Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Ron Paul Please Run For Texas Governor!

rated by 0 users
This post has 27 Replies | 5 Followers

Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,028
Points 51,580
limitgov Posted: Thu, Apr 16 2009 2:16 PM
Rick Perry is pretending to be a libertarian to get re-elected and possibly run for president in 2012.
He is a puppet of the New World Order and a judas goat.

We need real leadership here in Texas!
  • | Post Points: 65
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,914
Points 70,630

limitgov:
Rick Perry is pretending to be a libertarian to get re-elected and possibly run for president in 2012.
He is a puppet of the New World Order and a judas goat.

We need real leadership here in Texas!

Don't we everywhere Stick out tongue  But then again I can't expect much from the State in terms of leadership

"Do not put out the fire of the spirit." 1The 5:19
  • | Post Points: 35
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 377
Points 7,180
Ansury replied on Thu, Apr 16 2009 2:51 PM

Well, that's kind of selfish, isn't it?  :p  The rest of us want a real leader too!

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 282
Points 6,595
nandnor replied on Thu, Apr 16 2009 2:51 PM

Funny that the ony thing politicians and elections are useful for is to decrease of the need for them

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 11,343
Points 194,945
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

Jesse Ventura has mentioned that after he won, the game has been re-rigged.

Political strategies are doomed to fail because you are playing someone else's game.   Even Ron Paul never thought he would create change, he was only trying to leave a contrasting record, so that in the future it could not be said that no one dissented.

Real change is going to come when people see it is in their best interest to have less government or voluntary government.  You can't change the head of the snake and think it won't slither anymore.  You have to change the entire nature of the body politic.

Does it hurt to engage in politics?  I'd like to say no, but I have to honestly say yes.  We all have a finite amount of time and resources.  Knowing we need education instead of voting, every time you make a vote, could have been time spent educating yourself or others.

Ron Paul did a great job opening people's minds up.  But even he was loathe to encourage people to vote, rightfully I suspect, because he doesn't vote himself.

"When you're young you worry about people stealing your ideas, when you're old you worry that they won't." - David Friedman
  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Posts 79
Points 900
jdavidb replied on Thu, Apr 16 2009 3:18 PM

wilderness:

limitgov:
Rick Perry is pretending to be a libertarian to get re-elected and possibly run for president in 2012.
He is a puppet of the New World Order and a judas goat.

We need real leadership here in Texas!

Don't we everywhere Stick out tongue


Grown ups don't need "leaders."  At least, not the state kind of leaders.  Grown ups might form a voluntary relationship with a mentor or seek to emulate someone or receive advice and counsel for someone, but they generally do not need to be led around by the nose.  Society does not benefit from imposing mandatory leadership on everybody; isn't that the obvious lesson of Austrian economics, or am I in the wrong place?  Grown ups might look for allies for defense, including selecting a captain to organize said defense effort.  But again, it's voluntary.  It's not somebody that you elect to forcibly lead your neighbor.

When the state says "leader," it's just a euphemism for "ruler."  You don't need it.  Act your age

Ron Paul might be an effective ally protecting you against tyrants like Rick Perry.  Shoot, Perry might even be a semi-effective ally protecting you against major enemies like Washington, but I doubt it.  He's too busy accepting subsidies for tanks to terrorize innocent children in West Texas, guilty of being born to bad people who think that if they are going to sleep with more than one woman they should marry them instead of just shacking up, who think that it's okay to get married at a young age if you have parental consent just as the law of Texas recognized up until three years ago.  He's also too busy molesting Texas daughters and impuning their virtue by insisting they be vaccinated with an untested vaccine for a sexually transmitted disease.

What do you suppose the odds are that Perry would support secession for the FLDS?

http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2008/04/collectivist-child-abuse.html
http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2008/05/ordinary-face-of-everyday-evil.html
http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2008/05/texas-child-grab-another-immaculate.html
http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2008/05/chconcentration-camps-for-children-its.html
http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2008/06/have-pity-for-bullies.html

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,914
Points 70,630

jdavidb:

wilderness:

limitgov:
Rick Perry is pretending to be a libertarian to get re-elected and possibly run for president in 2012.
He is a puppet of the New World Order and a judas goat.

We need real leadership here in Texas!

Don't we everywhere Stick out tongue


Grown ups don't need "leaders."  At least, not the state kind of leaders.  Grown ups might form a voluntary relationship with a mentor or seek to emulate someone or receive advice and counsel for someone, but they generally do not need to be led around by the nose.  Society does not benefit from imposing mandatory leadership on everybody; isn't that the obvious lesson of Austrian economics, or am I in the wrong place?  Grown ups might look for allies for defense, including selecting a captain to organize said defense effort.  But again, it's voluntary.  It's not somebody that you elect to forcibly lead your neighbor.

When the state says "leader," it's just a euphemism for "ruler."  You don't need it.  Act your age

Ron Paul might be an effective ally protecting you against tyrants like Rick Perry.  Shoot, Perry might even be a semi-effective ally protecting you against major enemies like Washington, but I doubt it.  He's too busy accepting subsidies for tanks to terrorize innocent children in West Texas, guilty of being born to bad people who think that if they are going to sleep with more than one woman they should marry them instead of just shacking up, who think that it's okay to get married at a young age if you have parental consent just as the law of Texas recognized up until three years ago.  He's also too busy molesting Texas daughters and impuning their virtue by insisting they be vaccinated with an untested vaccine for a sexually transmitted disease.

What do you suppose the odds are that Perry would support secession for the FLDS?

http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2008/04/collectivist-child-abuse.html
http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2008/05/ordinary-face-of-everyday-evil.html
http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2008/05/texas-child-grab-another-immaculate.html
http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2008/05/chconcentration-camps-for-children-its.html
http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2008/06/have-pity-for-bullies.html

Did you quote me for a reason or should I jump ahead and ask did you half-quote me for a reason? curious

"Do not put out the fire of the spirit." 1The 5:19
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 377
Points 7,180
Ansury replied on Thu, Apr 16 2009 7:42 PM

jdavidb:

Grown ups don't need "leaders."  At least, not the state kind of leaders.

 Oh, I like your point here. But I think you're picturing an ideal world. Practically speaking, we have to take gradual steps towards real freedom and away from statism, and a guy like Ron Paul is the most obvious first step... if that were even feasible. Maybe when they finally destroy the dollar, people will start to listen.

  • | Post Points: 50
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 743
Points 11,795

But if Ron Paul became Governor of Texas he wouldn't have the influence he has in congress right now- or the ability to try to pass legislation to audit the Fed or legalize industrial hemp or anything like that.

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 659
Points 13,990
ama gi replied on Thu, Apr 16 2009 8:32 PM

Ansury:
Maybe when they finally destroy the dollar, people will start to listen.

The dollar is already destroyed.  Most of us are just too stupid to notice it.

"As long as there are sovereign nations possessing great power, war is inevitable."

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,028
Points 51,580
limitgov replied on Thu, Apr 16 2009 9:35 PM

auctionguy10:

But if Ron Paul became Governor of Texas he wouldn't have the influence he has in congress right now- or the ability to try to pass legislation to audit the Fed or legalize industrial hemp or anything like that.

Not federally, no, but HE COULD LEAD US TO SECESSION!

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 377
Points 7,180
Ansury replied on Thu, Apr 16 2009 10:27 PM

ama gi:

The dollar is already destroyed.  Most of us are just too stupid to notice it.

Well I can't deny that, strike what I said and replace with "When the dollar finally collapses,"--we can't deny that it's being propped up successfully for the time being. Anybody wanna make some bets on when that'll happen? (In gold of course, haha) -- just kidding! Stick out tongue

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 79
Points 900
jdavidb replied on Fri, Apr 17 2009 9:19 AM

Ansury:

jdavidb:

Grown ups don't need "leaders."  At least, not the state kind of leaders.

 Oh, I like your point here. But I think you're picturing an ideal world. Practically speaking, we have to take gradual steps towards real freedom and away from statism

Of course we will only approach the ideal through gradual steps.

Have you read the end of the Libertarian Manifesto, by any chance?

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 377
Points 7,180
Ansury replied on Sun, Apr 19 2009 1:49 PM

jdavidb:

Have you read the end of the Libertarian Manifesto, by any chance?

 Never heard of it. I have read Ron Paul's version though, heh.

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Posts 79
Points 900
jdavidb replied on Mon, Apr 20 2009 9:11 AM

Ansury:

jdavidb:

Have you read the end of the Libertarian Manifesto, by any chance?

 Never heard of it. I have read Ron Paul's version though, heh.

Go check it out.  I'll wager Rothbard's is better than Ron Paul's, although I haven't read Ron Paul's, and Rothbard's is probably dated.

Here's the whole thing:

http://mises.org/rothbard/newlibertywhole.asp

Here's the material to which I was referring:

http://mises.org/rothbard/newlibertywhole.asp#p297

And here's the audio book, which is how I "read" it:

http://mises.org/media.aspx?action=category&ID=87

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Posts 39
Points 490

liberty student:
But even he was loathe to encourage people to vote, rightfully I suspect, because he doesn't vote himself.

What do you mean by that?  If he doesn't vote (for people for president, etc), that would be very interesting.  I thought he did vote, though, but that may have been an assumption of mine.  Do you have any links to anything where he says this?  It seems like I remember him mentioning in a video that some friends or people he knows "have it figured out" (or something like that) and don't vote, and I've been wanting to find that video so I can see exactly what he said and in what context, but I haven't found it yet.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 377
Points 7,180
Ansury replied on Mon, Apr 20 2009 9:45 PM

I will check the Rothbard manifesto out when I get a chance. Not to put down RP but yeah I'd probably wager the same, Murray never fails to impress.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 377
Points 7,180
Ansury replied on Mon, Apr 20 2009 9:50 PM

Yeah I'd also like to see some kind of video or something of Ron Paul saying he doesn't vote. It's a little weird to run and ask others to vote for you but not do so yourself. Maybe you misunderstood a comment during a primary, where he wouldn't have been allowed to vote in the state because he wasn't registered there?

Also, during my pathetically short 10 second google "research", I couldn't find any links about that. Stick out tongue

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 377
Points 7,180
Ansury replied on Mon, Apr 20 2009 9:54 PM

jdavidb:

Of course we will only approach the ideal through gradual steps.

 You know it's good you agree with me on this here--I'm trying to make the same kind of point in another thread here and someone just seems to want to argue over it, vs demanding overnight change (I guess), and I don't quite understand why.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 11,343
Points 194,945
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

gcopenhaver:
What do you mean by that?  If he doesn't vote (for people for president, etc), that would be very interesting.  I thought he did vote, though, but that may have been an assumption of mine.  Do you have any links to anything where he says this?  It seems like I remember him mentioning in a video that some friends or people he knows "have it figured out" (or something like that) and don't vote, and I've been wanting to find that video so I can see exactly what he said and in what context, but I haven't found it yet.

I see the way I wrote that could be interpreted as "Ron Paul doesn't vote."

I will tell you, I don't think he votes.  I don't know for sure that he doesn't vote.

I gave up on radicalism on the RPForums.  Ron Paul means all sorts of things to all sorts of people.  Unfortunately, to a lot of people, he means hyper nationalism.  If anyone has been listening closely, he talks about Gandhi, he talks about Lysander Spooner (Constitution of No Authority).  His video today is on secession (the right to self determination).  Paul is incredibly radical, and if he isn't libertarian, is one of the most extreme minarchists I have ever seen.

My advice is not to listen to his campaigns and their managers.  Listen to what he says.  He's never really pushed precinct leaders, he's never pushed voting, and he doesn't like to endorse very many people in politics.  He wouldn't even endorse someone for President.  Hell, his 4 way endorsement wasn't even a strong endorsement for people to vote.

Almost everyone associated with the C4L is a paleo-con or a libertarian.  Some like Anthony Gregory are anarchists.

"When you're young you worry about people stealing your ideas, when you're old you worry that they won't." - David Friedman
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 377
Points 7,180
Ansury replied on Mon, Apr 20 2009 10:34 PM

liberty student:

 Paul is incredibly radical, and if he isn't libertarian, is one of the most extreme minarchists I have ever seen.

Almost everyone associated with the C4L is a paleo-con or a libertarian.  Some like Anthony Gregory are anarchists.

 Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I gave up trying to classify people or groups using such terms long ago. Maybe I just don't see the point. Whatever RP "is", I like his thought process.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 11,343
Points 194,945
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

Ansury:
Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I gave up trying to classify people or groups using such terms long ago. Maybe I just don't see the point. Whatever RP "is", I like his thought process.

I went through this when I got here.

 

"When you're young you worry about people stealing your ideas, when you're old you worry that they won't." - David Friedman
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 377
Points 7,180
Ansury replied on Mon, Apr 20 2009 11:02 PM

Hehe, what was the end result/conclusion?

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 11,343
Points 194,945
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

Ansury:

Hehe, what was the end result/conclusion?

I'm a radical anti-state Austrian.

"When you're young you worry about people stealing your ideas, when you're old you worry that they won't." - David Friedman
  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 79
Points 900
jdavidb replied on Tue, Apr 21 2009 10:26 AM

Ansury:

jdavidb:

Of course we will only approach the ideal through gradual steps.

 You know it's good you agree with me on this here--I'm trying to make the same kind of point in another thread here and someone just seems to want to argue over it, vs demanding overnight change (I guess), and I don't quite understand why.

I'm not sure we are totally agreed.  I DO demand overnight change!  It is the only right thing to do!  It is also the only way to achieve gradual change.  Demand immediate cessation of all wrongful activity, and you have a chance of achieving gradual cessation.  Demand gradual cessation, and you'll get nothing.

(Read that Rothbard link!)

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 377
Points 7,180
Ansury replied on Tue, Apr 21 2009 10:10 PM

Hmm, I see what you're saying. It's a good point that I'll have to think about. I'll read the link too.

I can say that I only *expect* a gradual change to be possible..

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 21
Points 240
Jordan replied on Tue, Apr 21 2009 10:32 PM

I think RP talks about voting in this speech if anyone still cares.

He talks about having some friends that make an intellectual decision not to vote, but he thinks voting is a good idea. Of course, he might just feel like he has to say that to be taken seriosly.

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aquLH7yAdWo

Edit: Starts around 8:30.

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Posts 39
Points 490

Jordan:

I think RP talks about voting in this speech if anyone still cares.

He talks about having some friends that make an intellectual decision not to vote, but he thinks voting is a good idea. Of course, he might just feel like he has to say that to be taken seriosly.

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aquLH7yAdWo

Edit: Starts around 8:30.

Thanks, that's exactly the video I was looking for.

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (28 items) | RSS