The New Individualist on Ron Paul

[Chris Grieb]

Chris B., As Brant as pointed out I am in my 60ths.

Let me point out that I don't want gas chambers for followers of Islam or any religion if they don't agrees against me.

Let me repeat were you and Ron Paul for the suppression of the Danish Prophet cartoons. Do you recognize that some followers want to impose Sharia law in place of the US Constitution? Where do you stand on that issue.

I'm waiting for my answer just like I'm waiting for Galt to admit his predictions about Ron Paul being the nominee of the GOP were wrong.

I plan to not speaking out against those who want to impose Sharia law in this country and so I will be speaking against you and the sainted Ron Paul.

[algernonsidney]

Let me repeat were you and Ron Paul for the suppression of the Danish Prophet cartoons.

You may remember that Borders suppressed an issue of Free Inquiry because of the cartoons. I quit going to Borders right after that. I personally would love to see them printed all over the place. In fact, if I had the money, I might get a small plane and drop them over some Muslim enclave. And if you want to organize a public Koran burning, you can invite me.

I don't see very many people in this country calling for Sharia law. There was one very beautiful Muslim girl working out at Dell when I was there. Other than the fact that she wore long sleeves in the Texas summer, she seemed pretty normal to all of us.

We have generally attracted good Muslims here. They are doctors, engineers, scientists. Europe attracts the garbage because of their welfare state. Europe generally also disarms peaceful citizens.

If you want to fight Sharia law, then propose something better like a society based on the non-aggression principle. I believe in the non-aggression principle. It's the same reason why I am against this war and America's military adventures in general.

I'm interested in fighting ideas with ideas. You are the one who wants to kill everyone who disagrees with you.

[Brant Gaede]

I'm interested in fighting ideas with ideas. You are the one who wants to kill everyone who disagrees with you.

This is package-deal smearing. You can't imagine or accept the idea, it seems, that there might be a rational, moral position between yours and genocide, between pacificism and imperialism. BTW, this imperialism you refer to goes back to colonial days and one of the major causes of the Revolutionary War was Britain's attempt to hold back westward expansion. It pissed people over here off. This country has always been a kick-ass nation, never more evident than in the Civil War. Your general thesis is correct; your preventive or cure won't work or even be tried. Fighting for oil is not the same as self defense; it's failed domestic policies. There is little or no cure for the general stupidity of the citizenry, much less their politicians. The United States by all but banning DDT has effectively killed over 40,000,000 children by malaria and needlessly sickened and debilitated 500,000,000 people alive right now. Not a shot was fired.

--Brant

[Chris Grieb]

Baker; Stop misrepresenting my position.

Is Ron Paul against imposing Sharia Law?

One of the publications that printed the Danish cartoons was the New Individualist.

I stand by my opinion that you are not even fit to shine my or Robert Biddinotto's shoes.

[Rich Engle]

Chris longs for the days when you could stop off at Grand Central Station and get you a blackie to buff dem Oxfords reeeel good, yassuh!

Wait...worry not; I think you can still do that.

I stand by my opinion that you are not even fit to shine my or Robert Biddinotto's shoes.

Jeezus, dude. What's next? Do you control the universe from your bedroom, too?

rde

STILL trying to find more than one black Objectivist.

Edited September 14, 2008 by Rich Engle

[galtgulch]

I'm waiting for my answer just like I'm waiting for Galt to admit his predictions about Ron Paul being the nominee of the GOP were wrong.

I just came across your post and hasten to respond. I don't believe I ever predicted that Ron Paul would actually get the nomination although I do concede that I believe that he would have been the best of the lot regarding several crucial issues. I have pointed out his shortcomings in particular his religiosity resulting in his mistaken notions about evolution and abortion. Still he is correct that the government not adhered to the Constitution resulting in the existence of the FED and the IRS, the welfare state and the drug war all of which should be abolished. Also the inflation and going completely off the gold standard, violation of privacy in the Patriot Act, expansion of our military forces to over 800 bases in over 120 countries, an interventionist foreign policy are all issues Ron Paul would address but are issues which are off the table for the major party candidates.

He should have been the candidate and some of his ardent supporters tried to influence the delegates by sending them two DVDs designed to persuade them to vote for Ron Paul. That didn't work! Even Ron Paul supporters who managed to be chosen at caucuses or state conventions to become delegates for McCain or Romney and to go to the nominating convention were instead persuaded there to vote for McCain for the sake of party unity. Many but not all succumbed to such pressures but not all.

youtube.com then RNC Delegates Video #1 and #2

Ron Paul has founded the www.campaignforliberty.com to keep his supporters together to support candidates in the years to come.

The movement for freedom Ron Paul awakened will continue to grow and be influential. I am an Objectivist and intend to encourage others in the movement to read Rand, Branden, von Mises, Hayek, Rothbard, and others depending on peoples interests.

I think Objectivists might be able to help enlighten the Ron Paul supporters with the ideas Rand has taught us or pointed out to us.

[Chris Grieb]

Galt; Where did you and St. Ron stand on the Danish cartoon issue?

I remember posts of yours that predicted Paul would be the Republican nominee. Now you're just lying.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Just for the record, I skimmed all this. If there were any ideas presented, I missed them in the name-calling.

I am not too interested in going back to find out what I missed, either. I believe so many people feel as I do, it is reasonable to conclude that idea-wise, this thread communicates very little to nothing at all.

Do carry on, gentlemen. At least you guys seem to be getting some value out of this.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

Just for the record, I skimmed all this. If there were any ideas presented, I missed them in the name-calling.

I am not too interested in going back to find out what I missed, either. I believe so many people feel as I do, it is reasonable to conclude that idea-wise, this thread communicates very little to nothing at all.

Do carry on, gentlemen. At least you guys seem to be getting some value out of this.

You too, Michael! You too!

--Brant

[algernonsidney]

I don't believe I ever predicted that Ron Paul would actually get the nomination although I do concede that I believe that he would have been the best of the lot regarding several crucial issues. I have pointed out his shortcomings in particular his religiosity resulting in his mistaken notions about evolution and abortion.

When and where has Ron Paul ever said anything about evolution?

I find it especially interesting that the neo-con Bidinotto condemned Ron Paul for his position on abortion. His Ron Paul obsession was rather silly. Yet now he is head over heels in love with Sarah Palin. At least his new Palin obsession may have replaced his Ron Paul obsession. That's a typical Objectivist--act on whim, then rationalize. He isn't the first Objectivist who has his brain between his legs.

Still he is correct that the government not adhered to the Constitution resulting in the existence of the FED and the IRS, the welfare state and the drug war all of which should be abolished. Also the inflation and going completely off the gold standard, violation of privacy in the Patriot Act,

The war mongers don't care about those things. Taxes and the Fed make the war possible. Civil liberties are a threat to the war.

Chris Grieb misquotes everyone on this board. I am through with him. He once claimed to correct my spelling of the word "course." I had never written such a post. It doesn't matter what is true to him. He just acts on his immediate whims.

Even Ron Paul supporters who managed to be chosen at caucuses or state conventions to become delegates for McCain or Romney and to go to the nominating convention were instead persuaded there to vote for McCain for the sake of party unity. Many but not all succumbed to such pressures but not all.

Have you considered that these people were just fakes? It's certainly a possibility.

Edited September 14, 2008 by Chris Baker

[Chris Grieb]

Baker; There is a door.

Galt; You wrote some long posts which seemed to suggest that if the right things happened Ron Paul would be the GOP nominee. Delegates would watch a DVD and decide to nominate. I thought the above was not going to happen and told you so.

Baker; You still are not fit to shine Robert B's shoes. Perhaps you can shine Obama's shoes.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Chris,

Robert Bidinotto is a friend. I disagree with what he did about Ron Paul (and he paid a high price for the horrible magazine cover), but I do not doubt his sincerity. He believes in what he writes. He has a brilliant career and should it be that I or you have his achievements as a writer.

I certainly do not agree that he acts on whim or is thinking between his legs.

Since you are down on Objectivist behavior, what do you think about the Objectivist habit of constantly questioning a person's honesty, character, whim or intelligence when they disagree? Or of dismissing all the good a person has built over a lifetime and oversimplifying to the lowest point possible?

Oops. That sounds like what I have been reading out of you. You rant about Objectivists, but do the exact same things you rant against.

Once again, may I suggest reason?

Michael

[Selene]

Folks:

You could have heard a pin drop!

"When in England at a fairly large conference, Colin

Powell was asked by the Archbishop of Canterbury if our plans for Iraq

were just an example of empire building' by George Bush.

He answered by saying, 'Over the years, the United

States has sent many of its fine young men and women into great peril to

fight for freedom beyond our borders. The only amount of land we have

ever asked for in return is enough to bury those that did not return."

"Then there was a conference in France where a number of

international engineers were taking part, including French and American.

During a break one of the French engineers came back into the room

saying 'Have you heard the latest dumb stunt Bush has done? He has sent

an aircraft carrier to Indonesia to help the tsunami victims. What does

he intended to do , bomb them?' A Boeing engineer stood up and replied

quietly: 'Our carriers have three hospitals on board that can treat

several hundred people; they are nuclear powered and can supply

emergency electrical power to shore facilities; they have three

cafeterias with the capacity to feed 3,000 people three meals a day,

they can produce several thousand gallons of fresh water from sea water

each day, and they carry half a dozen helicopters for use in

transporting victims and injured to and from their flight deck.. We have

eleven such ships; how many does France have?"

Finally, a group of Americans, retired teachers, recently went to

France on a tour. Robert Whiting, an elderly gentleman of 83, arrived in

Paris by plane.. At French Customs, he took a few minutes to locate his

passport in his carry on. 'You have been to France before, monsieur?'

the customs officer asked sarcastically. Mr. Whiting admitted that he

had been to France previously. 'Then you should know enough to have your

passport ready.' The American said, 'The last time I was here, I didn't

have to show it.' 'Impossible. Americans always have to show your

passports on arrival in France!' The American senior gave the Frenchman

a long hard look. Then he quietly explained. 'Well, when I came ashore

at Omaha Beach on D-Day in '44 to help liberate this country, I couldn't

find any Frenchmen to show it to."

By the way, ALL the crosses, Stars of David and Muslim symbols at Normandy Beach point West to America.

Can we all agree that we are a good and gracious country that has continually moved towards individual freedom and the pursuit of happiness?

Adam

[algernonsidney]

Robert Bidinotto is a friend. I disagree with what he did about Ron Paul (and he paid a high price for the horrible magazine cover), but I do not doubt his sincerity. He believes in what he writes. He has a brilliant career and should it be that I or you have his achievements as a writer.

I would love to know more about the high price he paid. That would give me hope for Objectivists.

I haven't questioned his sincerity or honesty on this board, yet.

He's done some good work on environmentalism. Some of his stuff on criminal justice is worthwhile. He is also drowning all that out by being the biggest neo-con imperialist in Objectivism. I consider him worse than Yaron Brook. It's all on his blog for everyone to see.

He got his 15 minutes of fame back in 1988 thanks to his Willie Horton article. He has been riding on that for years. Does he still write for _Reader's Digest_?

I do know that he completely burned his bridges with FEE. It seems that he's essentially ghettoized himself with some of the losers at the Atlas Society. When he had good relations with FEE, he got to associate with people like Bettina Bien Greaves and Israel Kirzner. That is a really big step down.

You rant about Objectivists, but do the exact same things you rant against.

It should fit right in here. All I am doing is being a mirror.

[Brant Gaede]

Folks:

You could have heard a pin drop!

"When in England at a fairly large conference, Colin

Powell was asked by the Archbishop of Canterbury if our plans for Iraq

were just an example of empire building' by George Bush.

He answered by saying, 'Over the years, the United

States has sent many of its fine young men and women into great peril to

fight for freedom beyond our borders. The only amount of land we have

ever asked for in return is enough to bury those that did not return."

"Then there was a conference in France where a number of

international engineers were taking part, including French and American.

During a break one of the French engineers came back into the room

saying 'Have you heard the latest dumb stunt Bush has done? He has sent

an aircraft carrier to Indonesia to help the tsunami victims. What does

he intended to do , bomb them?' A Boeing engineer stood up and replied

quietly: 'Our carriers have three hospitals on board that can treat

several hundred people; they are nuclear powered and can supply

emergency electrical power to shore facilities; they have three

cafeterias with the capacity to feed 3,000 people three meals a day,

they can produce several thousand gallons of fresh water from sea water

each day, and they carry half a dozen helicopters for use in

transporting victims and injured to and from their flight deck.. We have

eleven such ships; how many does France have?"

Finally, a group of Americans, retired teachers, recently went to

France on a tour. Robert Whiting, an elderly gentleman of 83, arrived in

Paris by plane.. At French Customs, he took a few minutes to locate his

passport in his carry on. 'You have been to France before, monsieur?'

the customs officer asked sarcastically. Mr. Whiting admitted that he

had been to France previously. 'Then you should know enough to have your

passport ready.' The American said, 'The last time I was here, I didn't

have to show it.' 'Impossible. Americans always have to show your

passports on arrival in France!' The American senior gave the Frenchman

a long hard look. Then he quietly explained. 'Well, when I came ashore

at Omaha Beach on D-Day in '44 to help liberate this country, I couldn't

find any Frenchmen to show it to."

By the way, ALL the crosses, Stars of David and Muslim symbols at Normandy Beach point West to America.

Can we all agree that we are a good and gracious country that has continually moved towards individual freedom and the pursuit of happiness?

Adam

Well, no. I'm not a country. Americans slaughtered 200,000 Philipina over 100 years ago. Lincoln wiped out 5% of the population of the U.S. Most treatries with the native American populations were abrogated by guess who. "Our" involvement in WWI made WWII possible, the rise of communism and Nazism, the Korean and Cold Wars and (almost) nuclear armegeddon. Etc. All in the name of altruistic busybodyism, "Manifest Destiny," and American tribalism. Throw in "FREEDOM"--like the War on Drugs. How many hundreds of thousand people have "we" got locked up for that right now? Here come the cops! They're going to kill your dogs, maybe you and yours, ransack your home and terrorize your children. Then they'll confiscate your property, seize your bank accounts--assuming they have the "right" house.

--Brant

[Chris Grieb]

Brant; In your last post there is much I would agree with. I have posted here and elsewhere how wrong I think the so-called war on drugs. I have said here and elsewhere that the "war on Drugs" is a war really on people doing drug buying or selling.

On another point I have thought the American entry into World War 1 was wrong. Because of our entry in the First War I find no way to keep out of the Second. I reject Rothbard's view of the Cold War.

I am more then willing to be reasonable but a very great person said "Judge and be prepared to be judged for your judgments." I think Ron Paul should be judged by this standard.

As I have said in other places on web site I think there is a real danger from Militant Islam and its appeasers here in the West. If Ron Paul is one of those appeasers I am against him.

I repeat I like Robert Biddentotto and I enjoy the New Individualist including the Ron Paul issue.

I am going to tone down my posts in order to shed more light than heat. I would gently suggest that others do the same.

[Chris Grieb]

Selene; I liked your last post. I remembered some of those stories.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

All I am doing is being a mirror.

Chris,

It's your life and your choice, but what a waste of time.

This can be paraphrased to say you are taking the precious non-repeatable minutes and hours of your life and lowering yourself so you can reflect people you repudiate.

Is that to be your life? Your achievement?

You have much better in you. I can see it.

I am not trying to be condescending, but I am calling you on this. You have much good in you and I want to see more of it for my own selfish pleasure.

Michael

[BaalChatzaf]

Well, no. I'm not a country. Americans slaughtered 200,000 Philipina over 100 years ago. Lincoln wiped out 5% of the population of the U.S.

The Rebs fired first. Ft. Sumter in April of 1861. Lincoln did not do anything single handed. People signed up to fight for the Union of teir own free will before a draft was legislated and when it was legislated it was resisted in many places (see Draft Riots). I think the institution of slavery had as much to do with the Civil War as any decision made by Lincoln. The Southrons wanted to put their slaves and their "peculiar institution" in the new western territories and that was the cause of the war.

Wm. T. Sherman in his famous (or infamous) March Through Georgia pointed out that the Southrons sowed the wind and now they would reap the whirlwind. And so they did. And however badly Georgia was treated, Sherman and his Army utterly trashed South Carolina where the secession began. Sherman said: This is where the treason began and, by God, here is where it will end.

If you want to argue further on this point, start a new thread on the Civil War, so as not to clog up this thread.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Edited September 14, 2008 by BaalChatzaf

[kiaer.ts]

Adam, that was the best non-technical post I have read here.

[Selene]

Ted:

I am assuming that is a compliment. B)

Adam

[Chris Grieb]

I am not sure where to put this but the latest news according is that Cong. Paul has endorsed Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party. He is mad at Bob Barr because did want to join in joint statement with Cynthia McKinney.

I would not join in any statement with Miss McKinney either since Miss McKinney assaulted a Capitol policeman with her cell phone.

[Selene]

Chris:

Totally agree.

Just another example of the "rattlesnakes committing suicide!" see Gene Hackman in Mississippi Burning - ? movie.

Adam

[algernonsidney]

The Rebs fired first. Ft. Sumter in April of 1861. Lincoln did not do anything single handed. People signed up to fight for the Union of teir own free will before a draft was legislated and when it was legislated it was resisted in many places (see Draft Riots). I think the institution of slavery had as much to do with the Civil War as any decision made by Lincoln. The South wanted to put their slaves and their "peculiar institution" in the new western territories and that was the cause of the war.

If that is the case, then why did US Grant own slaves? If Grant wanted to protect slavery, then surely he would have not fought for the Union. And what about Major Robert Anderson? He was from Kentucky and also a slave owner. He was the Union officer specifically assigned to protect Fort Sumter. Finally, why did Robert E Lee free all the slaves he had inherited? He fought for the South, yet wanted no part of this "peculiar institution."

Interestingly enough, General Beauregard had actually been a student of Anderson's at West Point. He was the one who led the attack on Fort Sumter. After the war, he became a champion of equal rights for the newly freed slaves.

Lincoln was very much a proponent of Henry Clay's "American system." Basically, this was a system of high tariffs used to fund "internal improvements." Since Lincoln had also worked as an attorney for railroad interests, this meant corporate welfare. High tariffs hurt the South, as they wanted to export cotton to Europe and buy their manufactured goods.

Not surprisingly, Lincoln's Presidency ushered in a new era of giveaways. We have never turned back since that time. The Homestead Act gave land to homesteaders and bred the usual corruption. They gave land to corrupt railroad interests. They also passed the Morrill Act, which helped create land-grant colleges. These same colleges would later come back asking for more handouts. Most destructive of all was the National Banking Act, which got the feds back into the business of printing money.

Keeping consistent with their belief in fiscal restraint, the Confederate Constitution allowed for a line-item veto. It also disallowed the President from seeking re-election when he was President. He could run again, but he would have to sit out one term.

The South sent people to DC to make an offer for the four military installations that were in states which had left the Union. Lincoln refused the offer. I have heard from one source that Fort Sumter was not actually a fort, but simply a place where tariffs were collected.

Lincoln announced the Union blockade a few days later.

Edited September 25, 2008 by Chris Baker

[emb021]

I think the institution of slavery had as much to do with the Civil War as any decision made by Lincoln. The Southrons wanted to put their slaves and their "peculiar institution" in the new western territories and that was the cause of the war.

That's an overly simplistic explanation of the civil war.

Slavery was a factor, but not the sole cause.

Chris Baker touched on some of the other cause that are too often overlooked.

Some other things to keep in mind.

Yes, there were southerns who fought in the CW to keep slavery. There were also southerns who didn't like the idea they were fighting a civil war to keep slavery for other southerns.

Yes, there were northerns who fought in the CW to end slavery. There were also northerns who didn't like the idea of fighting a civil war to free the slaves (one of the reasons for the draft riots).

Lincoln was not anti-slavery. The Emancipation Proclemation did not free the slaves. It was nothing more then a policial ploy. Thomas DiLorenzo has a couple of good books debunking the myths about Lincoln.

Something also to keep in mind. The US was the only western nation that had to go to war to end slavery. All the other nations did so peacably. Why couldn't we?