Why Ron Paul is NOT a libertarian

Points East Blog ^ | 6 May 2007 | Self

[magellan]

This is vanity, but this is also a moment of clarity for me about Ron Paul. Comments welcome.

libertarians (small "l"), believe in individual responsibility. When Ron Paul (R, TX) says U.S. foreign policy is the cause for terrorists (individuals acting as a group for a common cause) to attack us, he violates a very basic libertarian tenant: Individual Responsibility.

Ron Paul uses the same logic liberals use when they say poverty causes crime.

Ron Paul revealed himself last night. He is NO libertarian.

[Rodney King]

Dr. Paul is smart enough to KNOW that were he to run for office as a “libertarian” (read UNPRINCIPLED DEMOCRAT) in the 7th District, he would have been defeated years ago.

Can you name even a single Democrat that supports abolishing the IRS, The Department of Education, and the Department of Energy? No? Perhaps you are letting your dislike of Ron Paul get in the way of logical thinking.

[WalterSkinner]

..a classic protest candidate--he possesses some sound political positions--but it is mixed with a lot of goofy ideas

Last night he just blew a hole in the bottom of his rubber raft in the eyes of any serious voters.

The "seminar poll voters" and people who would vote for a Jessie Ventura are not going to be sufficient to get him anywhere near the nomination.

It is time to trim the field--Dr. Paul, it is time to go home...

[Rodney King]

Last night he just blew a hole in the bottom of his rubber raft in the eyes of any serious voters.

Right, because the war is just so popular with the electorate.

It is time to trim the field--Dr. Paul, it is time to go home...

I find it interesting how badly people don't want people to hear what Ron Paul has to say.

[Howie66]

Perhaps YOU are letting your allegiance to Ross Perot....err..... Ron Paul cloud your feelings......err.....thinking.

I could NEVER support someone that gives credence to the feelings of an animal such as Bin Laden.

I was raised better than that.

[WalterSkinner]

..a study of history shows that not all wars are wrong--and the ones that are right are not always popular.

And Dr. Paul is getting plenty of airtime--his assertions concerning 9/11 blew away any serious consideration...

[Rodney King]

Perhaps YOU are letting your allegiance to Ross Perot....err..... Ron Paul cloud your feelings......err.....thinking.

I can't imagine how you equate Ron Paul with Ross Perot.

I could NEVER support someone that gives credence to the feelings of an animal such as Bin Laden.

If you are walking the woods and find a baby grizzly bear and start playing with it, and then get mauled by momma bear, you would not be "giving credence to the feelings of the mama bear" by simply observing why the animal might have attacked you. I was raised better than that.

[Howie66]

“How does a one percenter get so many threads? This is astounding.”

How many threads did the McCainiacs start in 2000 and again in 2006? Or, how many threads did the “Perot-istas” start in ‘92?

Same difference!

[Howie66]

Personally, I(1)wouldn’t be STUPID enough to be pissing around with a “baby Grizzly”, and (2) I am smart enough to be well armed and and an expert shot (USMC), so that “Mama Grizzly” would be stew were she to cross my path.

Then again, I wouldn’t be stupid enough to follow some twit that thinks that 9-11 was OUR fault.

[M203M4]

A resounding YES. While I agree that they would be easier to pacify today if America and Russia had not armed them (indirectly via oil revenue, and directly during the cold war), their attack on American soil itself was low-tech and borne of pure religious fanaticism. Our actions provided them with a convenient excuse for their actions to feed to other anti-American elements and the broccoli-spined, but the desire to have a world-spanning caliphate has dominated Muslim politics for centuries.

One problem is that most of us have a fairly limited historical view of that region of the world. Prior to the 1920s, the restoration of the caliphate (composed of all regions conquered even for a single day by Muslim holy leaders) was openly discussed in the arab world. It was, and still is, viewed as their birthright. The extension of that caliphate, upon its rebirth, was (and still is) likewise viewed as a sacred duty of Muslims. Intrinsic in their religion is the view that they should have dominion over all of mankind because it is the will of Allah.

Today, for a variety of reasons, this theme is not openly discussed by most Muslim leaders. But a cursory examination of the Islamic propaganda currently spreading to and being disseminated by even many well educated "westernized" Muslims reveals that the idea of a global caliphate did not vanish in 1920. Unless you want to make the argument that this is all 'just desserts' for the crusades, the west bears no responsibility for the pure hatred directed at us by Islamic fundamentalists.

The subjugation of America, and the rest of the world, is viewed as an inevitability. The revival and expansion of the caliphate has been viewed as a sacred duty for centuries.

[B. Chezwick]

Maybe more people would want to hear what he has to say if he didn’t do things like excusing islamic terrorism.

[Rodney King]

Maybe more people would want to hear what he has to say if he didn’t do things like excusing islamic terrorism.

Which he didn't do.

[B. Chezwick]

Of course they would have. It’s their religion.

[DaveTesla]

So in essence what Mr. Ron Paul is saying is that
if we allowed Saddam Hussein to take over half of the
Middle East and commit genocide on the Shiites and
Kurds Osama bin Laden would be happy?

Thereby preventing the 9/11 attack?

Let a genocidal maniac take over the Middle East and murder 1/3
of it’s population and we would be fine?

[Sam Gamgee]

No, you miss the point. He IS the face of libertarianism. It is a disease and little better than liberalism as Ayn Rand said. You may think you are a libertarian but my guess is you are just a laisse faire conservative like myself - or if you like a classical liberal.

Look at what libertarians like Lew Rockwell and Ron Paul promote. Go to say the Austrian Economic Forum website and talk politics with some libertarians there. They are against any sort of pre-emption whatsoever. They are obsessed with taking the constitution on non-interventionism and extrapolating a blame America first philosophy from it.

[Sam Gamgee]

Duh. It is incredulous that you believe otherwise. We by the way helped out the Middle East when we saved Egypt twice - from the Suez Crisis and saved them in the Yom Kippur.

[Sam Gamgee]

He’s done it twice. First by saying Israel should not have reacted so harshly against Hezbullah, then last night at the debates.

Reagan was WRONG by the way for pulling out of Lebanon. That action was the first of many that proved to them we are a paper tiger.

Some people don’t seem to get that withdrawal encouraged continuous action against US interests, not the other way around.

[Rodney King]

We by the way helped out the Middle East when we saved Egypt twice - from the Suez Crisis and saved them in the Yom Kippur.

A lot of good that did us.

[rightwingintelligentsia]

How does a one percenter get so many threads?

Same reason Cindy Sheehan, Rosie O'Donnell, etc. get so many threads. Everyone loves a good trainwreck.

[borntodiefree]

Let’s get realistic.

Who put the barbarian Saddam in power - US
Who put an embargo on Saddam and the Iraqis - US
Who gave Saddam his WMD’s - US (right out of Florida)
Who installed the Iran leadership - US
Who’s lackey was Osama - US CIA
Who put the Taliban in power in Afghanistan - US
Adding another 100 would be easy - US

Now there is a pitbull on a leash and he can’t get to you but everyday you walk by and throw a rock at it. One day his leash stretches out a bit, you throw your rock and he runs up and takes a chunk out of your butt.

Did the putbull make its own personal decision? Yes. Did you help him be more determined. You bet your butt you did!

I don’t put any class of man above any other we are all scumbags and fall short God’s glory, just to differing degrees. The crusaders were just as barbaric as the Muslim nation. Sadam regime was no more barbaric than the Europeans were to the native Americans. The British did to the Scotts the same thing that goes on today. It is man’s nature to not only be destructive but to say the enemy was worse no matter whose side and never look at his own issues. Look at Ceaser and the German’s who was barbaric...who wasn’t?

Now you can wave your flag and talk about the US’s glory or you can determine that we need to focus on ourselves and clean up our backyard and stop throwing rocks at the neighbors dog. I’m all for having a tall fence and weapons to kill that dog if he crosses into our backyard, but if we keep throwing rocks...one day he’ll get loose and try to tear another hole into us.

[cripplecreek]

All of that and you still managed to miss 1400 years of islamderthal history.

Welcome to libtardism. Looks like you’ve got it down to a science. Now run along and play with your truther friends.