Topic: Ron Paul
What Guys Like Ron Paul Used to Be Called "In fact, in the last century, right-wing types had a simple way of describing patriotic congressional representatives like Ron Paul, who championed limited federal government, believed in natural rights, respected the oath they swore to uphold, and eschewed Wilsonian-style foreign policy."by Colette von Hessen
(Conservative Libertarian)
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
What Guys Like Ron Paul Used to Be Called
[link edited for length] I came across this great article today and couldn't agree more with the sentiment -- except that I'm not a huge Lou Dobbs fan. Unlike the author, Isabel Lyman, I would actually listen to Rush Limbaugh than Lou Dobbs. Yes, Lou Dobbs is right on immigration, but his overt populism creeps me out. Rush is wrong on the war and a few other things, but he is generally highly entertaining, and far more thoughtful than his critics give him credit for. Here is what Isabel Lyman had to say in Taki's Top Drawer:
In fact, in the last century, right-wing types had a simple way of describing patriotic congressional representatives like Ron Paul, who championed limited federal government, believed in natural rights, respected the oath they swore to uphold, and eschewed Wilsonian-style foreign policy. We used to call them "conservatives."
You may be familiar with Taki from his founding of The American Conservative with Pat Buchanan as well as his connection to some Objectivist circles. If you haven't already checked it out, The American Conservative offers conservative analysis (opposed to neoconservative analysis, such as what is published in National Review and The Weekly Standard). Once upon a time, National Review could be counted on for reasonably conservative/libertarian (of the small-l variety) viewpoints. You can still find a few voices of reason in its pages, but it is getting frighteningly more and more neocon. And The Weekly Standard? I love Fred Barnes, but the rest of them have got to go. They are just way too hesitant to be constructively critical of the Bush administration. Reason magazine is good, but it's not quite filling the void, especially for for those of us who are pro-life (as the vast majority of actual conservatives are). I feel there is room for a new magazine for the revolutionaries who are Ron Paul supporters -- i.e., those of us who used to be called conservative.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 68 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of Colette von Hessen only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Colette von Hessen is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
And that's precisely why more and more libertarians are getting turned off by the Ron Paul campaign. Real libertarians are Pro-Choice. The Party even produced bumper stickers in the 1980s: "Libertarians are Pro-Choice on Everything."
The more and more Ron Paul gets associated with Paleo-Conservatives who are "fiscally conservative/socially conservative yet weak on defense," the more "fiscally conservative/socially tolerant, strong on defense" Barry Goldwater style libertarians will be turned off to Paul.
And worse, the PaleoCons seem to have a consistent, if not aligned, philosophy with NeoNazi groups, who are also non-interventionist, and conservative socially. Throw Pat Buchanan in the mix and it becomes mighty creepy indeed.
Posted By: Jim Cunningham
Date: 2007-12-04 07:28:50
To say that "real" libertarians are pro-choice when it comes to abortion is blatantly false. Real libertarianism can be summarized by two statements. The government's role is to enforce contracts between individuals and the government has the responsibility to punish unjust violence. A libertarian can be either pro-choice or pro-life depending on his or her view on what constitutes a living person. If he or she believes conception constitutes human life then a libertarian must be pro-life otherwise he is an anarchist. Since unborn children have legal rights and doctors’ are liable for any harm they may inflict on a fetus then there is nothing non-libertarian about being pro-life. Stop using that ridiculously oversimplified argument. Libertarians are not always pro-choice. They don't believe that you should have the choice to disregard contracts that you have committed to and they don't believe you should have the choice to murder people.
Posted By: Leland Thomas Faegre
Date: 2007-12-04 07:54:22
Paleo-conservatives are not weak on defense; non-interventionism is an American tradition that protects legitimate and patriotic defensive posture and morale.
What the Neo-Nazis do is irrelevant to this movement and Pat Buchanan is an invaluable asset in American political discourse. I would characterize your observations both here and in previous posts as non sequitur...
I disagree with Eric Dondero on his statement that Paul is weak on defense. I think it is a common misconception that just because he does not believe in occupying other countries that he is somehow weak on defense. In fact in his own words military spending is one of the main reasons for having a Federal government.
It is possible to defend a country without occupying the rest of the world. And in Paul's view it is a better way to defend because by occupying other people you tend to provoke them to wanting to attack.
While Paul does not line up 100% with the Libertarian party I think that he is the best chance of really getting some of their views implemented. If I was a Libertarian Party member I would be working hard to get Paul nominated. It is the only opportunity in a very long time to truly put libertarian principles in the national spotlight.
Ron Paul is not socially conservative - he is pushing liberty, which is the idea that people make their own decisions and are responsible for their own actions. And since when does not trying to expand an d empire equate to a weak defense? Not having our troops spread all over the world would alow for a greater defense of this country than ever before. I think when you start trying to boil complex ideas down to a series of two or three plus or minus categories you really short-change any possibility of an accurate analysis.
there's no reason to say that there's ever been any sort of consensus between libertarians, however, on the issue of abortion. the issue has been highly contested since the beginning of the major movement and remains as such today, the pro-choice angle merely wins out as it is the more anarchist of the two sides, indeed giving the mother a right to exclusion regarding her property(that being her body) towards the fetus. I personally gravitate towards minarchy and believe that the mother's right to exclusion from property does not trump the child's ownership of its own body and she cannot end its life thusly. A good example of this idea would be someone being kidnapped and stuck in a closet in a plane or on a boat at sea- when this person is found, does the owner of the plane or boat have the right to eject said person for trespassing, or is there a clause to exclusion that allows for reasonble steps towards expulsion from property?
"more and more libertarians are getting turned off by the Ron Paul campaign."
Meanwhile, droves of other unaffiliated people are getting turned on to his campaign, negating the need for unanimous LP support. The backbone of the Ron Paul movement is that he is the only candidate who stands for what other candidates don't stand for, and that is America first. All the other candidates have pledged to protect Israel and to keep our troops all over the world, and promising little change at home as well. The others are promising change for the worse.
Think about it. If Rudy Guiliani was a complete unknown, running on the platform he's running on, he would be a true "fringe weirdo kook" with absolutely no support. If he were running on Ron Paul's platform, he would win in a landslide.
By the way, I'm a pro-choice, libertarian-leaning independent, but I'm still willing to vote for Ron Paul if it means my friends and cousins in Iraq come home where they belong, my country moves away from the need for a governmental safety net, and our private lives get respected. Besides, he's already stated that Roe v Wade isn't at all high on his agenda. The risk is less with Paul than anyone else.
Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2007-12-04 08:50:58
Eric may find that throwing Pat Buchanan into the mix is "creepy." Personally, I find supporting Rudy Giuliani (as he apparently does) to be much more "creepy." Shall I count the ways?
(1) Giuliani is totally out of touch on Iraq and foreign policy. If you don't like President Bush, you'll really hate President Giuliani (as Dr. Paul has already pointed out in a recent Rolling Stone interview). Among other things, he has apparently not read the 9/11 Commission report, which seems incredible since he positions himself as the great 9/11 leader.
(2) Giuliani loves spending other peoples' money, as his mayoral record proves. He talks about cutting taxes, and he takes credit for tax cuts as mayor, but in reality he actively opposed the biggest of the cuts he claims to have supported and played no role in others. He also left office with a large budget deficit.
(3) Giuliani thinks that torture is okay.
(4) Giuliani thinks that the way to solve Social Security is to appoint yet another blue ribbon committee to study it. (That's one of the lamest things I've heard yet.)
(5) Giuliani favored the extension of the unconstitutional Patriot Act, which was later, indeed, found by an appellate judge to be...well...unconstitutional. Presidents are supposed to act a check and balance to legislative zealousness, not egg it on.
And those are just his greatest hits. Way to go, Eric. That's a real "libertarian" you're supporting there.
Eric Dondero, God bless your soul. Ron Paul fired you, and now you are a Rudy Giuliani troll.
As far as the issue of abortion is concerned, read Harry Browne. Libertarians support the rights of individuals to take actions that do not infringe on the rights of others. As Harry Brown clearly explained, there is no clearcut libertarian solution to the abortion question. For some Libertarians, this is a women's rights issue. Other Libertarians believe that abortion infringes on the rights of the unborn child.
Some people just don't understand the difference between isolationism and non-interventionism. I think Mr. Noel Gibeson hit the nail on the head a few weeks back on why Ron Paul is the strongest candidate for the defense and security of this great nation:
And if Libertarians cannot respect life, how in God's name are they supposed to protect liberty? Ron Paul said it best (I'm not sure this is exact) - "The last thing this country needs is federal abortion police." I say, let me and my fellow Ohioans decide what is best for our state.
Finally, I find it interesting that Mr. Dondero tries to associate RP 08 with Neo-Nazi groups. Is he on Rudy Giuliani's payroll, or what?
I've voted Libertarian since 1984, and I am pro-life. I believe everyone should have the right to live their life as they choose, as long as they don't infringe on the rights of other people to do the same. There can be no such thing as an abortion "right", because by definition, you can't have a "right" to take an innocent human life.
As for Barry Goldwater style conservatives, a prominent one just publicly endorsed Ron Paul: Barry Goldwater, Jr.
Eric Dondero...we know who you are. For those that do not know...Eric is going to try and challenge Ron Paul for his congressional seat. He is a former Ron Paul staffer and his comments are purely biased and should be taken as such. Disregard him and his smear.
Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2007-12-04 10:04:17
Actually, ctjohnson, I'm afraid I have to correct you about that. In a previous post on this site, Eric said he had declared that he is no longer a candidate for Dr. Paul's seat because someone else has already stepped forward to challenge for it on the Republican side.
However, I would like to get in one more question to Eric D. about his choice of Rudy Giuliani. Eric, how can you support a second amendment flip-flopper for President, one whose record as mayor of NYC speaks volumes on that issue?
I'm a registered Libertarian, and I am very much pro-life. I interpret libertarianism to be the protection of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." I include an unborn child under the category of protecting life. In fact, the Libertarian Party would be much more successful if the party did not openly attack its pro-life members.
What I find intresting is that one of the libertarian presidential candidates ( Steve Kubby ) has said that in the event that Ron Paul wins the republican nomination, that he would support Ron 100% and assist with Ron's campaign.
This is not the only Libertarian that has said this. The libertarian party has had alot of people leaving to support Ron . My question is: Why can't the Libertarians go outside party lines to support someone like Ron??
The Libertarian Party used to be the 3rd largest political party in the US, but this is no longer the case. The Constitution Party has now surpassed them and has stated that if Ron Paul wins the Republican nomination that they would not field a presidential candidate in 2008, and they would support Ron in the general election. Why can't the Libertarian party do this???
The Constitution party has also said that they were going to get ballot lines drawen for all 50 states so that in the event that Ron does not win the GOP nomination they would invite him to run on the Constitution Party presidential ticket. Either way the Constitution Party supports Ron Paul.
One of Ron's concerns about running as a third party candidate is what the Constitution Party is already doing, and thats getting ballot lines set for all 50 states.
I don't see the Libertarian Party willing to do anything but hamper Ron Paul. As for the Libertarians that have joined the Ron Paul Revolution. welcome and thank you.
Posted By: Colette von Hessen
Date: 2007-12-04 10:56:12
Branden, I agree -- I would be Libertarian with a capital L right now if they were pro-life like Ron Paul. So I guess that leaves me in a situation akin to what the French call "having [my] ass between two seats." It's not fun, but it is refreshing to see that Ron Paul and Tucker Carlson espouse views very similar to my own. I looked into the Constitution Party but I fear they have a religious bent, which I am not very keen on on. Unlike many non-religious people, I am not hostile to Christianity, i.e., I am tolerant to their beliefs. I feel that my heart lies somewhere between the Constitution and the Libertarian party. I would like the Constitution Party minus the religious stuff and the Libertarian Party minus the illegal amnesty and pro-abortion stuff. Ron Paul should start a new party. Looks like he's already got a great base from which to start one.
Eric is here to smear Ron Paul because Eric is a warhawk. He was fired by Dr. Paul, and he also thinks only people who were in the military have free speech. He belongs in Giuliani's camp, but even Giuliani probably doesn't want him. What's the matter, Eric? Not corrupt enough for Rudy's team but still an authoritarian cheerleader? For every neo-Nazi that drives someone away from Ron Paul's candidacy, there's Eric Dondero driving three back to him. Thanks, Eric!
As for abortion, that's a wedge issue. If GWB with a GOP Congress and conservative Supreme Court couldn't overturn Roe v Wade, no one will, not even Ron Paul who would just turn it back to the states to decide the matter anyway (which happens to be the proper Constitutional position).
LOL @ Dondero. It's hilarious that they worst they can throw against Rep. Paul is Eric Dondero. "Real libertarians are Pro-Choice," he says. Anyone who has any familiarity with the party knows that it is an issue on which principled Libertarians disagree. Dondero is a fraud. Even he will admit that Rep. Paul never wanted to fire anyone, so that makes him some kind of exceptional loser. Eric just wants other people to kill Muslims for him.
The worst thing anyone can truthfully say about Ron Paul is that he once had the bad judgement to let Eric Dondero work for him. That mistake has been corrected.
Hey, ***********, you've got a lot of nerve trying to pass yourself off as either a libertarianor a conservative. You apparently know very little about either.
First of all, many hardcore libertarians oppose abortion, because it violates a distinct individual's right to life. Principled libertarians may struggle with the legal exigencies implied by their opposition, but being libertarian does not require an indifference to human suffering, and only a complete moron would suggest otherwise.
Secondly, YOU support a gun-grabbing, pro tax, pro eminent domain, pro asset forfeiture, pro drug war, pro mandatory biometric national ID, goose-stepping globo-nazi. ********************.
Lastly, yes, Dr. Paul is competing for the presidential nomination of the formerly paleoconservative, formerly libertarian leaning(yes, Paul's border defense position disqualifies him as an ideologically perfect Libertarian) Republican Party. That the GOP is now overrun with ******** like you, though it may present an obstacle, is neither his fault nor his problem.
Oh yeah, and the USA defended herself quite handily before Wilson came along, and gave us an Income Tax, a Federal Reserve, a World War, and UN1.0. Has it even occurred to an imbecile like you that bullying the rest of the world is not America's manifest destiny, and that it makes us more enemies not fewer, or that unnecessarily deploying our military all over God's Creation makes us more vulnerable at home, not less? If you enjoy being a Wilsonian neo-nitwit, good luck with that.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
![[link edited for length]](http://vonhessen.typepad.com/.shared/image.html?/photos/uncategorized/2007/12/04/071130_ronpaul_vogel_2.jpg){kind=link}