# Liberty Movement > Rand Paul Forum >  Hit Piece Time: Washington Free-Beacon plays up Rand's neoconfederate ties w/Jack Hunter

## supermario21

For those of you wanting to read...


http://fre e beac on.com/reb el-yell/






> A close aide to Sen. Rand Paul (R., Ky.) who co-wrote the senators 2011 book spent years working as a pro-secessionist radio pundit and neo-Confederate activist, raising questions about whether Paul will be able to transcend the same fringe-figure associations that dogged his fathers political career.
> 
> Paul hired Jack Hunter, 39, to help write his book The Tea Party Goes to Washington during his 2010 Senate run. Hunter joined Pauls office as his social media director in August 2012.
> 
> From 1999 to 2012, Hunter was a South Carolina radio shock jock known as the Southern Avenger. He has weighed in on issues such as racial pride and Hispanic immigration, and stated his support for the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln.
> 
> During public appearances, Hunter often wore a mask on which was printed a Confederate flag.
> 
> Prior to his radio career, while in his 20s, Hunter was a chairman in the League of the South, which advocates the secession and subsequent independence of the Southern States from this forced union and the formation of a Southern republic.
> ...


Plenty more to read after this.

----------


## JCDenton0451

The good thing about free bacon is that nobody is reading this neocon rag. It's just a low-budget knock-off of the Commentary magazine.

----------


## Ekrub

http://freebeacon.com/rebel-yell/

Will be interesting to see if Jack Hunter plays a part in Rand Paul 2016. Rather funny his disdain for 9/11 triggers for being too radical when it is likely he will be kept at arms lengths due to his radical views.

----------


## erowe1

> his radical views.


Like what?

----------


## pauliticalfan

Is there any chance that it was Jack Hunter who wrote the racist newsletters in the 90s?

----------


## AuH20

> Is there any chance that it was Jack Hunter who wrote the racist newsletters in the 90s?


He'd be too young.

----------


## Warlord

This is just stupid.

----------


## Ekrub

> Like what?


Did you read the article? Or are you trying to out-libertarian me by claiming southern seccession and the celebration of John Wilkes Booth birthday aren't radical views?

----------


## Cleaner44

This is like shooting a BB gun at Abrams tank when it comes to Rand Paul winning the 2016 nomination.  Voters don't care that Obama might not be American and they certainly won't care about Jack Hunter.  Rand will run over some of the issues that impeded Ron.  Ron always started from the position of "crazy old uncle, wingnut, he can't win, extremist" politician.  Rand is already mainstream and widely accepted.  It is too late to cast Rand as a guy that can't win.  The only other major competition (Rubio) for 2016 is already having major problems within the GOP.  Rand is in the drivers seat and pathetic attempts to stop him will fail.  Now we simply must hope that Rand is going to largely act like Ron when he takes the White House.

----------


## green73

Wenzel:




> The neocon's want Hunter gone. It should be noted that the editor-in-chief of _The Washington Free Beacon,_ where the hit piece appeared, is Matthew  Continetti, who is married to Anne Elizabeth Kristol, the daughter of  neo-conservative kingpin Bill Kristol. In other words, this hit piece  was a sanctioned hit.


Let's see how this spreads. 

Already another piece coming over google news
*I'm Shocked—Shocked!—That Rand Paul Has Ties to Neo-Confederates*
http:// prospect.org/article/im-shocked%E2%80%94shocked%E2%80%94-rand-paul-has-ties-neo-confederates

----------


## erowe1

> Did you read the article? Or are you trying to out-libertarian me by claiming southern seccession and the celebration of John Wilkes Booth birthday aren't radical views?


No I didn't read it.

----------


## ObiRandKenobi

> http://freebeacon.com/rebel-yell/
> 
> Will be interesting to see if Jack Hunter plays a part in Rand Paul 2016. Rather funny his disdain for 9/11 triggers for being too radical when it is likely he will be kept at arms lengths due to his radical views.


What a joke.

We were told over and over that Obama's radical associations were irrelevant. People who actually blew things up. 

Maybe Rand should claim this guy was just a guy in the neighborhood.

----------


## William R

Jack also wrote Jim DeMint's book and he's now President of the Heritage Foundation.    Bottom line, NeoCon Jews have it out for Rand Paul.  From the Wall Street Journal, National Review, Weekly Standard , Faux News, to the Free Beacon.  Their golden boy Marco Rubio has gone down in flames.  Get used to it.

----------


## erowe1

> Jack also wrote Jim DeMint's book


Source?




> NeoCon Jews


Classy.

----------


## Keith and stuff

Interesting story.

----------


## ctiger2

The Southern Avenger will be thrown under the bus in due time.

----------


## evilfunnystuff

I never wanted to draw attention to it, but have thought it pretty funny how he spazes on people for the way he make the movement look whilst donning the confederate flag.

----------


## Keith and stuff

> I never wanted to draw attention to it, but have thought it pretty funny how he spazes on people for the way they make the movement look whilst donning the confederate flag.


But he tried a little. He did usually wear a jacket or suit with it. Does that count for something?

----------


## JCDenton0451

Now Salon and Atlantic wire are quoting Free Beacon as a legitimate news source..

----------


## evilfunnystuff

> But he tried a little. He did usually wear a jacket or suit with it. Does that count for something?


I didn't notice that, now it doesn't seem hipocritical at all. Lol

----------


## AuH20

It's illegal to promote Anglo-Celtic culture in the age of cultural marxism? Hypocritical much?

----------


## William R

> Source?
> 
> 
> 
> Classy.


 Jack Hunter assisted Sen. Jim DeMint with his latest book, Now or Never: Saving America From Economic Collapse. He is also the official campaign blogger for GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul, and he co-wrote Rand Paul's The Tea Party Goes to Washington. You can hear Southern Avenger commentaries on The Morning Buzz on 1250 WTMA. 

http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/c...nt?oid=4101798

Sometimes the truth isn't classy.

----------


## Brett85

So Jack Hunter is extreme?  What does that make Alex Jones or Lew Rockwell?  Lol.

----------


## Occam's Banana

> Now Salon and Atlantic wire are quoting Free Beacon as a legitimate news source..


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5xsWpGqvEY

----------


## Badger Paul

_"Now Salon and Atlantic wire are quoting Free Beacon as a legitimate news source.."_

Oh but to them it is legit because it published by their neocon friends in the Beltway. Do you think this was a conincidence?  Some people are getting pretty nervous about Rand so the time came to do a little digging and here's what they found. It was no different than with the newsletters. Someone took the time to dig through University libraries in the middle of the night to find them because they got nervous about Ron too. That what these people do. Nothing stays hidden anymore, not even pre-internet stuff.

Unfortunately for Jack, if I were him I would make sure I could get my old job back because knowing how Rand and his crew operates he's not going to be his press secretary for much longer if reporters keeping asking him about his "neo-Confederate" press secretary and not about drones. 

I'd like to feel sorry for Jack and certainly this is premptive strike against Rand there's no question about it. The problem is, those us on the outside looking while Jack was peddling Rand's endorsement of Romney as a good thing remember how dismissive of the "crazies" he was. Well Jack, now you're going to find out that to the Beltway, you're the "crazy".

----------


## JCDenton0451

> It's illegal to promote Anglo-Celtic culture in the age of cultural marxism? Hypocritical much?


Our American culture is not Anglo-Celtic or Anglo-Saxon. It's *Judeo*-Christian, or at least this is what Conservative politicians say.

 BTW, I always wondered where this *Judeo*- prefix came from...

----------


## Badger Paul

_"What does that make Alex Jones or Lew Rockwell"_

The kinds of people Rand will not be dealing with in the future.

I can't wait for those pictures to spread around the internet. That will be a hoot.

Let's this be a lesson to anyone who would like to work for CFL or for Paul 2016: You better be as free from any racial or 9-11 Truth or drug tint as possible. in other words, you better be pretty damn clean and have no paper trial or arrest records. Because there are a lot of people who not just oppose the Pauls, they think they're dangerous. And in that context, they will use any means at their disposal to take Rand down, including going after staffers, especially ones who wore Confederate masks styling himself as a professional 'rassler. Be warned...

----------


## JCDenton0451

I don't know anything about this Jack Hunter guy, and whether it's really worth fighting to keep him, but I sure hope Rand has bigger balls than someone like Jim Demint.

----------


## William R

> _"What does that make Alex Jones or Lew Rockwell"_
> 
> The kinds of people Rand will not be dealing with in the future.
> 
> I can't wait for those pictures to spread around the internet. That will be a hoot.
> 
> Let's this be a lesson to anyone who would like to work for CFL or for Paul 2016: You better be as free from any racial or 9-11 Truth or drug tint as possible. in other words, you better be pretty damn clean and have no paper trial or arrest records. Because there are a lot of people who not just oppose the Pauls, they think they're dangerous. And in that context, they will use any means at their disposal to take Rand down, including going after staffers, especially ones who wore Confederate masks styling himself as a professional 'rassler. Be warned...


Last time I looked Rand doesn't have any friends that were once on the FBIs ten most wanted list like Barry Hussein did and it didn't keep him from becoming President.

----------


## supermario21

People are even tying Jack and his endorsement to attack Mark Sanford. As Jack said, this is no worse/different than people getting involved in radical left-wing organizations on their campuses. I stand with Jack and hope Rand and his staff do as well. Same with Lew Rockwell. I want to see a blog post by Tom DiLorenzo ridiculing this crap!

----------


## Warlord

Jack has some good work for Rand I think.  He's helped built his social media profile.

----------


## supermario21

Oh BS...Obama was mentored by terrorist Bill Ayers...All Lew Rockwell does is do his best to promote economic prosperity and peace!!!

----------


## GregSarnowski

> _"What does that make Alex Jones or Lew Rockwell"_
> 
> The kinds of people Rand will not be dealing with in the future.
> 
> I can't wait for those pictures to spread around the internet. That will be a hoot.
> 
> Let's this be a lesson to anyone who would like to work for CFL or for Paul 2016: You better be as free from any racial or 9-11 Truth or drug tint as possible. in other words, you better be pretty damn clean and have no paper trial or arrest records. Because there are a lot of people who not just oppose the Pauls, they think they're dangerous. And in that context, they will use any means at their disposal to take Rand down, including going after staffers, especially ones who wore Confederate masks styling himself as a professional 'rassler. Be warned...


LOL you do realize what a wimp you sound like, kowtowing to the "politically correct" left?

Rand will be heavily attacked regardless of what he says, does or who he associates with.

----------


## Cowlesy

I think the author should spend a few minutes reading these.

http://www.theamericanconservative.c...ghts-struggle/

http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/S...nd-black-pride

http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/c...nt?oid=1114892

http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/c...nt?oid=1113793

Anyone who has read Jack Hunter over the years knows he's not any of the awful things implied by the WFB author.

I find this whole kerfluffle much ado about nothing.  It's just Rand's opponents trying to divide/conquer/FUD.

----------


## Cowlesy

> I think the author should spend a few minutes reading these.
> 
> http://www.theamericanconservative.c...ghts-struggle/
> 
> http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/S...nd-black-pride
> 
> http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/c...nt?oid=1114892
> 
> http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/c...nt?oid=1113793
> ...


Of which, I find this one to be the sharpest.




> *Using Obama's example to destroy political correctness, not reinforce it 
> *
>  by Jack Hunter 
> 
> 
>  In 2003, Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean found himself in hot water by suggesting that he wanted to be "the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks." Not amused, John Kerry accused Dean of pandering to racists, Dick Gephardt insinuated that such Southerners were anti-American, and Al Sharpton scolded Dean for paying lip service to "America's swastika." Dean soon fell in line and muted his rhetoric. 
> 
>  Last month, I had the privilege of addressing some of these allegedly "racist," anti-American, crypto-Nazis — the Sons of Confederate Veterans. The purpose of my speech was to point out that in 2008, anyone who embraces the Confederate flag is automatically considered beyond the pale. Even Republicans like Mitt Romney and John McCain are as quick to condemn the South's most famous symbol as Dean was to shut up about it. 
> 
> ...

----------


## RickyJ

I have  disdain for Jack Hunter and couldn't care less what he says or does.

----------


## AuH20

I believe Joel Skousen when he assuredly stated that a Republican president WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED to reverse course on this plan for engineered tyranny. They'll destroy Rand like Goldwater with enough lies to make one's head spin.

----------


## krugminator

It's pretty bad and immature talking about killing a former president and Hunter was less than professional in his blog posts 10 years ago. But nothing he said is overtly racist.  I've always felt that Hunter is way too amateurish for someone like Rand to be associated with, but this won't be a big deal.

I'm quite confident Rand will have no trouble when he gets questioned on this.

----------


## dinosaur

> I believe Joel Skousen when he assuredly stated that a Republican president WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED to reverse course on this plan for engineered tyranny. They'll destroy Rand like Goldwater with enough lies to make one's head spin.


Liars risk outing themselves.  They can bury someone like Ron Paul or Pat Buchanan much more easily than they can bury Rand at this point.

----------


## JCDenton0451

> I have  disdain for Jack Hunter and couldn't care less what he says or does.


Why? What's your problem with the guy?

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> 


Lol.

All these years, and this is the first I've heard of this. Did the neo-cons have to dig deep to find this humorous past? It looks like youthful goofiness to me. 


The article itself is the worst kind of twisted, misrepresenting hit piece I've seen in a long time. They insinuate so many things, and when you go to the links that are "references", they are totally different. They say that Hunter gave them a 50 minute interview, but the article spends the entire time dredging up and mischaracterizing things from the past.

----------


## supermario21

I think stuff like this will only push Rand more in our direction. He's going to stop bending over backwards to appease the beltway backstabbers and take his message more to the grassroots. At least that's what I'd like to see him do.

----------


## AuH20

Why do urban jews openly conspire against Southerners? Look at the ADL and SPLC. It's rank and file Jewish. Why do these people hate Southerners?

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> Why? What's your problem with the guy?


A famous 9/11 truther (Luke Rudkowski, wearechange.org) was harassing Rand about something (can't remember exactly what, maybe an Iran resolution? It was not about 9/11).  Hunter wanted him to go away and eventually said that conspiracy theorists made the movement look bad.

----------


## TruthisTreason

The meme continues:   http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...cial-comments/

Big hat-tip for the honorable mention....
Side note:
"In 2009, a staffer for Paul’s Senate campaign resigned after a racist post left on his MySpace page surfaced."

^^^^Yes another user posted a nasty/racist image on a (my) Myspace page in 2007--a few months after the last login. It was not a "racist" post by the staffer (me)!

----------


## amy31416

> Lol.
> 
> All these years, and this is the first I've heard of this. Did the neo-cons have to dig deep to find this humorous past? It looks like youthful goofiness to me. 
> 
> 
> The article itself is the worst kind of twisted, misrepresenting hit piece I've seen in a long time. They insinuate so many things, and when you go to the links that are "references", they are totally different. They say that Hunter gave them a 50 minute interview, but the article spends the entire time dredging up and mischaracterizing things from the past.


Naw. It's all quite openly available info about Hunter--he's definitely matured.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> The meme continues:   http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...cial-comments/
> 
> Big hat-tip for the honorable mention....
> Side note:
> "In 2009, a staffer for Paul’s Senate campaign resigned after a racist post left on his MySpace page surfaced."
> 
> ^^^^Yes another user posted a nasty/racist image on a (my) Myspace page in 2007--a few months after the last login. It was not a "racist" post by the staffer (me)!


Oh boy, it has begun. The neo-cons have launched their smear campaign.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

It's all over Twitter.

----------


## amy31416

> Oh boy, it has begun. The neo-cons have launched their smear campaign.


And they're hanging with the liberals to do it.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> The good thing about free bacon is that nobody is reading this neocon rag. It's just a low-budget knock-off of the Commentary magazine.





> Now Salon and Atlantic wire are quoting Free Beacon as a legitimate news source..


It's everywhere now. The neo-cons and MSNBC leftists have unleashed their smear campaign.

----------


## cajuncocoa

> Last time I looked Rand doesn't have any friends that were once on the FBIs ten most wanted list like Barry Hussein did and it didn't keep him from becoming President.


You'll soon find out that the MSM only cares about things like that when it has the potential to bring down someone NOT on the Left.

----------


## trey4sports

The $#@!? Jack Hunter is 39? 

You've got to be kidding me! 

I thought he was _twenty_-nine at best.

----------


## WM_in_MO

But I thought everyone was coming around on Rand?

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> But I thought everyone was coming around on Rand?


Neo-conservatives feeding smear stories to the far MSNBC left. Leninists and Trotskyites still have all of the their backroom connections.

----------


## compromise

> Why do urban jews openly conspire against Southerners? Look at the ADL and SPLC. It's rank and file Jewish. Why do these people hate Southerners?


Of course the ADL's rank and file is Jewish. It's a Jewish organization.

The SPLC contains a number of white liberals of varying origin.

A lot of people on here seem to obsess over the liberal/neocon Jew links while ignoring the fact that most of the leaders within the liberty movement are of Jewish descent:

- Murray Rothbard
- Walter Block
- FA Hayek
- Ludwig von Mises
- Ayn Rand
- Milton Friedman
- David Friedman
- Barry Goldwater
- John Stossel
- Peter Schiff
- Robert Nozick

Indeed, a lot of white supremacists and anti-semites actually condemn libertarianism for serving the interests of Jews, given the prevalence of Jewish intellectuals within the movement.

----------


## AuH20

> Of course the ADL's rank and file is Jewish. It's a Jewish organization.
> 
> The SPLC contains a number of white liberals of varying origin.
> 
> A lot of people on here seem to obsess over the liberal/neocon Jew links while ignoring the fact that most of the leaders within the liberty movement are of Jewish descent:
> 
> - Murray Rothbard
> - Walter Block
> - FA Hayek
> ...


Why are predominantly northern, urbanly located Jews so statist and hold so many anti-freedom positions?  It's largely the unsavory environment (high academia, legal & governmental which are self-fulfilling prophecies in terms of philosophical development) that these jews are being raised in as opposed to the conclusion that all jews are a lost cause.

----------


## Warlord

> It's everywhere now. The neo-cons and MSNBC leftists have unleashed their smear campaign.


Wont last. This is the most stupid smear ever.

----------


## compromise

> Why are predominantly northern, urbanly located Jews so statist and hold so many anti-freedom positions?  It's largely the unsavory environment that these jews are being raised  inas opposed to the conclusion that all jews are a lost cause.


See this paper by Milton Friedman:
http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detai...#axzz2YZrT9Hly

----------


## dinosaur

> Wont last. This is the most stupid smear ever.


Nice threat at the end of the Yahoo article..."Weeks like this one, where Paul starts off strong and then quickly winds up muddled, are not likely to stop if he does decide to run for president.  In all likelihood, Jack Hunter will be going away. The radical cloud hovering over Rand Paul will not."

----------


## V3n

I would like some free-bacon.

----------


## Warlord

My guess is they will go after anyone connected to or around Rand since they can't get to him

----------


## AuH20

> See this paper by Milton Friedman:
> http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detai...#axzz2YZrT9Hly


Friedman touches on the so-called "intellectual" niche that jews have plugged themselves into obviously. They have essentially become "high priests" of the state thanks to the innumerable benefits that the system has provided them. The guardians from high level academia are no different from the pagan high priests that kept the rest of the tribe in check during ancient times.  They have been groomed to define 'truth' at all costs.

----------


## radiofriendly

They really are doubling down on this - I don't think this will stick...saw on HuffPost that he wears this mask numerous times! 
The final trick will be for us to...should we make this off topic?....get them to actually bring up Aqua Buddha again..........

----------


## Brian4Liberty

Four more smear articles from today:




> Rand Paul aide has history of racial comments
> By Rachel Weiner, Published: July 9, 2013 at 12:05 pm:
> http://wxx.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...cial-comments/
> 
> Rand Paul’s newest problem
> By Jennifer Rubin, Published: July 9, 2013 at 12:15 pm:
> http://wxx.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...ewest-problem/
> 
> Tuesday, Jul 9, 2013 08:30 AM PST
> ...

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> They really are doubling down on this - I don't think this will stick...saw on HuffPost that he wears this mask numerous times! 
> The final trick will be for us to...should we make this off topic?....get them to actually bring up Aqua Buddha again..........


There must be 20 articles about this now...new ones keep coming across twitter.

----------


## dinosaur

The conservative rags don't seem to be dirtying their hands with this yet.

----------


## JCDenton0451

> Why are predominantly northern, urbanly located Jews so statist and hold so many anti-freedom positions?  It's largely the unsavory environment (high academia, legal & governmental which are self-fulfilling prophecies in terms of philosophical development) that these jews are being raised in as opposed to the conclusion that all jews are a lost cause.


Their problem goes deeper than that. The Jews are raised to fear and distrust the _goyim_, which makes them distrust the idea of_ freedom for the goyim_, since the goyim might use this freedom to persecute the Jews. Traditionally, the State was a friend of Jewish people: the Jews were able to make alliances with ruling elites in Europe and Middle East to serve as creditors and tax-collectors. That's the only way they were able to survive in Medeval Europe, where the local population hated their guts.

The Jewish community has a stong sense of history, and their past tragic experiences and paranoia shape their behavior. To put it simply, the Jews distrust you, fear you and want the Government to reign you in.

----------


## devil21

Is this supposed to anger conservatives in today's political climate?  Sure, the left will spin itself into a tizzy but this doesn't seem very damaging, considering the anti-Obama/pro-states rights sentiments within the GOP right now.

Shame they had to go after Jack to try to damage Rand.  Nice guy and very capable....

eta:  Did just occur to me that Rand has been making inroads on the left lately so that may be the angle here.  Try to turn him off to any Dems that were starting to like him.  It's been obvious that the neocons would rather a warhawk Dem win than a conservative Republican.  We really really need to purge these $#@!ing neocon Zionists OUT of the Republican party.

----------


## JCDenton0451

> Why do urban jews openly conspire against Southerners? Look at the ADL and SPLC. It's rank and file Jewish. Why do these people hate Southerners?


They don't like your culture, your political tradition, and they seek to change you by force. It's very much like neoconservative foreign policy, except they're not doing this to Israel's neighbours, they're doing this to you.

----------


## Mr.NoSmile

Best they get it out of the way now.

----------


## Anti-Neocon

> We really really need to purge these $#@!ing Zionists OUT of the Republican party.


It's difficult to purge them out of the party when they essentially own it.  The American public must first turn against them which will make the non-Zionist money interests realize they have to change in order to win.  The most important thing we can do is try to get people away from the mainstream Zionist media.

----------


## devil21

> It's difficult to purge them out of the party when they essentially own it.  The American public must first turn against them which will make the non-Zionist money interests realize they have to change in order to win.  The most important thing we can do is try to get people away from the mainstream Zionist media.


I did add a distinction to the post you quoted.  Not all Zionists are "neocons" of the Kristol ilk.  Figures that the originator of this article is directly tied to Kristol.  I agree with your post though.  It's just clear to me now that these neocons are a-ok with destroying the Republican Party as long as they get what they want.

----------


## JCDenton0451

> Is this supposed to anger conservatives in today's political climate?  Sure, the left will spin itself into a tizzy but this doesn't seem very damaging, considering the anti-Obama/pro-states rights sentiments within the GOP right now.
> 
> Shame they had to go after Jack to try to damage Rand.  Nice guy and very capable....
> 
> eta:  Did just occur to me to Rand has been making inroads on the left lately so that may be the angle here.  Try to turn him off to any Dems that were starting to like him.  It's been obvious that the neocons would rather a warhawk Dem win than a conservative Republican.  We really really need to purge these $#@!ing Zionists OUT of the Republican party.


Yes, indeed. The Zionists need to go, and adopting anti-Israel stance would be easiest way to get rid of them...The problem is what to do with millions of Evangelicals who were led to believe that Sate of Israel is some kind of holy entity.

The neocons didn't join the Republican party because they shared Republican ideals. They did it to achieve control. The US has a two party system, which means if you control the two major parties, you effectively control this country's politics.

----------


## devil21

> Four more smear articles from today:


Notice the one thing they all have in common?  I won't say it lest I get an "infraction" for stating the obvious but they're not even trying to hide it.

(be careful JCDenton, there are some mods here that will ban or give you an infraction for bringing up things like your above posts...gotta be uber-PC even when your own party is being destroyed in front of your face)

----------


## TaftFan

I pushed back on Redstate: http://www.redstate.com/freedomrepub...-on-rand-paul/

----------


## TaftFan

TAC: http://www.theamericanconservative.c...vs-jack-hunter

----------


## Peace Piper

We Are Change confronts the Southern Avenger




Laugh it up about Bilderberg. A secret meeting of "leaders" planning the future for proles worldwide. It's a big Yuk Yuk.
Whatever you do, DO NOT Question it. The Southern Avenger will call you out as a "Kook Conspiracy Theorist".

Rand is confronted about his support for Mutt Romney
(which would have gotten him kicked off this very forum,
but Rand is "family" and "family" can do No Wrong.)




Some people think Rand should be treated like some kind of Deity,
all because he's related to someone else that spoke his mind.

Well it's not going to work like that.

----------


## JCDenton0451

> (be careful JCDenton, there are some mods here that will ban or give you an infraction for bringing up things like your above posts...gotta be uber-PC even when your own party is being destroyed in front of your face)


Which is why I did my utmost to be polite. My intentions are solely educational.

It's worth noting that this attack against important Paul's aide came completely out of nowhere. If anything this is a badly-needed remainder to Rand that neocons are treacherous, they can't be bargained with or appeased.

----------


## devil21

> Which is why I did my utmost to be polite. My intentions are solely educational.
> 
> It's worth noting that this attack against important Paul's aide came completely out of nowhere. If anything this is a badly-needed remainder to Rand that neocons are treacherous, they can't be bargained with or appeased.


It is clearly a planned and coordinated attack.  Reminds me of the "journolist" thing from a couple years ago.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JournoList


(eta:  WashPost is deleting comments that oppose/expose the agenda behind the articles)

----------


## JCDenton0451

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JournoList



> "find a right winger’s [sic] and smash it through a plate-glass window.  Take a snapshot of the bleeding mess and send it out in a Christmas card  to let the right know that it needs to live in a state of constant  fear. Obviously, I mean this rhetorically.


Damn. These creatures are so vicious.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> Notice the one thing they all have in common?


One thing is that they all came out pretty quickly. These were the first four I saw come across Twitter. Not sure what times zones they were, but they were sprouting like weeds in about an hours time.

----------


## phill4paul

Lol. Guess the Southern Avenger can step out to the smoking area with the rest of us "Troofer/Conspiritard" outcasts. Don't want to rock the boat with radical views that might hurt a serious political campaign. Gotta watch casting stones doncha know.

  Though, in honesty, seems a bit early to  be sending out hit pieces. On a staffer no less.

----------


## LibertyEagle

The article in the OP is a hit piece from a no-name source.  Please deactivate the link, lest you give it more visibility than it otherwise would have had.  Sheesh.

And folks, please think twice before you bring over here every remote  hit piece that you see on the net.  Sometimes I wonder how many of the media just come here to get info that we stupidly gathered for them, when they are wanting to run hit pieces on our candidates.

----------


## TaftFan

> This is a hit piece from a no-name source.  Please deactivate the link, lest you give it more visibility than it otherwise would have had.  Sheesh.
> 
> And folks, please think twice before you bring over here every remote  hit piece that you see on the net.  Sometimes I wonder how many of the media just come here to get info that we stupidly gathered for them, when they are wanting to run hit pieces on our candidates.


Actually it lists the name at the bottom. Usually though the author is named at the top. She is a neoconservative.

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Actually it lists the name at the bottom. Usually though the author is named at the top. She is a neoconservative.


The point was, who the hell has heard of the Washington Free-Beacon?  It's not like it is a major publication.  

Why gather all the hit pieces?  All it does is help the media and also boost them in google rankings, so that many more will read them than otherwise would have.

Sometimes we are our worst enemies.

----------


## phill4paul

> The article in the OP is a hit piece from a no-name source.  Please deactivate the link, lest you give it more visibility than it otherwise would have had.  Sheesh.
> 
> And folks, please think twice before you bring over here every remote  hit piece that you see on the net.  Sometimes I wonder how many of the media just come here to get info that we stupidly gathered for them, when they are wanting to run hit pieces on our candidates.


  Google: Rand Neo-Confederate and let me know how many hits you get. This piece was obviously meant to spread. And quickly. To what end? I dunno. Seems petty and to use such fodder at this stage in the game seems pre-mature. I got some beefs with Jack but this seems much-ado-about-nothing.

----------


## TaftFan

This should be put in HT though.

----------


## Mr.NoSmile

> The point was, who the hell has heard of the Washington Free-Beacon?  It's not like it is a major publication.  
> 
> Why gather all the hit pieces?  All it does is help the media and also boost them in google rankings, so that many more will read them than otherwise would have.
> 
> Sometimes we are our worst enemies.


Rand Paul is a public figure and well known politician. Whether the links were gathered here doesn't really do much considering people would have read them anyway. And any Joe Schmo can put up an opinion or article and once it's out there, it's out there. Whether small or big time, it's still there. Even more so when Paul is still seen by some as radical and a 'whacko bird.'

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Rand Paul is a public figure and well known politician. Whether the links were gathered here doesn't really do much considering people would have read them anyway. And any Joe Schmo can put up an opinion or article and once it's out there, it's out there. Whether small or big time, it's still there. Even more so when Paul is still seen by some as radical and a 'whacko bird.'


You clearly do not understand how Google rankings work.  The more they are linked to, also hit, the more they are raised up in the google rankings.  This causes many more people to see the damn things, than would have otherwise.  Get it?

----------


## pacelli

Jack Hunter is more than capable of defending himself, if necessary.

----------


## Mr.NoSmile

> You clearly do not understand how Google rankings work.  The more they are linked to, also hit, the more they are raised up in the google rankings.  This causes many more people to see the damn things, than would have otherwise.  Get it?


And you seem to not get that people were going to read the stories any and every way they wanted to anyway.

----------


## TaftFan

http://www.southernavenger.com/uncat...ecent-attacks/

JACK RESPONDS

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> The article in the OP is a hit piece from a no-name source.  Please deactivate the link, lest you give it more visibility than it otherwise would have had.  Sheesh.
> 
> And folks, please think twice before you bring over here every remote  hit piece that you see on the net.  Sometimes I wonder how many of the media just come here to get info that we stupidly gathered for them, when they are wanting to run hit pieces on our candidates.


I tend to agree, but seeing as this was a water-shed type of day, I posted some. I broke the links though. 

As a general rule, I wouldn't post hit pieces on a daily basis. No need to give them more exposure.




> This should be put in HT though.


Probably.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> http://www.southernavenger.com/uncat...ecent-attacks/
> 
> JACK RESPONDS





> I am also no longer a guy who judges beer drinking contests in a wrestling mask.


Now I am disappointed.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

Jack would be prudent to not stand at a bus stop with someone from Reason magazine standing behind him. He might get thrown under that bus...

<no link to actual article>

----------


## devil21

> You clearly do not understand how Google rankings work.  The more they are linked to, also hit, the more they are raised up in the google rankings.  This causes many more people to see the damn things, than would have otherwise.  Get it?


Actually, Im pretty sure that's not true.  Plain http links are not indexed nor ranked by search engines.  Only hyperlinks with anchor text are included with ranking.  See my sig for an example of a hyperlink that gains rank based on visibility and hits.  The old "break the link" thing is a falsehood.  The Israel link in my sig is not ranked or indexed.  The fishing link is.

----------


## devil21

Best thing you can do is swarm comment sections on these articles and take them over.

A common tactic being used by the JournoList media types is to post their smear pieces then create user accounts and comment on their own articles with whatever additional spin they want to reinforce to whoever reads it.  Beat them at their own game!  Take over their comment sections and counter their games!

----------


## jct74

Jack responds




> *My Statement on Recent Attacks*
> 
> Todays article that brought my not-very-hidden radio pundit background to light does not accurately reflect me or my full, or true, views.
> 
> The role of a radio host is different from that of a political operative. In radio, sometimes youre encouraged to be provocative and inflammatory. Ive been guilty of both, and am embarrassed by some of the comments I made precisely because they do not represent me today. I was embarrassed by some of them even then.
> 
> I am also no longer a guy who judges beer drinking contests in a wrestling mask. Things change. We all hopefully grow up.
> 
> I abhor racism and have always treated everyone Ive met with dignity and respect as individuals. This was true in the past and it is true now.
> ...


http://www.southernavenger.com/uncat...ecent-attacks/

----------


## Beorn

Every night before I go to bed I put on my confederate luchador mask and bow before my aqua Buddha saying my nighttime prayers.

----------


## angelatc

> One thing is that they all came out pretty quickly. These were the first four I saw come across Twitter. Not sure what times zones they were, but they were sprouting like weeds in about an hours time.



yesterday, the news was all about rand paul calling out the neocons on foreign policy.  these are defensive pieces.  not that its good news, but defense is always better than offense when it comes to putting points on the board.

----------


## Badger Paul

"_OL you do realize what a wimp you sound like, kowtowing to the "politically correct" left?"

Rand will be heavily attacked regardless of what he says, does or who he associates with._ 

Yes and I'm sure Rand doesn't want to wind up like Paula Deen either, who was dumped by the media corporation and food conglomerates in our capitalist society. Because who has been the biggest promoters of "political correctness" in our society? Not the government. Not even universities. It's business, like it or not. 

Oh and conservative publications too who want to stop Rand from being President. Because if PC shouldn't matter to conservatives, then why is Free Beacon the one "outing" Jack Hunter? Hmmm?

----------


## Badger Paul

_"Jack would be prudent to not stand at a bus stop with someone from Reason magazine standing behind him. He might get thrown under that bus..."_

Or Dave Weigel for that matter.

----------


## JCDenton0451

> Oh and conservative publications too who want to stop Rand from being President. Because if PC shouldn't matter to conservatives, then why is Free Beacon the one "outing" Jack Hunter? Hmmm?


Are you that dim? The Free Bacon is a filthy neocon rag. The editor is married to Bill Kristol's daughter. Alana Goodman is a Zionist witch, who used to work at Commentary. They have an agenda.

Also I think it's daft to mention Rand Paul and Paula Deen in the same sentence. lol

----------


## supermario21

Dave Weigel was tweeting $#@! about the Pauls/Hunter earlier today, that JournoList POS.

----------


## phill4paul

Blast from the past....

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...ht=Jack+Hunter




> Some believe they need to throw away the 'radicals' that spread the message in the years between campaigns. Those 'radicals' that no longer cast a positive light on the foot in the door approach. Best be careful Jack. This is not a good time to be dividing the movement.


  Still, though I have a beef with Jack, it still seems to me silly. But, at least, he might see now what it is like being deemed a 'radical.'

----------


## green73

> Dave Weigel was tweeting $#@! about the Pauls/Hunter earlier today, that JournoList POS.


NOOOOO. Color me surprised.

----------


## krugminator

> Dave Weigel was tweeting $#@! about the Pauls/Hunter earlier today, that JournoList POS.


 He has more or less been favorable to Rand Paul about this.  He will almost certainly vote for Rand in 2016. I think it's good having someone like Dave Weigel comment on Rand, because he has some cred. with people on the left.

----------


## jfriedman

> Notice the one thing they all have in common?  I won't say it lest I get an "infraction" for stating the obvious but they're not even trying to hide it.
> 
> (be careful JCDenton, there are some mods here that will ban or give you an infraction for bringing up things like your above posts...gotta be uber-PC even when your own party is being destroyed in front of your face)


I don't think there should be any issue pointing all the authors in this particular selection are Jews.  Jews who are neoconservative (closet liberals) or *some* whose penultimate issue is the protection of Israel most certainly have it out for Rand Paul.  I read the Beacon article and looked at the author's referenced twitter page, and there is a picture of her with Sheldon Adelson and Jose Antonio Vargas, both of which she labels "patriots."  Mr. Adelson spent millions on the Romney campaign allegedly because of Obama's Israel positions, and Mr. Vargas is the former Washington Post reporter who outed himself as a gay illegal alien.  We can't say the author has a bias against traditional conservatives, but with whom one dines can at times reveal things.

I think it just happens that there are a lot of kosher reporters out there.  I do not think it has anything to do with their religion, because you will find lots of evangelical neoconservatives especially with respect to foreign policy.  The worst thing Hunter can do is apologize or equivocate.  He must stand up against the hits, and Rand Paul's people must stand with him.  In this political climate, conservatives and republicans are tired of being tarnished as racists.  From reading Jack Hunter's writings, he is clearly not a racist.  As many have pointed out, "Racist" and "Racism" are devices of the left with which to attack the Right.  It's a basic concept of nature, if you exhibit weakness toward these leftists, they will crush you.  If you run from a dog, it will bite you and chase you.  They need to punch right back and say the truth: that the insinuations are false, because they are.  The problem with our country is we can't have an honest talk about race.  Black people generally will do so, but whites cower in fear.  The average white male who is seen as the oppressor of the ages, is attacked by the leftist minorities, but your rank and file person generally welcomes a conversation.

----------


## phill4paul

posting error.

----------


## AuH20

> I don't think there should be any issue pointing all the authors in this particular selection are Jews.  Jews who are neoconservative (closet liberals) or *some* whose penultimate issue is the protection of Israel most certainly have it out for Rand Paul.  I read the Beacon article and looked at the author's referenced twitter page, and there is a picture of her with Sheldon Adelson and Jose Antonio Vargas, both of which she labels "patriots."  Mr. Adelson spent millions on the Romney campaign allegedly because of Obama's Israel positions, and Mr. Vargas is the former Washington Post reporter who outed himself as a gay illegal alien.  We can't say the author has a bias against traditional conservatives, but with whom one dines can at times reveal things.
> 
> I think it just happens that there are a lot of kosher reporters out there.  I do not think it has anything to do with their religion, because you will find lots of evangelical neoconservatives especially with respect to foreign policy.  *The worst thing Hunter can do is apologize or equivocate.  He must stand up against the hits, and Rand Paul's people must stand with him.  In this political climate, conservatives and republicans are tired of being tarnished as racists.  From reading Jack Hunter's writings, he is clearly not a racist.  As many have pointed out, "Racist" and "Racism" are devices of the left with which to attack the Right.  It's a basic concept of nature, if you exhibit weakness toward these leftists, they will crush you.  If you run from a dog, it will bite you and chase you.  They need to punch right back and say the truth: that the insinuations are false, because they are.*  The problem with our country is we can't have an honest talk about race.  Black people generally will do so, but whites cower in fear.  The average white male who is seen as the oppressor of the ages, is attacked by the leftist minorities, but your rank and file person generally welcomes a conversation.


Alex Jones once stated how he would cover political events and the spiteful progs would come over to him, taunt him with the label of a racist, while being fully cognizant that he wasn't one. These accusations are weapons and they are aware of it's power. We cannot cower when they go to this despicable playbook. Fight back against these soulless demons because they abhor resistance.

----------


## RecoveringNeoCon

LOL

Maddow is doing a 15 minute monologue right now on Ron Paul newsletters, followed by Rand Paul ties to Jack Hunter.

----------


## AuH20

> LOL
> 
> Maddow is doing a 15 minute monologue right now on Ron Paul newsletters, followed by Rand Paul ties to Jack Hunter.


The Moonbat signal is in the sky in cities everywhere. LOL

----------


## green73

If nothing else this should be instructive as to how the establishment works. 


From the Ron Paul feed on google news.

----------


## TaftFan

Jack Hunter: The Man Democrats Will Use to Make Rand Paul Look Like a Racist
http://www.policymic.com/articles/53...-like-a-racist

----------


## green73

> Jack Hunter: The Man Democrats the Duopoly Will Use to Make Rand Paul Look Like a Racist


fixed

----------


## AuH20

Do you find any coincidence that Rand unloaded on Hillary about ten days ago and then Media Matters, the Clinton media organ, incites this whole Jack Hunter fiasco?

----------


## RP Supporter

> LOL
> 
> Maddow is doing a 15 minute monologue right now on Ron Paul newsletters, followed by Rand Paul ties to Jack Hunter.


Vile bitch. Gee, and then they whine when Republicans don't go on their shows. Why ever not? If they had any credibility as a news station, they wouldn't have tried to play gotcha games with him just after he won the primary. And I say they, because Ms. Maddow has her bread buttered right along with the rest of them.

And already, I'm sure the "reasonable, responsible" right are up in arms about this. They annoy me even more then the left. You expect the Democrats to play this game. Rand could be a unicorn and they'd still find a way to make him out to be vile. But squishy republicans that attack Rand over this are little more than sellouts who deserve to have any so called "conservative" credentials revoked.

----------


## supermario21

Nobody's watching MSNBC anymore, their ratings are in the tank..

----------


## RDM

> Is there any chance that it was Jack Hunter who wrote the racist newsletters in the 90s?


Ben Swann already investigated and uncovered the author.

----------


## cajuncocoa

Who vetted Jack Hunter?  How hard was it to learn this about him BEFORE he did work for Ron and Rand?  Everyone here  is blaming the media for bringing this up...well, Jack isn't exactly denying it.  Shouldn't someone have seen this coming??

----------


## TaftFan

So should Rand let Jack go? That is the question.

----------


## devil21

Thanks for posting that video above!  Very interesting.

----------


## devil21

> Who vetted Jack Hunter?  How hard was it to learn this about him BEFORE he did work for Ron and Rand?  Everyone here  is blaming the media for bringing this up...well, Jack isn't exactly denying it.  Shouldn't someone have seen this coming??


We have to vet everyone for everything they did their entire lives in the oft chance a coordinated media attack is made up out of essentially nothing?  Jack is guilty of speaking the truth and supporting his heritage.  Nothing more.  Get a grip.

----------


## cajuncocoa

> So should Rand let Jack go? That is the question.


Let me answer your question with another question:  do you want to spend the  next 3 years explaining why Rand has someone in his campaign who once wore a confederate flag mask?

----------


## devil21

> So should Rand let Jack go? That is the question.


That's up to them but I think it would be a bad move and it would signal to the media attack dogs that they can damage the campaign with trumped up BS and even lies in the future.  If Rand (and/or Jack) bends on this then it's declaring themselves fair game for whatever bull$#@! the media can come up with.




> Let me answer your question with another question:  do you want to spend the  next 3 years explaining why Rand has someone in his campaign who once wore a confederate flag mask?


Is this a problem for conservatives?  Im sure most are tired of being called racist at every turn by liberal media types.  It may hurt with liberals that would consider voting for Rand but Im trying to win the nomination first.

----------


## cajuncocoa

> We have to vet everyone for everything they did their entire lives in the oft chance a coordinated media attack is made up out of essentially nothing?  Jack is guilty of speaking the truth and supporting his heritage.  Nothing more.  Get a grip.


YOU get a grip.  The Confederate Flag may be a symbol of southern heritage, but that's not the perception most Americans have.  Good luck trying to convince them otherwise.

To answer your first question, you only have to vet anyone about anything you don't want to come back to bite you later.

----------


## cajuncocoa

> Is this a problem for conservatives?  Im sure most are tired of being called racist at every turn by liberal media types.  It may hurt with liberals that would consider voting for Rand but Im trying to win the nomination first.


The only people I know in the south who sport confederate flags tend to be rednecks, not the type of Republicans who show up at tea party rallies. Whether it hurts Rand will depend  on how badly other Republican candidates want to win the nomination, and whether they will use this against Rand or not.

----------


## devil21

> YOU get a grip.  The Confederate Flag may be a symbol of southern heritage, but that's not the perception most Americans have.  Good luck trying to convince them otherwise.


You get a grip.  You're acting like this is already 86'ing Rand's (not even announced) campaign.  cajun never misses a chance to inject some FUD.....

Do you have some hard data on this perception?  I'd like to review it please.




> To answer your first question, you only have to vet anyone about anything you don't want to come back to bite you later.


Then I guess the media will just have to start inventing $#@! if mere implications is enough to get (very capable) campaign staff fired.  This is NOT the time to wave the white flag.

----------


## Mr.NoSmile

I agree that either Hunter being let go or his position lessened as a result of this would validate the articles being written about it being a[nother] problem for both him and Paul. Or they can ignore it, let folks believe they can do whatever damage they think this would have on Rand Paul and Jack Hunter. It will be brought up again, no doubt, but I don't see this having any severe consequences other than the media painting an image of Rand Paul and Jack Hunter that many already believed to be true. Hunter stepping aside would prove them right, but I do appreciate him coming out and saying something about it rather than remaining silent.

And I get that the Confederate flag is still this symbol of division to many. No getting around that. What one sees as pride, another sees as racist- that's just going to happen. And I feel Hunter would know how to word how it's a symbol he embraces without coming off as a type of nationalist.

----------


## devil21

> The only people I know in the south who sport confederate flags tend to be rednecks, not the type of Republicans who show up at tea party rallies. Whether it hurts Rand will depend  on how badly other Republican candidates want to win the nomination, and whether they will use this against Rand or not.


"Sporting" the flag is much different than knowing what it represents.  I don't "sport" one but I know what it represents.

----------


## cajuncocoa

> You get a grip.  You're acting like this is already 86'ing Rand's (not even announced) campaign.  cajun never misses a chance to inject some FUD.....
> 
> Do you have some hard data on this perception?  I'd like to review it please.
> 
> 
> 
> Then I guess the media will just have to start inventing $#@! if mere implications is enough to get (very capable) campaign staff fired.  This is NOT the time to wave the white flag.


OK, keep sticking your head in the sand...it's no skin off my nose one way or the other.

----------


## krugminator

> So should Rand let Jack go? That is the question.


If it were me, I would probably get rid of him and say that while he was a good employee, I wasn't aware of how unprofessional his views were in the past.

If Rand makes it more of a public issue, I think he is talented enough to spin keeping Hunter on his staff. He could easily make himself look like a loyal boss and he could cite Rush Limbaugh being fired over Donavan McNabb, Charles Murray and the guy who did the immigration study at Heritage as people wronged by political correctness.  He could turn this into a political positive if he wants by drawing a line in the stand vs political correctness.

----------


## Inkblots

This whole thing seems like a complete nothingburger to me.  No one but no one is going to care that a senator's social media director was a member of the League of the South 20 years ago. 

This is the kind of story that bounces around the Beltway media echo chamber for about 24 hours and then disappears, only to reappear as a 5 second segment of a 30 second attack ad a few years down the line that people will similarly ignore.

----------


## green73

> The only people I know in the south who sport confederate flags tend to be rednecks, not the type of Republicans who show up at tea party rallies. Whether it hurts Rand will depend  on how badly other Republican candidates want to win the nomination, and whether they will use this against Rand or not.


I love ya, Cajun, but I'm surprised by you in this thread. I support that flag, not because I support slavery or the Confederate government--which I don't--but because it represents a most fundamental human right: the right to secede.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> LOL
> 
> Maddow is doing a 15 minute monologue right now on Ron Paul newsletters, followed by Rand Paul ties to Jack Hunter.


Shocking! Shocking I tell you! 

Maddow is a vile, hate-filled totalitarian, just like her fans. The constant stream of hate from the Maddow types on Twitter today was disgusting. They would march half the nation into the woods and execute them tonight if they thought they could get away with it, emulating their Communist predecessors like Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot.

----------


## cajuncocoa

> I love ya, Cajun, but I'm surprised by you in this thread. I support that flag, not because I support slavery or the Confederate government--which I don't--but because it represents a most fundamental human right: the right to secede.


You may be misunderstanding my point then because I respect that it represents that too.    That's not why I asked who vetted Jack Hunter.

I asked because (unfortunately) that's not how the majority of Americans see that flag. Even those who do would probably consider secession as treason.

  I'm not making the judgment whether it was right or wrong for Jack to wear that mask.  Jack's already done that for himself when he apologized for it.  Now Rand has to deal with the fallout of that.  

To be honest, it would make my day if Rand mentioned his support of that flag as symbolizing the right to secede.  But it could be political suicide for him to do so.

----------


## BlackTerrel

Obama got the same sort of guilt by association and worst.  In fact pretty sure I saw some of the stuff posted here.

Here's the thing: people don't care.  Unless you're associated with someone really bad like OJ Simpson or David Duke people don't fall for the six degrees of Kevin Bacon game.

When it came to Obama the people who already hated him used it as a reason to hate him and the people who liked him ignored it or defended it.  It doesn't actually change anyones mind.  Same will happen here.

----------


## Beorn

Come on.

Jack will not and should not be fired over this. 

Most of the time circling the wagons is a bad thing, but this is one of those occasions where it's called for. 

If I were a political operative I would think twice about how loyal Rand would be to me if he does not back jack on this. Rand has almost two years to go before the battle begins for real and he's going to need a cohesive team he can trust and who can trust him. 

Rand will back him and this will blow over.

----------


## BuddyRey

The stateocrat media made a huge mistake in not holding onto this nugget until 2016 to use it as an October Surprise.  Guys, seriously, this will completely be forgotten in three years.  This is one of the few instances in which the fish-like longterm memory of the average voter actually works in our favor.

----------


## supermario21

Pretty sure other than MSNBC, nobody in the TV media reported this.

----------


## supermario21

Also, will Lindsey use this to attack Nancy Mace? LOL

----------


## Mr.NoSmile

> Also, will Lindsey use this to attack Nancy Mace? LOL


Aww come on! Not on the assertion that Graham would attack Mace by using Hunter, but just the revelation- to me anyway- that she's met Hunter too. At this point it _is_ a waiting game of whether she'll officially declare.

Back on topic, though...

----------


## devil21

> Also, will Lindsey use this to attack Nancy Mace? LOL


Kotin and Jack had drinks together in Greenville South Carolina too!  Kotin must be a racist anti-semite!

(Good lord, it really is ridiculous isn't it?  On a good note, Im owning the comment section on Weiner's washpost blog about it....even got the author herself scrambling for anything she can find to avoid looking like a fool.  It's fun.)

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> The article in the OP is a hit piece from a no-name source.  Please deactivate the link, lest you give it more visibility than it otherwise would have had.  Sheesh.
> 
> And folks, please think twice before you bring over here every remote  hit piece that you see on the net.  Sometimes I wonder how many of the media just come here to get info that we stupidly gathered for them, when they are wanting to run hit pieces on our candidates.


How many times do we have to get quoted from this vary website before we finally learn?

----------


## devil21

> How many times do we have to get quoted from this vary website before we finally learn?


It's unavoidable.  Only option is to do like they do and start private Google groups or put RPF into some sort of lockdown mode.  It's simply the difference between a grassroots movement and an elite controlled agenda.  We have no choice but to be transparent and since few here want to fight dirty against them, it's just something we have to deal with.

----------


## Brett85

Before today I basically just thought that Jack was a moderate libertarian.  After actually reading the article, it's kind of suprising to know that he was involved with all of this pro Confederacy stuff and all of these other controversial.  I'm always somewhat of a pessimist, so I always worry that these kind of things could hurt Rand in the 2016 election.  (Not in the primary but in a general election)

----------


## Brett85

> I love ya, Cajun, but I'm surprised by you in this thread. I support that flag, not because I support slavery or the Confederate government--which I don't--but because it represents a most fundamental human right: the right to secede.


I would think that the most fundamental human right is the right to be free, and the Confederacy represented the worst abuses of freedom and civil liberties in the history of our country in regards to slavery.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

Southern rockers have used that southern flag for years because it supposedly represents being "rebels" from the south, without it having any pro-slavery or racist intent. Oh well, redefining words and demonizing opponents is standard fare anymore.

----------


## Okaloosa

http:// dailycaller.com/2013/07/09/damaging-staffer-admission-rand-paul-is-just-playing-a-game/

Now this online blog is getting in on the action.  I found this courtesy of the anti Ron, Rand, and Libertarian facebook page Jews for Liberty.

Damaging staffer admission: Rand Paul is just playing a game

Posted By Matt K. Lewis On 11:28 AM 07/09/2013 In Blog - Matt K. Lewis | No Comments


The Free Beacon is out with a tough piece on a Rand Paul staffer who has a rather colorful past.

Frankly, this sort of thing is why I warned back in January that Paul would have a hard time winning a general election. But while most people will focus on Jack Hunter’s past “neo-Confederate sympathies,” arguably the most damaging part of the story comes toward the end, where Hunter seems to confess that Rand Paul is in the process of conning the pro-Israel lobby, neoconservatives, and other mainstream conservatives. Here’s an excerpt that might prove especially damaging:


“When libertarians and paleoconservatives balked at Paul’s remark last January that “any attack on Israel will be treated as an attack on the United States,” Hunter downplayed the comment as a ‘little rhetorical concession’ and said the senator was ‘play[ing] the game.’



‘For every questionable action—support for Mitt Romney, comments about the U.S.’s relationship with Israel … these things do not diminish the overall record of the most libertarian senator since the Founding era,’ wrote Hunter on the Southern Avenger website. ‘Not making these certain diplomatic statements or gestures on occasion, also makes taking these ideas into the mainstream much, much harder. A little rhetorical concession goes a long way.’



‘Some say Rand is not Ron because he is ‘willing to play them game,’ Hunter continued. ‘That’s exactly right. That’s the point—to play it, influence it, and win it as much as you can. The neoconservatives certainly do, to their advantage.’



Hunter has also said that Rand Paul holds the same foreign policy views as his father, Ron Paul.



‘The philosophy hasn’t substantively changed [from Ron Paul to Rand Paul]. The methods and style most certainly have.’”

It’s one thing to have an aide with baggage (even very bad baggage), but the larger problem here is that this also speaks to credibility and honesty — to Paul’s fundamental character.

It should be noted that Paul’s spokesperson has pointed out that Hunter doesn’t speak for Sen. Paul.

----------


## spladle

> I would think that the most fundamental human right is the right to be free, and the Confederacy represented the worst abuses of freedom and civil liberties in the history of our country in regards to slavery.


Slavery in America: Was It Really So Bad?

----------


## TruthisTreason

They're attacking me heavy today as well.  For the record, I stopped playing music with "bands" several years before even meeting Rand Paul and that image was posted by someone else around the time everyone stopped using Myspace. But honestly before I became interested in Ron Paul, then politics, I never dreamed of acting like a Nazi and deleting people's posts on a Band Fan Page. Live and learn. 

 If you say enough, anything can be taken out of context and used in a smear. While I admit not being 100% politically correct from day one, I challenge anyone to find one person who has ever been treated unfairly by me because of the color of their skin, gender or sexual orientation.

Never dreamed the old band would make Maddow (cool!).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bn0n...e_gdata_player

----------


## Brett85

> Slavery in America: Was It Really So Bad?


You're really going to defend slavery and then post comments on this forum and claim to believe in liberty?  Maybe some of you really do have an agenda that isn't the same agenda those of us have who believe in liberty and non aggression .

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> They're attacking me heavy today as well.  For the record, I stopped playing music with "bands" several years before even meeting Rand Paul and that image was posted by someone else around the time everyone stopped using Myspace.


Wow. Was Diamond Darrell your guitar player?  You guys probably opened for Lynyrd Skynyrd!

----------


## anaconda

Look at all of the "progressives" cry "racist!" at the HuffPo:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3570440.html

----------


## devil21

> I would think that the most fundamental human right is the right to be free, and the Confederacy represented the worst abuses of freedom and civil liberties in the history of our country in regards to slavery.


There were no slaves or racism in the non-Confederate north, right?

----------


## Brett85

> There were no slaves or racism in the non-Confederate north, right?


It certainly wasn't as widespread as it was in the south.  But, I didn't claim the north was perfect either.

----------


## Mr.NoSmile

> There were no slaves or racism in the non-Confederate north, right?


Well, given the Fugitive Slave Act, even those who made it to the North could be brought back and sold into slavery. The North probably had more free territory, but still some hostile territory. Plus, no slavery in an area didn't mean early forms of segregation could not be created.

----------


## devil21

> It certainly wasn't as widespread as it was in the south.  But, I didn't claim the north was perfect either.


It's just revisionist history.  It is framed as if slavery only occurred in the Confederate south and that slavery itself was the reason for the Civil War.  Anybody with even the slightest grasp of history knows that is simply not true.  Lincoln was "for slavery before he was against it" and the Civil War was about secession, not slavery itself.

----------


## Brett85

The primary reason the South wanted to seceed was so that they could continue slavery.  So the Civil War was about both slavery and secession.

----------


## AuH20

Just pulled this from the comment section of an MSNBC piece. The left is going down whether we break them electorally or  when the wheels of the country inevitably come off.  I'm entertained by these cretins:




> Ron and Rand Paul are clearly racist individuals.
> 
> Here is Ron Paul just hanging out with Don Black, owner of stormfront.org and also a KKK grand wizard/big doner of Paul's campaign.
> http://globalcomment.com/wp-content/...aul-nazis2.jpg 
> 
> Here is Rand Paul arguing for voting against the civil rights act provision of not allowing businesses to hire based on discrimination on Rachel Maddow's show:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IS_qya7w0hs
> 
> Here is Rand Paul trying to tell people at a historical black university that they would have voted for Republicans if only they knew more about black history (ala Chris Hayes):
> ...

----------


## AuH20

If Rand Paul really wants to return serve, he should make a comment like this, "_I find it comical that I'm being assailed as a white supremacist for frivolous reasons when the democrats are the ones who revel in the blood of black and Hispanic infants. It's pretty darn racist to target minority women and their offspring for population control._" Smoke these vile scumbags out. Take the gloves off. The time for pleasantries are over. A diamond bullet right through the head of the brain numb electorate. Wake em up!

----------


## BlackTerrel

> Slavery in America: Was It Really So Bad?


And every time I think we've reached the limits of stupidity...someone's always gotta top it

----------


## supermario21

I would argue that the south seceded more because of protectionist tariff policies implemented by Lincoln which caused economic hardship in the south. The south was a largely agricultural economy whereas the north was industrial based. Lincoln was able to win by campaigning on essentially carrying out Hamilton's "American System" economy which was mercantilist, full of crony capitalism and tariffs, as well as central banking. Yes, slavery may have been a part, but Lincoln's economic policies were devastating to the south. The nullification fights which are now labeled racist weren't about slavery, they were about various economic policies of the Whigs (which Lincoln inherited). I wish I could explain this better, but check out Tom DiLorenzo's writings at lewrockwell.com or better yet, get a copy of "The Real Lincoln" and/or "Hamilton's Curse."

----------


## ronaldo23

> Slavery in America: Was It Really So Bad?





no...but seriously....

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> And every time I think we've reached the limits of stupidity...someone's always gotta top it





> no...but seriously....


Just in case you missed it, that poster (spladle), makes it perfectly clear that they are a left liberal. It can be safely assumed that the post you reference is meant to be a joke, or to make this forum look bad. Take your pick.

----------


## anaconda

A good place to start:

----------


## James Madison

> Just pulled this from the comment section of an MSNBC piece. The left is going down whether we break them electorally or  when the wheels of the country inevitably come off.  I'm entertained by these cretins:


Look at all the sanctimonious jerkoffs taking a break from their Chinese slave goods to decry the practice of slavery.

----------


## jtstellar

170 posts?

----------


## spladle

> You're really going to defend slavery and then post comments on this forum and claim to believe in liberty?  Maybe some of you really do have an agenda that isn't the same agenda those of us have who believe in liberty and non aggression .


I don't believe that you actually read what I linked to. If to say that slavery in America might not have been quite so bad as many people believe it was is to "defend slavery," then yes. I believe in liberty too, but I suspect that we have different understandings of the word.

----------


## devil21

Quick slavery talking point:

Under bankster control we are ALL slaves.  Never let people forget that.  Slavery never ended.  It just became global and multi-racial.

----------


## spladle

> Just in case you missed it, that poster (spladle), makes it perfectly clear that they are a left liberal. It can be safely assumed that the post you reference is meant to be a joke, or to make this forum look bad. Take your pick.


Curious to know why you think I'm a left liberal. I don't think anything I've said here has made that clear at all.

Slavery apologia can certainly be a bit shocking if you've never been exposed to it before, but my intent in posting it was neither to make a joke nor to make anyone look bad.

----------


## spladle

> Quick slavery talking point:
> 
> Under bankster control we are ALL slaves.  Never let people forget that.  Slavery never ended.  It just became global and multi-racial.


Don't be silly. In what way(s) are we slaves?

It's true that slavery hasn't ended everywhere, and it's certainly multi-racial, but I'm pretty sure we wiped it out in this country around 150 years ago.

----------


## jtstellar

> Don't be silly. In what way(s) are we slaves?
> 
> It's true that slavery hasn't ended everywhere, and it's certainly multi-racial, but I'm pretty sure we wiped it out in this country around 150 years ago.


well to the point that people abuse the federal reserve system and feed themselves via the new creation of public's money supply to fund various of their pet projects and special interests, at the same time hide behind a horde of ignorant citizenry that enables such behavior--the rest of us who has wakened up to this scheme very much feel enslaved by mob rule, perhaps not in the orthodox sense, but when are things ever?  

history is always moving forward, you can look back 10 years from now and give this era a term, but what will it matter anymore?  we're living this enslavement by the majority as we speak

----------


## JCDenton0451

Folks, slavery is one someone owns you as property, can force you to work at his plantation, and can beat you or even kill you with impunity if you disobey his orders...

But what does it have to do with the zionist attack on Rand Paul anyway. The Zionists don't control the global financial system. Just US foregn policy. lol

----------


## spladle

> well to the point that people abuse the federal reserve system and feed themselves via the new creation of public's money supply to fund various of their pet projects and special interests, at the same time hide behind a horde of ignorant citizenry that enables such behavior--the rest of us who has wakened up to this scheme very much feel enslaved by mob rule, perhaps not in the orthodox sense, but when are things ever?  
> 
> history is always moving forward, you can look back 10 years from now and give this era a term, but what will it matter anymore?  we're living this enslavement by the majority as we speak


You are not "enslaved" by mob rule in any meaningful sense of the word, and it's silly to speak as if you were. Some people might even find it offensive. Stop.

----------


## jct74

here's a follow up piece from Free Beacon just published a few minutes ago

http://freebeacon.com/family-ties/


it appears Jack isn't going anywhere




> Pauls office indicated late Tuesday that the senator would stand behind Hunter.
> 
> Our office policy is that all employees treat individuals with the equal protection of the law. We find no evidence that this policy has been violated by any employee, said spokeswoman Moira Bagley in a statement.

----------


## Warlord

Good. Hopefully the smear merchants go away.. but they wont.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> Curious to know why you think I'm a left liberal. I don't think anything I've said here has made that clear at all.
> 
> Slavery apologia can certainly be a bit shocking if you've never been exposed to it before, but my intent in posting it was neither to make a joke nor to make anyone look bad.


Your post about slavery could certainly be taken in many ways, most of them bad.  And it would be used by the hate-mongers to smear us. Most people don't go to the link. I did, and it still wasn't clear what the point was.




> As a liberal, I object to this.

----------


## spladle

> here's a follow up piece from Free Beacon just published a few minutes ago
> 
> http://freebeacon.com/family-ties/
> 
> 
> it appears Jack isn't going anywhere


Very happy to hear this, I've been a fan of Jack's for several years now and would've been extremely disappointed to see this sort of smear work as intended. Proud of Senator Paul too. Think I'll max out to his campaign in 2016 as a thank you. =)

----------


## spladle

> Your post about slavery could certainly be taken in many ways, most of them bad. And it would be used by the hate-mongers to smear us. Most people don't go to the link. I did, and it still wasn't clear what the point was.


Which ways are those? I felt my purpose in posting the link was pretty clear - Traditional Conservative claimed that "the Confederacy represented the worst abuses of freedom and civil liberties in the history of our country in regards to slavery," and I offered a counterpoint, suggesting that perhaps slavery had not been quite so bad as he imagined.

I try not to make a habit of conducting myself with an eye to how hate-mongers might use my words or actions against me. That's part of the reason why I am not a public figure.

The point of the link is that you have been presented with a one-sided view of history, and there is at least one more. If you're curious, there are still primary sources floating around that allow one an unvarnished glimpse of what came before us. This is but one example. There are others.




> As a liberal, I object to this.


There is a difference between "liberal" and "left-liberal." I am a liberal in the same sense that Hayek, Friedman, and von Mises were liberals.

----------


## thehungarian

Here's how much the average person knows about or even cares about Jack Hunter:

----------


## Warlord

> Here's how much the average person knows about or even cares about Jack Hunter:


Precisely.  It's just hacks getting worked up.  Will be fine i think.

----------


## Matt Collins

> The meme continues:   http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...cial-comments/
> 
> Big hat-tip for the honorable mention....
> Side note:
> "In 2009, a staffer for Pauls Senate campaign resigned after a racist post left on his MySpace page surfaced."
> 
> ^^^^Yes another user posted a nasty/racist image on a (my) Myspace page in 2007--a few months after the last login. It was not a "racist" post by the staffer (me)!


Have you considered suing her or at least trying to get an injunction because she defamed you? Her piece made it seem like YOU posted those thing, when in fact you did not. I'd talk to an attorney

----------


## angelatc

Has Glenn Beck jumped into or (more likely imho) out of, the fracas yet?

----------


## angelatc

> Have you considered suing her or at least trying to get an injunction because she defamed you? Her piece made it seem like YOU posted those thing, when in fact you did not. I'd talk to an attorney



In the least, he would have to prove damages.  And look at her statement - it's 100% factual.

----------


## cajuncocoa

Judge Nap's statement as posted on Facebook:




> *A word about Jack Hunter:
> 
>  Yesterday you saw some hawks, whose ideology is dying and whose  worldview is being discredited every day, launch an attack on Senator  Rand Paul by attacking one of his brilliant aides, Jack Hunter.
> 
>  Jack’s sin in their eyes was having spoken favorably of states’ rights,  and negatively of Lincoln. They can’t seem to recognize that states’  rights--even secession--does not equal racism; it constitutes a brake on  the feds’ march to totalitarianism. Most modern day states’ rights  advocates recognize the sovereignty of the states and their inherent  ability to nullify and avoid federal violations of the Constitution in  order to protect life and liberty from an overgrown, intrusive federal  leviathan that literally now interferes in or spies on every facet of  our lives. And most historians and legal scholars who appreciate  personal liberty and limited government recognize that the history of  Lincoln’s assaults on civil liberties is a topic capable of divergent views and worthy of exposure.
> 
>  But really, the hawks and neocons weren't attacking just Jack—who  possesses profound intellectual honesty and who has a gift for reducing  complex arguments to understandable terms--for his views on federalism.  Everything that was "broken" in the "news" story in the Free Beacon has  been public information for a long time. It was not hidden. And it was  not news. Some of it was youthful hyperbole, and all of it was sliced  and diced out of context.
> 
>  What’s news? Egypt is in chaos and  President Obama continues to fund the military there as it slaughters  protestors. There are new calls from both sides of the aisle to  reconsider foreign aid. Americans are rallying against their own  government spying on them. Left and right are coming together to say  "enough" and soundly reject the idea of arming the al Qaeda affiliated  rebels in Syria 
> ...

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> Which ways are those? I felt my purpose in posting the link was pretty clear - Traditional Conservative claimed that "the Confederacy represented the worst abuses of freedom and civil liberties in the history of our country in regards to slavery," and I offered a counterpoint, suggesting that perhaps slavery had not been quite so bad as he imagined.
> 
> I try not to make a habit of conducting myself with an eye to how hate-mongers might use my words or actions against me. That's part of the reason why I am not a public figure.
> 
> The point of the link is that you have been presented with a one-sided view of history, and there is at least one more. If you're curious, there are still primary sources floating around that allow one an unvarnished glimpse of what came before us. This is but one example. There are others.


Perhaps the two posters who commented on your post can tell us what they thought it meant. On a third rail subject like that, a detailed explanation usually helps at the time of the initial post.

Paging BlackTerrel and ronaldo23... satisfied with the further explanation?




> There is a difference between "liberal" and "left-liberal." I am a liberal in the same sense that Hayek, Friedman, and von Mises were liberals.


Some people use the terms left-libertarian and right-libertarian. If you had to choose one, which would you prefer?

----------


## JCDenton0451

"left-libertarian" is oxymoron.

----------


## cajuncocoa

I like what the Judge had to say, but I still believe that too many people who see that flag have been conditioned to think _ra-a-a-a-a-a-a-acism!!_  Especially those who are not from the south.

Maybe this whole brouhaha will open some necessary dialogue on this issue.

----------


## TruthisTreason

> Have you considered suing her or at least trying to get an injunction because she defamed you? Her piece made it seem like YOU posted those thing, when in fact you did not. I'd talk to an attorney


No, I haven't really thought about it. The story pushed by the Courier-Journal writers just cold made up stuff. They said something about a poem attacking black people. There were no poems attacking anyone.

----------


## Matt Collins

> "left-libertarian" is oxymoron.


Not really...

----------


## JCDenton0451

"Cultural focus on community/individual" - what does that even mean??

Don't tell me you have to be a Bible thumper to be considered right-wing.

----------


## JCDenton0451

How can you say that the leftists lack cultural focus on community when they're all about social engineering and community organising

----------


## Brett85

> I don't believe that you actually read what I linked to. If to say that slavery in America might not have been quite so bad as many people believe it was is to "defend slavery," then yes. I believe in liberty too, but I suspect that we have different understandings of the word.


Your understanding of liberty obviously doesn't include the non aggression principle, that people shouldn't have the right to infringe on the rights of others.  You also made that clear when you stated that you support legal abortion.

----------


## Brett85

> "left-libertarian" is oxymoron.


But isn't that what you are?  You've said that you support legal abortion and even support taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood, as well as supporting mandatory labeling of GMO's.

----------


## spladle

> Some people use the terms left-libertarian and right-libertarian. If you had to choose one, which would you prefer?


It would depend on the company I was in. There are many places where association with the right is considered low-class, and so it would be in my interest to emphasize the more leftist aspects of my political beliefs (pro-immigration, pro-choice, support for a basic income guarantee, etc). In other places (like here), it might be more in my interest to emphasize the rightist aspects (pro-secession, anti-democracy, support for a flat/fair tax, etc). If forced to consistently hew to one or the other, right-libertarian would probably be most appropriate. "Neoreactionary" might be even more so.

----------


## spladle

> "left-libertarian" is oxymoron.


I don't agree with this. Kindly explain why you think so?

----------


## spladle

> Your understanding of liberty obviously doesn't include the non aggression principle, that people shouldn't have the right to infringe on the rights of others.  You also made that clear when you stated that you support legal abortion.


You are simply mistaken. That I believe most people overestimate the evils of slavery in America is not the same thing as believing it was efficient, just, or should be reinstituted. I think you are probably capable of recognizing this if you try hard not to let prejudice cloud your thinking.

I think pretty much everyone agrees with the NAP in one form or another. Where people differ is in their understanding of what constitutes aggression.

To say that people shouldn't have the right to infringe on the rights of others is just a tautology; it has no content. You must first define both what people are and what rights they have before the claim has any value. Understand that some people think animals have rights and that if you eat them you are violating those rights, making it legitimate to kill you for doing so. I do not endorse this position; I simply want you to see that how things seem to you is not necessarily self-evident or even true. You could be wrong.

----------


## devil21

> Don't be silly. In what way(s) are we slaves?
> 
> It's true that slavery hasn't ended everywhere, and it's certainly multi-racial, but I'm pretty sure we wiped it out in this country around 150 years ago.


Well, here's a start.  You pay about 35-40% of your paycheck into various taxes.  Then you are taxed again for every purchase you make and often taxed multiple times in the case of food and energy.  I figure most people pay at least 50% of their gross earnings per year as various forms of taxation.  The most onerous of tax is the income tax, which you are required to pay at the barrel of a gun, and most of which goes to pay interest to bankers.  When you can't keep the fruits of your labor, that sounds like banker slavery to me.  Forced taxation is slavery.  You work and do not get paid.  That's slavery.   Every country that uses a fiat currency requires this tax slavery to sustain the system.  Get it?

----------


## spladle

> Well, here's a start.  You pay about 35-40% of your paycheck into various taxes.  Then you are taxed again for every purchase you make and often taxed multiple times in the case of food and energy.  I figure most people pay at least 50% of their gross earnings per year as various forms of taxation.  The most onerous of tax is the income tax, which you are required to pay at the barrel of a gun, and most of which goes to pay interest to bankers.  When you can't keep the fruits of your labor, that sounds like banker slavery to me.  Forced taxation is slavery.  You work and do not get paid.  That's slavery.   Every country that uses a fiat currency requires this tax slavery to sustain the system.  Get it?


You are simply wrong. Two things may share a common element without being identical. Taxation is not slavery - they are separate and distinct practices. That's why we use two different words to describe them.

----------


## NewRightLibertarian

Serves him right for his attempted purge of all conspiracy theorists from the liberty movement. He's getting much deserved cumuppance with this. Hope Rand ditches him like a bad habit.

----------


## spladle

> Serves him right for his attempted purge of all conspiracy theorists from the liberty movement. He's getting much deserved cumuppance with this. Hope Rand ditches him like a bad habit.


Conspiracy theorists should be purged from the liberty movement. He is getting no comeuppance - Rand has (rightly) decided to stick with him.

Jack Hunter is a better man and more important than you.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> It would depend on the company I was in. There are many places where association with the right is considered low-class, and so it would be in my interest to emphasize the more leftist aspects of my political beliefs (pro-immigration, pro-choice, support for a basic income guarantee, etc). In other places (like here), it might be more in my interest to emphasize the rightist aspects (pro-secession, anti-democracy, support for a flat/fair tax, etc). If forced to consistently hew to one or the other, right-libertarian would probably be most appropriate. "Neoreactionary" might be even more so.


How about gun control?

----------


## NewRightLibertarian

> Conspiracy theorists should be purged from the liberty movement. He is getting no comeuppance - Rand has (rightly) decided to stick with him.
> 
> Jack Hunter is a better man and more important than you.


Well, your hero has now been disgraced after his pathetic, failed purge of conspiracy theorists. It's too bad that Rand is sticking with this albatross when he may sink his presidential hopes.

Here's video proof that the man is a pedantic, tantrum-throwing coward:




MSNBC may be doing us a favor with this expose. We don't need people of this temperment with radical views and associations as leaders within the liberty movement.

----------


## spladle

> How about gun control?


I wish that it were more difficult for certain classes of people to obtain firearms. I think the best way to achieve this end would be to allow shooting victims (or their families) to bring suit against people who sell firearms to shooters who were known (or easily could have been discovered) to be dangerous at the time of the purchase.

----------


## nayjevin

Where slavery exists, it is bad.  Where 'indentured servants' believe they have equal opportunity, but truly do not, it is bad.  Where children are raised to believe servitude is normal, it is bad.  I don't see any argument that slavery is not as bad as people think to be in any way fruitful.

----------


## spladle

> Well, your hero has now been disgraced after his pathetic, failed purge of conspiracy theorists. It's too bad that Rand is sticking with this albatross when he may sink his presidential hopes.
> 
> Here's video proof that the man is a pedantic, tantrum-throwing coward:


I don't agree that he has been disgraced or that the video you linked shows him as a pedantic, tantrum-throwing coward. I agree with every word he said and think he conducted himself with as much patience as was appropriate. Curious to know what you think he should have done instead.




> MSNBC may be doing us a favor with this expose. We don't need people of this temperment with radical views and associations as leaders within the liberty movement.


That you begin sentences with "MSNBC may be doing us a favor..." should set off alarm bells in your head. MSNBC does not do any favors for liberty.

I have already addressed his temperament. To which radical views and associations do you refer?

----------


## spladle

> Where slavery exists, it is bad.  Where 'indentured servants' believe they have equal opportunity, but truly do not, it is bad.  Where children are raised to believe servitude is normal, it is bad.  I don't see any argument that slavery is not as bad as people think to be in any way fruitful.


How do you feel about wage slavery?

----------


## JCDenton0451

> But isn't that what you are?  You've said that you support legal abortion and even support taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood, as well as supporting mandatory labeling of GMO's.


I don't see abortion as a political issue, I see it as a religious/cultural issue. Suffice to say the so-called "pro-life" movement is rooted in the evangelical Christian community...I disagree with evangelicals on MANY issues, from their backward views on sex to their blind loyalty to State of Israel.

As for taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood, it is perfectly consistent with fiscally conservative philosophy if you see what I mean. You spend millions to make birth control and sex ed available to poor people, so that you don't have to pay billions in welfare dollars for their children.

----------


## NewRightLibertarian

> I don't agree that he has been disgraced or that the video you linked shows him as a pedantic, tantrum-throwing coward. I agree with every word he said and think he conducted himself with as much patience as was appropriate. Curious to know what you think he should have done instead.


Maybe answer the question? Have a polite conservation like a normal human being? But instead, he huffed and puffed because he's a little wanna-be political operative. Now he's paying the price, getting exposed for his own fringe, radical views. It's poetic justice at its finest.




> I have already addressed his temperament. To which radical views and associations do you refer?


His neo-confederate, pro-secession beliefs and his association with a group that promotes an extreme agenda. Personally, I have no problem with these beliefs but it may sway some idiotic voters (and they dominate the electorate)

----------


## spladle

> Maybe answer the question? Have a polite conservation like a normal human being? But instead, he huffed and puffed because he's a little wanna-be political operative.


Kindly quote the question you believe he failed to answer.

Normal human beings do not have polite conversations about Bilderberg and the CFR - they avoid people who try to. Jack grew annoyed and exasperated with the interviewer for reasons that he made perfectly plain - people who focus on conspiracy theory stuff make the movement look bad to undecideds.




> Now he's paying the price, getting exposed for his own fringe, radical views. It's poetic justice at its finest.


He has _renounced_ those views in an effort to whitewash his past. He said and did some things that were not always in the best interests of the liberty movement, but which may have benefited him financially at the time. He regrets those things now and demonstrates it with his contrition. Groups like WeAreChange are _actively_ hurting us. This is an important difference.




> His neo-confederate, pro-secession beliefs and his association with a group that promotes an extreme agenda. Personally, I have no problem with these beliefs but it may sway some idiotic voters (and they dominate the electorate)


He has done about as much walking back of these things as can reasonably be expected. What more would you have him do? We can't change the past, only move forward with an eye to avoiding mistakes we've made before.

Hopefully nobody around here is publishing any racist newsletters . . . yknowwhatimean?

----------


## anaconda

Remember this piece that Jack Hunter did on secession & nullification and liberal hypocrisy?

----------


## NewRightLibertarian

> Normal human beings do not have polite conversations about Bilderberg and the CFR - they avoid people who try to. Jack grew annoyed and exasperated with the interviewer for reasons that he made perfectly plain - people who focus on conspiracy theory stuff make the movement look bad to undecideds.


What makes the movement look bad to undecideds is having pro-Confederate beliefs that can be easily misconstrued as racist by political hacks right and left. However, Jack seems to think that those are fine and dandy and that he has the moral authority to determine what is acceptable within the liberty movement. 'Normal human beings' didn't have conversations about the Federal Reserve too until Ron Paul showed up. By your logic, he shouldn't have focused on the Fed all these years because it wasn't dinnertable conversation amongst the masses.




> He has _renounced_ those views in an effort to whitewash his past. He said and did some things that were not always in the best interests of the liberty movement, but which may have benefited him financially at the time. He regrets those things now and demonstrates it with his contrition. Groups like WeAreChange are _actively_ hurting us. This is an important difference.


They're actively hurting us by doing fantastic investigative journalism and releasing it to the world for free? No, they're doing us all a great service while Jack Hunter tries to worm his way up the political ladder. 




> He has done about as much walking back of these things as can reasonably be expected. What more would you have him do? We can't change the past, only move forward with an eye to avoiding mistakes we've made before.
> 
> Hopefully nobody around here is publishing any racist newsletters . . . yknowwhatimean?


He should resign from the Rand Paul campaign if he really cared about liberty so that his checkered past doesn't screw things up for Rand's inevitable 2016 run, but he won't be doing that. He has his mind set on being a conservative politico and seems to care more about that than he does about truth or liberty.

----------


## spladle

> What makes the movement look bad to undecideds is having pro-Confederate beliefs that can be easily misconstrued as racist by political hacks right and left.


Yes, very much so. That Jack has these sorts of things associated with him is bad.




> However, Jack seems to think that those are fine and dandy


No, he does not. He apologized explicitly here:

"In radio, sometimes youre encouraged to be provocative and inflammatory. *Ive been guilty of both, and am embarrassed by some of the comments I made precisely because they do not represent me today. I was embarrassed by some of them even then.*

I am also no longer a guy who judges beer drinking contests in a wrestling mask. Things change. We all hopefully grow up."




> 'Normal human beings' didn't have conversations about the Federal Reserve too until Ron Paul showed up. By your logic, he shouldn't have focused on the Fed all these years because it wasn't dinnertable conversation amongst the masses.


Normal human beings _still_ don't have conversations about the Federal Reserve.

You misunderstand and misrepresent my logic. I fear this conversation is becoming too complicated for you to follow. I hope to end it soon.




> They're actively hurting us by doing fantastic investigative journalism and releasing it to the world for free?


No, that is not how they're actively hurting us.

----------


## Brett85

> As for taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood, it is perfectly consistent with fiscally conservative philosophy if you see what I mean. You spend millions to make birth control and sex ed available to poor people, so that you don't have to pay billions in welfare dollars for their children.


How is birth control not available to poor people when you can go into a 7-11 and buy a condom for 99 cents?  Even birth control pills aren't very expensive either.  Your views on fiscal issues are basically the same views that the Democratic Party has, that we have to spend money now so that we won't have to spend more money later.  That was their justification for Obamacare, that spending money on Obamacare was necessary so that we don't have to spend so much money later on down the road when people get sick and have to go to the hospital.

----------


## NewRightLibertarian

> No, he does not. He apologized explicitly here:
> 
> "In radio, sometimes you’re encouraged to be provocative and inflammatory. *I’ve been guilty of both, and am embarrassed by some of the comments I made precisely because they do not represent me today. I was embarrassed by some of them even then.*


He's backing off because he's a chicken $#@! who doesn't want to jeopardize his meal ticket. He should face the music, be a man and own up to his beliefs.




> Normal human beings _still_ don't have conversations about the Federal Reserve.
> 
> You misunderstand and misrepresent my logic. I fear this conversation is becoming too complicated for you to follow. I hope to end it soon.


Awareness about the evils of the Fed is at an all time high. But under your warped your line of thinking, we shouldn't talk about important truths because the public is unaware. We should be educating and spreading awareness and then we can take action against the crooks in charge. Thank goodness Ron Paul doesn't think like you.




> No, that is not how they're actively hurting us.


They may be hurting political operatives like Jack Hunter, but they're one of the great organizations leading the liberty movement. They produce some of the best journalism available in an age where it's desperately needed, give it away for free and encourage others to get involved in holding the government's feet to the fire on key issues. You need to get your head out of your ass and stop worrying so much about what the political establishment thinks, it's making you a lousy freedom fighter.

----------


## devil21

> You are simply wrong. Two things may share a common element without being identical. Taxation is not slavery - they are separate and distinct practices. That's why we use two different words to describe them.


You work for free and call it something else?  What do you call that?  Charity?

----------


## spladle

> He's backing off because he's a chicken $#@! who doesn't want to jeopardize his meal ticket. He should face the music, be a man and own up to his beliefs.


You're going full Maddow here, sgt. You never go full Maddow.

Leaving aside the question of how you came to see inside Jack Hunter's heart, let us assume for the sake of argument that your blind, unsupported (and unsupportable) assertion is correct: Jack Hunter is a chicken $#@! who doesn't want to jeopardize his meal ticket. Why should he, as you say, "own up to his beliefs?" Who would benefit from his doing so?

Would Jack Hunter benefit? No, Jack Hunter would not benefit.

Would Rand Paul benefit? No, Rand Paul would not benefit. Having it known that you associate with men who hold unpopular views is a bad thing for a man in politics.

So who would benefit? Well, _you_ would benefit. We can infer this from the fact that you want him to "own up to his beliefs." It stands to reason that you would not want this to happen unless you expected to benefit from it. How would you expect to benefit? Well, we've already answered that - Jack Hunter claiming to hold unpopular beliefs (whether or not he actually does) would hurt Jack Hunter, and it would hurt Rand Paul. You want Jack Hunter and Rand Paul to be hurt. This desire is hateful. You ought to purge yourself of this feeling. Hate is not good.




> Awareness about the evils of the Fed is at an all time high. But under your warped your line of thinking, we shouldn't talk about important truths because the public is unaware.


To which "evils of the Fed" are you referring?

I will repeat myself:




> You misunderstand and misrepresent my logic. I fear this conversation is becoming too complicated for you to follow.


You misunderstand and misrepresent my line of thinking. I fear this conversation is becoming too complicated for you to follow. I will not repeat this again. If you continue to behave in an aggressively and unapologetically ignorant fashion, I will stop taking you seriously, and you will lose a valuable opportunity to learn. Listen when I say this: You are modeling me incorrectly in your head. What you think I think is not what I think.

It is good to talk about important truths of which the public is unaware - however, you are unfit to decide what the truth is. You lack the intelligence and experience to reliably distinguish truth from falsehood. You also lack meta-awareness of your own shortcomings. You are certain of things that you cannot justifiably be certain of. You should correct this overconfidence and become a more humble thinker.




> We should be educating and spreading awareness and then we can take action against the crooks in charge.


There are no crooks in charge. The people in charge decide who the crooks are, and people are not fond of self-incrimination. That's why so many take the Fifth.




> Thank goodness Ron Paul doesn't think like you.


Ron Paul does think like me in many important ways.




> They may be hurting political operatives like Jack Hunter, but they're one of the great organizations leading the liberty movement. They produce some of the best journalism available in an age where it's desperately needed, give it away for free and encourage others to get involved in holding the government's feet to the fire on key issues. You need to get your head out of your ass and stop worrying so much about what the political establishment thinks, it's making you a lousy freedom fighter.


You and I have different understandings of what constitutes the liberty movement. The one you are referring to has been co-opted, taken over, and repackaged for mass consumption; it is now headed by figures like Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, and Mike Lee. In doing so, they have mixed and matched some elements of the original with bits of establishment thinking; their goal in doing so is to become part of the establishment so that they may have some small measure of influence over the making of policy in our government.

You need to get your head out of your ass and start worrying more about what the political establishment thinks. Have you been following the NSA leaks? The political establishment has more power than you can possibly imagine - they have tentacles that literally span the entire globe. Any entity with this much power is IMPORTANT; it is a force to be reckoned with. If you try to fight them and pose any kind of serious threat, they will utterly destroy you.

I am not a freedom fighter. Osama bin Laden was a freedom fighter. If your goal is to become a terrorist, then our aims are at odds.

----------


## spladle

> You work for free and call it something else?  What do you call that?  Charity?


When I work for free, yes, I do call it charity. What would you call it?

----------


## Origanalist

> When I work for free, yes, I do call it charity. What would you call it?


Forced slavery, nothing less.

----------


## NewRightLibertarian

> You're going full Maddow here, sgt. You never go full Maddow.
> 
> Leaving aside the question of how you came to see inside Jack Hunter's heart, let us assume for the sake of argument that your blind, unsupported (and unsupportable) assertion is correct: Jack Hunter is a chicken $#@! who doesn't want to jeopardize his meal ticket. Why should he, as you say, "own up to his beliefs?" Who would benefit from his doing so?
> 
> Would Jack Hunter benefit? No, Jack Hunter would not benefit.
> 
> Would Rand Paul benefit? No, Rand Paul would not benefit. Having it known that you associate with men who hold unpopular views is a bad thing for a man in politics.
> 
> So who would benefit? Well, _you_ would benefit. We can infer this from the fact that you want him to "own up to his beliefs." It stands to reason that you would not want this to happen unless you expected to benefit from it. How would you expect to benefit? Well, we've already answered that - Jack Hunter claiming to hold unpopular beliefs (whether or not he actually does) would hurt Jack Hunter, and it would hurt Rand Paul. You want Jack Hunter and Rand Paul to be hurt. This desire is hateful. You ought to purge yourself of this feeling. Hate is not good.


You have a hard time with reading comprehension. I want Jack Hunter to remove himself from the Rand Paul campaign because he is a liability and because of his extremist views. He is bullshitting to try and keep his gravy train flowing in because he's a typical political worm and doesn't want his spotlight to fade.




> You misunderstand and misrepresent my line of thinking. I fear this conversation is becoming too complicated for you to follow. I will not repeat this again. If you continue to behave in an aggressively and unapologetically ignorant fashion, I will stop taking you seriously, and you will lose a valuable opportunity to learn. Listen when I say this: You are modeling me incorrectly in your head. What you think I think is not what I think.
> 
> It is good to talk about important truths of which the public is unaware - however, you are unfit to decide what the truth is. You lack the intelligence and experience to reliably distinguish truth from falsehood. You also lack meta-awareness of your own shortcomings. You are certain of things that you cannot justifiably be certain of. You should correct this overconfidence and become a more humble thinker.


I understand your bull$#@! completely, no matter how much you try to spin things. You want to run from the truth like a coward, I don't. You lick the boots of politically-connected weasels, I don't. Ron Paul's stated the truth about the secret societies running the show on many occasions. Perhaps you should listen to him and instead of writing long-winded, meandering drivel, OK? 




> Ron Paul does think like me in many important ways.


Only in your diseased, delusional mind.




> I am not a freedom fighter.


You really hit the nail on the head with this one. You don't stand for freedom in any way, shape or form. Now go run from the discussion like your hero Jack ran from polite questioning.

----------


## spladle

> Forced slavery, nothing less.


Okay, well you're weird then. Most people wouldn't call it that. My charity work is not forced - I elect to perform it freely, because I like helping people.

Although if we must use your language, I feel compelled to point out that my earlier claim becomes even stronger: Slavery _really_ isn't that bad! lol

----------


## spladle

> Now go run from the discussion like your hero Jack ran from polite questioning.


Okay son. I'm sorry you're so full of rage and hate. Perhaps with time you'll mellow out a bit and come to better understand and accept your place in the world. Many young men go through a phase such as the one you're experiencing now. I wish you well. God bless.

----------


## BlackTerrel

> Quick slavery talking point:
> 
> Under bankster control we are ALL slaves.  Never let people forget that.  Slavery never ended.  It just became global and multi-racial.


That's all nice but my life today with air conditioning, the internet, an iphone, a cold beer and a nice girlfriend is a lot better than that of a guy 300 years ago who had to pick cotton 16 hours/day slept in hay and was killed if he looked at a white woman the wrong way.

I guess it's all relative.

----------


## Origanalist

> Okay, well you're weird then. Most people wouldn't call it that. My charity work is not forced - I elect to perform it freely, because I like helping people.
> 
> Although if we must use your language, I feel compelled to point out that my earlier claim becomes even stronger: Slavery _really_ isn't that bad! lol


No, I'm talking about the time you spend working to pay your taxes, not charity work. One is done under threat of force, the other is given freely.

And yes, I'm weird. I'm here aren't I? That pretty much puts me outside of the norm.

----------


## NewRightLibertarian

> Okay son. I'm sorry you're so full of rage and hate. Perhaps with time you'll mellow out a bit and come to better understand and accept your place in the world. Many young men go through a phase such as the one you're experiencing now. I wish you well. God bless.


Unfortunately for you, I'll never stop making bootlickers like yourself look like complete fools whenever possible. Now I'll let you run away with your tail between your legs.

----------


## spladle

> No, I'm talking about the time you spend working to pay your taxes, not charity work. One is done under threat of force, the other is given freely.


I do not spend any time working exclusively to pay my taxes.

As I have said before, that two things share a characteristics in common does not render them indistinguishable. Taxation and slavery have a characteristic in common. That does not make them the same thing.




> And yes, I'm weird. I'm here aren't I? That pretty much puts me outside of the norm.


I meant specifically that you're weird in how you use the word slavery, and I'm not sure why you would choose to be. Using words weirdly seems like it would only create needless confusion.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

Other than this being a diversion from more important issues, and a pre-emptive propaganda strike against Rand, there is another relevant point to be made. 

At no time did I ever hear or read anything from the "Southern Avenger" about the South. Or about slavery. Or about racism. He was writing about libertarian issues. Maybe in his goofy youth, he was talking about that stuff. But the vast majority of libertarian and conservative minded people who saw his Youtube video articles, never saw that old stuff. We saw his more modern, relevant discussions of current day politics. 

Who cares what he did in his youth? It is not part of the current discussion. It not an issue that any libertarian or conservative group is discussing. Are we all supposed to be responsible for every action of every person who agrees on some issue? If someone writes articles about fixing the broken tax code, and we agree with that, what does it have to do with the fact that the person wore a goofy mask when they were younger? 

This is all so stupid it's ridiculous.

----------


## spladle

> Unfortunately for you, I'll never stop making bootlickers like yourself look like complete fools whenever possible. Now I'll let you run away with your tail between your legs.


I'm not a bootlicker, sgt, and the only one who looks like a complete fool here is you. Your immature posturing and fruitless attempts to assert dominance over your elder and better have pretty interesting explanations rooted in evolutionary psychology. Want me to post some links so that you can educate yourself, or would I be wasting my time? Sad to think how many testosterone-fueled young men are rendered incapable of intellectual growth by their sex hormones.

----------


## Origanalist

> I do not spend any time working exclusively to pay my taxes.
> 
> As I have said before, that two things share a characteristics in common does not render them indistinguishable. Taxation and slavery have a characteristic in common. That does not make them the same thing.
> 
> 
> 
> I meant specifically that you're weird in how you use the word slavery, and I'm not sure why you would choose to be. Using words weirdly seems like it would only create needless confusion.


So how do you distinguish between the time you keep the fruits of your labor and the time you're working to pay taxes? Do you break down every day or do you have a "tax freedom" day?

Either way, when you're on the gubmints clock, you're doing slave labor.

----------


## phill4paul

> This is all so stupid it's ridiculous.


  Not a fan of the guy anymore, and in truth feel injured by his sentiments regarding Ron Paul "radicals", in the end this is how I feel.

----------


## spladle

> So how do you distinguish between the time you keep the fruits of your labor and the time you're working to pay taxes? Do you break down every day or do you have a "tax freedom" day?


I make no such distinction, nor is there any need to. I keep a % of what I earn and pay the rest in taxes. A similar situation often exists when a business rents real estate. Would you say that business owners in this situation are being enslaved by their landlords?




> Either way, when you're on the gubmints clock, you're doing slave labor.


I do not spend any time working exclusively to pay my taxes.

As I have said before, that two things share a characteristics in common does not render them indistinguishable. Taxation and slavery have a characteristic in common. That does not make them the same thing.

----------


## Origanalist

> I make no such distinction, nor is there any need to. I keep a % of what I earn and pay the rest in taxes. A similar situation often exists when a business rents real estate. Would you say that business owners in this situation are being enslaved by their landlords?


Nobody is forcing that business under the threat of violence to rent that real estate.

Really, this is pretty basic stuff here. For such a brilliant guy, I'm surprised you're having such a hard time grasping it.

----------


## spladle

> Nobody is forcing that business under the threat of violence to rent that real estate.
> 
> Really, this is pretty basic stuff here. For such a brilliant guy, I'm surprised you're having such a hard time grasping it.


Nobody is forcing you under threat of violence to continue living in the United States or to work here.

Taxes are the rent you pay for the privilege of living and working on land owned by someone else - the US government.

Consider the possibility that I have been exposed to and am familiar with the arguments you are presenting but have rejected them. Next try to figure out why. If you can see that, you'll probably come to agree with me.

----------


## NewRightLibertarian

> I'm not a bootlicker, sgt, and the only one who looks like a complete fool here is you. Your immature posturing and fruitless attempts to assert dominance over your elder and better have pretty interesting explanations rooted in evolutionary psychology. Want me to post some links so that you can educate yourself, or would I be wasting my time? Sad to think how many testosterone-fueled young men are rendered incapable of intellectual growth by their sex hormones.


Even more inane, uninteresting, irrelevant, pointless blather out of you. But I guess that's the kind of trash dullards like you have to resort to when you've lost an argument.

----------


## nayjevin

> How do you feel about wage slavery?


It would be more effectively combated without the word slavery.

----------


## Origanalist

> Nobody is forcing you under threat of violence to continue living in the United States or to work here.
> 
> Taxes are the rent you pay for the privilege of living and working on land owned by someone else - the US government.
> 
> Consider the possibility that I have been exposed to and am familiar with the arguments you are presenting but have rejected them. Next try to figure out why. If you can see that, you'll probably come to agree with me.


Lol, fat chance. You're right, nobody is forcing me to work here. I could just suck of the gubmint teat and put my grandkids further into debt and live however I please. Or I could pack up a go to another country and let big government lickspittles run roughshod over those of us who yearn for liberty. However I chose not to. So it seems we're at loggerheads spladle.

----------


## spladle

> It would be more effectively combated without the word slavery.


Then you agree that it is something which needs to be combated? What about it do you object to?

----------


## spladle

> Lol, fat chance. You're right, nobody is forcing me to work here. I could just suck of the gubmint teat and put my grandkids further into debt and live however I please. Or I could pack up a go to another country and let big government lickspittles run roughshod over those of us who yearn for liberty. However I chose not to. So it seems we're at loggerheads spladle.


I have not advised you to do any of those things. I maintain that it is probably in your best interests to continue working and paying taxes on your income. So how are we at loggerheads? I don't understand.

----------


## Origanalist

> I have not advised you to do any of those things. I maintain that it is probably in your best interests to continue working and paying taxes on your income. So how are we at loggerheads? *I don't understand.*


That much is obvious. I don't want to pay taxes on my income. I don't want pay taxes on my income. I don't want pay taxes on my income. 

It is NOT in my best interest to do so. By doing so I am further enabling a system that not only is not in MY best interest, but is not in the best interest of anybody who values freedom and liberty.

What are you arguing in favor for here?

----------


## phill4paul

> That much is obvious. I don't want to pay taxes on my income. I don't want pay taxes on my income. I don't want pay taxes on my income. 
> 
> It is NOT in my best interest to do so. By doing so I am further enabling a system that not only is not in MY best interest, but is not in the best interest of anybody who values freedom and liberty.
> 
> What are you arguing in favor for here?


  The term "income" is foreign to me at this point. I trade. 2 years and the rest of my life running.

----------


## spladle

> I don't want to pay taxes on my income.
> 
> It is NOT in my best interest to do so.


You might be right. It depends on whether you can get away with not doing so. If you can, then of course, by all means, do. I never meant to suggest or imply that you have some sort of _obligation_ to pay your taxes - only that if you get caught not doing so, bad things will probably happen to you. Uncle Sam wants his cut, and he has ways of hurting you if you don't pay up.




> By doing so I am further enabling a system that not only is not in MY best interest, but is not in the best interest of anybody who values freedom and liberty.


Would sitting in a prison cell be better? What are you arguing in favor of here?




> What are you arguing in favor for here?


Truth, justice, and the American way.

----------


## phill4paul

> You might be right. It depends on whether you can get away with not doing so. If you can, then of course, by all means, do. I never meant to suggest or imply that you have some sort of _obligation_ to pay your taxes - only that if you get caught not doing so, bad things will probably happen to you. Uncle Sam wants his cut, and he has ways of hurting you if you don't pay up.


  FUD. Plain and contrived.




> Would sitting in a prison cell be better? What are you arguing in favor of here?


  Better than what? Living in a 36 square foot prison or a 5,490,232,704,000,001 square foot one?

----------


## spladle

> Better than what? Living in a 36 square foot prison or a 5,490,232,704,000,001 square foot one?


Better than paying your taxes.

Is this your way of saying that you think we should work to colonize other planets? I enthusiastically agree. =)

----------


## Origanalist

> Better than paying your taxes.
> 
> Is this your way of saying that you think we should work to colonize other planets? I enthusiastically agree. =)


You can run, but you cannot hide.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...rk-on-the-moon

----------


## phill4paul

> Better than paying your taxes.
> 
> Is this your way of saying that you think we should work to colonize other planets? I enthusiastically agree. =)


  I don't pay federal income tax. I have know idea what the $#@! you are talking about WRT colonizing other planets.

----------


## RonPaulFanInGA

As lame and ineffective as the Civil Rights Act thing in May 2010.

Republicans primary voters aren't going to fall for race-baiting B.S.

----------


## spladle

> I don't pay federal income tax.


But you agree that doing so would be preferable to spending time in prison, yes?




> I have know idea what the $#@! you are talking about WRT colonizing other planets.


You seemed to imply that the earth is a prison. I agree. In order to escape it (and our sun going nova), we'll need to colonize other planets in other solar systems. I think this is a worthwhile endeavor.

----------


## spladle

> As lame and ineffective as the Civil Rights Act thing in May 2010.
> 
> Republicans primary voters aren't going to fall for race-baiting B.S.


The purpose of this hit was not to alienate Republican primary voters. It was to hurt Rand's chances in a general election.

Make no mistake, neo"conservatives" would much rather see Hillary in office than Rand Paul.

----------


## phill4paul

> But you agree that doing so would be preferable to spending time in prison, yes?


  I don't pay federal income tax. I will not spend time in prison for not doing so. Therefore I do not agree.




> You seemed to imply that the earth is a prison. I agree. In order to escape it (and our sun going nova), we'll need to colonize other planets in other solar systems. I think this is a worthwhile endeavor.


  Earth is a prison. Why would those that control the Earth allow a sovereign to escape it willy nilly?

----------


## devil21

> I make no such distinction, nor is there any need to. I keep a % of what I earn and pay the rest in taxes. A similar situation often exists when a business rents real estate. Would you say that business owners in this situation are being enslaved by their landlords?


That is a voluntary contractual agreement between two private entities.  There is no coercion in that scenario since both are willing participants and have agreed on terms.  I think you're on the wrong forum spladle.




> I do not spend any time working exclusively to pay my taxes.


You spend at least 35% of your time working exclusively to pay your taxes.  That is, unless you're on the dole and are one of those that get bigger tax credits and refunds than you actually pay. ymmv

----------


## nayjevin

> Then you agree that it is something which needs to be combated? What about it do you object to?


I just see that there are people combating it.  How about you enlighten us on wage slavery, if that's relevant?

----------


## spladle

> I don't pay federal income tax. I will not spend time in prison for not doing so. Therefore I do not agree.


I didn't ask whether you paid federal income tax or whether you would spend time in prison for failing to do so. I asked whether you thought paying taxes would be preferable to spending time in prison. Your answer was a complete non-sequitur.




> Earth is a prison. Why would those that control the Earth allow a sovereign to escape it willy nilly?


I have agreed that Earth is a prison, but you seem confused - the only wardens are the limits of our scientific knowledge and understanding of how to travel great distances through space.

Who do you think controls the Earth? What do you mean by a "sovereign?"

----------


## spladle

> That is a voluntary contractual agreement between two private entities.


Please define: voluntary, contractual agreement, private entities

Why could we not say that the exchange of taxes for government services is a voluntary contractual agreement between two private entities?




> There is no coercion in that scenario since both are willing participants and have agreed on terms.


You seem to be using the word "coercion" in an extremely unusual way. Almost everyone recognizes that coercion or the threat thereof is used to enforce contracts.




> I think you're on the wrong forum spladle.


Why do you think that?




> You spend at least 35% of your time working exclusively to pay your taxes.  That is, unless you're on the dole and are one of those that get bigger tax credits and refunds than you actually pay. ymmv


Which 35% of the time? How might one go about only working the 65% of the time he is not working to pay his taxes, so as to reduce his workload by 35% without incurring any legal tax obligations at all?

----------


## spladle

> I just see that there are people combating it.  How about you enlighten us on wage slavery, if that's relevant?


I only asked because you said this:




> Where slavery exists, it is bad. Where 'indentured servants' believe they have equal opportunity, but truly do not, it is bad. Where children are raised to believe servitude is normal, it is bad. I don't see any argument that slavery is not as bad as people think to be in any way fruitful.


I think your analysis is overly simplistic. How do you define slavery, indentured servants, and servitude? What is it about these things that makes them bad? If it is bad for children to be raised believing that servitude is normal, does that mean it is bad for children to be raised believing that working for a living is normal? Should they instead be raised to believe that they are owed welfare checks by the government?

----------


## phill4paul

> I didn't ask whether you paid federal income tax or whether you would spend time in prison for failing to do so. I asked whether you thought paying taxes would be preferable to spending time in prison. Your answer was a complete non-sequitur.
> 
> 
> 
> I have agreed that Earth is a prison, but you seem confused - the only wardens are the limits of our scientific knowledge and understanding of how to travel great distances through space.
> 
> Who do you think controls the Earth? What do you mean by a "sovereign?"


  Umm... Too much mish mashed donkey drool for me. I made my point clear.  I can't, or more precisely won't, help you to understand it. Have a good evening, tomorrow and entirety of life.

----------


## nayjevin

> I think your analysis is overly simplistic.


What is it about my analysis that you find simplistic?




> How do you define slavery, indentured servants, and servitude?


What would you say the correct definitions are?




> What is it about these things that makes them (forms of slavery) bad?


If you feel it is worth someone's time to go into great detail about why slavery is bad, (or not so bad?) go for it.  Might not put yourself in a great position to stick around long, if you choose the not so bad route.  Uh, slavery is bad.  That ok with you?  Liberty is good.  Are we ok still?




> If it is bad for children to be raised believing that servitude is normal, does that mean it is bad for children to be raised believing that working for a living is normal? Should they instead be raised to believe that they are owed welfare checks by the government?


What are the correct answers to these questions in your view?

----------


## spladle

> What is it about my analysis that you find simplistic?


You used the word "bad" four times and the word "because" zero times. Because you did not explain why you thought these things were bad, it is not possible to extrapolate whether you would think other things are bad as well.




> What would you say the correct definitions are?


I would say that there are no correct definitions. Words can mean whatever we want and agree for them to mean.




> If you feel it is worth someone's time to go into great detail about why slavery is bad, (or not so bad?) go for it.  Might not put yourself in a great position to stick around long, if you choose the not so bad route.  Uh, slavery is bad.  That ok with you?  Liberty is good.  Are we ok still?


Post 150 itt is a link to an article from _Radish_ entitled Slavery in America: Was It Really So Bad? No one has attempted to argue with anything said there.

I am okay with you saying that slavery is bad and liberty is good so long as you understand that those statements are content-free in the absence of definitions. Marxists would say that slavery consists of being forced to work for a wage, and liberty consists of having the unjustly acquired property of the capitalists forcefully seized by the state and redistributed amongst the workers.

"Slavery is bad" and "liberty is good" are nothing more than applause lights.




> What are the correct answers to these questions in your view?


It depends on how we're defining servitude, which is why I asked you to define servitude. For some definitions, the answers are yes. For others, the answers are no.

----------


## devil21

> Please define: voluntary, contractual agreement, private entities
> 
> Why could we not say that the exchange of taxes for government services is a voluntary contractual agreement between two private entities?


If I really have to explain contract law (never mind legal tender laws that bind one to the fiat) to you then Im not going to waste my time any further.  Enjoy your time here.

Next you'll tell me that my federal income tax pays for my local fire department and police department.

----------


## spladle

> If I really have to explain contract law (never mind legal tender laws that bind one to the fiat) to you then Im not going to waste my time any further.  Enjoy your time here.
> 
> Next you'll tell me that my federal income tax pays for my local fire department and police department.


It's a virtual certainty that I know contract law better than you do. But if you're not interested in learning, that's fine. Ignorance is bliss, happy trails.

----------


## jct74

I don't agree with some of his conclusions but it's a more thoughtful and fair analysis than anyone else in the progressive media will give, as usual whenever Conor writes anything about Rand.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...deracy/277701/

----------


## angelatc

Do not ever do that to me again.  Thank you in advance.

----------


## jct74

> Do not ever do that to me again.  Thank you in advance.


eh, I don't endorse his column or anything.  I give him credit for a thoughtful take at least, which he always does when he writes about Rand, so I think it's interesting to see what he wrote about this.


edit: I'll merge this with the main thread so as to not draw too much attention to it, not extremely favorable to Rand or Jack overall but he still brought up a few good points that no other progressive media outlets would bring up and his commentary on Rand is always interesting, so thought it might be worth posting.

----------


## angelatc

> eh, I don't endorse his column or anything.  I give him credit for a thoughtful take at least, which he always does when he writes about Rand, so I think it's interesting to see what he wrote about this.
> 
> 
> edit: I'll merge this with the main thread so as to not draw too much attention to it, not extremely favorable to Rand or Jack overall but he still brought up a few good points that no other progressive media outlets would bring up and his commentary on Rand is always interesting, so thought it might be worth posting.



No the article wasn't that bad, but the sentiments there still aren't of freedom. And the comments made me wish I could just walk away from humanity and never return.

----------

