Friday, December 28, 2007

LRC today on Ron Paul and more
You are asked, ad nauseam, if you lose the Republican nomination, will you back the winner? You reply, quite reasonably that you gladly will, but only if that person changes his views on foreign policy, free enterprise, etc. I wonder what would happen if journalists asked Rudy, Mitt, Fred, Mike, John what would they do if you win it: would they back you? I expect they would all lie and say they would. But, the truth is that they would support Hillary, Obama or Edwards instead of you. After all, the views of the present Republican poll leaders are far closer to those of the present Democratic poll leaders than they are to yours.

...the secret of your success has nothing to do with “money bombs” or “charisma” or “expert fund raisers,” etc.
Walter Block compares the other, unsuccessful money bombs to a cargo cult, seeing the method and not understanding the reasons behind its success.

On the Nazi smear:
One tack is to equate Nazism and Communism. One is national socialism, the other is international socialism. You oppose both. If anything, you incline toward the latter, since you are an internationalist (that ought to confuse them, if nothing else). They are equally bad. No, wait, here you can incline on the Nazi side, since the Communists have murdered more people, far more people.

The mainstream media sees dangers in only one direction, not both. When Britain’s Prince Harry wore a swastika, they went ape. This is evil, this is an abomination. Well, yes, of course, it is. But, seemingly every fifth kid on college campuses wears a Che Guevara T-shirt, or one depicting a hammer and sickle, and no one in the MSM says word one about it.
I once heard NPR get misty over the October Revolution.

How Dr Paul ought to answer his consistently rude (often ‘conservative’) TV interviewers:
A. Please allow me to answer your first question before breaking off and trying to answer a second, and then a third, all at the same time.
B. I am sure your audience will get more out of this interview if you allow me to answer a question.
C. Please do not continually interrupt me; it is impolite.
D. Ignore his follow-up questions, and tell him you are going to keep doing this, until you answer the first few questions to your satisfaction.
On gold:
Strictly speaking, you do NOT favor the gold standard. Rather, you favor free-market money: any monetary medium chosen by market participants.
On the right kind of internationalism, like listening to sane, decent people around the world and thus not invading Iraq:
Robert Taft’s voluntarist internationalism insisted only that American policy abroad should be constitutional and conducted with the consent of, and in the general interests of, the American people. It was a policy formulated in the same spirit that animates what people are calling “the Ron Paul Revolution” today. In truth, this “revolution” consists in nothing more than calling the Republican Party back to its roots.

Unfortunately, after Taft the party gradually adopted the Democrats’ doctrine of unilateral interventionism.
The doctrine that brought you Vietnam.

Shock therapy
How realistic possible catastrophes could produce a Paul presidency. Of course I don’t mean a Reichstag fire! The people in charge now would just drive the country into the ground so that the people wake up.

No comments:

Post a comment

Leave comment