Adam Kokesh: Why I Don't Support Rand Paul

[Sola_Fide]

Isn't Adam "running for President" or something? He speaks of "my supporters" in this clip. Oh well. Adam is too pure to associate with you statists. I wonder why Adam never had these harsh words to say to Ron, who spent his life in politics?

 

[Intoxiklown]

I don't understand the infatuation with this guy. When he said the "Maybe some of the stoners.....", I quit watching. He's bashing Rand for verbal judo in politics, and then uses one of the libertarian stereotypes himself to explain away support of Rand. If Kokesh was half as smart as he likes to portray himself as, he'd realize he sounds like a pompous ass trying to explain to Rand how his father, Ron, thinks and believes.

 

[Brett85]

This should definitely help Rand.

 

[Matt Collins]

Who cares what AK says? He is irrelevant and doesn't matter at all. He really pissed away his chance to do anything worthwhile.

 

[Sola_Fide]

Who cares what AK says? He is irrelevant and doesn't matter at all. He really pissed away his chance to do anything worthwhile.

It's not really important. But it presents an opportunity for us to have a conversation about it so that some of the arguments against Rand d can be answered.

 

[William Tell]

Kokesh has become such an arrogant jerk. He doesn't even support the Constitution anymore. He's better than us y'all.

 

[jmdrake]

Meh.....this stupidity will actually help Rand more than it will hurt him. At 2 minutes in Adam Kokesh flat out lies. Rand never said he opposed gay marriage or supported it. Adam Kokesh is being a hypocrite by trying to talk about how principled Ron is (can't piss off the Ron Paul supporters) then attacks Rand for having the same political position on gay marriage as Ron, leave it to the states. Really, I don't know what the hell is this hyper-fascination by some libertarians with gay marriage. But at least be honest about it, an Adam Kokesh is not. Rand Paul saying he is personally "offended" by calling gay marriage gay marriage is not the same as coming out against it politically. He hasn't asked for a federal ban on it. He didn't go as far as Ron did in proposing that we strip federal judges from the ability to hear cases on same sex marriage, which is the only way to actually stop gay marriage. Rand never said the Supreme Court overstepped its bounds by striking down sodomy laws as Ron said. In reality Ron's actions have been far more hostile to gays than Rand's words. So if Rand is non libertarian because of this issue than Ron isn't libertarian either. Being libertarian doesn't mean I agree with all of your actions. It means I don't take steps to prevent you from doing those actions if you aren't harming some innocent person.

/Randrant

 

[Sola_Fide]

Kokesh has become such an arrogant jerk. He doesn't even support the Constitution anymore. He's better than us y'all.

Technically, I don't support the Constitution either, but I don't use that as a reason to not ever be involved with political ideas and "the machine".

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Adam, please tell us why you don't support Jeb and Hillary. Thanks.

 

[presence]

I support Rand.

I support Kokesh too.

 

[jmdrake]

Adam, please tell us why you don't support Jeb and Hillary. Thanks.

No. Adam please go out and support Jeb and Hillary. That might help Rand further.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Technically, I don't support the Constitution either, but I don't use that as a reason to not ever be involved with political ideas and "the machine".

You're skipping a step. A critical step. If we cannot even reduce government down to that of the Constitution, there is no chance at all. A young person trying to understand the principles upon which our country was founded, is a good thing. Heading towards our government actually being in line with the Constitution is a fantastic thing. Which is why Ron Paul talked about it so often.

Adam isn't helping the cause here at all.

 

[AuH20]

He's entitled to his opinion. He makes some good points, but some just come off as disingenuous.

 

[SilentBull]

I really wish he would just go away.

 

[LawnWake]

He doesn't even support the Constitution anymore.

Well, why would he? It's a piece of government paper. It has no real power or authority as evidenced by the fact that the consitution exists, it calls for one of the most limited governments known to history and it still exploded into a imperialist behemoth.

"Yes, but if people just supported it..". Uh huh, right. Because 99.99999% of people who even go through the trouble to seek out government power, are fine with limiting it and through that, their own power.

Constitutionalism is naive. It's a failed experiment.

The best thing you can expect from a potential Rand Paul presidency is a temporary slowing down of the growth of government. But I think it's worth the trouble.

 

[AuH20]

Well, why would he? It's a piece of government paper. It has no real power or authority as evidenced by the fact that the consitution exists, it calls for one of the most limited governments known to history and it still exploded into a imperialist behemoth.

"Yes, but if people just supported it..". Uh huh, right. Because 99.99999% of people who even go through the trouble to seek out government power, are fine with limiting it and through that, their own power.

Constitutionalism is naive. It's a failed experiment.

Getting back to the Constitution would take a miracle. What Adam wants would be even more difficult to conjure. So he's really whistling past the graveyard. If Constitutionalism is naive, Adam's remedy is even more naive in light of our current shackles.

 

[LawnWake]

Getting back to the Constitution would take a miracle. What Adam wants would be even more difficult to conjure. So he's really whistling past the graveyard. If Constitutionalism is naive, Adam's remedy is even more naive in light of our current shackles.

The point of the consitution is an arbitrary place. I mean, yeah, the consitution is a pretty good place compared to what we have now, and slightly less limited than the consitution too, and slightly more too.

However, the future and technology is looking bright. Bitcoin and the deep web present great tools for agorism. And, while this is not feasible any time soon, space colonization will lead to a very advanced form of "sea" steading in the future, where anarcho-capitalist colonies seem very possible. That's the very distant future, though. We could have our first libertarian floating cities within the next 50 years.

 

[William Tell]

Getting back to the Constitution would take a miracle. What Adam wants would be even more difficult to conjure. So he's really whistling past the graveyard. If Constitutionalism is naive, Adam's remedy is even more naive in light of our current shackles.

This. Adam is saying Rand isn't pure enough. Probably half of 1 percent of the population agrees with Adam politically. And he wants to fling poo at the 10% that are closest to him.

People like myself are not what is standing between Adam's ideal and the current state of affairs. But he probably thinks I'm a sheeple for voting for Rand. Guess what Adam, I wouldn't shed a single tear if the government went away. But it ain't happening. Making comments on the internet about "denying consent" does next to nothing for liberty.

Ancaps like patting themselves on the back about how ideologically "pure" they are. And then they act like people who try to shrink government are the problem.

 

[Deborah K]

You're skipping a step. A critical step. If we cannot even reduce government down to that of the Constitution, there is no chance at all. A young person trying to understand the principles upon which our country was founded, is a good thing. Heading towards our government actually being in line with the Constitution is a fantastic thing. Which is why Ron Paul talked about it so often.

Totally agree.

Adam isn't helping the cause here at all.

Actually, I would think that the people who don't want the "fringe element" of the movement involved in supporting Rand would be glad about these comments.

Adam can't win. If he supported Rand, certain people would say he's hurting the cause. If he's against Rand, certain people say he's hurting the cause. In the end, Adam wants what we all want. It just that his approach is not always palatable for many. If he's irrelevant, then it shouldn't matter, should it?

 

[LibertyExtremist]

Unfortunately, I've seen a lot of this stuff from libertarian pages on Facebook and in the comments. There are many who don't think he is "pure" enough. What makes me cringe is seeing those who think Gary Johnson is so much more libertarian than Rand. Sure, when you have absolutely no chance of winning you don't have smooth out some of your libertarian edges. It seems that many libertarians are willing to cut off their nose to spite their face, IMHO. I've always liked the Jeffrey Tucker approach of supporting that which moves the pendulum toward liberty.