Comments on: January 8, 2008

By: RonPaul4Ever

RonPaul4Ever — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 20:27:48 +0000

I used to wonder why Reason always published an negative article about every Libertarian (or even slightly libertarian leaning Republican) presidential candidate.

Now I know.

By: FTW08

FTW08 — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:36:53 +0000

“and while some will drop out”

That’s the problem bro, there is NO REASON for anyone to drop out. Ron Paul IS NOT RACIST AND HAS NEVER BEEN.

By: Anonymous For Paul

Anonymous For Paul — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:25:32 +0000

LuLz, Andrew “AIDS aint that bad after all” Sullivan.

By: MikeT

MikeT — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:35:18 +0000

I can’t think of more than a handful or articles that Reason has published in the last few years that were worth reading, except to gawk at. Hopefully Reason will get the kick in the teeth it needs now that Radley Balko has taken over.

By: georgedance

georgedance — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 10:04:31 +0000

Thank you for writing ths. It hasn’t killed the campaign, though; even though TNR put out another piece today, the day of the Michigan primary, the vote held up – and the MSM seems more interested in Paul beating two of the Fox News Five this time, than in following up Mr. Kirchik’s ramblings.

So I’d disagree with your cynical conclusion about the effect on the next generation. By and large the young people in the Paul campaign were expecting it to be attacked, and while some will drop out, most will remain and get a bit tougher from the experience. They’ll learn that electioneering can be dirty, but not that it’s futile; I have a feeling they’ll become more determined to win: if not this November, maybe in Congressional elections in 2 years’ time.

Otherwise, I share your sentiments. I don’t have the first-hand knowledge you do of the Beltway Libertarians, but I was thinking along those lines; and I’m glad to have the eyewitness confirmation.

By: Joe Allen

Joe Allen — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 07:22:40 +0000

The irony is that the blowback might help Dr. Paul. Many leftist were considering supporting Dr. Paul for his anti-war stance, but had big objections to Paul’s implied connection to the Cato institute. Lefties hate Cato and this messy divorce bumps up their opinions of the good doctor.

Also there is the obvious wrath of libertarians like me who now see the beltway fake libertarians for what they are. Reason and CATO are in much worse shape than the campaign of Dr. Paul. They have incured everlasting enmity from freedom lovers and scorn from respectable journalists.

By: js290

js290 — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 06:09:42 +0000

For libertarianism to have any meaning, it must be discussed in the context of non-coercion and laissez-faire free markets. In that context, this smear against Paul isn’t even an interesting conversation.

By: David Macko

David Macko — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 06:03:27 +0000

They are all vile vermin and traitors. Remember them and treat them with the contempt and disgust with which Benedict Arnold was treated after the First American Revolution. There is only one basic difference between these scum and Arnold. He at least shed blood for the Revolution before he committed his unspeakable treason.

By: The Orange Line: anatomy of a smear campaign « Formerbeltwaywonk’s Weblog

Tue, 15 Jan 2008 23:20:13 +0000

[...] here for more analysis of why beltway “libertarians” engage in anti-libertarian [...]

By: quizinator

quizinator — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 01:21:41 +0000

Brilliant! I especially liked the one-sentence biography of Alan Greenspan:

“They study Ayn Rand, then marry Andrea Mitchell and testify against tax cuts. “