View article at its original site
Showing comments 1—17 of 17
Posted 02/05/10 12:57 PM CTLovesNathanHale Atlanta, GA | This is a TOTAL FRAUD! McPalin and Huckelberry need to be bleeding out of every political orifice NOW, before they get real traction from well meaning dupes. The scum that are trying to hijack the liberty movement are collectivists, and traitors. We are going to break their political backs! |
| Posted 02/05/10 5:29 PM asti223 Miami, FL | I sure hope C4L is on this... We started this thing and we better be leading it. We cant allow the same Pro-War, Pro-Spending Republicans and opportunity to take this project over! |
| Posted 02/05/10 9:04 PM Al Langhans Elizabethville, PA | Exactly, lay the principles. I hope National Security doesnt mean having bases all over the world in countries that dont need it. And fiscal responsibility means ending the Fed Reserve in time. Not right away but 5-10 years. Having a budget that allows for low to moderate taxation that helps pay off debt, but dont spend anymore. Cut back hard. Pork projects should be downright "banned" if your a "tea party member".
I hate these lines people give me about how these politicians cant take paycuts cuz they got to make a living and survive. Come on. Your a public servant, not the other way around. Most make over 100k anyways. Hell in my state of PA, they just released a report on govt wages and we had 3 guys who made more money then the governor. Around 190k, 185k, and 170k. SERIOUSLY, how is that responsible. We need to address that. AND THIS "Prospective political candidates will be expected to support the Republican National Committee platform, though without any specific litmus or purity test." WHY Republican? Hijacking the libertarian movement. |
| Posted 02/06/10 12:34 AM Paul Hogan Middle Village, NY | We need to remain level headed, trying to work while in a rage only leads to mistakes. The Tea Party movement started out as pretty much anti-government, but it was never really clear if they were actually promoting anything. Right now people are angry, the democrats are in power and the Republicans smell blood in the water. This doesn't necessarily mean that every member of the Tea Party is going to adopt a neo-con ideology. I suspect some media propaganda is at play here in an attempt to swing the Tea Party to the Republican Party which is actually no better or worse than swinging them to the Democratic Party. The Republicans talking about fiscal responsibility after the Bush years is beyond the pale.
Although the libertarian philosophy is growing, we can't expect the entire country to embrace all of our philosophy and it's going to take years for even half of our ideology to to gain any substantial support; this is just a simple truth. Our non interventionist attitude towards foreign policy is going to remain a tough sell. Most conservatives honestly believe that having a global military presence protects our national security. The Campaign for Liberty and other libertarian groups do not believe this to be true and we need to persuade other conservatives to embrace our hands-off approach to foreign entanglements. Don't be surprised if we see disillusioned members of the current Tea Party regroup and form a Sans Republican Tea Party. "Prospective political candidates will be expected to support the Republican National Committee platform, though without any specific litmus or purity test." They can "expect" whatever they want to expect, why not expect the candidate walk on water for that matter. Since when has a political candidate done what they were expected to do? |
Posted 02/06/10 1:23 PM Red in Blue State Watsontown, PA | As an organization, I think CFL is way ahead of the Tea Party groups. I'd love to see them all coalesce around some very basic ideas. That was what Reagan ran on by uniting many seperate movements around a very few unifying themes. Unfortunately, once in office that coalition began to fray and a few groups grew in power at the expense of others.
I try to frame discussions with non-liberty movement people in terms of freedom. they understand left/right or D/R but don't understand that they are really the same. I explain that one group wants financial freedoms but controlled social freedoms and the other wants the opposite. Then they begin to understand that both groups are trying to infringe on the rights of others via government. The discussion always ends with the understanding that rights (and freedoms) come from God and that government only takes them away. |
| Posted 02/07/10 11:41 AM libertyforever Island Lake, IL | I watched the Palin speech on c-span last night. Horrible. She is a TOTAL neo-con and she will ruin the movement by confusing the tea-party people who don't know about Ron Paul yet. She mixes a little liberty speech in with her neocon rhetoric and easily confuse the masses. She must be stopped by the true patriots. She is definately going to run 2012 and she has fox (faux) news on her side. I don't feel positive about this and know that the NWO is setting her up to high jack the whole thing!! |
Posted 02/07/10 2:38 PM NetMan Dover, NJ | There is no doubt about it. Palin is a neo-con. Hard to believe they would consider her for president in 2012. She's a terrible speech maker without a script and would get ripped to pieces in a presidential republican primary debate. |
Posted 02/07/10 2:59 PM WTLCrimson Fairhope, AL | The litmus test should be as follows; Who has the right to declare war? The president, or congress?
This is the point of contradiction between "national security" and upholding the Constitution, and if we make the point that the right to declare war is constitutionally given to congress only, and get that discussion heard, it will cause enough of a rift to perhaps keep the tea parties from becoming a solid homogeneous wing of the neocon machine. When they have 3 basic principles, and out of those 3 two conflict right in full view, you have a chance. We also need to throw water on Sarah Palin whenever possible. She will create a cult of personality that will suck the debate out of the room. |
| Posted 02/07/10 7:28 PM ScottXS Hoffman Estates, IL | Yes libertyforever, Palin obviously appears as a coached, dimwitted errand-girl; a Repug-Obama. I wish she were asked, "what organization coaches you"? "Have Tea Party ever been polled on how many think your part of the Neocon-CFR-NWO mob"? But she won't.
They mean to infect and subvert us. We must infect and subvert them back. We need to have the last laugh on them, by using their organizing to bring folks to us. We must embarrass them about their pay-to-play cover charge, their avoidance of principle or policy, their phony, slick, focus-group, sound-bite, commercial marketing of pop-star types. That always gives them away. The primary factor in driving the mass of the American public to either eventual violent insurrection or permiting a Hilter or Stalin absolute power will be the sensless rage that results from persistent deciet while promising change but giving an increasingly corrupt double-bind party duopoly. When I heard Beck and Palin chat about the lack of trustworthyness in congress, how none took on the banksters, in light of Paul's voting record and Fed Audit, I became certain Beck and Paul are indeed "Judas Goats" to infiltrate and either subvert or discourage opposition. But we must infect them back! We will become parasites in them, and provocateurs in their midst! |
| Posted 02/07/10 10:46 PM WTLCrimson Fairhope, AL | ScottXS,
regarding Beck, I saw him earlier this morning and he was asked if there was anyone in washington that he respected...he squirmed a little and said that he didn't endorse, but respected Bachmann and Demint...and my first reaction was a little surprise, since Paul would seem to be the first choice. Then again, Demint and Bachmann both have worked with Paul pretty closely, and I later wondered if Beck is doing Paul a favor by not name dropping him.. Beck is so controversial and polarizing, that it might not be good for Paul to be seen as close to him. Paul has such an message that does go across lines. If you have a movement, you need some people who are controversial to get attention, but you need others, that must be different people, to bring new folks in from areas you normally dont "recruit". Beck can appeal to the longstanding GOPers, and he has brought some interest to libertarian ideas from those types - whereas Paul actually attracts some from the left and many from younger areas of society. The fact that Beck never mentions Paul anymore, but mentions two people who have worked very closely with him (and he also seemed to be describing Kucinich in the same segment as a lefty who made his eyes bleed, but was working on something he agreed with...he was kinda coy about that part)...but he is so conspicuously not mentioning Paul these days that I wonder if there is something intentional. |
| Posted 02/07/10 11:35 PM WTLCrimson Fairhope, AL | Here, I found a clip of the Beck interview...the second half is interesting as to who he is describing here....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alRGulpjcRE |
Posted 02/08/10 07:51 AM MichaelBarry Sebring, FL | I believe....
The way forward on our non-interventionist foreign policy is to assert and show that: Securing the borders of the United States by 1) restricting who becomes a legal citizen to those who can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they pose no threat to national security, 2) elimintating entirely illegal immigration 3) assuring those who are here on a legal basis leave in a timely manner, 4) raising a much higher bar for admission as a foreign student, etc. are all steps which are anterior to waging war on foreign soil. Talking about war as necessary to national security when none of the preliminary steps have been taken is ignorant at best....and perhaps disingenuous. My take on the Tea Party Convention is that it was deliberately constructed to throw the entire Tea Party movement into disarray and obfuscate truth. Republicans are desperate to seize control of the Tea Party movement without accepting libertarian ideas. |
| Posted 02/08/10 08:52 AM Red in Blue State Watsontown, PA | "My take on the Tea Party Convention is that it was deliberately constructed to throw the entire Tea Party movement into disarray and obfuscate truth. Republicans are desperate to seize control of the Tea Party movement without accepting libertarian ideas."
Yes, yes 1000%, yes. The more I watch Palin, then more I think that she is the GOP's version of Great Leader. Someone who can captivate the dimwitted and appeal to the masses, but if actually elected will not be up to the task or even worse be a stooge for the neocons. I don't think she's a knowing Judas Goat, but loves the attention and adoration just like Great Leader craves the spotlight. |
Posted 02/08/10 1:47 PM sweetliberty San Rafael, CA | This is all so weird. I hope that upholding the Constitution makes it clear that the neo-con version of "national security" is unacceptable.
Personally, I think these politicians who are trying to organize the tea party movement into a mini-GOP are going to find themselves frustrated. The only ideals that seem to pervade all the tea party gatherings across the country is that the People are tired of being taxed to death, and tired of watching their government spend, spend, spend. I think any time the Sarah Palins of the world try to attach another "principle," they'll feel push-back. From real people. |
| Posted 02/08/10 8:23 PM ScottXS Hoffman Estates, IL | WTLCrimson,
You wrote, "he (Beck) was asked if there was anyone in washington that he respected...Paul would..be the first choice...Beck is doing Paul a favor by not name dropping him.. Beck is so controversial and polarizing" Yes, that's right, agreed 100%. But that doesn't speak to Beck as being a man of principle or discernment. I've noticed he often speaks of underlying philosophies, ranting about Marxism and Progressivism. True enough. But he doesn't dare touch the Republican-side of the welfare-warfare state. His CFR boss Murdoch probably couldn't stand it. The tenents he espouced last year seemed to be populist folk-wisdom, no coherent philosophy. But that would describe most people. I'm not sure reaching across groups, per se, is a desirable goal. But exploiting venues to educate and recruit (potential) opponents or defectors is. Beck, in the interview you cited, is right enough about that. A socialist has their sentiment-based agenda. Democrats have their prolitariat pressure-group politics. Republicans short-sighted utilitarian nationalist realpolitique. Both groups endorse neo-corporate fascism with FED fiat globalism. But we should claim Libertarianism, and its principles. But, as in the last election, Dr. Paul endorsed Chuck Baldwin, Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinny, because votes for them are voters encouraged to free themselves from the Democrat and Republican Statist electoral hedgemony. The Tea Party would do well to just preach that message - either co-opt or destroy the CFR-owned parties. |
Posted 02/08/10 10:17 PM Isomies Mechanicsville, VA | So, as individuals we all cooperate and support whoever we like. For my part, I will never consider myself part of any group, party or movement that endorses WAR, the police state, or big government in ANY WAY. Ya'll are free to do what you like (for now).
Stay free |
| Posted 02/09/10 7:31 PM WTLCrimson Fairhope, AL | ScottXS,
I think we are in pretty much agreement on things. When I spoke about Paul reaching out to some on the left, I did not mean it in the light of creating the dreaded "big tent", I meant that Paul has the ability to educate some who might be looking for a better explanation. After all, I was once to some degree what you would call a neocon. I was rehabilitated. I now enjoy reading antiwar.com and also the columns by Phil Giraldi. Back to beck, regarding his tunnel vision towards progressives only, I sent him an email requesting that he take time, at least 1 show, bring Justin Raimondo and say Tom Woods on, and talk a little about what happened to the old right. The story is one of ideology, but all the problems did not just come with the progressives who identified with FDR, some of the progressives came in with Ike. We will probably find out how sincere Beck is within the year, if he does a show which really researches the right, and if he continues his slow conversion to libertarian type thinking, maybe we will have someone who can be worked with - or maybe he will try to betray our line of thinking, but I think he would lose a lot of contributors and perhaps a few friends he depends on if thats the case (the Judge seems to give Beck a chance, and I tend to believe that indicates that he thinks Beck is at least someone to work with). |
You must be a member to post comments. [Become a member] [Login]
