Ron Paul Excluded From Iowa Presidential Forum - Audio of both sides

[thomez]

Originally Posted by David Octavius

I find it funny libertarians extol the virtues of liberty and then once someone exercises it in the manner they don't like they bitch and moan and even use force. That is the flaw of libertarianism, its hypocrisy, they want liberty, - so long as its defined their way. We all want liberty but how we choose to define it is our decision, its not the definition of some ideology.

what?

[Fed Up]

The Iowa Crime of '07 by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

[Simius]

Originally Posted by Fed Up

Just to clarify...

Neither Ron Paul nor his campaign manager Kent Snyder gave out this guys home phone number. They did give out his business number and email address which are public information listed on his website.

Anyone who called 411 could get this guys home phone number as it's public information. To actually call this person's at home is idiotic. My guess is that it's Sean Hannity and Michell Malkin. Who's to say it isn't?

Yeah, I imagine RP is quite embarrassed that some of his followers are doing this. I was going to mention something about real RP supporters needing to reign in some of the juvenile supporters... But I'm not sure how that would be possible while keeping the Net buzz strong.

Originally Posted by thomez

what?

I think he is talking about threating Ed Failer's wife and children. Or as far as hypocrisy goes quoting laws stating that a 501c3 can't be biased... to argue for a candidate who doesn't believe such laws and limitations to free speech should exist in the first place. (Well, I'm assuming he doesn't since libertarian philosophy would be opposed to such laws.)

[thomez]

If this happened to any candidate in the race, the same shit would happen. People would be calling him, emailing him, etc etc.There are morons on all sides.

As far as the law goes, of course nobody should be tax exempt, but that really isn't the point in my opinion. The real point is that the "establishment" candidates and their employees would like to silence Ron Paul so much that they will not even invite him to speak - when they are supposedly for lower taxes, and he is without doubt for the lowest taxes of any Republican running for President. The real point is that they know Ron Paul has a message on taxes and small government that real conservatives might really latch onto... so they would rather not invite him to speak than have to deal with him and his eloquent, correct and Constitutional answers.

[lew]

Originally Posted by David Octavius

I find it funny libertarians extol the virtues of liberty and then once someone exercises it in the manner they don't like they bitch and moan and even use force. That is the flaw of libertarianism, its hypocrisy, they want liberty, - so long as its defined their way. We all want liberty but how we choose to define it is our decision, its not the definition of some ideology.

News link to the story that states that libertarian has forced those groups at gunpoint to include Dr. Paul?

[hsmith]

Originally Posted by Dumpy Dooby

I laughed lew. I laughed.

we are all oters, what do people expect

[Dumpy Dooby]

Originally Posted by David Octavius

I find it funny libertarians extol the virtues of liberty and then once someone exercises it in the manner they don't like they bitch and moan and even use force. That is the flaw of libertarianism, its hypocrisy, they want liberty, - so long as its defined their way. We all want liberty but how we choose to define it is our decision, its not the definition of some ideology.

Wrong again.

Nobody used force. Libertarians are all in favor of free speech, which is what we're exercising right now by complaining about his decision. Hell, even if people were calling and threatening the guy's wife and children, that's still not a violation of his inherent rights, though I do find it to be a depravity.

[David Octavius]

Originally Posted by Dumpy Dooby

Wrong again.

Hmmm they are attempting to coerce him through threats, how is that not a violation of rights??

Its fruitless to argue with libertarians, they purposefully use abstract concepts and depend on everyone debating on their narrow definitions of what liberty is in order to have legitimacy. I will not use your definitions of liberty or force or whatever else you guys use as your movement as no real traction especially on the federal level and not even a real world example of your ideology being even attempted in another country much less working, so we owe it no legitimacy what so ever - its nothing but another pie in the sky ideology, similar to communism in that vein, simplistic and never work in the real world.

Oh yea, I find it funny that you believe in no force but yet the market is based on force, it use the power of the majority or a few major players who have the power to dictates the direction of economic life for individuals and not always for the better, but that force against the wishes of those individuals seems to be ok to you - hypocrisy

And Simus, you were right on both accounts, thanks

[Fed Up]

Iowa Tax Group Banning GOP's Ron Paul Seeks Loopholes for Special Interests - Free Market News Network

[Dumpy Dooby]

Originally Posted by David Octavius

Hmmm they are attempting to coerce him through threats, how is that not a violation of rights??

Are those libertarians that are coercing him? Do you have any evidence to support that position? Even if that is the case, is it intellectually honest to make generalized claims about the entirety of a group of individuals that happen to share a political philosophy, even when your claim isn't based on anything related to that political philosophy?

Its fruitless to argue with libertarians,

But you type essays at us every other day.

they purposefully use abstract concepts and depend on everyone debating on their narrow definitions of what liberty is in order to have legitimacy. I will not use your definitions of liberty or force or whatever else you guys use

That's why I always make sure to qualify my points with "from a libertarian standpoint" or "libertarianism asserts" or "one of the tenets of libertarianism is" etc. Regardless of whether or not you like the concepts of libertarianism, you can't really deny that the concepts are there, and they are being communicated to you. In argumentation, it's only necessary for both parties to understand what the other is communicating. Obviously we can get to that point.

as your movement as no real traction especially on the federal level and not even a real world example of your ideology being even attempted in another country much less working,

This is your reason for not wanting to communicate with libertarians?

so we owe it no legitimacy what so ever - its nothing but another pie in the sky ideology, similar to communism in that vein, simplistic and never work in the real world.

The same could be said about all ideologies. Why the attack on libertarianism? Is there something different about libertarianism? Perhaps something more than "it has no traction" this time?

Oh yea, I find it funny that you believe in no force but yet the market is based on force,

I don't believe in government using force. Individuals can use force as long as they're not violating the rights of anyone while they're doing it. Nice try though.

it use the power of the majority or a few major players who have the power to dictates the direction of economic life for individuals and not always for the better, but that force against the wishes of those individuals seems to be ok to you

Okay with me? Not really because it yields negative consequences. On a legislative level, I think that situation is perfectly acceptable. From a moral standpoint, it's unacceptable.

- hypocrisy

- ignorance

[AVengeance]

Originally Posted by Fed Up

Iowa Tax Group Banning GOP's Ron Paul Seeks Loopholes for Special Interests - Free Market News Network

That would be a pretty good reason they wouldn't want him there. He would expose their true purpose.