What I find both humorous, but at the same time troublesome, is that the
writer of this epistle doesn't have his facts correct.    "They"  being
those that call themselves "Libertarian";  really "don't get it".




On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 8:59 AM, THE ANNOINTED ONE <[email protected]>wrote:

> Tell me, just how many more times must this single encounter be
> "translated" so we can understand it??
>
> That so many fine authors want to put  such a short list of short
> encounters in front of me with such long in-depth definitions and
> explanations is so very Republican/Democratic of them.
>
> I was under the impression that the best thing about Paul supporters
> was that they "get it". Those that don't "get it" probably never
> will.
>
> Just what is to be gained by boring the piss out of me and making sure
> that I ignore the next 20 minute article about a 5 minute
> conversation?
>
> Answer... I will ignore all that follow whether about new info or
> not.
>
>
> On Aug 19, 5:53 pm, MJ <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Friday, August 19, 2011Ron Paul s Exchange with Santorum Says It Allby
> Jacob G. Hornberger
> > The exchange over Iran between Ron Paul and Rick Santorum in the recent
> Republican presidential debate goes a long way in explaining why the
> mainstream statists, including those in the Republican Party and the
> mainstream media, wish that libertarians would just go away.
> > Santorum pointed to 1979, the year of the Iranian revolution, when the
> Iranian people took U.S. diplomats hostage and held them in captivity for
> about a year. Santorum pointed to that pivotal event to show that the United
> States has been at war with Iran ever since.
> > For statists, Santorum s point is the end of the discussion. The U.S.
> government is good. It is innocent. It was just minding its own business
> when Iranian revolutionaries attacked our country without any reason
> whatsoever.
> > We saw the same phenomenon after the 9/11 attacks. They just hate us for
> our freedom and values, U.S. officials cried. We were just minding our own
> business when the terrorists decided to kill Americans. The sentiment was
> the mindset of American statists.
> > And what happens if a libertarian says, Wait a minute. The story isn t
> that simple. Let s look at what motivated these foreigners to do these
> things. Let s examine what the U.S. government has been doing in foreign
> affairs ?
> > Well, we all know what happens. The statists go ballistic, both in
> politics and in mainstream newspapers across the land. Oh, you re blaming
> America! You hate our country! You must be a terrorist yourself. America,
> love our government or leave our country!
> > In fact, Paul s exchange with Santorum wasn t the first time this has
> happened. Recall that famous debate exchange between Paul and Rudy Guliani
> four years ago. Paul pointed out that the terrorists came here on 9/11 to
> kill us because our government had been over there for years killing them.
> > Guliani went ballistic, as did his fellow statists on the stage. Their
> fellow statists in the mainstream media went crazy too. No one, and
> certainly not a presidential candidate, is supposed to say such things. It s
> considered beyond the pale. Everyone knows that our government is good,
> wise, and benevolent, believes in freedom and democracy, and would never do
> anything bad to foreigners.
> > Yet, that s actually when Ron Paul s 2008 presidential campaign took off.
> Tens of thousands of ordinary Americans instinctively knew that here was a
> man who wasn t feeding them pabulum. Here was a man who had the courage to
> speak the truth about U.S. foreign policy. He was willing to observe openly
> that the emperor wore no clothes.
> > And that s why the statists wish that Ron Paul would just go away. It s
> why they wish libertarians would just go away. That s why they resent us. We
> cause people to confront reality, which is sometimes not a comfortable thing
> to do. In a sense, we libertarians are therapists, people who help their
> patients confront realities that are oftentimes quite painful to face.
> > Look at the drug war. The statists just want to keep doing what they ve
> been doing for 40 years -- busting drug sellers, busting drug users, and
> locking people up for the rest of their lives. Along come libertarians and
> point out the utter inanity of the whole thing. The never-ending deaths,
> destruction, corruption, violence, gang wars, and infringements on privacy
> and liberty. Libertarians say: End this idiocy by legalizing drugs.
> > But that s considered outside the pale for the statists. It s okay to
> call for reform of such programs. But abolition? Oh my gosh! I wish those
> libertarians would just shut up and go away. Everything is working out so
> fine without them.
> > Look at how Ron Paul responded to Santorum. He explained to Santorum that
> the history of bad relations between Iran and the United States did not
> begin in 1979 but rather in 1953. That was the year that the CIA, the U.S.
> government s secret intelligence force, entered into Iran and ousted the
> democratically elected prime minister of the country, Mohammed Mossadegh, a
> man who had been named Time Magazine s Man of the Year.
> > Why did the CIA do that? No, not for freedom and democracy, as the
> statists would like to believe. Instead, the CIA interfered with the
> internal affairs of Iran to retaliate for Mossadegh s nationalization of
> British oil concessions. Yes, the CIA s anti-democracy coup was about oil,
> not freedom and democracy.
> > In fact, having ousted a democratically elected prime minister, the CIA
> proceeded to install a non-elected brutal dictator, the Shah of Iran, into
> power. The CIA then proceeded to train and work closely with the Shah s
> counterpart to the CIA, his brutal and tortuous Savak intelligence force.
> The Shah then proceeded to impose one of the harshest dictatorial regimes in
> the world on the Iranian people, with the full support of the CIA and the
> rest of the U.S. government.
> > Of course, U.S. officials didn t care one whit what the Shah was doing to
> the Iranian people. All that mattered was that he was our friend.
> > Imagine if Savak had assassinated John Kennedy in order to get Lyndon
> Johnson into power. How would the American people feel about that some 50
> years later? I ll tell you: the deep anger and rage would still be palpable.
> > Well, that s how the Iranian people felt about the U.S. government in
> 1979. That s why they took the U.S. officials hostage. They were still angry
> about the CIA s ouster of their democratically elected prime minister. They
> were still angry about the Iranian people who had been brutalized,
> incarcerated, and tortured by the Shah and his goons, with the full support
> and cooperation of the CIA.
> > That s what Santorum and his fellow statist cohorts don t want to
> confront. They want to continue living their blissful little lives of
> delusion. For them, the federal government is god. It is all-good. It is
> all-knowing. It is all-powerful. It doesn t support dictatorships. It
> believes in freedom and democracy. It never does bad things to people, not
> even conduct syphilis experiments on them.
> > That s the myth that is inculcated in every public school across America
> and in most government-licensed private schools. That s the mindset that is
> produced in people like Santorum and the other statist candidates on that
> stage.
> > It s also the mindset of the mainstream news media reporters asking the
> questions. That s why they feel so comfortable with the statists on stage.
> That s why they feel so uncomfortable whenever Ron Paul is answering their
> questions.
> > Let s face it: the statists wish that libertarians had never been born
> and are extremely concerned about the rising popularity of libertarianism
> among the American people. That s why they ve done their best to lock the
> Libertarian Party out of the political process with their inane
> ballot-restriction barriers. That s why they kept Ron Paul, a long-serving
> congressman, out of the early presidential debates four years ago. That s
> why they are keeping Gary Johnson, a popular two-term governor of New
> Mexico, out of the current round of debates. After all, Johnson, another
> libertarian, is also calling for ending the drug war and bringing the troops
> home. Why should it surprise us that they re locking him out of the
> presidential debates, as they tried to do four years ago with Ron Paul?
> > They think that if they can just keep hewing to their little myths and
> delusions and keep teaching them to their children in their
> government-approved schools, everything will be fine. If they could only
> shut out those pesky libertarians who confront people with truth and
> reality, everything would be hunky dory.
> > But truth will out, which is why so many people are gravitating to Ron
> Paul. They instinctively know that he s speaking truth to power, and they
> can see that power doesn t like it.
> > Ron Paul summed up the problem most eloquently when, in response to Rick
> Santorum, he stated, We just plain don t mind our own business. That s our
> problem.
> > Of course, that s the problem with statists. They mind everyone else s
> business but their own.http://www.fff.org/blog/jghblog2011-08-19.asp
>
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Reply via email to