Select comments from IPR readers on Wayne Root’s Libya Makes Obama’s Final Four – Too Bad America Loses:
Thomas L. Knapp:
Lots of good stuff there!
In particular, it’s good to see Wayne raising the issue of Bradley Manning’s treatment (and no, I haven’t been part of the chorus ragging on him for not having addressed Wikileaks/Assange/Manning).
Jill Pyeatt:
Thanks for speaking out about this latest atrocity. [..] I was part of the “chorus ragging on him for not having addressed Wikileaks/Assange/Manning”, and I appreciate the comment about Mr. Manning very much. I continue to make social issues my primary emphasis as a Libertarian, as many Libertarians do, and I’m glad for Mr. Root to branch out in our direction in this article.
Matt Cholko:
I actually agree with damn near every point made here, which is a rarity when reading a Root article.
Keep it up Wayne!
Michael H. Wilson:
Nice piece Wayne. Real nice! 😉 That puts a grin on my face.
Mike B. :
Wayne,
Nice article!
I think Obama should call in sick for the rest of the year.
And please let there be a government shutdown!
Steven Wilson:
[..] this is the first time I have read anything by Root which deals with facts and not the rambling of a Kevin Trudeau salesman.
Ending the illusion is the most difficult thing. Now your leading.
Steven R Linnabary:
…our President has proven to be, nothing compares to the sin of cooking up a war, and putting American soldiers’ lives at risk, to distract the masses from his …
This line got my attention. And the essay got better from there. Wayne gets it.
But one minor correction, I think Obama promised to escalate the war in Afghanistan.
John Jay Myers:
I laughed out loud 3 times, so that was nice. There are a lot of really good things in this article. [..] Really good stuff, with some funny jabs at both sides.
Ayn R. Key:
A good article by Root. Yes, this one really does deserve praise for coming out against this war.
However, some of the most die-hard Root critics were not convinced.
Darryl W. Perry:
I promise I’m not “picking” on Wayne… However, statements like “The USA can no longer afford to be the world’s policeman” leaves the impression that IF the country wasn’t broke, the USA should be the “world’s policeman.”
Robert Milnes:
I’d say Wayne has had some good coaching & speech & writing assistance specifically designed for & aimed at Libds particularly IPR.
Doesn’t this change in wording & tone by Wayne & almost complete positive reaction here in flagrant contrast to his previous articles bother anyone?
Maybe make you a little uncomfortable? Suspicious?
You are being played like a violin, libs.
Kinda like Obama played the progressives.
& Ron Paul played the anti-war people.
Suckers!
Brian:
God, I hate this so much. Worst one yet.
Tom Blanton had a detailed critique; since it was longer than the comments I’m reproducing here, I’ll just link it and recommend you read it for yourself.
Thomas Sipos – dubbed “The Root Whisperer” by an anonymous commenter – has posted three articles on his blog attacking this latest Root article, one of which Jill Pyeatt cross-posted to IPR.
Other positive reactions to the article were to various degrees less surprising:
LibertarianGirl:
good article by Wayne!!:)
Robert Capozzi:
My feedback is A/A-. [..]
paulie:
I like this column a lot. I think its tone, and the use of certain words, will make it more appealing to those that supported Bush’s wars when they started than what I may have said instead.
We’ll need some of those people to put an end to these wars.
Moreover talking about how wars are helping make America broke mergers the original message of the tea parties – Taxed Enough Already – with the antiwar message. That’s a synthesis that I think really needs to happen.
Maybe this latest quagmire will finally accomplish that.
JT:
Nicely done. Libertarians should give credit where credit is due and not pick nits.
NewFederalist:
I agree with [Darryl Perry] about the “world’s policeman” phraseology but otherwise this is probably his best effort yet! Good job, Mr. Root!
George Whitfield:
Great article Wayne. I think your writing has improved by contrasting the Libertarian position from both the Democrat and Republican ones. Keep up the great work.
Kevin Knedler:
Wayne’s “libertarian journey” continues, as it is for many of us who are recent converts. This article and the radio interview on the 300+ station Willie Cunningham show on Sunday night, March 20 make it a great week for Mr. Root. I say, “keep pounding away” Wayne.
David Colborne:
Overall, I really like this article. Nicely done and keep up the good work.
Arkansas Libertarian Ballot Access
Oh, oh… we’re screwed!
Unlike many latter day wonders, TR knew the truth before he died.
“These international bankers and Rockefeller Standard Oil interests control the majority of newspapers and the columns of these papers to club into submission or drive out of public office officials who refuse to do the bidding of the powerful corrupt cliques which compose the invisible government.” – Theodore Roosevelt
C’mon Bob Milnes… respond to Tin Foil Cap. WWTRD? (What Would Theodore Roosevelt Do?) Save us all from the NWO and certain enslavement as well as total destruction!
@84, 88 & 96
No, it (4 or 5 way POTUS races) doesn’t happen
anymore. Wonder why? Any light bulbs left?
What ALSO happened shortly after the 1912 race? I keep trying to get this through, no one seems to see it!
The major media (over 95% of the total worldwide media now) was bought off and has been controlled during ALL of our lifetimes. Third Parties are either blacked out for the most part or ridiculed if any major progress is made. Except when a change (or new placement) is wanted at the top, the media will give the TP effort the necessary coverage to sway the election. Examples include ’68, Wallace a Dem split the race and the (the media won’t have me to kick around anymore -’62) R-Nixon won, ’80 Anderson (CFR member) pulls liberal votes from incumbent Carter and Reagan wins, ’92 Perot pulls moderate and conservatives from incumbent Bush 1 so Clinton (Trilateral member) wins. All controlled third Party efforts in that the media covers the TP candidate’s campaign.
The Internet age is a great thing for alternative political beliefs. However never forget in most cases it is still within a vacuum, geeks talking to geeks isn’t reaching into the living rooms of the masses. They still get 95 to 100% of their national news from the controlled people.
Until the “masses” of the alternative Parties realize the media is controlled and game plan around that MAJOR obstacle very little progress will ever be made in reaching the real masses with their message ! It is sad to me that so many think they are “ABOVE” believing in any type of “conspiracy”. It is here and it’s accelerating faster than at anytime in my memory. It’s time to stand against it or be CONSUMED! It’s time to spread the message now as never before as time may be drawing short to do so! The enemy has been much more effective in strategy as their goal is within sight now!
What year did this begin?
HISTORY OF THE CFR & THE MODERN CORPORATE MEDIA: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWZTh3JCvX8
4:48v
see the pattern? Not yet?
Obama’s Cabinet: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4NUXRf8Um8&feature=related
Obama Cult, Still Think You Voted for Change? : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hW2HSGtiuoE&feature=related
Comments On YouTube -Uploaded by robpatozz on Jan 1, 2009, “Obama is CFR like many of his predecessors, as evidenced by his cabinet picks, decisions to keep Gates and the CFR running the U.S. foreign policy, the game remains the same. Say hello to the NEW WORLD ORDER! We are marching straight into a one world government, that can ONLY be achieved through fascism, military force, and genocide as witnessed all over the world. Wake up before it is too late. May God bless you.”
“Brzezinski, Rockefeller, Bush, Clinton, Kissinger, Rumsfeld, McCain, OBAMA etc. all? NWO SCUM!!!!!”
-mittenola 1 year ago on YouTube.
“The election was a joke. There? is no choice, no change.”
-ProtectUsFromTheLie 2 years ago on YouTube.
Explaining the left-right paradigm to a co worker!: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Kw7j4lbDB4
“The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can throw the rascals out at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies.” – Carroll Quigley-(Bill Clinton said Quigley was his mentor during 1993 Inaugural Address), speaking of the Globalists’ American political strategy since the early twentieth century.
“The Council on Foreign Relations is the American branch of a society which originated in England … [and] … believes national boundaries should be obliterated and one-world rule established.” – Carroll Quigley (Bill Clinton said Quigley was his mentor during 1993 Inaugural Address), speaking of their political goal since the early twentieth century.
.
Robert: “How do you explain the republican left circa 1912?”
The Republican Party as a whole was a party of greater centralized power since its inception. Its standard-bearer, Abraham Lincoln, exemplified that, as did Teddy Roosevelt decades later. Grover Cleveland, one of the best U.S. Presidents, was a Democrat.
During the time of Woodrow Wilson to FDR, the Democratic Party underwent a shift to advocate greater centralized power as well. This left Americans with no party truly dedicated to reducing the size and scope of the national government for much of the 20th century, despite lip-service paid to the idea by later Republican politicians. The last President to spearhead a reduction in the overall budget was Warren Harding in the early 1920s.
Root & Ron Paul certainly are not anarchists.
How do you explain the republican left circa 1912?
Milnes: “So how do you explain a republican reactionary rightist bolting across anarchism to progressivism which is predominantly leftist-hence the progressive democrat Wilson won in 1912-but has rightist elements ?”
TR was always a staunch supporter of more government authority and power (i.e., not libertarian). He didn’t undergo some kind of political transformation. You need to read about U.S. political history.
wha do you mean?
Bob@116,
What makes you think that voting implies non-violence?
Ok, I did some refresher research.
Did I tell you I did a lot of volunteer work at a leftist/anarchist bookstore while in Boulder?
Now, Most was a leftist/anarchist, not a libertarian. The left is intertwined with violence, in contrast to libertarians. The concept of propaganda by deed-violence, advocated by Most, was also advocated by the assassin of McKinley.
Of course there is going to be adversarial incidents between leftists & progressives. & this is why progressivism is the next great step in politics. It can avail itself of nonviolence-voting.
It can do without socialism>communism. etc. What do you suggest the libs do-go violent/left or go violent/right or go progressive? Or stay put?
Yes, Roosevelt threatened the miners’ strikes with the army. But he didn’t do that. He arbitrated to the benefit in balance-to the miners.
& this sort of transformation, republican>libertarian, is what Root is claiming.
Evidently the next step is libertarian>progressive.
“Persecutor? Evidence please.”
His use of the “Italian Squad” to infiltrate and take down anarchist organizations during his time as police commissioner in New York City.
His suppression of the 1902 coal strike with the threat of sending in the army, and of the Western Miners Federation a few years later.
The abduction/jailing of Johann Most in St. Louis for telling him to “shut up.”
The regrettable right digression in the libertarian movement began at least as early as the 1940s, around the time Paul was born and long before Root was born.
If you’re going to opine about Roosevelt, you might bother cracking a fucking book and learning something about him instead of just making it up as you go along.
Persecutor? Evidence please.
& not paulie’s politically correct pop-nonsense either.
The regrettable right digression with the likes of Root & Ron Paul is easily ecplained. On the linear political spectrum the right is right next to libertarian. The bell curveindicates there are far more rightists than libertarians so they overwhelm & dominate.
The next farther right is well there isn’t any. It ends at anarchism. & say, that’s where the left ends too!
So how do you explain a republican reactionary rightist bolting across anarchism to progressivism which is predominantly leftist-hence the progressive democrat Wilson won in 1912-but has rightist elements ?
The only possibility I see is he was a left libertarian approaching anarchism.
Of course he couldn’t articulate that or propose anarchistic policies.
He would’ve been deported.
Bob,
Libertarian ideas were well developed in TR’s time. As a matter of fact, they hadn’t undergone the regrettable “right” digression which plagues the libertarian movement today.
In libertarian terms of either 1911 or 2011, though, TR was not a libertarian or anything like a libertarian, and in point of fact was an enthusiastic persecutor of libertarians and their ideas.
JT, come on. Give the guy a break.
How couldhe do anything libertarian? 100 years ago even libertarians hardly knew what was libertarian.
& he wasn’t pres in 1912.
1901-1909.
If he were to time travel from 1912>2011, here today, he’d ask me to use my computer to look up libertarian>definition>search & say, yep,I guess that makes me a libertarian.
Now, how do we make winnertarians?
I’d say, just listen to me, Teddy.
Milnes: “JT, read the Wikipedia article about TR.
Specifically,”The left wing of the republican party…” split off to form the Progressive Party.
That would HAVE to be the libertarian wing, or as we see it today, the RLC/Libertarian Party.”
No it wouldn’t. I take it you don’t have any examples of TR doing anything libertarian then. That’s all I wanted to know.
OR… maybe it’s because we have gone pretty far off topic.
I’m surprised this thread still has some life in it.
Maybe that is because paulie left.
Root is a Reagan/Ron Paul Libertarian.
Right, Sipos?
JT, read the Wikipedia article about TR.
Specifically,”The left wing of the republican party…” split off to form the Progressive Party.
That would HAVE to be the libertarian wing, or as we see it today, the RLC/Libertarian Party.
If Root is a “Reagan libertarian” and Milnes is a “Roosevelt libertarian” – can I be a “(James) Buchanan libertarian”?
After all, his critics often claim “he did nothing”
Milnes: “Correction, JT said good things. @77.”
Those aren’t good things, IMO, or to libertarians in general. And didn’t you say before that TR was libertarian or at least semi-libertarian?
Milnes: “Damn, now it is less funny.”
A comment can’t be less funny than not funny.
Damn, now it is less funny.
Correction, JT said good things. @77.
NF, you said good things-not libertarian things.
LOL!
The only thing that has significantly changed that would affect the percentage of vote is that the dem/rep duopoly has become stronger-more polarized.
Hence the socialist 6% goes dem.
Tea party stays gop.
Libs & greens stay @1%,
Tremendous pressure to vote EITHER dem or rep.
NF @94, to the dems.
Where else?
Milnes: “Trust buster.”
One of the worst things he did.
Milnes: “NYC police commissioner/reform/anti-corruption.”
Police commissioner? That’s not what he did as President. He did enforce a law to close beer halls on Sundays.
These are your examples of TR being a libertarian?
nf96, yes, poor premises > poor conclusions.
That’s an easy one.
How to replicate the wide-open nature of 1912….harder to do. 2012 could present such a seminal moment, OR we could overplay the hand dealt us.
RC@95- I totally agree with you. My point to Bob Milnes has always been that his premise is flawed. In 1912 women could not vote; the civil rights movement was half a century away even two world wars and a great depression had not occurred.
It’s folly to say voters then are the same as voters now. It’s quite a different world now.
Wilson carried the “solid South.” Now, it’s pretty much R territory, for ex.
Things have changed…a lot.
Where is the 42% that Wilson polled going now?
NF@88, I think the democrats are getting Debs’ 6% now. Those votes and the progressive vote would have to be taken fom the dems for a third party to win.
JT @87,
Trust buster.
NYC police commissioner/reform/anti-corruption.
@83, yes, a third party could finish 2nd like in 1912, or win.
tk 89, I do like the notion of “continuing approximation.” Whether I’m Weaverian or true conservative…dunno…I’d need more information.
TAAALism has many overlapping ideas.
I’ve never read Weaver, but isn’t that the dude who said “Ideas have consequences”? If so, that’s such a silly idea! The only consequence an idea has is on the thinker!
Ideas CAN have consequences if they are shared. Free form between the ears…not so much.
Bob @ 86,
I think I’ve finally got you pinned down. You are a Weaverian “true conservative”:
@84 “lpw83, yes, more like a 4 way race, with Debs getting 6% as a Socialist.”
Even the Prohibition ticket polled nearly one and a half per cent. That is not done much these days by minor parties.
Milnes, I don’t think any of the things you listed as TR’s accomplishments were either good or significant.
es, sorry, I don’t get the “Capozzi problem,” and since I am Capozzi, that is a challenge.
If I am getting your meaning, you’re suggesting that I think absolutists cannot understand and communicate with The Normals, as The Keaton calls the median citizen. If that’s your read, I can’t say that’s my view. It probably IS harder for an absolutist to relate to the rest of us relativists, as you have to translate absolutism into more comprehensible for us relativists.
It probably can be done, though it (in my experience) often comes across as tortured and artificial. I admit that my perceptions are of course biased, as all perceptions are….
“Should the LP denounce this water-transport mission, too?”
The party should not. But principled libertarians are consistent to recognize it for what it is or was, as may be the case that TK makes.
There in is the Capozzi problem. The disbelief that practical political tactics or poise can be handled deftly within the context of a consistent perspective and not do the damage of perception, the other raeagent of the polis.
Rather, it is in the alleged hands of the crazed absolutist meat cutters who can’t appreciate the soft underbelly (ignorance, sloth and faith, right?) of the American soul.
lpw83, yes, more like a 4 way race, with Debs getting 6% as a Socialist.
In that case, the “3rd party” running second was the result of a schism of the GOP, not a true 3rd party. TR was a former prez, coming back into the ring as a Progressive, a splinter of the GOP.
There is no inherent reason why a 3rd party could not win or come in second that I can see. There are a LOT of obstacles, including $ and ballot access.
For it to happen, it seems a remote possibility that people like Johnson and Paul — not quite having TR’s standing, but some — could do what TR did and bolt the GOP. It’s also conceivable that the GOP could nominate a really weak candidate, weaker even than McCain was…Palin or Huckabee, for ex.
Odds are much lower that a Wrights or Root could command a national stage. Either would do their best to spread the word, but without some pre-poured foundation and a plausible resume, I’m not seeing the sorts of candidates coming in 2nd, or even close.
We seem to be even unable to get into Perot type territory, even with a semi-plausible candidate like Barr. Even then, our candidate would likely have to be a 10 on the charisma scale.
If memory serves me correctly, 1912 election was the last time a 3rd party finished 2nd in a strong 3-way race. I believe Taft and the GOP finished 3rd– he was the incumbent.
Could a 3rd party finish 2nd again?
Or even win?
At national level.
Let’s try that again-
Einstein-Reich/
Roosevelt-Lenin
correction-
Einstein><Lenin
Contemporaries/polar opposites-
Einstein><Lenin
Conservation.
Panama canal.
Peace negotiations-Russia v Japan.
Founded Progressive Party.
Milnes: “He actually accomplished many things.”
What are a few of the many things he accomplished that were good?
@70, outrageous arrogance.
Did it ever occur to you that I might be right & you wrong?
Maybe TR was an asshole. Paternalistically racist towards NAs, imperialistic etc. But for his time he was remarkable.
He actually accomplished many things.
& he did come within @7% of radically altering politics in America.
Obvious=libertarians are losers.
But good at ballot access, for all the good it does them.
Just read a political history book, Milnes. It should be obvious from that. Then again, a lot of things should be obvious to you that aren’t, so just skip the book.
So Paulie…You going on an Aqua Buddah retreat??
Milnes, when is your new campaign website going to be online?
Milnes TR was one of the biggest racist ever to hold office. He was a priggish fop who used others for his own glory.
I don’t have time to explain it to you yet again, I need to pack and get out of here, and I still hope to get some articles put up before I leave. I don’t care what you “think” either. Someone else will have to explain it to you now, or not.
TR as a progressive in new party-rather than a republican, would have been better than Wilson a progressive within the democratic party-depending on several factors.
Why do you keep saying the meaning of those terms have changed A LOT in 100 years? A LOT? I don’t think so.
& I thank Tom for getting 66 out of the spam filter.
I said Teddy Roosevelt would have been probably even worse than Wilson. I made no categoric statements about Democrats, Republicans or Progressives. The meaning of those terms has changed a lot in 100 years, anyway.
Bob @ 65,
“We may agree that, in context, this sort of distortion seems less offensive to our shared desire for lessarchy.”
No, we don’t. Very much the opposite, in fact.
The fact that it seems “less offensive” is very BAD for any desire for lessarchy. It tempts us to wax Augustinian (“da mihi castitatem et continentiam, sed noli modo”) about getting off the merry-go-round.
paulie @60, @57 correct.
Are you really saying you prefer dems & reps-reactionaries, elected to government positions, than progressives?
Prefer-not -not either, paulie.
Do you understand how foolish that is?
tk63: To wit, after WWII the US essentially made Japan a US military protectorate.
me: It doesn’t seem unreasonable that — after responding to an attack by the Japanese government — the USG did this as part of the neutralization process. Perhaps they shouldn’t have, and perhaps the neutralization period was “too long,” making it more difficult for the Japanese to develop their own infrastructure.
It was a judgment call, one I can live with. I agree that governments distort by their very nature. I prefer to keep such distortions to a minimum.
We may agree that, in context, this sort of distortion seems less offensive to our shared desire for lessarchy.
“Conspiracy-minded Ls might say this military effort is actually part of a cover up for GE, as their nuke plant is failing and dangerous. I guess that’s possible — that Immelt made a call or something. Myself, I think the USG would do the same thing it’s doing if the plant were NOT a GE nuke. Hard to know, though.
Now, if some deranged PT boat captain from NK started shooting at these US ships, I would also support military counter-force to get this water to Japan. I wonder if folks like Wrights, Knapp and Paulie would. My guess is Root would be OK with it, but I could be wrong about that.
Should the LP denounce this water-transport mission, too?” (me- NO, HELL NO!)
“(I did oppose the Libya mission, to be clear.)”
me-My question is WHY wasn’t this effort made last week. Radiation debris from this disaster has completely covered the continental USA and is past Iceland now headed to Europe. It will be circling the northern hemisphere until it gets rained down or drifts down. I don’t care to breathe or eat the poison myself. It causes cancer NO MATTER what the corporate MSM tell the masses! It may take a few years but this disaster will KILL millions of people. Japanese school children were still drinking milk and playing outside at breaks (in the rain no less) at all schools as late as Wednesday this week. One report stated the level was 1600 times above the safe level over 100 miles away from the plant!
Let’s see , who owns the media and the nuke plants?
Media-?Opoly: http://www.myspace.com/video/vid/16796162
then there is also another “theory”!
New World Order Globalists Plan To Kill 90% of the World Population:
“We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.” – David Rockefeller
Let it just keep poisoning the air for a month or so!There are about 5 to 6 billion TOO many people on the earth anyway!
Bill Gates reveals the agenda “AGENDA 21”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-lqDM2OGCc&feature=related <minute
Bill Gates Admits To His Population Control Programs: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWyL9dg8la8&feature=related <minute
Bob @ 62,
Interesting question.
I’m willing to stipulate that the mission in question is good and even necessary. However, the reasons why this is so go back to distortions produced by previous state action.
To wit, after WWII the US essentially made Japan a US military protectorate. At first the US forbade Japan to have armed forces at all, and subsequently they’ve only been allowed to develop along certain lines that keep them limited in scope and closely tied to their own territory.
Consequently, “The [Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force] fleet is also short of underway replenishment ships and seriously deficient in all areas of logistic support. These weaknesses seriously compromise the ability of the MSDF to fulfill its mission and to operate independently of the United States Air Force and the United States Seventh Fleet.”
That “compromise of ability” was intentional — and that deficiency translates to “the US has the naval barges that we would have if they would let us have them.” The US Navy is effectively the Japanese Navy for certain purposes.
“AP – U.S. naval barges loaded with freshwater sped toward Japan’s overheated nuclear plant on Saturday to help workers struggling to stem a worrying rise in radioactivity and remove dangerously contaminated water from the facility.”
Speaking of Libya, I do wonder where folks like Wrights and Root stand on this humanitarian use of taxpayer dollars. The US military is being used to do something that is not “self defense.”
I would think that there would be some outrage about this for absolutist-minded Ls. There may be no bombs and no shooting, but this certainly appears to be busybody behavior.
If I have absolutism scoped correctly, I do hear that argument. It IS “consistent.” However, since the US has the infrastructure, I don’t object to this effort, which I think does qualify as humanitarian in purpose.
Conspiracy-minded Ls might say this military effort is actually part of a cover up for GE, as their nuke plant is failing and dangerous. I guess that’s possible — that Immelt made a call or something. Myself, I think the USG would do the same thing it’s doing if the plant were NOT a GE nuke. Hard to know, though.
Now, if some deranged PT boat captain from NK started shooting at these US ships, I would also support military counter-force to get this water to Japan. I wonder if folks like Wrights, Knapp, and Paulie would. My guess is Root would be OK with it, but I could be wrong about that.
Should the LP denounce this water-transport mission, too?
(I did oppose the Libya mission, to be clear.)
paulie, can you prove you are not a secret republican communist?
No. I’m afraid you caught me on that one.
I’m also a shape-shifting chupacabra from outer space, and I can’t produce my birth certificate no matter how hard I try.
@57 Correct. Although Wilson was a disaster, TR back in the saddle would probably have been even worse.
@ 58 Wrong. It was a group decision and remains a group decision. Although, my view on what IPR policy should be was a lot more lenient than some people’s on our internal discussion.
So don’t be surprised if it gets more restrictive without me.
paulie, can you prove you are not a secret republican communist?
No paulie. Everybody deferred to the busybody.
paulie pefers a government of dems & reps over Roosevelt progressives.
Who will be left in chage of The **** Police?
Everyone who writes at IPR, as has been the case all along.
IMO he was approaching anarchism towards the end of his life.
Your opinion is based on delusion and is far removed from reality.
paulie is temporarily leaving IPR!
It may or may not be temporary.
Or the beginning of anarchy at IPR, without the dictator?
There has never been a dictator at IPR. Apparently you don’t understand that the policies at IPR were a group decision, and still are.
Who will be left in chage of The **** Police?
The End of the world at IPR?
Or the beginning of anarchy at IPR, without the dictator?
paulie is temporarily leaving IPR!
IMO he was approaching anarchism towards the end of his life.
He probably didn’t understand where his brilliant mind was taking him. It was still very unexplored territory then.
A Golden
ageshower of progressivism.Fixed!
IPR is The World According to paulie
If that was true, the world would be coming to an end this weekend, as I will be heading out on the road and may not be at IPR much or even at all for the foreseeable future after that.
TR came within @7% of the vote to changing radically politics in America.
A Golden Age of progressivism.
paulie @45, IPR is The World According to paulie.
Not proof the world revolves around paulie.,
NF @38, IMO Sipos wouldn’t be so generous to Root. Me either.
But here was an article that could’ve been written by another libertarian that was a republican pretending to be a libertarian.
LOL.Maybe it was.
Who, me? Well, if you claim I’m a secret Republican, I guess that would make up for Dondero claiming I’m a secret Communist, LOL..
I would have taken out this part too:
Worse, the rebels fighting Gadhafi are supported by al Qaeda. So now we’re fighting on the same side as al Qaeda — the terrorist murderers of American soldiers, women, children, and the elderly.
Can someone do that for me? It’s just that there is no proof of this, and it sounds like a BS fox news sound bite.
I thought the article was too long, and as always it mentioned Obama way too much, but it wasn’t flat out horrible, here is a redacted version that I made just because I am bored on a Friday night, this is Wayne’s speech had I been able to edit it:
Nothing compares to the sin of cooking up a war, and putting American soldiers’ lives at risk, to distract the masses from disastrous problems at home. As everything government touches turns to disaster, wars serve as the perfect “Weapon of Mass Distraction?”
Wars tend to make Americans patriotic and rally behind the President. They tend to forget the economic tragedy building by the day and ignore the signs of Armageddon all around them. Mission Accomplished! Haven’t we heard that before? It didn’t work out too well the first time either.
Why should we risk American lives in Libya? Is Gadhafi any worse than all the other murdering, tin pot dictators we either support or do nothing about? Why not invade Darfur on George Clooney’s recommendation? Innocent people are dying there, too.
Before we start a third war, shouldn’t we all ask a few questions? Has Libya attacked us or any American interests of late? I know of no such attacks. And, by the way, who are we to tell Gadhafi to step down because he’s “lost the confidence of his people?” Sounds like the current administration has been looking in the mirror again. Maybe the French should demand Obama step down?
Last I checked, Gadhafi is a bad guy — a murdering thug. But he’s been a bad guy for forty years. Why now? Worse, the rebels fighting Gadhafi are supported by al Qaeda. So now we’re fighting on the same side as al Qaeda — the terrorist murderers of American soldiers, women, children, and the elderly.
What’s our goal? Does anyone have any idea? Who takes over after Gadhafi? Who is in charge? Do we get dragged into a third ground war? What defines winning? Charlie Sheen? And other than the French, who is in charge — the United Nations, a bunch of lawyers, and a President whose major concern is his golf game? Are you kidding? I’ve been a patriot my entire life, but you won’t find me supporting these wars.
It’s past time to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan, and we are adding a third war? Are we mentally unstable, or just totally incompetent? And by the way, who declared war? Congress? Doesn’t that pesky document, the U.S. Constitution, say that only Congress can declare war?
There’s one more little problem with a third war. We’re broke. The USA can no longer afford to be the world’s policeman. We have a $14 trillion national debt and unfunded liabilities of $60 to $80 trillion more. Cities, counties and states are insolvent and we are starting a third war where we don’t belong, Two wars Obama promised to end, but never did. Guantanamo he promised to close, but never did. The Patriot Act he criticized, but then extended. How about the torture he condemned? Yet now we torture a U.S. soldier named Bradley Manning (of Wikileaks fame), even though he’s been convicted of nothing. Twenty-three hours a day of sitting shackled, naked and freezing in his cell…and this is how we treat an American soldier who is innocent until proven guilty?
Mr. Obama, you’ve already won a Nobel Peace Prize for doing nothing. Are you now trying to win an Oscar for impersonating George W. Bush?
Now we are in 3 wars in which we don’t belong, based on no threat to America, with no clear definition of victory, spending trillions more we do not have. It is time to ask an important question — Can this nation survive with two war parties?
And a libertarian..
You aren’t one yourself. JT is though.
Wrong again.
Milnes: “JT, so you are a libertarian? Hmmmm. Coulda fooled me.”
Well, Teddy Roosevelt fooled you into thinking he was a good President, so apparently that’s not hard to do.
Yes, I’m a libertarian, which should be obvious from my many posts on this site. And that’s one reason why I think putting a libertarian candidate and a progressive candidate (or a conservative candidate) on the same ticket is moronic.
“JT, I expected you to toot for Root.
But I was hoping NF wouldn’t.
paulie, fuggetaboudit. He’s a whore for root.”
When Root says something that is balanced and libertarian I will support him every time. When he sounds more conservative and pro-Republican I will not. It’s really that simple, Bob. I would feel the same about someone claiming to be libertarian but sounding more like a liberal or being really soft on the Democrats. I despise both major parties separately but equally! 😉
But here was an article that could’ve been written by another libertarian that was a republican pretending to be a libertarian.
LOL.Maybe it was.
JT, so you are a libertarian?
Hmmmm. Coulda fooled me.
Positive reinforcement for something done right. When Root talks like amway, which is almost all the time, it makes me ill. But here was an article that could’ve been written by another Libertarian that was a republican pretending to be a libertarian.
If Root wants to lead, he needs to understand how to play the game. 2008 was a joke. Everyone who understands sociology knew that it was a cry for ballot access and media.
Harry Browne got people to approach him, he never, as I know of it, broke down a door and tried to sell something called L/liberty.
Wayne must be trained to be LP. If he repeats 2008 in 2012, his career is over. He only gets two runs. Thats why he won’t offend the R’s. He needs a career after his last run.
1. Use facts that can be confirmed.
2. Identify the cause to effect relationship.
3. Be clear.
4. Offer secondary solutions.
5. Don’t hump the people all at once.
Advertising and group dynamics is not difficult.
I stand corrected by paulie.
He is a wannabe prostitute for root.
Oh, and he’d have to mention the LP and its importance in his appearances as well.
I will say that if he took a more balanced approach rather than only reach out to disgruntled conservatives, I’d be a big fan. I’m not holding my breath for that though.
Milnes: “JT, I expected you to toot for Root.”
Why? I’ve criticized him numerous times before. Not as virulently or often as some other regulars here though.
Despite the unsupported opinion of one (in his own words) “disabled, unemployed, broke, depressed, mentally ill, no significant other, not tech savvy, [..] no campaign contributions, no volunteers or staff, not on any ballots” resident of NJ, my whoredom is freelance, and Mr. Root has not at present or in the past retained my services.
JT, I expected you to toot for Root.
But I was hoping NF wouldn’t.
paulie, fuggetaboudit. He’s a whore for root.
Oh, I still like/defend the overall premise, and I don’t feel like getting overly detail oriented and seeing whether I can re-write it better when I’m not dead tired.
Paulie: “I’ll grant that the article isn’t perfect. You may have noticed that I posted it in the middle of the night.”
I for one like it. I think it’s notable that one of Root’s articles received very positive responses from a slew of people who often criticize what he writes. It’s unusual on this site, and that makes it newsworthy.
/groan
The neo and other conservatives are split between those who think this is a great excuse to bash Obomba and those who think this is a great precedent for bombing the hell out of Iran, without even asking congress. For now Root is in the former category. Hey, at least libertarians talk openly about circle jerks. Wikipedia which is about 60% twenty something guys doesn’t have the balls to have an actual article about circle jerks. If I had the time I’d write it for them. One great source is an old Boy Scouts manual. HA HA HA
roflmao
…here comes a serving of pure protein – it tastes a tad salty
@ # 21.
THAT comment was truly disturbing. lol
LG
You could get cockeyed 😛
MC
That’s what I meant
I never considered myself a frequent Root critic. I do disagree with quite a bit of what he has to say, but I thought my critiques were somewhat infrequent 😉
not true
When you sit down in the middle surrounded by a circle jerk, it’s best to keep your eyes closed, and not look up. I’ve heard the stuff burns your eyes if you don’t keep them closed.
Wow, there are images in the video you just posted that appear to have burned my eyeballs a bit…
By the way, speaking of Circle Jerks, has anyone made an updated video of this song featuring Obama yet?
I have no problem with Root when he acts like a Libertarian. The problem is 90% of the time he acts like a Republican.
@4: Glad you liked it.
Regarding this article itself… hey, it’s free. It doesn’t cost IPR a dime to post this article and it boosts comment traffic, which is only good for the bottom line. Granted, I don’t want to see too many of these, but I don’t mind one getting sprinkled in from time to time.
@10 I’ll do my best.
@11 I think Mr. VanDyke was calling IPR and/or the LP a circle jerk.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=circlejerk
SVD @ 8: What?
Could we have more articles like this? I want breaking news on the comment sections at TMZ also.
walks into circle with pants around ankles and an erection
Allyn Root was right, for once…
Then why did you lead off with a comment from someone who almost always has something good to say about what Root writes?
You’re better known as a persistent Root critic. I think some of the people who would read this article would have missed your recent comments because they rarely read the comment sections.
As for leading off, the comments are not in any particular order.
Dude, this post is way too meta. If people want to see comments on an article, they could look at the article.
You think this is meta? Wait until I publish the highlight reel from the comments on this one..and the highlight reel from that…and…
Seriously, my thought process was that more people read articles than comments, and that the tone of many of the comments and who was making them was noteworthy.
Of course, I realize that this will not be interesting to some of our readers; that’s why there are a lot of other articles to read and discuss.
I’ll grant that the article isn’t perfect. You may have noticed that I posted it in the middle of the night.
Dude, this post is way too meta. If people want to see comments on an article, they could look at the article.
Paulie @ 3,
“I thought it was noteworthy that a lot of people who usually never had anything good to say about Root or anything he ever wrote… did this time.”
Then why did you lead off with a comment from someone who almost always has something good to say about what Root writes?
DC@1 Overall, I really like this article. Nicely done and keep up the good work.
LOL.
Tinfoil
paulie, R U trying to get a job on the Root-Gary(?)2012 ticket or what?
No. I thought it was noteworthy that a lot of people who usually never had anything good to say about Root or anything he ever wrote… did this time.
If a bunch of people who normally had good things to say about Root had bad things to say all of a sudden, I may find that newsworthy as well.
You may notice that I also included opinions and links to opinions from people that did not like the article.
I have no idea what I will be doing in 2012.
paulie, R U trying to get a job on the Root-Gary(?)2012 ticket or what? All this trouble to cut and paste. You can smell that Root victory already on the first ballot and who knows you might supplant cigar man as the only person (outside paid petitioners) that ever MAKES money on a LP POTUS campaign!
Cigar man? Think about it you know cigar man . He is the BIGGEST DUD in third party history ! He has NEVER produced the numbers on the ballots, only in his bank account !
Can you FLAME someone not around? WHY NOT!?
WAR you need to go in here and spend a week or two and I promise you will NEVER be the same again in your political views – The Alex Jones Show Archives: http://www.gcnlive.com/programs/alexJones/archives.php
Btw never fear it’s documented.
Overall, I really like this article. Nicely done and keep up the good work.