Profile | Chip Hanlon
Website | Delta Global Advisors
» Follow Me on Twitter
» My Facebook
Author's Latest Posts |
- Carly Fiorina to Endorse Citizen Power Initiative
- Paycheck Protection Simply Cannot Fall Short
- Last Call: Carly Fiorina Interview, Part III of III
- If You Get Paid Like a Pro, You Need to Deliver Like One
- Red County Exclusive: Carly Fiorina, Part II of III
More»
Steven Greenhut Jumps the Shark
By Chip Hanlon | 07/09/09 | 01:05 PM EDT | 166 Comments
If you didn't see Steven Greenhut's July 4th column, Declarations on Independence, you really should go back and check it out.
In the past, I might have highlighted a Greenhut as a positive "must-read," but seldom would that happen anymore, and certainly not in this case. Here, Greenhut shows how, like many Libertarians, he has become a prisoner of his own supposed philosophy.
Now, the article does make some points about the intrusions of government that will have you nodding your head, like government burdens on employers and infringments on the right to bear arms. However, one passage in particular gives a valuable glimpse into the mind of the extreme Libertarian:
Fourth, try attending one of the many military displays, where you can honor those agencies that have protected your freedoms by invading countries that you previously had never heard of. While you're at it, try appreciating every one of the $500 billion-plus spent by the Pentagon this year, along with the additional billions spent by the nation's intelligence officials to protect your freedoms in ways so important that they must be kept secret from you.
One of the few functions of government someone like Greenhut would acknowledge as appropriate is its duty to protect its citizens-- via both the military for national defense and via a law enforcement/court system. Apparently, though, according to Steve those intelligence agencies and their "secrecy" have no place in a national defense scheme. And you can just hear the disdain he holds for those in our military in the very first line in that paragraph.
Is it legitimate to question laws like the Patriot Act or the size and scope of our military spending and engagements? Undoubtedly, but Libertarians don't stop on any reasonable ground in these areas.
They argue-- with the benefit of hindsight-- that we should never have gotten involved in World War II, that Abraham Lincoln is one of history's worst war criminals, that the Berlin Airlift was an inapporpriate allocation of federal dollars. I guess the Cold War policy of containment was, what, unconstitutional, Steve?
After all, Libertarian hero Ron Paul himself routinely calls Ronald Reagan a "failure," so yes, they probably have concluded that any money spent toward bringing down the Iron Curtain was a waste. In their bizarre ideology, it is better to passively watch all the events of the world and take literally no hand in shaping it to meet our American interests nor the those of individual liberty around the globe. Some belief system.
You didn't realize all these things about folks like Greenhut?
Their "philosophy" is really pretty simple: Libertarians hate government, period, and the government they hate the most is their own. Thus, they will seldom offer much in the way of the solutions other than railing against the lack of political purity in our system, even if their "purity" would allow for polygamy, for instance.
And it's why a guy like Steve will take inane examples of government "intrusions" and turn them into full-blown conspiracies. You can question its effectiveness, statistically, but I doubt most rational people think that a law prohibiting someone from shooting a bottle rocket firework onto my roof represents an assault on all of our constitutional freedoms. And I guess by singling out a rare instance of excessive police force, Steve's saying the teenager's next keg party should just be allowed to carry on all night, better that than calling in the "jack-booted thugs" that folks like him worry so much about.
Sadly, because the GOP failed so miserably on fiscal responsibility while in the majority, many on the right are being enticed by the little they know about Libertarians-- their commitment to fiscal restraint. To an extent, their ideas here are admirable. When their full belief system is known, however, support of Libertarians like Paul cannot be defended.
But folks like Paul are learning, becoming better at hiding their extremist views. Thus, it's important to catch those moments when they show their true colors-- moments which will call their credibility entirely into question.
Just like when Fonzie jumped the shark, marking the moment when Happy Days lost its relevance as a show, Steven Greenhut just had one of those moments, giving all of us a glimpse into the extremist he seems to have become due to his frustration with the Republican party.
Laughably, Libertarians claim a monopoly on channeling the innermost thoughts of our Founders; in truth, their frustration cannot excuse the nonsense they try to pass off as reason.
If you're not represented by the Libertarian beliefs I highlighted above, get off your water skis, Steve... come over to the shore with the rest of us and dry off. Let's work to limit government from a position of common sense, not extremism. Let's work to fix the GOP, not run off and join the merry band of Ron Paul and his "philosophers."
| 
|
166 Comments | Related Topics »Orange County (CA)
RECOMMENDED SITES
Comments
I COULD NOT possibly LOVE that article any more than I do. BRAVO, sir!!!!!! I am so sick and tired of my smug Libertarian friends cheering on what they think will be our economic collapse. They don't really want to do anything to stop the Obama course we are on. They WANT to see another Depression result from it. What is wrong with these people?!!!!
I've have yet to meet a libertarian that would actually like to see another depression result from the current economic downturn. Libertarians want to avoid another depression, which is why they work tirelessly to educate people on the dangers of the fiat monetary system we currently have. The Obama course that we are on would be no different if John McCain were in office. The only difference is the Republican party would still be digging their hole, but their losses in the previous election cycles have finally forced them to start climbing out.
You've obviously never met a gold bug.
That's akin to suggesting that soldiers hope for war. Gold is a good bet, and sure looks better than devalued currency. But that does not ill wishes betray.
Then you're not a gold bug, just a rational investor concerned about inflation in today's environment, as am I. No offense, but you've obviously never met a gold bug, either.
Haha, you make it sound like any of this is new. Yes the numbers are higher, but who cares?^. Stealing is Stealing. I don't care what they do with the money after it's stolen.
You should revise that to the ..............................Herbert Hoover, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry S Truman, Dwight D. Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, James Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, William J. Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack H. Obama Course.
Like it or not, Government will always be a machine that steals to support it's appetite for murder and enslavement.
It's not Right vs Left, only The State vs You.
Neocons want to eat their cake and have it too when it comes to picking and choosing their next tyrannical law. They believe you can have things like a drug war and NOT ultimately end up with a full blown tyrannical government!
It's like the saying "give 'em and inch and they'll take a mile". Neocons actually believe you can give the government 1000 miles...but of course that's only if the laws agree with their personal beliefs and desires....regardless of how far that belief strays from the rule of law that The Constitution is supposed to guarantee us.
It's one thing for the "left" to try to turn America into a China, a North Korea, a Russia.....but atleast they acknowledge what it is they are and what they are doing.
But the neocons....oh no....they tell you right to your face "I'm a patriot" "I'm for freedom and liberty" when actually they are every bit the hardcore statists/fascists the "left" is. They don't know who and what they are or what it is they have done to my once great nation.
Neocons,
I know you all believe that big government isn't big government as long as it adheres to the neocon agenda and belief system....but you are wrong...very very wrong.
When this country was founded it wasn't about right or left it was about whether you were a statists or not. If you do not realize what you have done and who you are you will eventually be fighting on the side of government i.e. tyranny. It doesn't get any more obvious, I could not possibly state it more clearly. If you don't wake up and fight against evil you will be fighting for evil!!! Evil = A Government that has been given two inches let alone one thousand miles!!! As a Libertarian myself I see a need for government....but NOT a government that has been given even two inches!!!!
ZxEfR
What I love is seeing the neo-cons stand up for what they believe in --- war war and more war! Go neo-cons to your battles against everything, everyone, everywhere. Please leave my family and our tax dollars out of your deficit spending to prop up your foreign intervention and overthrow of democratically elected governments (Iran in the early 50s was Democratic until the CIA overthrew it).
Far from wishing for and cheering on a Depression the libertarian (I like the way you capitalize the L to associate it with the Libertarian Party - touche) acknowledges reality - it is already here. Obama and Congress promised us that if we just passed the stimulus unemployment would not go above 9.0% - we have already (obviously) passed that milestone and it is only going up. That is the "official" number BTW which even mainstream economists would acknowledge as discounting the real number - if we used the means of calculating unemployment that they did in the first Depression we would see that we are in the second Depression - with unemployment somewhere north of 17.0% (check out John Mauldin's numbers if you get the chance).
What I, and many others, are tired of is the America "right or wrong" drink the Kool-Aid attitude by bovine Americans who can't spell Afghanistan much less find it on a map. The average American has not consideration for what it is like to live in Irag and Afghanistan post-invasion. When using conservative numbers the US government has killed upwards of 500,000 Iraqis (I am just talking about the war here and not the sanctions, etc.) and we have lost less than 5,000 (thankfully) the idea of just dismissing that as a non-issue is not only morally repugnant and dehumanizing but it is beneath everything this country has stood for (rhetorically) since its founding.
Am I proud to be an American - yes. Am I proud of my government - absolutely NOT - and neither should anyone who has a claim on morality or a sense of history and reality.
It's sad to read how economically ignorant the Republican Party has become.
It used to be just the Democrats who were the big spenders, and still believed socialism could work, but not any more. Is there really any difference between the parties? It certainly doesn't look that way.
And I can't even consider myself a Libertarian or at least part of the national party, because look who they choose to run for President last year. What a joke. As George Carlin once said, "individuals are smart, groups are stupid." and both Democrats and Republicans fall right into that pile.
Isn't that convenient? Now that the neocons are out of power and deservedly so they whine about how us not supporting the big ole GOP is going to hand victory to the Democrats. Blame, blame, blame, whine, whine, whine, is all they will ever do. I guess Obama is our fault huh? If we would just support the GOP and "get back to work", we could turn the whole country around in no time! Yippee!!!
Not.
nm
Chip, your "George Bush/center right common sense" the last eight years before Obama brought us the highest spending and largest growth by the government that we've ever seen...all under GOP rule I might add. Is that what we should be in a hurry to get back to? If it is, count me out. Your obsession lately of hammering Ron Paul is quite hilarious. We're trying to bring believablility and credibility back to the party. Do you really think if the GOP were handed back the majority after 2010 that they will have learned their lesson? That truly is wishful thinking at this point. Now, I do agree with you that some Libertarian ideas are wacky and I don't agree with all of them. However, your quest to purify the GOP of libertarian thought is itself laughable. We're never gonna win another national election if we don't broaden the party.
It is precisely my point that smart folks like you have leapt into the arms of a false prophet; frustration with the GOP is no reason to accept the ideologies of Ron Paul. And I believe you know that I could not bring myself to vote for McCain and that I did not vote for W in '04 (I voted each time, but merely skipped the line for President in each case), so you're assertion that I'm advocating "George Bush/Center right common sense" is a purposeful mischaracterization on your part, Allan. Perhaps it's because you're too embarrassed to take up forcefully for your new hero, Paul. Good... you should be.
Chip Hanlon,
While you try to make a name for yourself blasting THE MOST conservative, constitutional congressman in government, the GOP remains infested with non-credible, big government jackasses that proven to be pretty much in line with the Democrats - until now - and are therefore undeserving of our votes.
There was a time in this country where Ron Paul's views were pretty mainstream. Free markets, sound currency, humble foreign policy, fiscal restraint, aggressive protection of individual rights, general distrust for government...you know the script...all desireable and attractive objectives.
The GOP - in its current form - has nothing to do with the above-mentioned ideals and is unworthy of my support. Until the GOP purges itself of all modern-day, pseudo-conservatives who were so recently doing all the same things Obama and this Congress is doing, I will continue to do everything in my power to undermine it...because IT is no different than the thugs we've got now in the majority.
I'm done serving this government in uniform. I'm done furthering the government-created bubble/bust monopolies on Wall St. I'm done tolerating fakes like yourself who have the gall to criticize the most constitutional, open and honest, intellectually honest person in government- Ron Paul.
As Ron Paul would say, 'it has little to do with me (Ron Paul)...and everything to do with the message'...a message you haven't gotten yet, Chip.
~ Sean O'D.
Good to hear you didn't support McCain or Bush the second time around. Unfortunately, I did vote for W both times and Arnold the first time, so you got me on that one :) But back to your subject because I'd like to know which views/idealogies that will disqualify a person in Chip Hanlon's world. We know you give a pass to Republican politicians for supporting trillion dollar bailouts, but it's not okay in your book to question something like the drug war, foreign policy, or auditing the Federal Reserve. BTW, I'm not embarassed at all to support Ron Paul. The fact that you keep writing about him shows his relevance to the debate today in the party.
no, it shows merely how frustrated Republicans are with their own party over fiscal matters-- they're willing to hold their noses and support a nut like Paul. Even you privately admit you'd rather support the GOP-- if it were Reagan's GOP again, I'm guessing you'd be back on board, Allan. Am I wrong?
Even though I was never old enough to vote for him, I'd vote for him again in a heartbeat today if someone like him were around. Unfortunately, all we seem to be getting lately from the GOP are candidates like Guliani and McCain who so water down the classic GOP message that it's hard to tell them apart from most Democrats. If you had your wish, who would you want to the GOP standard bearer for 2012?
Absurd! We held our noses when voting for the "lesser of two evils" Republican candidate. Ron Paul taught us that we don't have to keep holding our noses to take part in the political process. His no-compromise approach showed us exactly why the GOP failed.
Chip Hanlon said this: "....a nut like Paul."
--------------------------------------------
Chip's becoming frustrated that his retarded opinion is flawed and being thrown back into his face so he resorts to name calling.
So typical and predictable and childlike.
How long before he violates Godwin? <snicker>
Chip,
The label you apply to Ron Paul makes me question your intelligence and your research. On what solid evidence do you base your criticism of Dr. Paul? Dr. Paul has had a successful career as a medical doctor and has served many years as the honest, principled voice of reason in Congress for many years. He advocates America's right to defend itself, but rightly opposes America's illegal attack on Iraq. America invaded a country that posed no threat to us, killing many innocent civilians, and needlessly wasting the precious blood of many fine American soldiers. Our soldiers and our defense budget would serve our country and defend our Constitution by protecting America's borders and building a stronger defense system, rather than hypocritically being deployed by our corrupt and overreaching facist government to attack Iraq in the name of "democracy."
Thanks for linking to my column, Chip. The quotation you cite, part of a tongue-in-cheek piece lampooning growth in governments, criticizes what I view as excessive U.S. interventions and excessive secrecy by recent administrations. But I can't recall arguing that the U.S. shouldn't provide defense, intelligence or law enforcement. Interesting how you use the terms "someone like Greenhut" and "folks like Greenhut." That saves you from actually having to address things I actually believe. And then you throw in terms like "extremist," etc., to seal the deal. Most of the things you bring up are positions I have never taken, but -- oh, yeah -- people like me must take them! That reminds me of the common guilt-by-association tactics that come from the Left. No doubt we disagree on many things, ranging from the frequency of law enforcement abuse to the viability of the Republican Party as a party that could actually limit government to the proper use of the U.S. military. My columns clearly are open to criticism. But try sticking to what I've written, not what folks like me supposedly think!
You don't routinely condemn the entire GOP, didn't tell me in person in Minneapolis what a thrill is was to go to the Ron Paul event there and what a waste of time it was being at the GOP convention? You're now a Libertarian, Steve, and "folks like you" means recent Libertarian converts. I'd like to have you back-- we'd need folks like you to help straighten out the only party which can challenge the Dems. Instead, you've chosen to back a person, Paul, with some of the strangest beliefs imaginable. You point to his good ideas while ignoring his bad ones, a pass you no longer give to our party. I'm afraid that if you stay over there too long, you'll end up like the most die-hard Libertarian whackos, that you'll find it hard to come back and will in time end up trumpeting some of the nuttiest beliefs they hold. I find it interesting that you and Allan never address those, yes, extremist beliefs they hold-- you ignore them completely. I don't plan on letting you. Go back through my article and defend a few of the beliefs I mention. For starters, I belong to a political organization which carries the name of a U.S. President your party deems a war criminal. I'd be very curious to know if you share that particular view (particularly today of all days--and you know what I mean by that). You are a highly intelligent person who has indeed jumped the shark, my friend. Come back to relevance. Come back to the only party on the right that matters and help fix it.
So Chip, you would like to have us back but what is the likelyhood of that happening when you spout rhetoricall statements like we have witnessed. I can tell from your photo you are not even close to my age and I am a military veteran. I didn't vote for W either time or McCain this time. I worked with Military Intelligence from the mid 70's to 78 and I have a very good grasp of the reality of what truly goes on. You my friend run around talking about things you have no clue about. The problem is not so much that there are people that support Ron Paul, because they have learned that there is no difference between the Neo Con GOP and the Democrats. You get yourself all worked up about something like Ron Paul and fail to see what is truly going on. No the people that support Ron Paul will not be back and that is the sad state of affairs for the GOP. The GOP must learn that in order to gain the numbers they need they will need to change. So continue with your sarcastic statements about how crazy you think Ron Paul and his followers are in your eyes and watch where that gets you. I would suggest you pick up one of Ron Pauls books and read it with an open mind. Maybe then you will learn what is lacking to bring the GOP back in numbers. Your anger will gain you nothing and eventually you will find yourself loosing people that read your columns. Good Luck my friend and don't worry about me ever coming back to read anything you have to say.
What is strange about -
Only committing our troops to actions, which are in defense of our country?
Having sound money, as outlined in the constitution, which would put cuffs on government spending outside its means?
Allowing the States to exercise their rights as outlined in the Constitution?
Opening the books of the Federal Reserve to see what they are doing?
Eliminating the IRS? The money stolen from us, whom Reagan outlined in his Grace Commission Report, through the IRS goes only to pay for the interest on the paper money the Federal Reserve creates out of thin air?
Giving people the right to opt out of government sponsored social security and medical coverage so that they can save for their own expenses and keep the fruits of their labors?
Letting failed companies’ fail and not handing the bill to bailout out these companies to the people?
Having a balanced budget of the Federal Government so that a Federal Reserve won’t need to finance our deficits?
Getting the Federal Government out of the affairs of the States?
What is strange about that? Jefferson and Washington formed this country under these "strange ideas". Please outline what policies you think are off?
I am all for it and Republican Party is in a dire situation if they do not go back to their roots. The Elephant won’t fool me, as he is the same as the Donkey. Ron Paul was simply the ONLY republican who woke me up to this fact.
As an outsider to this whole show at this site, it is totally comedic to come in and see a supposedly self-respecting pundit resort to the level of ad hominem and straw man logical fallacies this Chip Hanlon character apparantly is extremely fond of using. Dear sir, if you are providing fuel for the libertarian wing of the political spectrum via well crafted satire of nonsensical neo-conservatism, you are doing a great job! Keep it up!
too lazy to type it out. so, i second what you just said. =)
may i ask how going to Iraq helped defend the USA. Or how the patriot act protects my rights. or having our military spread out in over 100 countries in the world. or how spending millions to defend apan and korea protects my rights. We would have never needed to fight the USSR to defeat them, communism is dammed to fail from the beggining. This is precisely why i think the USSA will to.
I have to partially agree with Allan on this one. If we're going to win back those libertarian minded frustrated Republicans, it won't be by the way of trashing their "philosophy" but by advocating our message and eloquently communicating to those folks WHY they should come back to us. The GOP's latest support for the TARP (John Campbell anyone?) did WONDERS for those who have trashed the GOP lately. Our unwillingness to question aspects of the institution that we agree with (the Fed, the war on drugs, etc) does not give someone who cares about the constitution any reason to think that we have changed at all since the last time we were given power. Actions speak much louder than words...and folks are watching.
I agree with you on virtually all of this, particularly regarding your critiques of Republicans--have they learned enough since losing power? Clearly not. That said, the GOP is our only path back to power so we need to keep pounding on them until they return to a Reaganesque path (sorry Jeb Bush, I know you find that notion passe). I fully intend, however, to keep pummeling Libertarians like Greenhut and Allan... if I can humiliate them relentlessly by exposing the totality of the Ron Paul belief set, I dream it may allow a few wayward Republicans who have wandered over there to read such exchanges and to return to the GOP privately, without any embarrassment. This will be a personal mission of mine until the Ron Paul "movement" is back in the 1% column where it belongs.
What exactly is the Ron Paul belief set that you speak of? Why should anyone be embarrassed to support it?
What the heck??? The "craziness of Ron Paul?" "exposing" the beliefs set? I don't even know where to start. I'm not here to defend (L) - they can hold their own - but it is Ron Paul who is far more "conservative" then GHWB, GWB, Cheney, Rumsfield and the lot of them. What set of beliefs does Ron Paul hold that was NOT espoused by our Founding Fathers? A group of men that neither (R) or (D) seem to consider very important nowadays. Is it the danger of a Central Bank? A "belief" held also by Jefferson and Franklin after he witnessed the destruction of our currency by the printing press he once admired? Is it the foreign entanglments? About which were warned against by both Washington and Jefferson? Is it the size of gov't? a limited gov't that all Founding Fathers espoused while drafting our Constitution? I could go on...
During the primaries I didn't put a RP bumper sticker on my car. Now I proudly have one that says "Ron Paul was right". You know why? It makes me feel smart! It says that I supported the only candidate who actually has a clue about what's going on. He is the only presidential candidate in the debates that saw the pending economic crisis. He was right about the Iraq war, even as I stupidly supported it in the beginning. What wasn't he right about? Perhaps you mean he is crazy... crazy like a fox?
Another point - you will "badger relentlessly" those (r) who support RP and other libertarian ideas? Fine, you do that! And continue to watch the mass exodus of (R) from our party! I laugh when I hear Hannity and his ilk talk about monetary policy and the Federal Reserve... where were these idiots a year ago? Oh yeah, calling Ron Paul crazy. Good call, guys! Spot on analysis!
Final point - re: FISA and other secretive exploits by our gov't... (R) were all for this when GWB was in power, now they are wary of such power in the hands of a (D). Duh! That's why these powers were never meant to be in the hands of gov't at all nor was there to be such secrecy! The FF knew that NO ONE could be trusted with such powers! And if one man could, that man would inevitably have to turn over those powers to another who may not be so trustworthy. Their brilliant plan was to keep secrecy and said powers from the gov't altogether. I absolutley must agree with the (L) on that one.
Greenspan and Bernanke espouse themselves to be libertarian, however if you have read anything about the philosophy you would plainly see that NO WHERE do libertarians advocate a central bank that can manipulate money supply and interest rates. This is the one main misunderstanding of the neoconservative branch of the Republicans. A free market does not have a central bank that distorts true price discovery of the market in interest rates and a free market does not have a money supply that can be augmented in private at the behest of political cronies. Keep in mind that the deficit spending, that is used to fund 700 military bases in 130+ countries out of roughly 190, is financed the same way the welfare state is financed. It is all done through inflation at the hands of the Federal Reserve. This is a hidden tax that is used by politicians to spend more than the government actually has.
To claim Greenspan is a libertarian is like saying George Bush was a conservative. Utter nonsense.
One thing many neoconservatives will notice about libertarians (small "l" thank you) is that we tend to support our arguments with facts. Most of the debates I have had with neo-cons end up with the neo-con name-calling as they are backed into a corner with no counter to the supporting facts behind the scam of our foreign policy or outright lies of the Republican Party. You can tell when you have a neo-con cornered intellectually when they start screaming and name-calling.
I see more name-calling from the hard-line Republicans than I do from the libertarians.
Chip, please keep doing what you're doing! We applaud you wholeheartedly...
...for helping cement those recent small 'l' libertarian converts in their beliefs! You are doing a wonderful job in pointing out all the fallacies of neocon-ism and helping people to 'lift the veil' from their eyes and see the true meaning of liberty. Thank You!!
If this were a poker game right now, the small "L" libertarians in the party like myself are holding a stronger hand to play going forward and I think you realize that, so you resort to calling people like myself and Steven out because we may hold some minority viewpoints in the party. I happen to think it's a far worse crime for Republican politicians to talk about smaller government and then do the opposite when they get back to DC than to hold some views that you categorize as whacky. So you keep your jihad going against small "L" libertarians in the party if that makes you happy and I'll continue doing the hard grunt work of trying to convince people who have left the party because we have stood for nothing, to come back. I relish the debate :)
How many Libertarian legislators are there in California? None. The mess we are in is the fault of the red and blue parties, period.
How many legislators? Zero??? It has been 35 years. Leave the fringe and come join us in the battle. There is real work to be done.
Steve fails to address at all what he ACTUALLY DID say in that offensive and insulting paragraph. It is a "jumping the shark" moment. I have had Libertarians write me all week expressing their disgust at such a vitriolic disdain for our military (by military, I mean the troops, not the institutions he so loathes). I know exactly what he said, and it was reckless and irresponsible. And I know exactly what he meant, and it is why the fringe Libertarians never have, and never will, make any real cultural or political impact in society.
Chip is right - fiscally conservative people like us must do all we can to shun the craziness of Ron Paul, while still embracing the few policies he holds that we share. I am a "strong dollar, low spending, low tax, the GOP is out of control" kind of guy. If that means I have to start calling Abe Lincoln a war criminal, and comparing Bush with Hitler, and berating any person or institution of lawful authority in the country, than count me out. But it doesn't. There are reasonable people everywhere on this side of conservatism who do not have a sociological and psychological attraction to the fringe. We can be Reagan Reoublicans again. Ron Paul had a platform to talk about sound money and low spending and Constitutional government. He used the platform to talk about the hijcakers of 9/11 being just regular thugs. He is useless to the cause. Onward and forward.
So beautifully said. Replace my whole article with paragraph 2 of David's comment. Flawless.
Again, what is the "craziness" of Ron Paul?
Also, what is wrong with objectively analyzing Lincoln's presidency? Is it not responsible to analyze the decisions of all of our past presidents? While you criticize those who call Lincoln a war criminal, you provide no evidence to counter their argument.
As far as comparing "Bush with Hitler"...When has Ron Paul ever said that?
Ron Paul used his platform effectively to discuss sound money, low spending, and Constitutional government. That is why he has such passionate followers. Moreover, are the hijackers of 9/11 not thugs? Are murderers not thugs? I think you are simplifying his statements. When has he ever said they are "regular thugs"?
Furthermore, I do not think libertarians hold disdain for our military, that is, the men and women who volunteer their lives to protect us. What libertarians disdain are the decisions made by politicians regarding unjust military action. There is a big difference, and your mischaracterization stems from either ignorance or purposeful slandering.
Lastly, what is so great about being a "Reagan Republican"? Did Reagan not increase the debt and budget deficit? Did Reagan not increase the "war on drugs"? Did he not arm Osama Bin Laden? Contrary to popular belief, Reagan is not responsible for the collapse of the Soviet Union. Granted, he "cut" taxes, but he still favored having an income tax. Why would we want to support such an ideology?
Regarding your first full paragraph about Lincoln: personally, I have analyzed it and decided Lincoln is NOT a war criminal. Most Americans have, too, nut. Apparently you believe he is, which I believe was precisely the point made in the article. Cuckoo... cuckoo...
Reagan Republicans... you hate them, too? If this party were led by Reagn today, you would have about 10 other people in the country voting with you for Ron Paul. Good job.
And when had Paul compared Bush with Hitler? That might be inaccurate, but your pal Ron says crazy, crazy things all the time. Here's just one of his A-holey quotes, then a bunch of links highlighting who he is:
CALLER: I want a complete, impartial, and totally independent investigation of the events of September 11, 2001 . I’m tired of this bogus garbage about terrorism. Ask Michael Meacher about how he feels about this bogus war on terrorism. Can you comment on that please?
HON. DR. RON PAUL: Well, that would be nice to have. Unfortunately, we don’t have that in place. It will be a little bit better now with the Democrats now in charge of oversight. But you know, for top level policy there’s not a whole lot of difference between the two policies so a real investigation isn’t going to happen. But I think we have to keep pushing for it. And like you and others, we see the investigations that have been done so far as more or less cover-up and no real explanation of what went on.
So Paul's part of the '911 was a coverup crowd?' How sane! More fun from your enlightened philospher:
http://michellemalkin.com/2007/05/19/trutheriness-and-ron-paul/
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/october2005/121005slamsbush.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbOE4Ip7In0
That's your boy? No thanks.
First off, get it right my friend, Ron Paul has never been, and never will be a "Troother." He stated his support for a re-investigation of "9-11" based on his personal beliefs that the ineptitude of the government was on full display on 9-11-01 and as a result people lost their lifes.......You have to be willfully ignorant or operating with some hateful agenda to buy into the notion that to believe the government was inept on 9-11 is in any way a "Truther" position. This crap is like a cow chewing its cud, when ever it is expedient people like you are quick to vomit up something that was bitten off and chewed up over two years ago. Your closing quote from what I can only assume is a "Truther" and the Congressman's response are a clear raping of the context of what he has said publicly. And while we are at it, if you want to debate the veracity of the Congressman's claims about the Civil War, and a rising police state in the United States, I'd be more than willing to entertain such a debate if your willing to forgo baseless assertions and smear that find there wellspring in raped and convoluted twisting of the context of the mans words, in the face of evidence to the contrary.
Your links are clearly smear, and nothing more. First off, you try to associate Ron Paul with the likes of Alex Jones (Prison Planet link) in an attempt to prove some connection with "Truthers." As Ron Paul said in the debate in South Carolina, he cannot control what is said about him in the media, radio, alternative media, and the internet. Again, either you have an agenda or are blatantly ignorant of the facts concerning Ron Pauls public statements. Again, you stated you disagreed with Ron Paul on whether Lincoln was a war criminal or not. That would be better left to an honest debate, where as you have used it as a smear.
In closing your argument that Ron Paul is crazy is flawed immensely and is either your lack of facts or blatant willful ignorance.
P.S. I left out mentioning the Malkin link because she twisted the truth and context of what Ron Paul was saying, and their is evidence of her blatantly trying to smear the man.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v60TWZNVgtk
JDB
Ron Paul has had the same platform: sound money, limited government, & limiting foreign entanglements for his ENTIRE political career. the 9/11 hijackers were nothing but thugs who bullied their way into cockpits and crashed planes. How long ago was it that US foreign policy gave Bin Laden and the Mujahydeen & Bin Laden $$$? Similar to how the US armed Saddam only to later quarrel w/ him.
The Gov accountability office just smuggled bombs into 10 federal buildings and reported it on the floor of the house this past week. Here is a list of countless liberties we have sacraficed for the idea of further security yet the government has failed to provide that security:
FISA- telecom companies immune to lawsuit despite spying on US citizens, US government has tortured and prsioners have died from torture in US custody, US fed gov wishes to permentantly detain prisoners despite some already being found not guilty, air port passengers are subject to further seaarches and loss of liberty, and the list can go on, and on.
How much $ has been wasted for ZERO gains in security? The GOP, what is left of it, is pathetic. The likes of Lindsy Grahm and other remaining, fearmongering neocons and war hawks are a scourge of this nation and shame the term republican (= representative form of government).
W Bush is a war criminal. Torturing anyone is a crime against humanity and should be punished in accordance with US law. Bush is also the biggest theif in US history. What he and Paulson and now Geithner continue to due to citizens is atrocious along with their enablers at the Fed. But we live in America today where a large portion of the population support torture, have no idea what the federal reserve ssytem is or does, hate muslims, and still blindly support the federal government that consistently restricts their freedoms out of faith that it is for their own good despite countless lies and theft at their hands. Until americans care about their freedom they will continue to 'get the government they deserve good and hard'.
Reagan never cut nominal government spending. He is no conservative.
David,
I think you just jumped the shark.
I would think the members of the military would be unhappy about dying in a war that never should have been...
What a waste!
They should be unhappy-every dollar spent, every life lost has been a complete and total waste, at least from the perspective of the best interests of the nation and the vast majority of its' citizens. Chump Hanlon is a great example of why the Republican party is-most deservedly-dying, and why the 'asset management'(or your favorite buzzphrase) business is-finally-starting to implode.
Chip, Dave, and Dan
Go and get your own column read by hundreds of thousands like Steve THEN you can fling your "conservative" fecal matter on the wall to entertain yourself and your "conservative" pals who seek power.
Your rants against those of us who DONT believe in the use of force or the THREAT of force to achieve political or social end is so College Republicanesque.
ie devoid of facts and slippery slope appeals to emotion, authority and the "majority"..
YOUR :"conservative" freemarket rhetoric is going to be really effective and respected in our half-slave command economy and surveillance state. Keep up your shilling for the taxpayer subsidized warmongering GOP interventionists and purveyors of worthless fiat currency oh...and with a "good" track record.
Thanks for your backseat driving/heckling/complaining in OUR fight for freedom.
Chris Bieber
CAL YAF State Director 85-95
Legislative Aide to Assemblyman Gil Ferguson
Legislative Aide to Speaker Doris Allen
Doris Allen? Did you really say "Speaker Doris Allen?" Talk about amateur hour! -Chip Hanlon One of Many Citizens Who Proudly (and Successfully) Worked to Recall Doris Allen
Well Chip
Good reply.......your attempt at emotive reasoning shined through once again.
Very fine and detailed analysis of my points and authorities.
Your deflection was a "good" example of a Motion for Summary Judgement WITHOUT the Points and Authorities.
And in courts, that "motion" would be dismissed.
Like your reply.
friend of Steve and Alan at the OCR
Chris Bieber
oh and HiSpeed monorails and Garden Grove curtainhanger Curt Pringle...how "conservative"..and "Republican"
oh Chip you were such a player in CRP Legislature affairs...do you recall who the Caucus chose to speak regarding prolife floor debates in the 80's and early 90's?
NRA and Operation Rescue member Doris Allen.
and who RETURNED Dr. Allreds bribe campaign contribution in 95 as "blood money"??
Liberal Doris Allen
and who ACCEPTED and TOOK/TAKES LOTS OF BLOOD MONEY FROM DR. ALLRED???
principled prolife conservative Scott Baugh.
You didn't make any points worth debating. Plus, I like to let folks like you shout--it proves my point. So you are indeed a big D.A. supporter--super. Republicans who don't remember the episode can Google "Doris Allen" and draw their own conclusions. Pretty simple, really.
Post new comment