Skip to main content

Tyler, forgive me, it's just too good to pass up....

Tyler and Shirley are both Ron Paul advocates.

Waldo isn't.

And frankly, I couldn't resist this one, because Waldo in full rant is the reason you should read him every day:

Dr. Ron's Paulines are now planning a three-day extravaganza outside the gates of the Republican Convention. Good Republican that he is, Dr. "I hire all my kids but don't give my fundraiser health insurance" Ron will show up for a book signing, at which he will divest the suckers of their money in between their sessions on kum-bah-yaing, organizing for taking over the party by 2040, Star Trek, building solar-powered girl sex robots, and debating the merits of the 100% Ron Paul community in East Bumfuck Gulch, TX now or the Ebay founder's cities on spikes in the ocean later with each resident getting 350 square feet of independence apiece.

It's sad, really. All those people who don't realize that the airy way Paul say he has no idea what people are doing in his behalf can be interpreted as "they're a bunch of nitwits who'll buy my book no matter what" just as easily as it can be seen as some sort of cosmic call for the doctor to abandon his plow and come forward at the urging of 1.2% of the nation. Face it: you're organizing movement around a man who care so little about you he won't give up his seniority in Congress to come join you.

Somewhere, Patrick J. Buchanan is laughing his ass off.

Comments

Just to keep the record straight, solar-powered BOY sex robots are also part of the master plan.

This was at my insistence.
Tyler Nixon said…
I've never been one to indulge fiction, much less fantasy...
John Elliott said…
Steve, your site is definately worth reading daily, but I won't bother with this Waldo again.

What's really sad is that a libertarian would be so critical of a very effective libertarian politician. Just who should we "organize movement" around?
John
Just so you know, Waldo is not and doesn't claim to be a Libertarian.

And among those who share profound misgivings about many of Ron Paul's positions, you should also count me.
Mr. Elliott: I apologize for several typos- now corrected- in my comment. Shoulda been "a movement."

I'd organize one around someone who's a real Libertarian. Ron Paul and Babar are situational Libertarians. You can't build a party on the backs of people who blow in for an election and are then gone.

BTW: you and Tyler sound like high school hall monitors. Get a grip.
John Elliott said…
Steve

Waldo seems very concerned about Ron Paul's party affiliation for someone that's not a party member.

And I have my doubts about some of Paul's social conservative views also.
John Elliott said…
Waldo

Obviously "a movement" - I just didn't get it for some reason, I apologize for nitpicking.

Do you have a specific person in mind that would be a more effective libertarian than Ron Paul? An 10 term U.S. Congressman that openly calls for the legalization of drugs and abolishing the income tax seems like a good choice to me.

Would Ron and his supporters cease to be kooks in your mind if they all joined the LP?
John
Waldo is an old friend of thirty years duration who is an acute and opinionated observer of all things political and culture.

He is deeply interested (as am I) in issues surrounding gay rights in America, and has severe misgivings about any politician of any stripe who seems to advocate either my commission or omission that American citizens of different sexual orientations should somehow be second-class citizens.

In this I agree with him completely.

Our primary difference is that I am committed to building a functional but principled Libertarian political party. He doesn't have that particular baggage.

Some days I wish I didn't.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...