Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Election Issues New website for libertarian republicans

Ron Paul is going to be on the "The Constitutional American" on Monday, Aug 27, from 5-7 PM (Central time). You can listen to him at WRJM-FM . WRJM archives the programs, so if you miss the show, you can check it out later. If you're not familiar with Paul, this is a good opportunity to find out what he's about.

Joe

Ron Paul is on MSNBC this morning with Joe Scarlborough. If they shut Joe up, it might be a good interview.

I WANT IMUS BACK!!!

Paul was very direct about our position in Iraq. He stated what most of us know to be true that our leaving troops on Muslim land after the first Iraqi war annoyed the Taliban and they struck us on 9/11. He did not exaggerate or pontificate on this subject and when Joe told him we were taking on the people who attacked us, Paul quietly told him, it was not Iraq who attacked us. Somehow his not blasting with "Brains and Balls" emotionally brought the facts home to the listeners. The loud mouth conservatives who are running do more harm to the GOP than good. People are tired of Limbaugh, Hannity and the others like Coulter who blast away at Liberals without seeing the corruption in their own party.

The GOP has ruined any political debate because they avoid the facts of the war and will continue to work on the prohibitions to show their full control over the American people. Sadly there is no lesser of two evils in America. I like Ron Paul's words but do not trust him on the social issues.

Aknight,

We can explain here, if Sandy doesn’t object.

Although it’s true that Lew receives criticism for associating with some extreme left-wingers, it’s his own writings and beliefs regarding federalism, foreign policy & anarcho-capitalism that I personally have a hard time with, and I really don’t think I’m a collectivist who seeks to tax those who create & produce the most for our country at a higher rate than those who don’t.

I believe it’s possible that many Americans who are reasonably aware of American history & politics simply have difficulty rationalizing the common boundaries between the individual rights that writers like Ayn Rand and many others on both the left & right stood for, compared to the modern Libertarian movement that Lew Rockwell and his followers represent. In my opinion, there is a distinct difference between anarchy & freedom, and the bottom line is that Lew Rockwell appeals mostly with the radical left/right crowd that seems to be arguing in defense of anarchy. I also have a hard time with the religious fervor that his likeminded followers adhere to his fringe paleolibertarian views. To me, it comes across as an extremely dogmatic movement that is trying to get back to an American system of Government that never existed, and for a good reason - it doesn’t work.

May Abraham Lincoln rest in peace. . .

Cheers,

Mal

Mal, you have pretty much described the difference between the Republican and the Libertarian agenda. What Lew has done is open up the dialog for both Republicans and Democrats. He wants a clean uncomplicated form of a Constitutional Republic.

In the last years we have seen this form of libertarianism trashed by both sides of the aisle. There are only 2 or 3 people on Reader Rant who understand this difference. The problem is not Lew Rockwell but the American people who are not academically ready for acting, thinking and surviving on their own abilities. It is a trick done by all government people to make the citizens dependent on the actions of the government itself.

This whole movement of limited government was debated seriously prior to the Goldwater election. We learned that the American people were not prepared in 1964 to take care of themselves and we gave up trying to convince the GOP to continue to limit the government's power. Shortly after this defeat the idea of a third party began to grow and the Libertarian movement was off and running.

The first changes needed was in the ways our government handled the economics. We are fortunate to have R.S. who understands this economic disaster that we have today. Rather than labeling any of us as Libertarians, why not listen and learn from writers like R.S. I wouldn't dream of trying to expose anyone to this myself as I understand clearly the disrespect here for an uppity Atheist female. I did battle here 8 years ago and will not do it again.

To reject Lew Rockwell is a shame as his association with Von Mises and Murray Rothbard is invaluable and should be looked into instead of an automatic rejection. Rockwell's concepts were very popular in the late 30s when many began to research the reasons for the Depression. I understood why our banks folded and our investments were worthless but I had a very concerned Capitalist train me. Even through high school we learned of the danger of the federal government.

Mal, this independence economically from our government did work! It took FDR and his New Deal to destroy our government. No one knows this as well as Harry Browne, Murray Rothbard and Lew Rockwell. I learned all about this when the subject was "Self Reliance" Many great writers taught us how to be self reliant and I always took it to mean off the government's teat.

Living through Bush/Clinton/Bush and seeing a runaway government trash our American Values and replace with some kind of religous crap, I yearn for anarchy!

The strange thing is that Lew is a Roman Catholic and in his religious mind loves the protection of the church but it does not extend to his wanting the protection of the government. This seems to be a problem all over America that people cannot separate the church from the state so we become enamored of those candidates who will take care of us from the crib to the grave. I guess maybe we aren't able to survive without Big Daddy and that shocks me no end.

So the LP in the enemy of many here at Reader Rant. I remember when this whole damn forum was directed by the Religious Right and God ruled the roost. Why are so many millions of Americans afraid of freedom? You are even afraid to debate a limited government.

Mal, change your signature statement, I doubt Ms Rand would approve of you anti-libertarian views.

I wrote about this subject the day after the GOP debate at the Reagan Library. This hit a lot of internet sites and I received a lot of pro and con comments. People are frightened of the Libertarian Party as it is a new concept of old government laws.

http://www.rightpov.com/

Stop and say hello to my pets who are a cross section of all political positions.

Sandy,

I wholeheartedly reject Lew Rockwell, but it doesn't mean that I reject your views. I've always respected your viewpoints, and I always will. I just don't buy this revisionist history BS that some Libertarians are trying to sell as our new way forward.

As far as you being an Atheist under attack - get over it sister. I'm not exactly the most popular poster around here myself I'm an Agnostic leaning/anti-religious fundamentalism kind of guy who doesn't really know what the hell happened millions of years ago, but I do know a little something about what happened a couple of hundred years ago and it isn't exactly what Lew Rockwell and some other radical libertarians are trying to say it was. I understand where they're coming from, and I agree with some of what they say. I just ain't buying this new religious cult growing from the school of "Austrian Economics".

What kind of economic system of government does Austria have anyway?

Study up on Ayn Rand, Sandy.


If she were alive today, she probably be branded as a neo-con.

Never! Rand hated the concept of American power in other nations! She stood for independence from all forms of government and she wrote about this in both her huge novels. Have you read her essays? She did back away from the libertarians that evolved during her last years as did I. Get back to her main philsophy of independence from the federal government.

I have wandered all over the Objectivists and libertarian sites and they change from year to year. I cannot debate Rand by today's standards as none of them represent her views that were clear at the time they were written. Both Liberals and Conservatives have tried to ooze their own brand of control over her politics. She was trashed first by Christians for daring to counter her Atheism. Then came the Liberals who found her an anarchist. She endorsed Goldwater in 1964 and even those Conservatives were shaken as the agenda did not gibe.

I've left all these forums and sites and will live by my own opinions of her words. I kept in contact with Leonard Piekoff who is her heir and the keeper of her words. I was thrilled when he did a series of lectures at Berkeley and my JJ was able to attend.

Rand is no Neocon as I define it.

C'mon now Mal be honest, do you actually believe that Rand would have ever allowed herself to be aligned with Trotskyites? Rand was an ardent opponent of anything even remotely related to Marxist ideology. There was only one woman of fame I was aware of in my youth who spoke more stridently against all things Marxist: The Black Dragon Lady, Madame Chiang Kai-Shek.

Just the same, here's my favorite Ayn Rand quote spoken in opposition to libertarians: