It is obviously an agenda, and when can you actually call a spade a spade? It’s shoveling dirt right now, it’s denying access to debates, It’s supporting tyrrany either through strategic inaction or outright disinformation. I suppose you’re more comfortable playing the card of calling a person a “Tin Foil Hatter” than admitting that there is something organized in the fishiness, and that that organization is maliciously and selfishly serving the interests of the status quo political realities in the country.

What interests do you serve by your disingenuous twittering on about how delusional the entirety of a candidates positions are, really? Are you really serving the cause of limited government and individual liberty by belittling those that espouse an opinion based on the evidence of our age? Gulf of Tonkin(let’s have a war), Iran – Contra(let’s fund a war in a client-state), Billions or Trillions of money vanishing in Iraq (it’s not organized malice it’s incompetence?), nothing to see here JAZZHANDS! ;)

Come on now, wake up.

Yes, the Martians controlling Radley’s connection to the Kochtopus have sent the Church of Scientology a meo saying it’s time for the Illuminati to shut down the “Paul Operation,” which, as you know, has been a “black flag” operation by the CIA from the start.

Mises Institute >>>> Cata
Why back an imitation when you can back the real thing. Liberty that is.

Maybe my definition of libertarianism is too narrow but to me ( and Ron Paul even says this) it is philosophy of individualism. PERIOD. The LA Riots may have been pretty “savage” but they were acts committed by individuals. And please don’t say that only “the blacks” mob or riot. In the perfect South of Lew Rockwell, Jeff Tucker, and all those guys- it was perfectly acceptable ( and possibly still would be) for gangs/mobs of inbred white idiots to riot and murder people because of their race. It was also acceptable for police officers to do the same.

Ron Paul has said that we even have to treat TERRORISTS ( meaning those mostly Middle Eastern Muslim fellows) as individuals only and bring individual justice. Even though it could be said that those guys could be “identified by the color or their skin” and other characteristics. But some of his “supporters” have no problem making bigoted generalizations about all blacks or all gays. Interesting. Of course, those weren’t Ron’s words. But apparently a large % of RP’s “supporters” don’t support Ron Paul as much as they worship Lew Rockwell. If Lew Rockwell or Murray Rothbard said it, please don’t insult their Gods. ROn Paul supporters must now be racial collectivists. if not, we are “neocons.”

As has been covered many times in many places Lew Rockwell celebrated the beating of Rodney King. He and Rothbard also supported police dealing out “punishment.” How LIBERTARIAN of them. Sounds like they LOVED State Power as long as it served their interests. You know like beating “the blacks” or lynching them to “keep the social order.”

My friends and family are not racists, so I just don’t have the experience to understand the perspective that libertarianism and Ron Paul would benefit from being associated with racists. But acccording to many rapid Lew Rockwell cultists ( I say that because they worship LRC but dont care too much about Ron Paul really. They never started crying over the newsletters until their man Lew was implicated) on the ronpaulforums and other places- “the anti-war left” is much more in agreement with the LRC/LVMI crowd that the “corporatist neocons” of reason and Cato. Really? I don’t know too many anti-war leftist neo-confederate racists. If anything young anti-war people are more likely to be turned OFF by racism.

And that was a point made by reason. Ron Paul’s current success ( though perhaps it was jump started by the old newsletter donors) is fueled more by young anti-war folks, not racist “populists.” All you “populists” are probably HURTING Ron Paul and his campaign by working to turnoff “normal” decent people- those people who don’t scapegoat others ( hey Ron Paul always says he doesnt believing in scapegoating immigrants or others!) and are tolerant.

The political pandering of 15-20 years ago is disturbing, but could have been addressed and swiftly taken care of. The Damage is not coming from the newsletters, reason, Cato, or any number of longtime libertarians ( according to the LRC cultists of course, all normal libertarians are pro-war neocons who are being paidoff by big business, other campaigns, and “Isreali bankers”). It is coming from the blind defenders who show such ignorance and nuttiness in their response. It comes from places like LRC where the response is to attack the messengers and not address the substance of anything. It is to call people disturbing names.

I actually DO support ROn Paul. That’s why I wanted this stuff dealt with. All these articles are in agreement that Ron Paul did not write the newsletters. Hmm, Ron Paul supporters ( real ones anyway) should be HAPPY. Good, the Ron paul today who talks about individualism and civil liberties did not write those disgusting collectivist pieces. Who did? Lew rockwell? Oh yeah? Maybe there is a proper way to address this.

But NO, the response is “TNR and that homosexual blah blha blha, leftists, commies, reason necons, blah blah blah, Cato has an agenda they support Rudy and are funded by Jewish bankers, blah blahblha, what that wasnt racist?. real libertarians are christians who believe in slavery, the white social order, defending white women’s honor with lynchings, beating black protesters, murdering those Jew comsymps who tried to help those n***** vote,etc blah blah fed, blah blah, necons, blah blah, radley nick and boaz only care about smoking pot and sex, and so on. homos. Being paid by Fox News. Its a conspiracy!”

As a ROn Paul supporter, when/if the campaign implodes I will NOT blame Cato, Reason, or any decent people like Radley Balko. I will blame the nutjobs who perverted a decent message (I disagree with RP on a couple things, but if one chooses to engage in politics, you take the closest thing) and drove away the potential normal voters. You know, people against the War and for the Constitution, but are still moderately sane and don’t fetishize the Confederacy.

If anything, this ordeal has made me have even more respect for the reason and Cato folks and the work they do in support of liberty and tolerance.

I guess every news org has it’s price. I at least hope that Reason was paid well for their services.

And I´m more sensitive to racism and bigotry than most Americans.

We will march together, as ONE. Ron Paul has inspired us all…black, white, brown, & yellow.
http://www.freeatlast2008.com/

If a woman is dating a man who never takes her anyplace nice, why does she complain only about him to her girlfriends when there are billions of other men who aren’t taking her anyplace at all?

Philosophically I am a libertarian. But give me a strict constitutionalist over a mushy socialist any day of the week. When I have to worry only about the state government oppressing me, it will be the happiest day of my life.

“What I don’t know is how much he might have known about who wrote such things. I personally don’t care, considering it was over 10+ years ago, and that he might not even remember.”

I’m less concerned about who wrote the individual articles than with who Ron Paul put in charge of the newsletter and who had editorial authority over it. While I can certainly understand if smaller details (such as individual writers for each article) are forgotten I find it extremely unlikely that he doesn’t remember who ran it for him, considering the amount of revenue it generated for him personally, and I find it disingenuous that a candidate running on a platform of integrity and distrust of government would expect us to merely take his word for it…especially if the person who edited the newsletter is still working for him in a prominent capacity.

As for why libertarians attack Ron Paul and not other candidates I suspect it’s because we just take it as read that the other candidates are bad and we’re interested in discussing the one that’s most relevant to us and whether we should support him. Whatever the tone, articles about Ron Paul are about Ron Paul, not the other candidates and attempting to deflect blame from him by pointing at nasty things about them is not a valid defense.

Point taken on the rancor and I apologize.

I assume the reason that so many libertarians and libertarian-leaning persons are critical of Ron Paul and do not harp incessantly on the other candidates… is that they, and their politically like-minded associates, have ALREADY determined that they despise the politics of, and have no intention of voting for, the other candidates. Why waste time railing about Giuliani or Clinton or Huckabee when I, and everyone I know with a similar political orientation, would probably never vote for any of them under any circumstances?

Additionally, by labeling himself a libertarian and a devotee of Austrian economics, Paul has styled himself as a representative of a certain political philosophy. The result is that others who self-identify as followers of that political philosophy may naturally have an interest in how that candidate comports himself, and the views that he actually holds. If Paul represents libertarianism to the wider public, then I’m interested in what the wider public thinks about libertarianism through what they ascribe to Paul. I may also be interested in vocally distancing myself from a self-styled libertarian with odious personal views or political programs.

We’re at an impasse, so this will just be food for thought for everyone.

I don’t attempt to excuse anything. It’s a simple concept called being fair. If your answer is “we’ll attack other candidates once we are good and satisfied with the attack on Ron Paul and associates”, then I’ll guess that this will never move past the “attack Ron Paul and associates” stage, which confirms a hidden agenda.

I’m satisfied that Ron Paul isn’t a racist. What I don’t know is how much he might have known about who wrote such things. I personally don’t care, considering it was over 10+ years ago, and that he might not even remember. I have a hard time remembering what I had for dinner last week. I have a sharp memory when it comes to my work, but other things fall by the wayside. Isn’t it possible that the same is happening here? Or is your memory perfect of all things in your life over the past 10+ years?

Gosh, you should come over to our site to be a participant in the Paulestinian Drinking Game :)

Attempting to excuse what Ron Paul did or didn’t do by claiming that other candidates are just as bad or worse is not a valid defense for Ron Paul, it’s a fallacy. He made a series of mistakes and he’s done a horrible job of dealing with them…that’s got nothing to do with anybody but him.

I don’t think there’s anything wrong with Ron Paul’s ideas (well, except for immigration, where I think he’s completely wrong) or that the man’s racist…but I do think he’s terrible about ferreting out who’s a help to what he wants to get accomplished and who holds him back and that he has a tendency to let his message get hijacked by people with their own agendas. I think that’s enough of a reason to come out against him as president or for libertarians to distance themselves for him in this race. But I am a big fan of him as a Congressman (where his weaknesses aren’t quite so damning) and I hope he continues on in that capacity. I believe that the government and Americans in general are certainly better off with him as a Congressman than without him.