Shit That Libertarians Say

Mar 21

1am

The Ron Paul Megapost

paxamericana:

I’m posting this mostly for myself so I can have a handy link whenever I (foolishly) decide to debate Ron Paul supporters. 

The Newsletters:

How Ron Paul used racist newsletters to wipe out debts, get rich

Has gone on record that he had no knowledge of the content of the racist newsletters that bore his name AND signature,

But has not only quoted them, but personally defended the newsletters in the past,

But also REFERENCED HIMSELF in the newsletters.

And later admitted he WAS aware of the contents and that only “some of [it was] offensive,”

Ron Paul signed off on racist newsletters in the 1990s, associates say

Ron Paul-Supporting Former Ron Paul Secretary: He Knew All About Those Newsletters

TNR Exclusive: More Selections From Ron Paul’s Newsletters (Or: There’s no way in hell he didn’t know what was in them.)

New Batch Of Ron Paul Newsletters Just As Racist As The First

The Freedom To Oppress: Why Ron Paul’s Old Racist Newsletters Matter

Ron Paul has no one Left to Lie To

“Race Terrorism in America” by Ron Paul (PDF)

Ron Paul’s Newsletters. Scanned. See the originals for yourself. They’re worse than they’ve been quoted for.

(ht)

Everything Else:

Ron Paul wants to define life as starting at conception, build a fence along the US-Mexico border, prevent the Supreme Court from hearing cases on the Establishment Clause or the right to privacy, permitting the return of sodomy laws and the like (a bill which he has repeatedly re-introduced), pull out of the UN, disband NATO, end birthright citizenship, deny federal funding to any organisation which “which presents male or female homosexuality as an acceptable alternative life style or which suggest that it can be an acceptable life style” along with destroying public education and social security, and abolish the Federal Reserve in order to put America back on the gold standard. He was also the sole vote against divesting US federal government investments in corporations doing business with the genocidal government of the Sudan.

Oh, and he believes that the Left is waging a war on religion and Christmas, he’s against gay marriage, is against the popular vote, opposes the Civil Rights Act of 1964, wants the estate tax repealed, is STILL making racist remarks, believes that the Panama Canal should be the property of the United States, and believes in New World Order conspiracy theories, not to mention his belief that the International Baccalaureate program is UN mind control.

Mar 11

12am

"As an O.B. doctor of thirty years, and having delivered 4,000 babies, I can assure you life begins at conception. I am legally responsible for the unborn, no matter what I do, so there’s a legal life there. The unborn has inheritance rights, and if there’s an injury or a killing, there is a legal entity. There is no doubt about it."

Ron Paul.

You’re a fucking prolife piece of shit. 

Mar 04

3pm

"Capitalism should not be condemned, since we haven’t had capitalism."

Ron Paul

Way to disregard reality, Ron Paul.

inb4 “this is corporatism not capitalism”.

Private property = capitalism. Whether that private property is held by the state or the corporations, it is still private property, and is thus capitalism.

Mar 03

9pm

No Ron Paul, the dollar did NOT really lose 95% of its value since 1913. Yes prices rose 1900% in a century, but guess what, average incomes rose by 6600%

There is a chart making the rounds lately,  that claims the dollar lost 96.2% of it value since 1900.  One of Ron Paul’s fav talking points. Though technically true in a very narrow sense, if you look at average incomes during the same period, it is clear why this is deceptive.  Additionally, the way the line chart is presented is highly deceptive. It makes it seem that there has been higher inflation in the last 40 years.  But if you look at the actual numbers in the chart, that is clearly not the case. See the last 2 paragraphs for more detail.

Let us take at the period from 1913-2006, where we have complete data. So what do they mean, when they say the dollar lost 95.1% of its value in those 93 years? Essentially, an average good/service that cost $1 in 2006,  used to be priced at 4.9 cents in 1913. In other words, the average price level of goods/services increased by 1930% since 1913.  True, but guess what, average earned incomeincreased by 6560% during the same time period. Average earned income rose from  $740/yr in 1913 to $49,300/yr in 2006.  Adjusting for inflation, $740/yr in 1913 is $15,000/yr in 2006 dollars.  Average incomes, not only kept pace, but beat price inflation by 230%.

So does it make any sense all to say the dollar lost value?  In reality, the REAL purchasing power of the average American, has increased by 230% in the past century.  Sure, prices were cheap in 1913, but $740/yr doesn’t buy you a whole lot, not anymore than 15,000/yr today.  Even this statistic doesn’t fully capture the quality of life gains of the last century.  A household making $15,000/yr today is well below the poverty line, but yet, they are highly likely to have a refrigerator, indoor plumbing, electricity, tv, cell phone and maybe even heating and cooling.  They are highly likely to have government help in making ends meet - food stamps, subsidized housing, Medicaid etc:.  And yeah, thanks to advances in medicine, they don’t have to worry about half their children dying before the age of  5.  Their analogue in 1913, making $740/yr had none of these “luxuries”.  And that was the average income…  Can you imagine what the poverty line looked like then?

Anyone who says the dollar lost value, is really trying to sell the false point of view, that somehow things were better off in 1913.  Seriously?? Maybe we should send them back in time to live in the slums of New York.  Yeah, we had actual slums back then. Update 3/2/2012:  Yes, technically, in the parlance of mainstream economics, the dollar dropped in value.  But, anytime Ron Paul says the dollar lost 95% of it value, but conveniently ignores the fact that average incomes and average savings beat price inflation, he is deceiving the American public.  The fact the incomes and savings beat inflation, it makes the “fall” in the dollar completely irrelevant.  What I am saying is we need a change in terminology. 

Feb 28

8pm

Why does 76 percent of the Ron Paul's Super PAC money come from billionaire Peter Thiel, whose Palantir Technologies helps the government spy on citizens?

it should come as a shock and disappointment to his followers that Ron Paul’s single largest donor—his Sheldon Adelson, as it were—founded a controversial defense contractor, Palantir Technologies, that profits from government espionage work for the CIA, FBI and other agencies, and which last year was caught organizing an illegal spy ring targeting American political opponents of the US Chamber of Commerce, including journalists, progressive activists and union leaders. (Palantir takes its name from the mystic stones used by characters in Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings to spy one another.)

According to recently filed FEC disclosure documents, Ron Paul’s Super PAC has received nearly all of its money from a single source, billionaire Peter Thiel. So far, Thiel has contributed $2.6 million to Ron Paul’s Super PAC, Endorse Liberty, providing 76 percent of the Super PAC’s total intake. 

Thiel, a self-described libertarian and opponent of democracy who made his fortune as the founder of PayPal, launched Palantir in 2004 to profit from what the Wall Street Journal described as “the government spy-services marketplace.” The CIA’s venture capital firm, In-Q-Tel, was brought in to back up Thiel as one of Palantir’s first outside investors. Today, Palantir’s valuation is reported to be in the billions.

A recent Businessweek profile explained how Palantir makes its money—and why Ron Paul’s followers should be bothered:

Depending where you fall on the spectrum between civil liberties absolutism and homeland security lockdown, Palantir’s technology is either creepy or heroic. Judging by the company’s growth, opinion in Washington and elsewhere has veered toward the latter. Palantir has built a customer list that includes the U.S. Defense Dept., CIA, FBI, Army, Marines, Air Force, the police departments of New York and Los Angeles, and a growing number of financial institutions trying to detect bank fraud. These deals have turned the company into one of the quietest success stories in Silicon Valley—it’s on track to hit $250 million in sales this year—and a candidate for an initial public offering. Palantir has been used to find suspects in a case involving the murder of a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement special agent, and to uncover bombing networks in Syria, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. “It’s like plugging into the Matrix,” says a Special Forces member stationed in Afghanistan who requested anonymity out of security concerns. “The first time I saw it, I was like, ‘Holy crap. Holy crap. Holy crap.’ ”

Feb 22

9pm

"If an illegal comes across the border why isn’t that trespassing? Why can’t you punish them for that?"

Ron Paul during the Arizona CNN GOP debate.

Way to dehumanize entire groups of people by calling them “illegal”. Racist asshole.

Feb 20

4pm

76% of donations to Ron Paul's SuperPAC was from the Paypal cofounder

Silicon Valley renaissance man Peter Thiel donated another $1.7 million in January to a super PAC that backs Ron Paul, according to disclosure documents filed Monday.

The PayPal co-founder donated $1 million on January 3, and followed that up 10 days later with an additional $700,000 gift.

The donations, disclosed in Federal Election Commission filings, account for almost 75% of the $2.3 million collected by the Endorse Liberty super PAC last month.

They aren’t the first donations from the entrepreneur, venture capitalist and hedge fund manager.

Thiel made donations of $150,000 and $750,000 to the super PAC in December, gifts that were disclosed in the committee’s year-end filing.

Thiel’s $2.6 million in total donations account for 76% of the super PAC’s fundraising since it came online late last year, underscoring the ability of deep-pocketed donors to have a major impact on campaign spending.