Originally Posted by LawnWake
Reply With Quote
Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
And exactly the same thing can be said of 99.99% of everything posted at RPFs - it isn't meant to be profound or substantive; it's just people of like mind commiserating with one another (or of not-so-like-mind arguing with one another). And there's nothing wrong with that.
Likewise, Lew's "Political Theatre" isn't intended to offer "in-depth critiques or analyses" of anything. It's just a blog (by a man who "hates the State") for the purpose of throwing brickbats and taking potshots at politics in general and the political establishment in particular. He doesn't sugar-coat what he says and he is under no obligation to kowtow to the sensibilities & sensitivities of the broader movement. And there's nothing wrong with that, either ...
Whatever you think his intentions are he makes a living as a contrarian. Meaning if our leave me alone coalition is to grow to be the one we want it to be, its best to contrast our campaign rather then compare. Even if every now and then he says something that is the truth, that's just the politics of matter.
Our friends in the MSM are speculating on this, as well:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...23d_story.htmlRand Paul’s budding relationship with Mitch McConnell starts to fray
[...]
Paul’s maneuvering afterward most certainly went against McConnell’s wishes. With Paul leading the objections to a short-term extension of the existing legal authority for the NSA program, it highlighted McConnell’s tactical missteps in delaying consideration of the surveillance program and undermined any attempt he might have made to blame its potential expiration on Democrats...
There are other signs that relations between McConnell and Paul have become strained. According to Democratic aides, Reid approached McConnell late Friday night to ask about the possibility of moving up consideration of surveillance legislation by an hour — something that would require Paul’s consent.
But McConnell refused to ask Paul to accelerate the vote, the aides said, so Reid asked a Democratic ally of Paul’s on surveillance reform, Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, to approach him and ask for the accommodation.
“Do you not know, my son, with how little wisdom the world is governed?” - Oxenstiern
Violence will not save us. Let us love one another, for love is from God.
I never thought I would see the day Lew Rockwell is called an "unhinged crackpot" on RPF's. Disgusting...You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Occam's Banana again.
Except as a reprsentative of the movement it's making us look like anti-intellectual jackasses who resort to petty namecalling.
In other words, some people are and inherently should be above any sort of criticism because of their status.
"unhinged crackpot"
In other words, some people are and inherently should be above any sort of criticism because of their status.Especially when it's someone who's a friend to liberty. Do you sincerely believe Mitch McConnell is a friend?Except as a reprsentative of the movement it's making us look like anti-intellectual jackasses who resort to petty namecalling.
Insulting the Founder/Chairman of The Mises Institute and Ron Paul's friend =/= insulting Mitch McConnell (Who, as far as I'm concerned, can rot in hell.)
And I repeat: exactly the same thing could be said of much of what gets posted at RPFs - and there is nothing wrong with that.
Rockwell uses Political Theatre to expose, mock, deride and "name-call" those he feels deserve to be exposed, mocked, derided and "called names" - that is the whole point and purpose of PT. And there is nothing wrong with that, either.
Those who derive context-dropping judgements about the "intellectuality" (or lack thereof) of others on the basis of nothing more than hyperbolically acerbic entries in blogs that are explicitly intended as venues for wry spleen-ventings do not have any business making pronouncements about others' "intellectuality" at all. They are just looking for excuses to (hypocritically) dismiss - as being "anti-intellectual jackasses," for example - anyone with whom they disagree. Such people will always find an excuse to do so (no matter what Lew Rockwell says or how he says it).
IOW: I see no reason to cater to the sensibilties of people who are so entirely lacking in wit that they are unable to cope with hyperbole. Such people are not going to think well of you in any case ...
Last edited by Occam's Banana; 05-25-2015 at 07:45 AM.
yups...more to politics than meets the eye
I really doubt their relationship has changed. But the perception that it's worsened certainly helps Rand.
It appears to me you're incapable of forming opinions based on anything else but "this guy is on my side and this guy isn't"."unhinged crackpot"
Especially when it's someone who's a friend to liberty. Do you sincerely believe Mitch McConnell is a friend?
Insulting the Founder/Chairman of The Mises Institute and Ron Paul's friend =/= insulting Mitch McConnell (Who, as far as I'm concerned, can rot in hell.)
I explained what about this is wrong.
Rockwell uses Political Theatre to expose, mock, deride and "name-call" those he feels deserve to be exposed, mocked, derided and "called names" - that is the whole point and purpose of PT. And there is nothing wrong with that, either.[/QUOTE]
You know when some person is being an a-hole and their friends say "he's just like that?". Well, yeah, that's the problem.
Explaining that this might just be his tactic doesn't negate that he's using a very poor and useless tactic.
They kind of do. I for one don't debate people who don't support their views and I have trouble taking people seriously who don't.
Meh, I've never cared for Rockwell, but to each their own. also, he's been criticized on rpfs plenty in the past, especially over the newsletter stuff.
Why we would he want to "blame" the democrats when it is clear that the man he endorsed for pres. Wants the credit/blame himself. Some say missteps, others might say wily like a fox. I think this all went according to plan and was choreographed throughout.McConnell’s tactical missteps in delaying consideration of the surveillance program and undermined any attempt he might have made to blame its potential expiration on Democrats
Personally, I think the NSA wants it to expire.
I think what they want is actually the USA Freedom Act because it legalizes some of their snooping that was illegal even with the Patriot Act. And I expect that they'll actually get the USA Freedom Act passed.
Exactly. And IIRC the patriot act provision that is expiring only covers landlines (not cellphones) which has got to be completely useless. So why keep something that is useless and just gives bad press? this was all a ploy, they want it to expire; mitchie went along with Randy's game because it didn't really matter if he won on this issue.
I think I was partly wrong in my post, in that the preferred outcome would've been to renew the Patriot Act, and then pass another bill to legalize some of the parts that were deemed illegal. So they're getting their second preferred outcome. They really didn't have 60 votes for this.
yep UFA closes loopholes in current article and makes what they were doing legal, extend the provision and it ends when the supreme court rules, reform it and trick people into thinking there is reform and the program continues on in spirit under a different name. if we garner enough support and build a coalition it all ends 2016. Even if we strip away a section it is symbolic enough for us to win this, Bush created a neoconservative movement i think this will be bigger.
It's funny that Kristol says Rand is a leftist for opposing the Patriot Act, while the Patriot Act was already proposed by Joe Biden way before 9/11 (under another name), and it's main purpose is to raise more income taxes, hardly a genuine conservative goal.
I cant wait to hear Bill call the tea party liberal insurgents when we take over the parties nomination, he strikes me as a sore loser.
You didn't explain why anything was "wrong."
You merely expressed subjective distaste for something.
The latter is fine - but it is not the same thing as the former.
You know when some friends get together and make fun of the stuff they don't like? That's what Lew and his readers are doing via Political Theatre.
And, no, that's NOT a problem - at least, not to anyone except the prudish, self-appointed hall-monitors of the "Liberty Movement" ...
A "tactic" necessarily presupposes some objective towards the achievement of which the tactic is directed. Lew's objective at PT is to mock and castigate (and ultimately, to promote disrespect & contempt for) the political establishment - and to expose it for what he believes it is (namely, a fraud and a sham). For those whose purpose is, say, "electoral success" or "reforming the system from within" or whatnot, Lew's "tactic" at PT might very well indeed be "poor and useless." So what? The only conclusion to be drawn from this is that people who have one of those other objectives should probably avoid the "tactic" Lew uses at PT.
IOW: You are perfectly free to eschew his objective and pursue some other one - but if you do so, it is absurd to complain that his "tactic" won't achieve your objective. In that event (as should be obvious), he isn't trying to achieve your objective ...
No, they don't. If they did, they'd actually seek to address the substance of Rockwell's perfectly "serious" and "intellectual" content (which is voluminous and can easily be found elsewhere) - rather than pretend that they can dismiss him as an "anti-intellectual jackass" merely on the basis of his japeries at PT.
*shrug* I for one doubt that Lew has any wish to "debate" you about anything - so he probably won't be very abashed by the fact that your "trouble" with him would prevent you from doing so.
And in any case, if you really think that Lew Rockwell - the author of numerous substantive books, articles, speeches, etc. - has not "supported" (or is not able to "support") his views in a "serious" or "intellectual" manner (when it is his purpose to do so), then you are the one who is not to be taken seriously.
The Bastiat Collection · FREE PDF · FREE EPUB · PAPER Frédéric Bastiat (1801-1850)
- "When law and morality are in contradiction to each other, the citizen finds himself in the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense, or of losing his respect for the law."
-- The Law (p. 54)- "Government is that great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
-- Government (p. 99)- "[W]ar is always begun in the interest of the few, and at the expense of the many."
-- Economic Sophisms - Second Series (p. 312)- "There are two principles that can never be reconciled - Liberty and Constraint."
-- Harmonies of Political Economy - Book One (p. 447)· tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito ·
Well one person I could quote on this.."unhinged crackpot"Especially when it's someone who's a friend to liberty. Do you sincerely believe Mitch McConnell is a friend?
“I think we have good relations,” he said last week. “Really, period. We’re friends and we disagree on this issue. . . . We have disagreements in our caucus all the time. But I try to keep it on a friendly basis, and, you know, I don’t think this will hurt our friendship"
I second the previously motion to dislike Lew Rockwell. He currently acts like a shock-jockey in the Liberty Movement.
Which is to say, makes us look bad. He made us look bad in '07 and '11 and he makes us look bad now, channeling something more akin to Limbaugh than Hayek or Mises.
Back to the OP though, McConnell must have know that he didn't have the votes for a clean extension, which raises some serious questions as to what in the hell is going on in his head.
Last edited by RabbitMan; 05-25-2015 at 11:38 AM.
"Freedom, then Pizza!" - Oklahoma State GOP Convention 5/11/2012
The turtle beats the hare, except when the turtle depends on the hare for re-election.
Posting Permissions
Connect With Us