This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Ron Paul To Congress: "Stop Legislating Your Ideas Of Fairness. Protect Property Rights. Protect The Individual"

Tyler Durden's picture


From Ron Paul

Ron Paul’s New Year’s Message to Congress

As I prepare to retire from Congress I’d like to suggest a few New Year’s resolutions for my colleagues to consider. For the sake of liberty, peace and prosperity I certainly hope more members of Congress consider the strict libertarian-constitutional approach to government in 2013.

In just a few days, Congress will solemnly swear to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. They should read Article 1 Section 8 and the Bill of Rights before taking such a serious oath. Most legislation violates key provisions of the Constitution in very basic ways, and if members can’t bring themselves to say “no” in the face of pressure from the special interests, they have broken trust with their constituents and violated their oath. Congress does not exist to serve the special interests. It exists to protect the rule of law.

I also urge my colleagues to end unconstitutional wars overseas. Stop the drone strikes. Stop the covert activities and the meddling in the internal affairs of other nations. Strive to observe good faith and justice towards all nations, as George Washington admonished. We are only making more enemies, wasting lives and bankrupting ourselves with the neoconservative interventionist mindset that endorses preemptive war that now dominates both parties.

All foreign aid should end, which is blatantly unconstitutional. While it may be a relatively small part of our federal budget, for many countries it is a large part of theirs and it creates perverse incentives for both our friends and enemies. There is no way members of Congress can know or understand the political, economic, legal and social realities in the many nations to which they send taxpayers’ dollars.

Congress needs to stop accumulating more debt. U.S. debt monetized by the Federal Reserve is the true threat to our national security. Revisiting the parameters of Article 1 Section 8 would be a good start.

Congress should resolve to respect personal liberty and free markets. Learn more about the free market and how it regulates commerce and produces greater prosperity ever than any legislation or regulation.

Understand that economic freedom is freedom. Resolve not to get in the way of voluntary contracts between consenting adults. Stop bailing out failed yet politically connected companies and industries. Stop forcing people to engage in commerce when they don’t want to, and stop prohibiting them from buying and selling when they want to. Stop trying to legislate your ideas of fairness. Protect property rights. Protect the individual. That is enough.

There are many more resolutions I would like to see my colleagues in Congress adopt, but respect for the Constitution and the oath of office should be at the core of every single member’s of Congress due in 2013.



- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:00 | 3109257 francis_sawyer
francis_sawyer's picture

Their idea of "protecting your property rights" & "protecting individuals" is to take away your guns...

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:05 | 3109268 cossack55
cossack55's picture

RP is sooooooooooo 2012!!!   (Hmmmm...maybe 1912 would be more accurate)

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:08 | 3109301 tsx500
tsx500's picture

<<<<<   Ron Paul true American Patriot

<<<<<   Barack Hussein Obama true American Patriot

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:19 | 3109302 wee-weed up
wee-weed up's picture




RP is not 2012...

not 1912...


Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:19 | 3109345 HobbyFarmer
HobbyFarmer's picture

Ron Paul should TOTALLY run for presid....oh crap.  My country doesn't even have enough freedom loving individuals to elect him to represent the Republican party?????  Anyway, he'll always have a special place in my heart and that special place where his name was written on the ballot with my vote.  I'm sure it was counted.  Right?

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 16:08 | 3110196 Chief KnocAHoma
Chief KnocAHoma's picture

Our country is so far gone we may never get it back. A man like RP speaks the truth, and is marginalized because his ideas get painted as kooky talk. Who else has been splashed with that brush?

Kennedy asassination doubters, Fed doubters, Ross Perot, anyone challenging Obama, silver buyers, gun owners... am I leaving anyone out?

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 18:17 | 3110761 francis_sawyer
francis_sawyer's picture


Tue, 01/01/2013 - 01:57 | 3111633 awakening
awakening's picture


'am I leaving anyone out?'



Mon, 12/31/2012 - 20:28 | 3111117 FreedomGuy
FreedomGuy's picture

I am really going to miss RP. Even though he was shouting into the wind most of the time, he was still the conscience of the Republicans and anyone with a shred of dedication to the rule of law.

Any theories on who might take up his mantle in the Senate and House?

Rand in the Senate.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:10 | 3109311 SilverRhino
SilverRhino's picture

<-- Ron Paul cares about Americans more than Congress
<-- Congress cares about Americans more than Ron Paul

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:34 | 3109388 pods
pods's picture

So I'm the only down vote?

Congress cares about us a whole lot.
(Much like the farmer cares about his livestock.)


Mon, 12/31/2012 - 14:29 | 3109652 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

Ron's only mistake is talking like he's talking to humans

and not like he's talking to monkeys on crack.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 16:48 | 3110385 margaris
margaris's picture

Never let idiots drag you down to their level....

It's called principles.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 15:34 | 3110071 Seer
Seer's picture

As a farmer I kind of resent that remark.

Farmers, good ones, understand their commitment to the web of life.  It's about as symbiotic of an equation as you're going to find.  When it's cold, dark and rainy I very much doubt that anyone in Congress is going to get out of bed to attend to the well being of one of their "constituents" (unless that constituent pulls their strings).

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 16:02 | 3110161 pods
pods's picture

I think my analogy holds.  I can understand the symbiotic relationship for a farmer (worked for one, but never was one).

Same applies to us and CONgress though.  Think of the analogy in terms of a large scale feedlot type setup. Not a small farm.  We are valuable to them in terms of what they can get out of us.  

I have the utmost respect for farmers, growing up all around them.  Used to help bail hay in exchange for bowhunting priviledges.  

But we are valuable to CONgress, and their aim is to keep the majority of us happy and content.  



Mon, 12/31/2012 - 16:53 | 3110405 TheSettler
TheSettler's picture

"bale" hay...

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:42 | 3109422 Chupacabra-322
Chupacabra-322's picture

The highly educated intelligent & wealthy owners of the world banking, media, military & major corporations are in control of the world political & economic policies, so morally it doesn't really matter. They deceive, wage wars, killing and impoverish millions of the other 99% human populations, for the New World Order to satisfy their greed & arrogance, all in the name of democracy, freedom & war on terrorism. Does it sound delusional? Not if you are the so called? "God" chosen white western elephants.


Mon, 12/31/2012 - 15:43 | 3110095 Seer
Seer's picture


And good to see more use of the word "deceive."  I believe that we need to start realizing that this is all part of power (it's a natural behavior- those with more power can exercise more deceit).

As I've noted, however, as much as TPTB may want/desire/feel it the best (covering for the long-shot that they're benevolent) to establish a "higher order," it won't happen.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 17:02 | 3110420 margaris
margaris's picture

@chupacabra-322: Yes they are educated and yes they are wealthy.

But intelligent?

They didn't even see the internet coming, and how it would awaken many people.

In their greed they are grabbing for power so fast now that the whole world is waking up and realizing: "wait a minute, I don't have to put up with this crap, they don't give a shit about us."


If the elites were clever they would make two steps back, stop the wars, give the people more freedom and lower taxes and let the situation cool down, so they can make new better hidden plans to enslave humanity.

But humanity is waking up fast, and the only thing those "intelligent" elites can do is grab as much power as they can as fast as possible. ALL their agendas are cleary visible and understandable now to even the little informed people.

Greedy grabbing is the only thing they really understand to do, but that is NOT intelligence.

It's the stupidest thing they can do, it will be their demise, like it always has been for empires in human history.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 17:12 | 3110503 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

with respect,

ALL their agendas are cleary visible and understandable now to even the little informed people.

the awareness of their agendas is incremental, and the absolute majority of people haven't a clue where this is headed.

even here, the groupthink is palpable.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 17:38 | 3110627 margaris
margaris's picture

Yes, as I said:... to the little informed people.

Ofcourse there are the not-at-all-informed people around who are the majority.


It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people’s minds. Samuel Adams.


There is another quote I like very much, dont know who coined it:


Nobody wants to be first, EVERYBODY wants to be second.


Meaning, many people will stay in the background not acting. But when they see brave people fight for the freedom of humanity... they will stand up and assist.


Also: if you don't believe that a small group of people can change the future, ... understand that it's the ONLY THING that ever was able to make a change happen in all of human history.

So it's not like we need a proof of concept that it will work indeed.


Mon, 12/31/2012 - 18:26 | 3110788 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

I like the "brush fires" in the minds idea, very much.

and yes, most people want to make their decisions in a group/crowd, within the safety of others, not singled out as "first" which inevitably will be pilloried, also by group'd thinking. . .

as to the "future" - I hold that there is no "future" - there is "past" held as memory, the ever present now, and the "future" is an imagined projection.

hopefully a few outliers will continue to act, be followed, and the future will be somewhat less painful for them as a result.

best wishes.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 15:29 | 3110059 Diogenes
Diogenes's picture

Big government is the enemy of every decent honest hard working citizen and the friend of every pimp, chiseller, crook and wise guy. Ron Paul deserves credit for trying to turn it around.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 16:06 | 3110189 toncuz
toncuz's picture

Yet, it's BIG BUSINESS that bribes Congress, monopolizes resources, funds dictators, steals pensions, evades taxes, starts economic wars, gambles away shareholder equity then gets taxpayer bailouts, crushes small business owners and gives themselve bonuses that should have gone to shareholders and workers.'s OUR elected government that's the problem.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 16:38 | 3110332 akak
akak's picture

If your head is stuck so far up your statism-filled rectum that you cannot distinguish between true liberty and fascism, that is not my fault, nor Ron Paul's.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 19:42 | 3110996 Bohm Squad
Bohm Squad's picture

By extension, then, if I'm bribed to do something (or not do something), then it is not my fault, but that of the person handing me the bribe?  Peddle that pig patty somewhere else.  Lack of accountability is the problem.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 16:34 | 3110314 toncuz
toncuz's picture

And Ron Paul's idea of freedom coincides with the the GOP...make your elected government watchdog small enough so corporations BECOME your government. Sorry, John Galt fruitcakes...corporate fascism didn't work in Italy or Germany and it won't work in America.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:00 | 3109261 otto skorzeny
otto skorzeny's picture

congress  will do the exact opposite of what he said. from the founding father's lips to Ron's.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:00 | 3109262 MsCreant
MsCreant's picture

It is so sad he will be gone. Who will say these things when he has left?

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:04 | 3109285 Taffy Lewis
Taffy Lewis's picture

The only voice of reason in a sea of spendaholic crack whore assclowns (with my apology to crack whores).

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:13 | 3109322 I am more equal...
I am more equal than others's picture

crack whores will blow you for $5.00 and be satisfied with that.  congress forces the productive citizens to blow them and spends another $1 trillion in the name of fairness. 

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:39 | 3109406 From Germany Wi...
From Germany With Love's picture

So, here's a hypothesis:
There is a significant number of people out there who, when not pacified through social spending, will resort to crime.

I'm not entirely sure I subscribe to this hypothesis but it ands its implications are surely worth pondering.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:51 | 3109468 Bedonkedonk
Bedonkedonk's picture

Then an intended victim should pacify them with a .45 jacketed hollow point.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 15:44 | 3110103 From Germany Wi...
From Germany With Love's picture

And you can tell who the harmless welfare recipients are from those who are not? The criminal ones can be very adapt at appearing harmless at times.

So is social spending in part a way of saying "Here - you have some money, now shut up and be nice"? And if so - is that a good way of handling such people or is it not?

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 17:03 | 3110446 Overfed
Overfed's picture

Simple. The ones you catch stealing your shit, or breaking into your car, or hassling your family receive the .45 JHP.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 14:04 | 3109534 centerline
centerline's picture

Not a hypothesis, it is fact.  There is a large enough segment of the welfare state that pretty much believes they have a right to other people's work product.  Decades... generations in the making have created this.

When the shit hits the fan, these people WILL riot.  

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 14:26 | 3109633 NumberNone
NumberNone's picture

Welfare is basically money laundering and turning welfare recipients into welfare mules.   The message to the welfare recipient is...take your money, spend your money, just don't break the law or you lose this.  They serve as nothing more than mules to take money from producers, spend money where directed, and send it directly back to 'big business'.  They get to live their subsistence lives and in return the banks, the retail industry, the manufacturers, the government get to cover the transfer of trillions in wealth in the cloak of 'good deeds and starving babies'.   In fact the people that hate 'big business' will fight to the death for this transfer of wealth.  If your government branch or business relies on welfare mule to deliver you the cash being taken from the producers, why would you ever want to end the generational welfare?  Just keep it coming.  It's brilliant.  

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 17:05 | 3110459 Overfed
Overfed's picture

That has to be one of the most succinct descriptions of the welfare (and warfare) state that I've read. Kudos.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:19 | 3109342 TacticalZen
TacticalZen's picture

The followers of John Galt.


Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:28 | 3109378 Freedom In Your...
Freedom In Your Lifetime's picture

While what Ron Paul has been saying has played a huge part in my education process over the past 5 years, there isn't much more he can say that hasn't been said before. It's time for the individual to start looking after himself / herself. The debt system is crashing down sooner of later and big government is trying to get more and more control over the individual and no words will stop this. I am also sad to see Ron Paul leaving, but it makes me sadder to see the state of the country (world) at a point where words don't really matter anymore.

Those that still have the ability to critically think have acknowledged the problem and are aware of the coming consequences. Those that are smart but willfully ignorant will be kicked awake after the first shock or two (whether it is war, a more obvious police state, financial crash, currency crash, alien attack, whatever) and either adapt or die (figuratively of course). And those that are so brainwashed that they believe the drivel coming out of our 'leaders' will be manipulated by those same leaders to think those that try to think for themselves are the enemy.

It's not history repeating itself, but it's sure rhyming.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:33 | 3109385 Cyrano de Bivouac
Cyrano de Bivouac's picture

Why didn't the progressives(Noam Chomsky-Counterpunch types) support RP for President? His ideas about American foreign policy were the most ethical and had the most common sense. Better than any other politician in the  American political scene in over 100+ years.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:56 | 3109488 Bob
Bob's picture

Why didn't RP hook up with Nader and the two of them agree to run only on issues/changes that the two of them agree on?

Whether intentionally or not, he would appear to function as controlled opposition for the oligarchs.  That's from a Counterpunch-type perspective, of course.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 14:58 | 3109900 MayIMommaDogFac...
MayIMommaDogFace2theBananaPatch's picture

Whether intentionally or not, he would appear to function as controlled opposition for the oligarchs.

The man is a gynecologist for God's sake.  How this fact can not make you automatically love him and instantly reject thoughts like the one above, astonishes me. 

Maybe you just didn't know?



Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:50 | 3109456 Bob
Bob's picture

I'm still waiting to hear how his neoliberal utopia will yield any semblence of freedom for anyone but the people with the market power that having most of the money provides to extract from the rest whatever the market will bear . . . how this could reasonably be expected in this world rather than the neo-financial-hippy fantasy world where prosperity and justice will prevail if only property is defined as the essence of  "liberty."

He seems like a nice enough guy who gets half the picture and, of course, in the land of the blind the one-eyed man may be king, but I see no reason to worship at that altar. I see it as a misguided conga-line of folks dressed as Founding Fathers headed into neo-serfdom. 

Call me agnostic. 

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 14:05 | 3109547's picture

I've never heard Ron promote a centrally controlled system organized by top down edicts which is what the fictional Utopia was. Are you confused?

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 14:38 | 3109687 Bob
Bob's picture

Hey, if it's not centrally controlled, what could possibly go wrong?  Especially if we call it Liberty. Who needs om with a mantra like that?

It's flower power in the language of finance embellished with mangled 18th century political-philosophical rhetoric.  Good shit . . . reminds me of pre-Reagan Haight Ashbury.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 14:54 | 3109732's picture

My point was that you use language imprecisely. In fact, you've employed a pejorative allusion in an entirely contradictory fashion. You criticized Ron Paul for believing in a Utopia when in fact he consistently speaks out against the Utopian dreams of central planners. Why can't you simply admit the error and stop foisting the most obvious of straw men upon those of us who know better?

Once you make the effort to use words properly you will think more clearly as a result. At that point you will understand that if you are opposed to Utopianism then Ron Paul is your ally, not your enemy.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 14:57 | 3109879 Bob
Bob's picture

Oh, I see.  I've misused "utopia" according to your definition of the term. 

Let me dial it back, then, to "best of all possible worlds" so I don't negatively mischaracterize the pure idealism driving it. 

I think you've misinterpreted my point, however.  This reminds me of the dance Scientologists do around the issue of God:

Unlike religions with Judeo-Christian origins, the Church of Scientology has no set dogma concerning God that it imposes on its members.

(Damn, they sound like the most FREE religion on the planet, btw.  I had no clue.) 

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 15:17 | 3109968's picture


Oh, I see.  I've misused "utopia" according to your definition of the term.

It's not up to you or me to define Utopia. The word comes from a book by Thomas More in which he described a centrally planned society. Please consider using words properly and understanding literary allusions before you employ them as you will avoid confusion in conversation and errors in your own thinking.


I think you've misinterpreted my point, however.  This reminds me of the dance Scientologists do around the issue of God:


Does your retreat into dissociated issues signal a realization that you can't make your point by rational argument against Ron Paul himself or are your thoughts dissociated from reality in general?


Mon, 12/31/2012 - 15:26 | 3110018 Bob
Bob's picture

Pendantic snow jobs are the best kind, though!  Good luck on your Crusade, man.

Oops, I mean

So confusing!

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 17:03 | 3110427's picture

And you still fail to realize that the Utopianism which you railed against is precisely the thing you embrace in your criticisms of Ron Paul. More's the pity (pedantic pun intended).

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 02:05 | 3111646 awakening
Mon, 12/31/2012 - 15:11 | 3109973 MayIMommaDogFac...
MayIMommaDogFace2theBananaPatch's picture

Man, I totally forgot what a BLOWHARD Bob is.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 15:19 | 3110021 Libertarian777
Libertarian777's picture

talking out both sides of your mouth...

Ron Paul has never spoken of utopia. He's stated many times that you cannot have perfect security.

All he is preaching is freedom.

With freedom comes responsibility. Sure some will be irresponsible and horrible things will still happen. He is not proposing that freedom will stop all school shootings for instance.

Ron Paul is a strong believer in God and believes we should honor and respect God and the familiy unit. He does not approve of gay marriage, but he does not believe the GOVERNMENT has any say in how one conducts their life or with whom one associates with. Your reference to scientology has no relevance to Ron Paul (I don't even get what your point is? Are you trying to imply Ron Paul believes in no God? or in any god? or believes freedom is utopia? what is your point?)

"Obviously I don’t want to conflate complex issues of foreign policy and war with the Sandy Hook shooting, but it is important to make the broader point that our federal government has zero moral authority to legislate against violence.

Furthermore, do we really want to live in a world of police checkpoints, surveillance cameras, metal detectors, X-ray scanners, and warrantless physical searches? We see this culture in our airports: witness the shabby spectacle of once proud, happy Americans shuffling through long lines while uniformed TSA agents bark orders. This is the world of government provided “security,” a world far too many Americans now seem to accept or even endorse. School shootings, no matter how horrific, do not justify creating an Orwellian surveillance state in America.

Do we really believe government can provide total security? Do we want to involuntarily commit every disaffected, disturbed, or alienated person who fantasizes about violence? Or can we accept that liberty is more important than the illusion of state-provided security? Government cannot create a world without risks, nor would we really wish to live in such a fictional place. Only a totalitarian society would even claim absolute safety as a worthy ideal, because it would require total state control over its citizens’ lives. We shouldn’t settle for substituting one type of violence for another. Government role is to protect liberty, not to pursue unobtainable safety.

Our freedoms as Americans preceded gun control laws, the TSA, or the Department of Homeland Security. Freedom is defined by the ability of citizens to live without government interference, not by safety. It is easy to clamor for government security when terrible things happen; but liberty is given true meaning when we support it without exception, and we will be safer for it."

Ron Paul's message on Dec 24 2012

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 15:39 | 3110084 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture


the irony.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 17:02 | 3110437's picture

Oh, the humanity.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 17:17 | 3110538 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture


who trumps the other?

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 17:27 | 3110582's picture

Leno continued, asking Paul if a woman should have the right to choose.


“Yeah, I think so she should, but does the infant have the right to choose?” said Paul whose position on contraception changes as the fetus develops.


“The baby at eight months and weighs eight pounds — should you, the mother have the right to abort?” said Paul.”I have not been able to accept that.”

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 18:44 | 3110819 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

thanks for the mainstream nooze clip - as a gynecologist, I would have thought Paul knew the difference between "baby" and "zygote"?  and that "8 month old" abortions aren't really what is taking place, in fact are not practised unless the mother's life is in danger? ie, RARELY if at all?

maybe they didn't teach that back when he got his label.

zygote, then about 8 weeks later, foetus - of course, if it helps further an agenda, babies are all in the mind, and can be manufactured there at ANY time. . .in fact, men can have those babies too, anyone can make this stuff up, hm?

we've covered this ground ad nauseum, if you've anything "new" to add after reflection, please do.

otherwise, just leave me with a quick off the topic quote and we'll call it 2012/a year. . .

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 19:17 | 3110922's picture



babies are all in the mind, and can be manufactured there at ANY time. . .in fact, men can have those babies too, anyone can make this stuff up, hm?


So, Turkey Vulture, are you a man pretending to be a woman today or a woman pretending to be a man? I lost track. Of course, it's all just in your mind, what there is of it.


Sun, 11/11/2012 - 18:44 | 2971003 Cathartes Aura and once again, I am not a feminist, nor am I a woman, nor am I a voter - but you keep labeling me if it helps your thinking. .
Sat, 12/01/2012 - 17:02 | 3026882 Cathartes Aura

while I did my drinking 'n' arguing with a group of males, I am female (not that it matters, but yeah).



Mon, 12/31/2012 - 21:46 | 3111251 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

yeah, I realise this concept has never taken hold in your brain, but thanks for search 'n' save of my posts dude.

male != man, female != woman - unless one decides to adopt the traits the label applies.

I enjoy the writings of Foucault, Butler, Fausto-Sterling, and a few others who re-cognise that humans don't present solely as one or the other'd.

I am quite recognisable as a female in the world, but don't fit the "woman" attributes expected.  I have male friends who don't necessarily do "man" tags either, though culture allows for more leeway, particularly as they age - it's really the "school-aged" that get the most cultural policing into acceptable identities. . .another great reason to keep one's children out of the bully-system.

but really, the need to box my writing into a "man/woman" voice is the perfect descriptive of a weak argument - how shall you mock me if you don't know the right words to use?

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 01:59 | 3111595's picture


but really, the need to box my writing into a "man/woman" voice is the perfect descriptive of a weak argument


It was you who described yourself with the words "nor am I a woman" and 'I am female." Glad you finally realize how weak those arguments have been.


yeah, I realise this concept has never taken hold in your brain, but thanks for search 'n' save of my posts dude.


There you go boxing my writing into a "dude/dudette" voice again. Too bad the concept of practicing what you preach has never taken hold in your brain. But consider the works of Renault and General Sterling Price which indicate that the brain can sometimes present as an occupant of one's lower intestine.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 17:42 | 3110639 toncuz
toncuz's picture

The entire GOP, conservative Democrats and "libertarians" ARE the exact tools of the RIGHT-WING central planners (Are you happy six banks control 65% of American assets because of deregulation, Mr right-wing central planner?).

We don't need small goverment...We need GOOD government watchdogs that aren't being corrupted by treasonous BUSINESSMEN and their corporate dictatorships.

Don't pretend you care about "liberty", "democracy" or even "capitalism" if you've ever voted conservative. Ron Paul's utopian world without over-site is how Italy ended up with a corporate installed Mussolini.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 03:43 | 3111696's picture


.We need GOOD government watchdogs


Is your humor intentional or unintentional?


We don't need small goverment...We need GOOD government watchdogs that aren't being corrupted by treasonous BUSINESSMEN and their corporate dictatorships.

Don't pretend you care about "liberty", "democracy" or even "capitalism" if you've ever voted conservative.


Obama never took money from Jon Corzine or voted for a bank bailout or appointed Timmy "Turbo-Tax" Geitner to head the Treasury in your opinion. Meanwhile, back in reality...

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 14:10 | 3109566 Seer
Seer's picture

Seems that other than myself you are the only one asking the really tough questions such as this.

The "property rights" people differ little from the socialists/whatnots that they trash in that they too want something for nothing.  That is, they want "protection" of their rights without having a govt that can also TAKE from them those properties.  CAN'T HAPPEN!

Humans are deceptive.  This is just another example of it.  As you note it's about those who currently HAVE wishing to KEEP what they have and call everything "equal:" isn't that like what the banksters have been saying?  It's kind of like passing the "equal rights" amendment after one group of people had a 150 year year start over the others (and had already built the empires of control/power for themselves- yeah, "you're now equal!").

I like Ron, I supported him.  BUT... it's all good-sounding shit that'll ONLY ever be WORDS unless the actual details/questions can be dealt with, and it's here that things get really ugly, where reality says "nice try."  Always easier to call the shots from the couch...  There's 7+ billion humans on the planet, good luck getting "property rights" for everyone: one has to consider that without it being universal (which, in theory, it should be) you're going to encounter war, which means a military, which means "national security," which leads to...

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 14:19 | 3109602's picture



That is, they want "protection" of their rights without having a govt that can also TAKE from them those properties.  CAN'T HAPPEN!


Government is the main obstruction to securing individual and property rights. These rights can be protected when sovereign individuals organize voluntarily.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 14:20 | 3109604 centerline
centerline's picture

It all really does boil down to human nature.  Is how the games are played, why they are played, why history seems to repeat itself, etc.  And is so ironic that we refuse to accept it - because somehow most people think they are above it?  That it is not polite or correct to speak about real truths of inequality?  What a mess.  And a recipe for disaster.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 15:26 | 3110051 Libertarian777
Libertarian777's picture

well its like animal farm. All animals are equal, except some are MORE equal than others.

While your points about the details and the 150 year head start are valid, the market, when not interefered with, actually tends to correct these imbalances over time. This is the whole point of the american dream, come here with nothing (no property) and become successful (even though everyone else already here has a 'head start').

No company has lasted forever. The Dutch East India company was more powerful than most governments, yet it no longer exists. GE is huge and controls a lot of industries, but it too should have gone bankrupt/been split apart in 2008, but the government intervened. So whatever private property rights were violated by these large companies will, over time, eventually get reset. The problem is when government gets involved and takes your property (via taxes/inflation) and gives it to another (via welfare/bailouts/subsidies). Then these companies / individuals can continue to violate your private property rights and prevent the 'reset'.

Details can be sorted out, it may not always be perfect, but its a start. Indian reservations as a poor example is a start. Yes we cannot go back and give the native americans all their land back, but we need to start somewhere. Continuing on this path we're on is going to lead to social unrest and more and more people calling for ever more state control of all property. They will then vote themselves that property.

Ever wonder why asset forfeitures are on the rise? not for convicted felons, but also for those simply accused of felonies.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 15:46 | 3110111 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture


It's kind of like passing the "equal rights" amendment after one group of people had a 150 year year start over the others (and had already built the empires of control/power for themselves- yeah, "you're now equal!").

and of course, the ERA has yet to be passed - working on a Constitutional Amendment for Government to have Rights over a woman's body sovereignty might just get in the way now too.

good points Seer.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:53 | 3109473 1100-TACTICAL-12
1100-TACTICAL-12's picture

Ron Paul Tx Gov 2014?

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:55 | 3109483 centerline
centerline's picture

Yes sad.  But, I have a different twist on this....

At this point, I say let all the sane public voices go quiet.  Let only the voices of madness - of arrogance and lies - be heard.

Take away all the backstops and counterbalances - and get on with the inevitable.  

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 14:31 | 3109665 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

people will still say these things. But only to their attorneys during their prison visits.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 15:32 | 3110062 HurricaneSeason
HurricaneSeason's picture

Actually, all he does is talk, so he can get a job with Fox News and get 1000 times more air time and accomplish just as much in meaningful legislation as he did for decades raking in money from the goverment. A libertarian should "work" in the private sector anyway.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 16:11 | 3110220 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

Except for old age, Murdoch and Paul have little in common.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 12:59 | 3109263 IridiumRebel
IridiumRebel's picture

What is this thing, PROPERTY RIGHTS, that you speak of? 

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:03 | 3109280 cossack55
cossack55's picture

Apparently it is some archaic concept where an individual could actually OWN something.  Laughable. Everyone knows the STATE owns everything. 




Is the sarc really necessary?

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:10 | 3109306 I am more equal...
I am more equal than others's picture

You didn't build that.....

Sniping sarcasm is always necessary...hitting your target at 1,000 yards is a wonderful experience.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:30 | 3109380 Tsunami Wave
Tsunami Wave's picture

It's tradition, a barbaric relic, transitory.... oh that's gold.  Property rights are... uhhh... tradition, a barbaric concept, and transitory?

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 14:15 | 3109588 mkhs
mkhs's picture

Sorry, but could you point out the sarcastic part?

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 14:18 | 3109598 Papasmurf
Papasmurf's picture

What is this thing, PROPERTY RIGHTS, that you speak of?

Having your cake and eating it too.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 14:27 | 3109626's picture

I have always been in possession of the cake before I ate the cake. I had it and then I ate it, too. Easy peasy.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 15:29 | 3110054 Libertarian777
Libertarian777's picture

i ate the cake

and i'll vote to take your cake too

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 17:04 | 3110451's picture

You didn't bake that cake...

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 17:09 | 3110480 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

That takes the cake.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 17:09 | 3110484 akak
akak's picture

A paper cake is just as good as a physical cake ... even better, in fact.  More "safer", too.

Trust me, let me hold your cake for you, and you can redeem this coupon for a real cake at any time.

(The fact that I have cake crumbs in my beard, and weigh 500 pounds, is purely coincidental).

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 19:58 | 3111035's picture

Can't resist.


MacArthur's Park is melting in the dark
All the sweet green icing flowing down
Someone left the cake out in the rain
I don't think that I can take it
'Cause it took so long to bake it
And I'll never have that recipe again
Oh, nooooo

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 20:02 | 3111045 akak
akak's picture

Damn you Crockett!

And just when I was finally getting Jose Feliciano's "Feliz Navidad" out of my head.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 20:15 | 3111083 Dr Benway
Dr Benway's picture

His Billie Jean cover is pretty sick too

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 05:19 | 3111719 toncuz
toncuz's picture

The only property rights anyone should have is what they create...not what they could buy. Property rights are the great perversion that's destroying capitalism. We are still having this argument over which goverment programs or institutions are more socialistic or more market based.

Why aren't we done with this nonsense? Because "property rights" have been ingrained into our collective minds that "owning" something is ok. It is not ok...unless you created it or will not buy it to monopolize it. You should be able to rent anything...but not own anything. WE LIVE IN A FINITE RESOURCE WORLD. So-called property rights always leads to monopoly and monopoly always leads to free market destruction...since monopoly is the victory of the right-wing central planners or corporate socialists (see Reaganomics, also known as neo-corporate-fascism...the Mussolini brand not Hitler).

This is not the America of 1770 waiting to be opened up. Virgin land for the taking...slaughter/massacre some Indians and go get it. Bring some slaves along and build your great grand kid's fortune. Pay some immigrants dirt and those grandkid's grandkid's will also inherit some of that cash.

The founders of America had father's and grandfathers that left Britain because the upper classes controlled all the land and resources. The other half were criminals sent here by Brtish courts...America's well kept secret...we are no different then Australia. No wonder the blue-bloods want to control the history books and build monuments dedicated to freedom-loving slave-holders.

We started off well and ended up doing the same exact thing the Brits did...let our rich take over our society leaving the crumbs for the rest of us. The greatest catalyst for eventually bringing socialism to America will be the right-wing and most probably the Republican Party of patricians and their one third conservative friends in the Democratic Party. All because the defintion of "property rights" has been perverted by people who own too much.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 15:31 | 3110063 post turtle saver
post turtle saver's picture

In a world of eminent domain and property taxes, "property rights" are a figment of your imagination.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 17:14 | 3110509 Overfed
Overfed's picture

You have the right to pay property taxes; or they will send in a SWAT team to remove you from "your" property.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:00 | 3109269 pods
pods's picture

Sad state of affairs when people have to be asked to merely do their jobs.


Mon, 12/31/2012 - 14:12 | 3109574 Seer
Seer's picture

Sad state of affairs when most believe that "jobs" = "meaningful work."

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:07 | 3109271 Banksters
Banksters's picture

Power concedes nothing without a demand- Frederick Douglass


Sedition is commonplace in Washington- NDAA, Patriot act, Fisa, immunity from prosecution for bankers, etc, etc, etc...  So what are we the people going to do about it?  One thing is certain, CONgress and da prez will never prosecute themselves!!!

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:14 | 3109325 vato poco
vato poco's picture

"What are We The People gonna do about it?!?"

Fair question. Here's what We The People did about 7 weeks ago: we re-elected 21 of 22 incumbent Senators, and 353 of 373 incumbent House reps. This from a Congress that We The People told pollsters warranted a 9% approval rating. Any further questions?

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:20 | 3109346 mark mchugh
mark mchugh's picture


The ugly truth is we've got the government we deserve.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:42 | 3109415 markovchainey
markovchainey's picture

Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.
H. L. Mencken

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:48 | 3109449 seek
seek's picture

We don't deserve this.

This is a government that is forced upon us, in some ways overtly, in others covertly, be it through active voting fraud or the gerrymandering of districts to guarantee incumbents and parties stay in power to the influence of money, one thing is certain -- the "elected" government doesn't reflect the will of the people.

Seriously, you can have a 10% approval rating for congress and yet virtually all incumbents get re-elected? This dissonance screams that something in fundamentally broken in the political transmission mechanism, and that this happens shows clearly that they are not representing the people. The "elections" are theater like everything else.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 14:19 | 3109603 Seer
Seer's picture

On one hand people are blaming "the people" (democracy being the collective stupid).  And on the other hand, as in your case, people are saying that "the people" aren't being represented.  This borders on schizophrenia! (I'll not that both of these basic cases/notions have been commented on in this thread, with BOTH receiving way higher percentages of green arrows than red.)

At what point to the supposed "smart people," who are not part of the ruling class, wake up and realize that this entire notion of "government" only exists for the ruling class, that that is the way it's always ever been (regardless of what govt, even the "bold experiment" of "America")?

No gods, no masters.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 14:40 | 3109723 mark mchugh
mark mchugh's picture

I disagree.

I spent over 100 hours of my time this year tracking down the whereabouts of the pols who voted in the EESA (TARP bill). The story ran here at ZH. I've been blogging long enough to know when a story falls on deaf ears, and trust me, this on did. Despite all the bitching, most Americans are too lazy to re-think whatever ideology they already ascribe to, let alone take any form of action.

It brings me no pleasure to announce this truth, but that doesn't change what it is.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 16:00 | 3110153 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture


Despite all the bitching, most Americans are too lazy to re-think whatever ideology they already ascribe to, let alone take any form of action.

this, unfortunately, is the truth.  this is most likely why the Congress keeps getting re-elected as well.  people have a few things they WANT, and are willing to hold their nose about the things they may not agree with, just to get what they WANT.

it's all part of the voter-packaging, just like the "bills" passed that are embedded with "pork" and mis-truths.  the WHOLE system is FALSE, yet few want to absent themselves entirely, because they have a few things they WANT to get for themselves.

rinse. repeat.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 17:00 | 3110432 seek
seek's picture

This particular weakness would fall in the "covert" camp, as the educational system became progressively watered down, and each of the two faces of the one party reward their vocal supporters with goodies. As soon as a form of action does appear (Tea Party, Occupy) every effort is made to neutralize it as rapidly as possible, to prevent any momentum gathering.

Action is taken, it's thwarted and defused.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 15:38 | 3110080 Libertarian777
Libertarian777's picture

Seriously, you can have a 10% approval rating for congress and yet virtually all incumbents get re-elected?

yes you can...

you see, in the mind of the voter, i'll vote in my congressman, because he always brings home the bacon!

On the other thand the other 534 senators and congressmen are responsible for the national debt/fiscal cliff/wars etc. but not MY congressman.

So my approval for congress is 0% but for my welfare voting congressman its 100% approval rating.

I'm surprised we don't have a disapproval rating of 0% for the rest of congress.


Mon, 12/31/2012 - 14:06 | 3109551 lakecity55
lakecity55's picture

Those voting machines are rigged.

No matter who we vote for, the outcome is already determined.

Just sayin'

Keep Stackin!

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:02 | 3109277 krispkritter
krispkritter's picture

 'debt monetized by the Federal Reserve is the true threat to our national security' = FUCK YOU BERNANKE!

RP was too polite to say what he really meant.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:03 | 3109282 Ivanovich
Ivanovich's picture

And there goes our last hope of ever having sanity take root in such a corrupt organization.  Thank you for your time, Dr. Paul.  We will sorely miss your insight.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:04 | 3109284 PUD
PUD's picture


Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:06 | 3109289 Hey Assholes
Hey Assholes's picture

Dr. Ron Paul is and has been, a giant among pygmies.

Because they are not like him, we are in this terrible place as a nation.

The scum have destroyed our once decent country. Here come the totalitarians.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:06 | 3109291 Debeachesand Je...
Debeachesand Jerseyshores's picture

Thank you Ron Paul for your service to America and your vigorous defense of the Constitution of the United States.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:06 | 3109292 Dr. Engali
Dr. Engali's picture

Thank you for your service Dr. Paul. I'm afraid your words will fall on deaf ears in Washington. That town needs and enima.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:07 | 3109295 caimen garou
caimen garou's picture

oath, constitution, protect, respect,liberty, and peace. these are all words that are foreign to members of congress and tpous!

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:07 | 3109297 I am more equal...
I am more equal than others's picture

Fairness is not fair.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:07 | 3109299 Ookspay
Ookspay's picture

Ron Paul has been a great voice for freedom and Constitutional principals for years but it is now time to rally around "Rand" Paul and get him elected POTUS in 2016, if we last that long... Of course we will need to put a person of "color" on the ticket to mollify the muppetts and the media. But make no mistake about it, we need a Paul if we have any chance to reverse the assault on our personal liberty and regain fiscal responsibility.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:23 | 3109356 Squid Vicious
Squid Vicious's picture

ok then Rand Paul and Dave Chappelle in 2016!

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:52 | 3109427 OneTinSoldier66
OneTinSoldier66's picture

I wouldn't touch the Republican Party with a ten foot pole. And I really don't want anything to do with a guy that announces the Republican Nominee and that he's endosoring and supporting him... two months prior to when the the nominee is supposed to be nominated!


Screw Rand Paul(and Reince Preibus). They can take a giant leap.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 14:59 | 3109901 Ookspay
Ookspay's picture

In a two party system ya gotta play the game. Rand is a Libertatrian at heart but is smart enough to know first you get there and then make the changes. He supported Mitt because Mitt was far better than BO. You don't always get the choices that you want just the choices that you have. Let's sneak in Rand and then illicit real change, like the liberals do, lie...

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 15:05 | 3109949 OneTinSoldier66
OneTinSoldier66's picture



No. I refuse to lie. I won't stoop to that level. I am only willing to build a foundation based upon truth.


Mon, 12/31/2012 - 15:17 | 3110003 Ookspay
Ookspay's picture

Then you will lose. This is war and the first casualty of war is the truth. Those fuck heads will laugh at you and decieve you at every turn. Your idealism while noble is worthless in this age of deception, save it for your family and friends.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 16:16 | 3110233 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture


This is war and the first casualty of war is the truth.

indeed, tell it to the CIA, FBI, HomeLand Security, et al.

it is war, a war against sociopaths & worse, and humanity is losing. . .

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 16:29 | 3110245 OneTinSoldier66
OneTinSoldier66's picture

It is sad for me to see that you believe that those that lie or are willing to lie, win. And people who tell the truth, lose.


I, believe it is the other way around.


I know, the liars haven't lost power yet. Does that mean they aren't going to?


Is the only way of the world lying and deceitfulness? What kind of a world is that? The kind that we have now? If so, I don't speak the language of the world we now live in. Apparently you understand it and speak it's language though.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 17:42 | 3110642 livid levity
livid levity's picture

Preach it!

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 20:08 | 3111063 Ookspay
Ookspay's picture

"We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends." Deceiving ones enemies is often a tactic of war, used by Washington after those famous words from The Declaration of Independence.

If you do not believe that this is war and all means necessary must be employed, than we see things quite differently. We have been lied to by our politicians, the Treasury and the FED for far too long with much annihilation and pain. Deceiving them to defeat them is perfectly acceptable to me.

While I admire your idealism and values, I am not so virtuous as to accept their abuse and usurpations of my rights.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 15:44 | 3110102 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture


In a two party system

Non sequitur. The US is a single party system.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 16:11 | 3110217 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture


In a two party system ya gotta play the game. Rand is a Libertatrian at heart but is smart enough to know first you get there and then make the changes. He supported Mitt because Mitt was far better than BO. You don't always get the choices that you want just the choices that you have. Let's sneak in Rand and then illicit real change, like the liberals do, lie...

this is a classic example of voter-thinking - WTF dude?!

Rand, like his father, is a CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN - that's the PARTY he is IN, right now!  he's not anything else!

some of you like to make up little scenarios where these politicians can play the HERO role for you, and you completely ignore REALITY! 

to get what you want, you imagine some Trojan Horse "sneaking" in your team to get your wish list filled - and all the while THEY (Congress) are getting what THEY want, at everyone's expense.  tell me, how is this any different to all the "welfare" voters?  all the OTHER people voting for what they want?  everyone and their wants. . .

grow up, stop playing at electing someone to punish those you "don't like" and just work to keep the government OUT of people's lives. . .

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 16:34 | 3110291 akak
akak's picture

Cathartes, you are totally hung-up on the political name game, and are wrong, wrong, wrong, at least as far as Ron Paul is/was concerned.

Yes, he ran as a Republican, but was quite literally just A REPUBLICAN IN NAME ONLY!  If you want proof of that (and the proof is rampantly abundant), merely observe how he was treated by the rest of 'his' party not only during his years in office, but most especially during his two runs for the Republican presidential nomination ---- to say that he was an outcast, a pariah and persona non grata is to grossly understate the case.  Please stop thinking and believing (in the most naively childish manner) of some hypothetical, ideologically monolithic parties, for they do not exist.

But again, we all know that you insist on thinking with your womb and your reptilian brainstem, and not with your brain, when it comes to Ron Paul.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 17:32 | 3110604 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

akak, I could make the reverse argument for your choice of thinking.

you are totally hung up on labeling Paul a "libertarian" despite the FACT he is still embedded in the Republican Party, and holds some ideas that don't make an "official" Libertarian list,  that even his legacy son is playing by the Conservative Republican rule-book.  I've yet to read of Ron having an opinion on Rand. . .

and you can fling your "childish" "womb" and "reptilian brainstem" labels all you'd like - as if applying those labels in an argument isn't childish.

you go ahead and laud your leaders, follow whoever you like/love/trust.

I don't need to be led, and I'll continue to point out ideas that don't jibe - like "freedom" and "liberty" and "Constitutional Amendments" that are being carried forward by the Conservative Republicans even now, having been nurtured in the nest of Ron Paul.

if you'd like to address those topics, great - and if you'd like to just troll me like AnAnymous, and get yer thread upvotes as per usual. . . *shrug*

you should know by now, after over a year, I could care less about most "opinions" here.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 18:46 | 3110781 akak
akak's picture

Cathartes, aside from the fact that there is in fact no "official libertarian" list of political positions, I would challenge you to point out ANY of Ron Paul's political beliefs, aside from possibly the long-contentious and ideologically difficult issue of abortion, which is not generally if not exclusively libertarian in nature.  I honestly don't think that there is one such position.

As for flinging labels, do you not see your gross hypocrisy in flinging the "Conservative Republican" label at Ron Paul, as you love to do incessantly, regardless of the facts that I had just presented (and which you conveniently ignore): that Ron Paul was NOT accepted by his own party, did not in fact hold almost ANY standard views or positions of the Republican Party majority, and in fact publically admitted MANY TIMES that he ran as a Republican purely out of convenience and ballot-oriented pragmatism, given the restrictions of our corrupt two-party system?

No, you are never willing to address those points.  Why?

(I will agree with you on Rand Paul, whom I regard as a sellout and a traitor to his father's own political legacy.)

But oh yeah, I forgot --- you are a woman (or a reasonable facsimile thereof), and are therefore ALWAYS right, while I am just cynically fishing for green arrows to stroke my ego while high-fiving my 'bros.


PS: I still love 'ya!

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 19:03 | 3110876 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture


I'm a female, and I'm only "right" when I am - either argue me out of my "position" or accept that you haven't - it's nothing to do with hormones or genitals, alright?  and for all you know, I could be a Tyler stirring the thread-pot. ^^

most here cannot acknowledge the discrepancy between Ron Paul calling himself a "libertarian" (small "L" okay?), and yet working for over a decade on a Constitutional Amendment that furthers the State power over an individual's body rights.  I cannot see anything "libertarian" as defined so far in these actions, but apparently there is no dissonance with most here on the subject.

I only bring it up, yes, repeatedly, because my god, if the dendrites are created through reflection on the subject, perhaps, MAYBE, some might remove their support of a system of voting that cripples critical thinking and enslaves minds to think there could be ANY changes made through such a passive form.

voting??? really??? at THIS stage?

and a "single man" emerging to "lead" the nation to "liberty"?

no, that's laughable, albeit in a tragi-comedy way.  but Paul has kept people's minds IN the voting game, IN the hope-for-change WITHIN the decrepit parameters of what is controlling the peoples of this imaginary nationstate created as a money-farm for the powers that be, most likely the City of London folks, and those behind them.

divorce your mind(s) from loyalty to a meme that most likely never existed - put down the flags.


PS, and of course, I still love you too, lol - best wishes in the imagined "new" year, which is really just waking up in the morning, eh?   *grins*

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 19:58 | 3110946 akak
akak's picture

Cathartes, while this might seem totally hypocritical, given my past and current defenses of Ron Paul, I TOTALLY agree with you on the futility/mental enslavement of the voting system, and in fact I finally gave up even 'token voting' this past year myself.  The system is so irredeemably corrupt that I simply could no longer implicitly endorse nor condone it by taking part in the meaningless pseudo-democratic (small "d") charade.

And you are correct, if our political salvation were dependent on our voting for one single man, then any possible salvation via that route was almost certainly lost long before anyway.  But I still support Ron Paul's efforts in teaching Americans, and others, the near-forgotten lessons and value of liberty, even if those efforts would almost certainly not come to fruition, if at all, until after the catastrophic collapse toward which this country is heading.

But I must once again emphasize the point, even if I do not necessarily agree with the final opinion (as I am 'agnostic' on the abortion issue), that one CAN in fact be partially or even totally against abortion WHILE AT THE SAME TIME being a principled libertarian.  Even the most die-hard pro-choice libertarians recognize this fact.  It is also a fact that in the 30+ years that I have been involved in the broader libertarian movement, the abortion issue has undoubtedly been the single most contentious, and logically and morally difficult, issue over which libertarians have argued, with those (like Ron Paul) who lean 'pro-life' taking the side of the unborn infant/fetus in defense of liberty, a position which I can totally understand even if I do not necessarily agree with it.

You simply cannot cast Ron Paul as a libertarian hypocrite solely for taking a generally 'pro-life' position, especially when his position on the issue is more nuanced than you have acknowledged.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 20:24 | 3111101 Dr Benway
Dr Benway's picture

How about War on Drugs? If you do not fully and absolutely condemn the war on drugs, yet preach about how you believe in 'liberty', you are an absolute disgusting hypocrite shithead. Not a statesman, not a hero, but a vile shithead.

Somehow RP gets the most ridiculous passes here, even as he completely abandons any true agenda of 'liberty'. You can't be for liberty and compromise everything it stands for at the same time.

If elected, RP would just have been another Obama. They are ALL liars and hypocrites and swine and part of the system.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 20:27 | 3111116 akak
akak's picture

You are either a liar or an idiot.

Ron Paul has called for an end to the War on Drugs innumerable times.  If you were not paying attention, that is your own fault.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 20:34 | 3111126 Dr Benway
Dr Benway's picture

And you are probably both.

Just like Obama, he solely pays lip tribute to the idea of legalization.

Go ahead and pretend drug legalization was an important part of the RP platform.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 20:25 | 3111110 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

ahh akak, good to know you're removing the thorn of allegiance to a fiction, which is truly to be commended, in my opinion.

But I still support Ron Paul's efforts in teaching Americans, and others, the near-forgotten lessons and value of liberty,

I would value his teachings/lessons on the "value of liberty" were it applied across the board, to each human, and not used merely as a meme that pulls in crowds - this is why I stress the definitions of over-used words, "liberty" being one - how 'bout that "liberty, and justice, for all" meme?  where does that live, or live up to?

and one can be a "principled libertarian" and opposed to "abortion" (which in itself has many different lines drawn, at differing timelines), and still live up to "libertarian" principles by simply NOT HAVING AN ABORTION if you don't believe in them, yes?  but codifying one's beliefs into Constitutional Amendments is NOT "libertarian" because it enForces laws on individuals that remove their personal "liberty" - so one should perhaps call themselves another defining title, and let the "libertarians" stick with their "pro LIBERTY" tags.

that Ron Paul continues to use as "abortion" examples of "eight month old abortions" when that is in no way a norm or average is emotional speech that keeps people opinionating, and I find it very disingenuous, has been all along.

which is where I stand on the issue - if people need to have labels for beliefs/people, then define the label and stop pretending the definitions are moving lines in the sand that obfuscate the TRUTH of what that word means.  it's intentionally confusing, and intentionally deceptive.

Rand Paul likes to call himself "libertarian" too - AND he uses "Conservative Republican" when that label suits his agenda - it's called "being a politician" yes?  anyone in Congress, particularly as a career politician, is privy to much information the "public" does not have access to, and their long term actions should point out their leanings. . .

as to Paul's "nuanced" position on abortion, not seeing it when the truth of his continuing efforts towards a Constitutional Amendment are acknowledged.  the whole story tells me more than Paul has alluded to, I'm afraid.

I searched out any statements he's made directly to the Sanctity of Life proposed amendments, which are now being promoted by Rand, and Ryan, of course - couldn't find any direct quotes that included any mention of "libertarian" principles, or reasonably acknowledging that a Constitutional Amendment forcing birth could be carried out as Law without some dire consequences in the enForcement.  like a good politician, there are only a few statements, mostly emotional, and voters are left to fill in the blanks per their own beliefs, bending to justify their voting choice.  because, of course, that's how the voting system works!  I've found nothing proposed as to HOW this is going to be carried out - monitoring a woman's fertility is pretty much the only way, so of course it will be random and punitive, like so many laws are, subject to individual petty tyrants causing more pain in the community than ever needs be.

for what it's worth, I doubt we'll get there - but damn! one would hope others are smart enough to think this through logically, including the consequences, but I'm seeing zero attention paid to the "after effects" of making this an actual "law" - which is truly a dismal awareness to acknowledge. . .

hey akak, for what it's worth, even though we disagree, at times strongly, on this subject - I appreciate your rebuttals which allow for more depth to a subject that few here want to think about.  it says a lot about who you are as a human. . .


Tue, 01/01/2013 - 00:14 | 3111529 Ookspay
Ookspay's picture

Oh God, abortion? That is the tired old argument that you are going to pull out to completely disqualify the great Ron Paul and his Son? And to somehow claim that killing babies in the womb is an act of freedom and liberty. Are you going to belittle and ridicule them for also believing in God? There are many who believe that life begins at conception and that the Constitution explicitly protects LIFE! We don't vacillate and rationalize that belief, it is fundamental to who we are.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 11:32 | 3111968 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

Cathartes Aura said:

hey akak, for what it's worth, even though we disagree, at times strongly, on this subject - I appreciate your rebuttals which allow for more depth to a subject that few here want to think about.  it says a lot about who you are as a human. . .

For what it's worth, I appreciate both of you for demonstrating something so rarely seen in today's ideologically mediated world, namely that intelligent people can express their disagreements without descending into hate-filled diatribes, and that such expression can offer opportunities for learning and growth.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 16:08 | 3112643 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

as you were around, and contributing, to this same discussion at the same time last year, you'll no doubt be able to see the evolution in the exchanges between us - I truly value akak's principled beliefs, particularly as a foil for the ones here who just downtick and move on, never engaging the subject.  akak has allowed me a chance to refine my "voice" on this topic, which is one of the main reasons I come to the Hedge, to learn how others think, most of whom I'd never interact with in daily life.  I want to know their reasoning, and I want my reasoning to be sound.

(even if most here wouldn't agree with my characterising my arguments as such, my standards are my own, heh)

and if sometimes we both are more pissy than rational, know that I always take the arguing as if we were in a pub, sharing a few rounds, and maybe a few more! as we work on difficult subjects, always knowing the shared walk home will reconcile any imagined differences. . .

cheers 4thStooge! *raises a pint*   happy new year!

(this reminded me of you, in that weird way you'd appreciate?)

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 23:54 | 3111500 Ookspay
Ookspay's picture

Cathartes, In life there are very few times when one gets exactly what they want. Very few of us marry gourgeous super models or live in Castles with servants. We settle for the best that is realistically attainable. I believe that Rand Paul is the best Constitutionally grounded politician in this country who has a realistic chance of being elected within the current and prefferable two party system.

I do not want my politicians to "punish those who I don't like" as you say, I want them to stick to our founding Constitutional principles. I will pick the best candidate from one of the two parties as a third party candidate has absolutely no chance. Am I settling? Maybe, but life is usually about settling.

I do believe that Rand was raised with a good Libertarian background by his Father and has exhibited those principles in almost every vote that he has made. It will take someone like him and a unigue coalition of Libertarians and Republicans to save this country and return some of our freedoms. Many people check out of the system and allow the worst candidate to win by forfeit, this is not good. You can keep voting for Garry Johnson's and the like but it is a waste of time and we are running out of time.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:46 | 3112597 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

given that you've stated a preference for ducking 'n' diving with the "truth" and are willing to do whatever it takes to get what you want, I'm sure holding your nose and voting will bring the outcomes you seek.

or not.

while I doubt Rand Paul will get the lengthy political career he was raised in the shadow of, and so obviously desires - I can see why you'd be attracted to him, as he slips and slithers through the system. 

whatever it takes to get what I want.   yes, that's a popular belief in amrka.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 15:10 | 3109965 OneTinSoldier66
OneTinSoldier66's picture

I just want to take a moment to correct my spelling... it's Reince "Priebus".

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 15:19 | 3110026 Ookspay
Ookspay's picture

I prefer to spell it

W O R T H L E S S   D O U C H E B A G !

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:08 | 3109303 samsara
samsara's picture

"The Best President America Never Had"

Repeating myself...

America just had it's Secular "Give Us Barabbas"  moment.  

and Quoting Raiders of the Lost Arc....

We had a Choice/Chance ....    "We Chose Poorly"

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:38 | 3109401 zapdude
zapdude's picture

Excellent analogy.

And in any competition where the declared winner is found to have cheated, he is stripped of his title and his opponent is the actual winner.  The Romney campaign and the GOP changed the rules at the RNC and cheated Ron Paul out of any chance at the nomination.  Since Romney cheated, Paul should have got the nomination. 

No surprise, the fix is in and its all rigged.  However these are extremely important facts we should never let ourselves or our brainwashed countrymen forget.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 14:23 | 3109612 Seer
Seer's picture

This is all about POWER.  That we should think it ends up any other way is rather troubling...

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:09 | 3109305 luna_man
luna_man's picture



In One Ear...Out The Other!


Ron P., go in peace

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:10 | 3109310 Little John
Little John's picture

Good luck Dr. Paul, and thanks for all the truth.   I wish congress would heed your warning but they won't.

It will take much bloodshed for TPTB to relearn how free men must be govererned. Let it come, I ain't scared.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:13 | 3109320 Little John
Little John's picture

BTW wouldn't it be nice if ZH had spell check?

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 13:45 | 3109437 AssFire
AssFire's picture

Umm, it does- it is the "ABC w/ checkmark" on the upper right when you compose your comment.


Maybe you were joking?

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 14:45 | 3109788 Little John
Little John's picture

Thanks for the tip.

Mon, 12/31/2012 - 14:26 | 3109636 mkhs
mkhs's picture

TUI, typing under the influence, is not a crime.  Neither is TWI, typing while ignorant.


Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!