Caught this guy on the radio a while back. Looked for a thread here on Austrian economics in the mainstream but couldn;t find it.
There was a lady with a late night show (same area, maybe same channel) who is a self proclaimed ancap, but I can’t recall her name (suzy ?, nice jewish lady from NJ or NY)
this just in: technology moves too fast for the human brain to know right from wrong..
So even though I already replied (see the very last post on the first page), I just noticed you probably got this from the recent Lee Doren video. It looks as though he’s updated it to let everyone know he didn’t do his research before making the video (again, as this was a story at least 4 months ago) and now the charges have been dropped and the state is appealing…
Charges dropped http://www.theagitator.com/2011/09/17/illinois-judge-dismisses-charges-agains…
Now Appealed by State of Illinois: http://www.theagitator.com/2011/12/02/state-of-illinois-will-appeal-case-agai…
So of course since the announcement was just made that Cain’s gone, I went to his website to see how it looks. First thing I noticed was how the layout looks strikingly similar to Ron Paul’s…with the slideshow banner and everything. But you’ve got to see this slide…
The guy was always attacked for not having a clue about foreign policy, and this was solidified with his Libya debacle…and his response is to put up the map his advisers used to educate him on foreign relations and call it is foreing policy plan. Why is it not hard for me to imagine him sitting in a room with a bunch of guys with their sleeves all rolled up and their hair all ruffled from being on a 12 hour instructional session, and them going: “Okay Herman, let’s try this again…” And one guy at the front of the room uses a pointer to pinpoint specific countries on a world map and Herman responds with “friend”, “foe”, “competitor”, “rival”, “our bitch”, “assholes” for each respective region.
I could totally see them breaking out this map with all the labels for him to study and him going “Hey guys, this awesome! Why didn’t anyone show me this before! Why don’t we just show this to the American people! Prove once and for all I know what’s what. Look how simple this is. Just break it down. The whole world is like one big office.” I can’t believe anyone thought this guy ever had a chance.
What’s even funnier is it reminds me of the stereotype maps that bbnet linked earlier.
Get a load of the foreign policy page (while you still can).
This guy was on a roll … until the end:
Terrorists very demonstrably hated us for our freedom. We passes the Patriot Act and - Walla! No more 9-11s!
Ron Paul recommended that Americans read The Law by Frederic Bastiat during tonights ‘forum’ on Fox News!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2islwLIPkO4
This is a video from a friend based (loosely) on a post of mine. EDIT- Here’s my post: http://www.libertariansforum.com/cgi-bin/freedom/YaBB.pl?num=1322348481/7#7. Most of it’s probably overview of things you all are familiar with, but it seems OK, I hope!
Just for the future…voilà
He’s just not as well known as his father.
Frequently when I mention Rand, I get emails like the one below. This one came after I reported on Rand’s heroic opposition to Amendment No. 1274 of the The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 2012 (S.1867)
From: mike school xxx@yahoo.com
To: rw@economicpolicyjournal.comSubject: Isn’t his name RON Paul?
And you’re “the editor”?
(via EconomicPolicyJournal)
Before deciding to sympathize with the OWS “movement”, I recommend you watch these.
http://dailycaller.com/2011/11/05/chaos-video/
Some relevant sections of the California penal code:
I don’t think anyone here sympathizes with being douchebags and supporting socialist ideals. Any “sympathy” comes in the form of stuff like this. Have a look at some of the latest posts on the Mises blog if you need more evidence that Austro-libertarians around here aren’t all too crazy about these people…
Check out the surprising support from Fox News…
The use of call-and-response chants is evidence of the involvement of these guys, who also happen to be Soros-funded.
Clayton -
Ron Paul needs to make an ad regarding this electability issue… it would be easy to do, just go back in history and pick a couple respected Presidents who started off as “long shots” who were dismissed by the media of their day and who not only won, but turned out to be well-remembered by Americans. That should put the matter to rest.
Clayton -
It would be funny if RP appealed to Lincoln, Wilson, and FDR in ad and if ad was tremendously successful and got him elected.
Last election, RP appealed to Bush II, but Bush II was tremendously unpopular at the time.
IMO, he’s better off neglecting (rising above) the electability “issue” than giving it credence by addressing it. As the wider public gets acquainted with him and his positions it is becoming increasingly more difficult for his opponents (or talking head drones) to call him “inelectable” without having to explain themselves or without sounding like idiots that couldn’t even conceive of an alternative to the evidently disastrous left=right paradigm of the status quo.
Agreed. He has almost nothing to gain from addressing it. Tom Wood’s objections notwithstanding (some mentioned at the link included in this post), Paul’s campaign is doing a lot of the right things. According to Paul 90% of his time has been spent in Iowa and New Hampshire, and the local campaigns there seem to be doing quite well. Again I think there would be much to gain from taking some Woods suggestions into consideration, but by and large I think they’re doing it right.
He does well in Iowa, and NH or SC, and the “electability” “issue” will take care of itself.
It would be more correct to say he appealed to Bush 43…as his whole point was in bringing up the fact that in the 2000 election Bush sounded a lot like Ron Paul on foreign policy. He brought this up in direct response to his critics directly saying he had an issue with electability because of his unique (in terms of the Republicans in the race) stance on the subject.
“Bush II” might be the reference to “Bush 43 after the first election”…when he stopped with the non-interventionist rhetoric and started with the warmongering and domestic statism. In fact Ron Paul specifically mentioned how unpopular the actions of the administration were at the time…that was his whole point. Bush got elected by saying the same things Paul was saying…AND now (2007) Bush was doing the exact opposite of that, and was more unpopular than ever.
So the electability hawks have always had it completely backwards. It’s about being anti-Ron Paul…not any actual measure of electability.
When did I ever say that libertarians are “crazy” about OWS? Why do people rip statements from context so much on this forum? I said before the rare person who might be planning to sympathize with them does so, he or she should watch videos like this one.
