Combs Spouts Off

"It's my opinion and it's very true."

  • Calendar

    November 2024
    S M T W T F S
     12
    3456789
    10111213141516
    17181920212223
    24252627282930

  • Recent Posts

  • Tag Cloud

    al qaeda barbarism big government blogging colorado congress corruption culture democrats denver economics economy elections environmentalism firearms freedom global warming gop gun control guns health care human rights humor iraq islam islamofascism israel journalism leftists liberty media bias military moonbats msm music obama politics presidential candidates republicans socialism soldiers spending terrorism war weather

  • Archives

Posts Tagged ‘ron paul’

Proof that we’re living in Heinlein’s “Crazy Years”

Posted by Richard on March 3, 2016

Claims that we’re living in “The Crazy Years” from Robert A. Heinlein’s Future History series are nothing new, but they’ve been getting more frequent on Twitter during this election cycle. Understandable, I’d thought, if a bit overblown.

But now I’m convinced that we’re actually in the real-world equivalent of “The Crazy Years.” What convinced me is learning that there are long-time Ron Paul supporters backing Donald Trump for President (emphases in original):

Donald Trump personifies the Liberty Movement’s finest anti-establishment spirit. He is the only rational choice left in the presidential race for those of us who hold liberty dear.

Just like Ron Paul, Donald Trump loves America and Americans, and we find it fascinating that he arrived at many of the same positions as Ron Paul not by extrapolating them from libertarian principles but by applying his ample business experience and sheer human decency.

…

Ron Paul has not endorsed Donald Trump, and in fact this very website is filled with anti-Trump videos and articles by Ron Paul. Nevertheless, we strongly feel that Donald Trump is the only candidate left in the race who has the potential of restoring and preserving many of our liberties. He might not be perfect, but his heart is in the right place, and if anyone can prevail against the establishment it is a renegade billionaire like him.

It would be a great tragedy for our fellow Ron Paul supporters to sit out this election. To beat the GOPe and preempt a brokered convention, Trump needs many decisive victories so he can accumulate enough delegates to carry the nomination on the first ballot. This time around, our support can make a real difference!

We’re all in for Donald Trump. Join us, and him, in Making America Great Again!

Tim Martin, Esther Anderson, Jeff Hale
Founders, RonPaul.com Grassroots Website (est. May 2008)

I don’t know which is more mind-boggling, libertarians supporting Trump or anyone using the phrase “sheer human decency” to describe him.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

Ron Paul duped by CAIR collaborator

Posted by Richard on January 10, 2012

Ron Paul argues that the rise of radical Islamism and its terror war on America and the West are a consequence of our intervention in and occupation of Muslim lands, not their politico-religious beliefs. And he cites published research that supposedly proves it:

Though it is hard for many to believe, honest studies show that the real motivation behind the September 11 attacks and the vast majority of other instances of suicide terrorism is not that our enemies are bothered by our way of life.  Neither is it our religion, or our wealth.  Rather, it is primarily occupation.  If you were to imagine for a moment how you would feel if another country forcibly occupied the United States, had military bases and armed soldiers present in our hometowns, you might begin to understand why foreign occupation upsets people so much.  Robert Pape has extensively researched this issue and goes in depth in his book “Cutting the Fuse:  The Explosion of Global Suicide Terrorism and How to Stop It”.  In fact, of 2,200 incidents of suicide attacks he has studied worldwide since 1980, 95% were in response to foreign occupation.

But there are a couple of problems with Rep. Paul’s source, as Joel Richardson reveals:

It is essential to take note of the fact that the primary support for Paul’s belief concerning blowback comes from Robert Pape. The problem for Paul here is that by most accounts, Pape is an agenda-driven pseudo-scholar whose works and “studies” have been thoroughly debunked by several other scholars. I appeal to all supporters of Paul to read the following articles debunking Robert Pape’s, and thus Ron Paul’s, claims:

But not only are Pape’s claims based on manufactured data, he has also been caught red-handed conspiring with the Hamas-linked group Council on American-Islamic Relations.

How many Ron Paul supporters can honestly say that they feel comfortable knowing that this is the man Paul looks to as one of his primary guides concerning foreign policy?

Richardson goes on to argue that the radical Islamists’ desire to kill the Jews didn’t stem from the creation of Israel and its “occupation,” as Rep. Paul, the Palestinians, and the American left contend, but from the words of Muhammad himself more than 1300 years ago. That’s true, to a degree.

But modern Islamofascism arose out of Wahhabism in the 1920s, 30s, and 40s. Two of its chief architects were Hassan al-Banna, who founded the Muslim Brotherhood, and Grand Mufti Muhammad al-Husseini, the “Arab Fuehrer” who created Muslim Nazi divisions for Hitler and later helped found and set the ideological direction of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO).

Rep. Paul and those who agree with him need some serious educating regarding the politico-religious beliefs that he seems to know little or nothing about and dismisses as irrelevant. Here are some places to start:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 2 Comments »

Anti-capitalist conservatives

Posted by Richard on January 10, 2012

Yesterday, I mentioned in passing the leftist-sounding attacks on Romney by Gingrich and Perry. Bobby Eberle has much more:

In their quest for the Republican nomination, it seems these “conservatives” will embrace any idea in order to attack another candidate. The latest is an assault on capitalism… yes, capitalism! What’s next? Supporting higher taxes and bigger government?

As noted in a story on CNSNews.com, GOP presidential front-runner Mitt Romney is under attack by his fellow opponents, namely Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry. Why, you ask? Because Romney ran Bain Capital, which would restructure and reorganize companies in order to make them profitable. In doing so, everything that would be involved in saving a company was on the table: selling assets, trimming work staff, modernizing… you name it.

Oh the horror of it all! Gingrich and Perry are blasting Romney for not relying on the government, not going for corporate bailouts, but rather, for handling corporate woes in the private sector.

…

In National Review, Jay Nordlinger writes, “The last two presidential election cycles have revealed a stinking hypocrisy in conservatives: They profess their love of capitalism and entrepreneurship, but when offered a real capitalist and entrepreneur, they go, ‘Eek, a mouse!’ And they tear him down in proud social-democrat fashion.”

…

I’m not writing this column as a Romney supporter. I too would prefer someone more conservative. But in this race, the so-called conservatives are sure NOT sounding conservative to me. They are blasting Romney for engaging in capitalism. They are hounding him for turning companies around. That was his job, and apparently, he was good at it.

I said there’s no Reagan in this Republican field and no clearly best choice. The “conservative alternatives to Romney” have been making themselves less and less palatable to me.

Ron Paul is great on economic and fiscal issues and on the size and scope of the federal government, but he has some serious flaws: (1) that unfortunate association with the Lew Rockwell paleo-libertarians, (2) flirtations with 9/11 Trutherism and Bilderberger/CFR conspiracy theories, and (3) a dangerously mistaken and ignorant view of the Islamofascists.

I hate to say it, but Romney is beginning to look like the best (or least bad) that the GOP can offer this year.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Fed audit bill backed by 222

Posted by Richard on June 14, 2009

H.R. 1207, the Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009, has attracted 222 co-sponsors, a majority of the House. The bill, introduced by Rep. Ron Paul, requires the Comptroller General to audit the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and Reserve Bank operations. The co-sponsors include 59 Democrats.

A majority of Financial Services Committee members, including 7 Democrats, have signed onto the bill. Committee chair Barney Frank has so far blocked it. Bill Wilson, President of Americans for Limited Government, asked Rep. Paul to circulate a discharge petition if the bill hasn't been voted out of committee by the end of the month:

Wilson says the legislation is necessary “to account for more than $7.76 trillion committed by the Fed in just the past two years. The American people have a right to know why the nation’s central bank is moving trillions of dollars to foreign governments and banks, killing markets, and crashing the economy.”

“If the will of the majority of the Financial Services Committee, and now a majority of the members of the House is to be heard, HR 1207 must be sent to the floor,” Wilson said.

…

According to Bloomberg News, the Federal Reserve has committed over $7.76 trillion in the past 20 months, $1,67 trillion of which has already been disbursed. However, it is unclear who received these loans, or who will receive the remainder of the committed funds.

Wilson added, “Nobody can account for where nearly $2 trillion of loans made by the Fed is going—all because the Fed has consistently stonewalled the press, Congress, and anyone else. And because law exempts most of the institution from being audited by the GAO.”

…

According to Bloomberg, “The Federal Reserve so far is refusing to disclose loan recipients or reveal the collateral they are taking in return.” The Fed has argued it is actually allowed to withhold “internal” memos as well as commercial and trade secrets information. Bloomberg, on the other hand, has actively filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, demanding the information.

Thus far, the Fed’s Board of Governors has refused to comply with Bloomberg’s FOIA requests. In addition, the Fed’s regional Reserve Banks are arguing that they are private institutions beyond the reach of the Freedom of Information Act.

Yeah, they're public when it suits them and private when it suits them. That seems to be an increasingly popular modus operandi, unfortunately. There are good reasons why Fed operations shouldn't all be made public immediately, but releasing the information well after the fact would seem to address those (the audit would be due by the end of 2010). If there is zero accountability for these massive sums, the potential for waste, fraud, and abuse is huge. 

The $7.76 trillion amounts to over $25,000 for every man, woman, and child in America. But it's the children (and grandchildren… and great-grandchildren…) who are really on the hook for it. 

You can see the list of co-sponsors (plus the text and other information about the bill) at Thomas.gov. Only 16 Republicans haven't signed on, and Colorado's Mike Coffman (6th CD) is one of them. If you're a constituent of Coffman's (or one of the other non-supporters), how about asking his office what's up with that?   

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Ron Paul endorsed porkmeister Young

Posted by Richard on August 26, 2008

Ron Paul turned me off some time ago, but it wasn't because of economic or fiscal issues. On those, I thought he was solid. So I'm more than a little surprised and quite disappointed that he's pimping votes for one of the GOP's sleaziest congresscritters:

Former Republican presidential contender Ron Paul has endorsed Don Young in his bid to win an 18th term in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Paul, the 72-year-old congressman from Texas whose maverick presidential bid drew wide support in Alaska, sent out a letter to his supporters here urging them to vote for Young.

“Don and I have served together in Congress for many years, and I consider him a friend,” Paul wrote in the letter. “Don has been an outspoken voice against environmental extremists over the years and has strongly opposed the types of federal regulatory overreach advocated in the name of environmentalism.”

What about Young's federal spending overreach, Ron? What about his earmark overreach? What about his support for a gas tax increase? What about his pork projects that benefit campaign contributors in another state? Are you endorsing those, too? Can you tell us what portion of the Constitution authorizes the building of bridges to nowhere, Dr. No?

As I noted last week, I've contributed to Young's primary opponent, Sean Parnell. I think I'll make another contribution to him in "honor" of Ron Paul's endorsement of Young. Please join me in contributing to Sean Parnell's campaign today. You can do so at his website, or better yet, join the Club for Growth and contribute through them.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Ron Paul doesn’t speak for all of us

Posted by Richard on July 18, 2007

A great big thanks to Randy Barnett for informing the readers of the Wall Street Journal (and OpinionJournal.com) that not all libertarians subscribe to a "blame America first" foreign and national security policy virtually indistinguishable from that of Dennis Kucinich. The war against Islamofascism is, as Barnett spelled out quite even-handedly, a subject about which libertarians disagree:

Many libertarians, and perhaps most libertarian intellectuals, opposed the war in Iraq even before its inception. They believed Saddam's regime neither directly threatened the U.S. nor harbored or supported the terrorist network responsible for Sept. 11. They also feared the risk of harmful, unintended consequences. …

Other libertarians, however, supported the war in Iraq because they viewed it as part of a larger war of self-defense against Islamic jihadists who were organizationally independent of any government. They viewed radical Islamic fundamentalism as resulting in part from the corrupt dictatorial regimes that inhabit the Middle East, which have effectively repressed indigenous democratic reformers. Although opposed to nation building generally, these libertarians believed that a strategy of fomenting democratic regimes in the Middle East, as was done in Germany and Japan after World War II, might well be the best way to take the fight to the enemy rather than solely trying to ward off the next attack.
…

Naturally, the libertarians who supported the war in Iraq are disappointed, though hardly shocked, that it was so badly executed. …

Still, there are those pro-invasion libertarians who are now following the progress of Operations Phantom Thunder and Arrowhead Ripper. … They hope this success will enable American soldiers to leave Iraq even before they leave Europe and Korea, and regain the early momentum that led, for example, to Libya's abandonment of its nuclear weapons program.

These libertarians are still rooting for success in Iraq because it would make Americans more safe, while defeat would greatly undermine the fight against those who declared war on the U.S. They are concerned that Americans may get the misleading impression that all libertarians oppose the Iraq war–as Ron Paul does–and even that libertarianism itself dictates opposition to this war. It would be a shame if this misinterpretation inhibited a wider acceptance of the libertarian principles that would promote the general welfare of the American people.

What he said.  

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

GOP fundraising surprise

Posted by Richard on July 7, 2007

I haven't paid a lot of attention to the 2008 presidential race yet. Maybe I'm just being an old fuddy-duddy, but I think the 2008 election campaign belongs in 2008. So I've studiously avoided watching any of the already numerous "debates" the two major parties have held, and what I know of the various campaigns is pretty much limited to what I hear on a newscast or see when skimming the headline news stories.

But yesterday, Doug Mataconis at The Liberty Papers pointed out a bit of political news that caught my attention: The Ron Paul campaign has more money in the bank than John McCain. In terms of campaign cash, Paul is in third place (albeit a distant third) behind Giuliani and Romney.

It wasn't that long ago that many "experts" considered McCain practically a shoe-in for the nomination. Now, his campaign seems to be in free-fall. Good. I've never liked McCain, who's always struck me as an authoritarian at heart with a bullying and vindictive streak. And the Incumbency Protection Act, a.k.a. McCain-Feingold, is just one his many sins that I can't forgive. 

I have mixed feelings about Ron Paul's relative success. I'd sure like to see him promote a return to small-government Republicanism and spark a revival of the libertarian wing of the Republican Party. But I'm afraid he's spending most of his time and money talking about Iraq, because that's what gets him news coverage and attracts eager volunteers.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | 5 Comments »

Ron Paul vs. sane libertarianism

Posted by Richard on May 18, 2007

I didn't watch the last Republican debate (or the first, for that matter), but I've seen the video of Ron Paul saying 9/11 was America's fault for bombing Iraq. I'd like to point out that although Paul's perspective is admired by quite a few libertarians (and quite a few 9/11 Truthers), there are also plenty of libertarians who dispute his explanation.

 I think Paul's "analysis" is shallow and ahistorical. It's rooted in ignorance of the origins and nature of the Islamists, and it's woefully ignorant of the breadth of Islamist violence. For a much deeper libertarian analysis of why the Islamic fascists hate us, I recommend Mark Humphrys. For a powerful statement of why we must fight, see anarchist libertarian Eric Raymond's Anti-Idiotarian Manifesto (also linked at right). For some evidence that Islamofascist rage is not just aimed at America and is not just about our intervention in Iraq, see here and here and here and here … and a score of other places I don't have time to link to.

According to Nathan Nelson at RedState, one libertarian — former Paul campaign coordinator Eric Dondero — was so disgusted by Paul's blame America riff that he decided to run against Paul for his congressional seat. Nelson approved:

Back when I was in the process of leaving the Democratic Party and deciding whether or not to become a Republican, Eric Dondero commented on my old blog and left me information about Republican libertarianism. This information was a major factor in my decision to indeed leave the Democratic Party and become a Republican. To this day, I consider myself a Republican who seeks to balance conservatism and libertarianism. I don't believe that these two ideological systems are mutually exclusive, nor do I believe that either system is incompatible with the Republican Party. I think that Republican libertarians are a valuable part of our coalition and will only become more valuable in the years to come, because libertarianism is growing and our party can grow with it.

With that said, Congressman Ron Paul is like a sore on the behind of Republican libertarianism. He makes it seem as though Republican libertarianism is nothing more than Buchananesque defeatism and isolationism. Eric Dondero is a positive alternative to Ron Paul: unabashedly Republican, unabashedly conservative, unabashedly libertarian, and unabashedly willing to balance these three systems. Perhaps most importantly, he is unabashedly willing to vote in favor of defending our country. He is a better choice for Texas' 14th District and for America.

Dondero is a founder of the Republican Liberty Caucus. He has a website called Mainstream Libertarians and a blog called Libertarian Republican. Check them out.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | 5 Comments »

Paul takes plunge, Thompson touted

Posted by Richard on March 13, 2007

A couple of months ago, Representative Ron Paul, the libertarian Republican from Texas, set up an exploratory committee for a Presidential run. Apparently, the explorations unearthed quite a bit of money and support — enough to persuade him to go ahead:

HOUSTON – Ron Paul, a nine-term Texas congressman who describes himself as a lifelong libertarian, announced his candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination Monday.

Appearing on C-SPAN's "Washington Journal," Paul said he was at first reluctant to run, but that "a lot of people want to hear my message and I'm willing to deliver it."

Paul, who formed an exploratory committee in January, said he has raised more than $500,000 in the past month "with very little effort."

If Paul's campaign message is "Let's return the GOP to its limited-government roots," I'm on board. If I hear a lot of emphasis on "ending Yankee imperialism" and "opposing the BushHitler police state," so that he's virtually indistinguishable from the MoveOn nutroots crowd — then count me out. 

Meanwhile, former Senator Fred Thompson is merely thinking about exploring, but that's got a lot of conservative Republicans excited. Check out the enthusiastic comments on Doug Mataconis' post about a Thompson candidacy. 

If talk of Thompson entering the race suggests that McCain is fading, I think it's good news. The fact that Howard Baker and Bill Frist are promoting Thompson isn't exactly a plus in my book, but they're fellow Tennesseans with long-standing personal and professional relationships. It doesn't necessarily mean much policy-wise. My recollection of Thompson as a Senator is pretty vague, but fairly positive — likewise, his work as a prosecutor and role in Watergate.

I suspect that a lot of the grass-roots enthusiasm for a Thompson candidacy stems from one simple fact: Republicans remember how well they did the last time they nominated an actor. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | 1 Comment »