Libertarians: URGENT! Call @SenRandPaul's office & urge him to vote NO on the Iran sanctions bill! 202-224-4343
— Justin Raimondo (@JustinRaimondo) January 10, 2014
Earth to @SenRandPaul: PLEASE don't do this! http://t.co/IOtNc5ObFT
— Justin Raimondo (@JustinRaimondo) January 10, 2014
A friend emails:
The first question that popped into my head is "should it come to this" for Libertarians? Shouldn't Rand know that he shouldn't be voting for sanctions?
Rand Paul should simply be cut loose by the liberty movement. Sadly, he's little different from the rest of the neo-con losers.
ReplyDeleteI see that your friend used the capital "L", very good.
ReplyDelete"Shouldn't Rand know that he shouldn't be voting for sanctions?"
ReplyDeleteI was thinking the same thing RW.
If you hadn't had such wrong expectations of him, you would be able to get what he has to offer, which is a more rational voice on some issues.
ReplyDeleteIt's a waste of time to invest so much energy - positive or negative - in the guy.
He is what he is.
There are no "wrong expectations" of Rand. I'm going out on a limb but i think RW and i agree that there is nothing big to "expect" from Rand in the first place.
DeleteThe reason this particular drum is beaten is because way too many people keep repeating the canard that Rand Paul is "libertarian", and thus may influence people to think his words or actions represent people that are truly libertarian.
And secondly, to try to convince libertarians that EVEN that which you call "a more rational voice on some issues" will very likely be a sham since one can never seem to rely on Rand to stick to any principle with a clear voice. Everything is either up for debate, or expressed in what i think is a deliberately hazy manner.
If he had simply come out and said he is a neocon, hardly anybody in the libertarian ranks would have wasted a word on him. It is the fact that he weasily keeps trying to court both sides that makes him untrustworthy. We don't actually KNOW what he has to offer, and that is the danger of Rand Paul.
whatever...will make as much difference as calling George Dubya and telling him not to give subsidies to House of Saad and Mubarrek Or Calling Obama and telling him to stop sending tax dollars to Israel.
ReplyDeleteI have read Justin Raimondo's articles in antiwar.com for over ten years now, but I must confess it is sad to see him be so awkwardly blind to Rand Paul's fealty to the Likud Party. The Tea Party branch of the Republican party is very consistent in their fervent support of the Likud Party over the interests of Americans here at home.
ReplyDeleteYes, I have read Justin Raimondo's articles for ten years, but I have never really delved into what he has to say on Twitter until this morning. I peaked at his twitter feed months ago and I did not like what I saw. Today I have confirmed that Justin has lost his grip on reality. He thinks that "Because 2016 will be between a pro-Iraq war pro-surveillence state Democrat & an antiwar anti-surveillance GOPer". Then he goes full fanboy for Rand Paul, "What sectarians don't get is that we don't have any choice: it's either Paul 2016 or tyranny".
ReplyDeleteWhen Justin trotted out the opportunistic "Stand With Rand" I knew he was loosing his grip, but now he has shown his ability to reason is in serious decline.
"What sectarians don't get is that we don't have any choice: it's either Paul 2016 or tyranny"
DeleteWhat he doesn't get is that "sectarians" (as he so charmingly calls non-voting libertarians) DO have a choice; it's naive fools like him that still fall for politicians' lines of bullshit, that apparently have no choice, because that's what they always say: the lesser of evils/hold your nose etc.
It's disturbing that an otherwise sensible guy like Justin Raimondo still doesn't seem to understand how the system works; how votes are its fuel.
My stamp of approval would NEVER again be on a guy i simply have no reason whatever to trust. So let him go full fanboy for Rand. If his senses have still left him by 2016, i'll know never to take him seriously again.
If I'm not mistaken, Rand showed his colors by voting for Iran sanctions some time ago.
ReplyDeleteBegging a politician not to be a politician? How degrading that would be.
ReplyDeleteBut apparently the fact that Raimondo even HAS to do it, apparently, should tell him something about the guy he seems to like so much for no apparent reason (other than his being Ron Paul's son).
Seriously, what the HELL is it about Rand Paul, other than being in the Ron Paul family, that has so many otherwise sensible people starstruck? Are they so desperate that they kneel before what is no more than a simple conservative the way non-libertarian conservatives ought to be (sometimes good, sometimes bad, sometimes really bad)?
"Seriously, what the HELL is it about Rand Paul, other than being in the Ron Paul family, that has so many otherwise sensible people starstruck?"
DeleteI'm not sure the human race as a whole ever transcends the cult of personality....sadly. When even some of the outliers fall prey to it on the 2nd go round you know how powerful it can be.
I generally agree with you.
DeleteBut i also think some people are just losing a grip on reality in terms of expectations. They are so frightened that they seem to force themselves into believing that voting will stop a political decline toward even more authoritarianism.
But in practice it will in my opinion only lead to: 1) Even greater disillusionment; 2) Their stamp of approval on the policies of the man they voted for, no matter how bad; 3) Further decline.
To further explain number 3: i personally don't believe things will get better anytime soon no matter how desperately some libertarians want to believe it. Ron Paul could have gotten to the White House and even then it could have gotten ugly once he started tinkering with people's beliefs in government and their privileges. I believe people should just get ready for an even uglier future, and keep pointing people to the CAUSE of it, and instill a profoundly anti-state attitude in people relentlessly.
Voting will just make libertarians look like hypocrites who shouldn't be taken seriously.