Wednesday, October 1, 2014

The Problem With Ron Paul (From the perspective of a Rand Paul aide)

Salon highlights a part of the Ryan Lizza New Yorker article on Ron Paul's correct view on US intervention in Ukraine and sadly another subtle dark reference to Walter Block:
In a lengthy profile of the Kentuckian for the forthcoming issue of the New Yorker, Ryan Lizza offers a glimpse at the nascent Paul campaign’s early efforts to create space between father and son ahead of the 2016. An aide to the senator expressed exasperation that “the old man is still out there speaking his mind” after Ron Paul released a statement supporting Russian President Vladimir Putin shortly after the Russian-backed rebels showed [sic]down a Malaysian airliner over Ukraine. Rand Paul, commenting on his family’s ties to far-right and white supremacist figures, told Lizza that he “was never associated with any of these people. Ever. Only through being related to my dad, who had association with them.” 
Then, of course, we had this in the New Yorker article from Jesse Benton:
 Ron was always content to tell the truth as best he understood it, and he saw that as the point of his politics,” Jesse Benton, a close friend and political adviser to both men, said. “Rand is the guy who is committed to winning.”
Which is Jesse speaking truth.. Ron was never power hungry, and that is part of what made him great. Rand on the other hand wants to be president, badly.

Note: It should be pointed out that Salon is incorrect in stating that Ron came out in defense of Putin. It was more a case of Ron pointing out the consistencies in the mainstream U.S. media reporting surrounding Flight MH17.  See Daniel McAdams, of the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity, on this: Attacking Ron Paul, National Journal Hits New Lows



  1. You know, I was wrong about not wanting to see you and Walter debate over Rand. I take it back.

    Rand needs to be buried as far as the libertarian community goes. I thought you had already done a sufficient job of doing that RW.

    But since Walter dug his corpse up and starting dancing with it like "Weekend at Bernie's", I hope you finish it by putting it stake through Rand's heart(as far as any connection to libertarianism goes).

    When is Walter going to comment on whether he has ever interacted with Rand directly or not? And, what are these "family’s ties to far-right and white supremacist figures"? I think someone should call Lizza and ask what specific people he's referring to.

    I always thought it makes sense to interview the interviewer at times after a piece like this. You or Rossini could have a field day.

    1. I wish there was an "edit" feature on posts, so I could fix my hurried posts:


      "I thought you had already done a sufficiet job of that RW"

      I'm sure there's other stuff I missed.

  2. "far-right and white supremacist figures"????

    I've been in the "movement" for almost 42 years. I've never found any "far-right and white supremacist figures". Heck, libertarians are generally so afraid of their own shadow that they are afraid to explain to the evangelicals that they might have their own communities where they could d i s c r i m i n a t e against folks not like them and escape what they claim to be an anti-Christian culture.

  3. Did I mention that is vile and loathsome enterprise which constantly screams "racist racist racist" because they do not understand Austrian school concepts or the NAP and really have nothing else to fall back on?

    1. Since left-statist rags such as Salon do not understand libertarianism or Austrian economics (nor are they even interested) they, and on cue, simply interjected the usual racism card. I typically will instantly dismiss any article attempting to utilize this dishonest and manipulative device.

  4. We should have picked one of Rand's siblings to run instead of him. Any of them would have been better; they obviously didn't want to be politicians.