web traffic and debate flowing, and offers libertarians a chance to flex their ideological muscles and metaphorically kick the crap out of anyone silly enough to side with Jindal.

    What exactly is un-libertarian about Cathy's views? She's fairly well-read in libertarian philosophy. You can continue denying that you have an issue reaching people, but I think it's fairly obvious which wing of libertarian is most prominent right now.
    Last edited by Rothbardian Girl; 04-08-2014 at 09:47 PM.
    Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just and that his justice cannot sleep forever. Thomas Jefferson

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Rothbardian Girl View Post
    In a movement that values critical thinking, it might be more useful overall for publications not to become echo chambers. Posting controversial stuff gets web traffic and debate flowing, and offers libertarians a chance to flex their ideological muscles and metaphorically kick the crap out of anyone silly enough to side with Jindal.
    Reason was promoting Jindal's policy and suggested that it was a breathe of fresh air. Did you even read the article?

    What exactly is un-libertarian about Cathy's views? She's fairly well-read in libertarian philosophy. You can continue denying that you have an issue reaching people, but I think it's fairly obvious which wing of libertarian is most prominent right now.
    If you think some second-rate blogger who only gets attention because she's middlingly attractive and because she talks about sex is making more traction than the Mises Institute, you're hallucinating. And you should change your name on this forum immediately as well.

  34. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by sgt150 View Post
    Reason was promoting Jindal's policy and suggested that it was a breathe of fresh air. Did you even read the article?



    If you think some second-rate blogger who only gets attention because she's middlingly attractive and because she talks about sex is making more traction than the Mises Institute, you're hallucinating. And you should change your name on this forum immediately as well.
    Sorry if I was unclear - I meant the robust debate in the comments section of the article. I don't know how you can deny that she is getting any traction. She has spoken about various topics at some major conferences in Europe and around the world, she was on a panel at CPAC about Bitcoin, and she was just on television last night. Even Julie Borowski gets more exposure than anyone from the Mises Institute, for heaven's sakes. I think it has a lot to do with some of their associates' apparently obsessive need to engage in circular firing squads, as CaptUSA put it.

    You still haven't explained why you think she is "masquerading". Her efforts as a libertarian have been consistent with prioritizing changing individuals' value judgments (as mentioned by Mises himself!), and getting people to realize how those in fact are the 'hands behind the curtain', if you will, rather than any explicit institutional factors.
    Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just and that his justice cannot sleep forever. Thomas Jefferson

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. The long, slow death of the rule of law.
    By Lucille in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-28-2015, 12:09 PM
  2. Greek Junk: Condemned to slow death
    By PeacePlan in forum Economy & Markets
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-22-2012, 12:43 PM
  3. Global Warming Alarmism Dying a Slow Death
    By FrankRep in forum Stop Global Warming Fraud
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-05-2010, 12:08 PM
  4. Reason Magazine
    By Glelas in forum Family, Parenting & Education
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 01-06-2010, 08:38 AM
  5. TIME: Is the Dollar Dying a Slow Death?
    By emazur in forum Economy & Markets
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-07-2009, 05:21 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •