Mike Gravel said he is more Libertarian than Ron Paul

[ARealConservative]

You are something else Yongrel. You ganked this straight from Hitchens and his verbal raping of Falwell on Hannity.

I want to be a fan of yours, but the lack of creativity and one-liners are getting old.

Agreed.

I though for a second he was actually going to enter into a debate.

Nope - just some one-liners and then he ran off to another thread.

 

[GHoeberX]

Well at least he is being honest about the reasoning behind his new political affiliation.

Touché

 

[luis9343]

nah, early on mike gravel and ron paul were my favorite candidates, not exactly because i perfectly agreed with their stances or i was a conservative/libertarian or a fabian/marxist or whatever, those things are exaggerated. Before i see them as libertarians or socialist etc.. i see them as Mike Gravel and Ron Paul, which too me matters a lot more. The main reason early on i liked them was because they seemed the most honest, they tackled the big issues and they went against the mass, the media. Weather mike runs as a socialist, libertarian, marxist or anarchist, i will support mike or ron over any other candidate because of who they are and their personal morals etc. Its a pity he doesn't have a great chance.

 

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Paul strongly supports the right to choose to participate in gaming. He's been a big advocate in the fight for Internet poker rights, for example.




Gravel is a liberal libertarian who believes in big government but also in personal freedoms (I don't think he fits the definition of "libertarian" at all). I think he sees big government as a wonderful tool to "give" us personal freedom.

Paul is a conservative libertarian who distrusts big government. He (rightly, IMO) sees growing government as threat to our freedoms.

I think it's night and day. It's hard (for me, at least) to see Gravel getting any support from anyone who believes in Ron Paul's positions. I know I won't.

Gravel is a Liberaltarian lol Still, I'd take him over Wayne Root

 

[ThePieSwindler]

If bob barr runs, all this is irrelevant (which mike gravel is anyway). Joseph, what do you think about Barr?

 

[jason43]

This is what its really all about.

"If Ron Paul could raise all that money with his libertarian message, you know, I think I could raise a lot of money."

 

[ARealConservative]

This is what its really all about.

"If Ron Paul could raise all that money with his libertarian message, you know, I think I could raise a lot of money."

is that a real quote?

Ron Paul has been reaching out to us on the internet for nearly a decade. Gravel is in for a real disappointment.

 

[Carole]

Like so many who do not quite get Dr. Paul, I think Con. Gravel also misses the mark. He overlooks the fact that it was the entire package of Dr. Paul that was so appealing-especially Liberty and the Monetary system. Mr. Gravel's issues do not promote smaller government and they embrace socialized medicine. Below is the response I left at the end of the article.

My response:

Carole | March 27, 2008, 3:49pm | #
Gravel said, "If Ron Paul could raise all that money with his libertarian message, you know, I think I could raise a lot of money."

You know folks, like so many others,I just do not think Gravel gets it.

Ron Paul had so many of the right answers on so many issues. Congressman Gravel has far fewer right answers and he likes taxes.

Gravel also likes socialized medicine. He thinks it can be paid for with a "portion" of the Fair Tax. He fails to understand that even now our entitlements promised for medicare and prescription drugs can never be met, that we are bankrupt. There is likely no tax big enough to do what he wants, unless we all work for the purpose of giving all our money to government.

He thinks he can raise a lot of money due to his Libertarian leaning, but Ron Paul garnered support from nearly every "group." Gravel seems to overlook the fact that Ron Paul considers himself a Republican. He left the Lib. party after one year, did he not? He does not claim to be a Libertarian. The MSM claims that.

Con. Gravel has some good points among his issues, but I wonder if he has the grasp on the monetary system ( a big issue with RP followers) and the economy.

Just being Libertarian is not going to guarantee the kind of donations Ron Paul was receiving. It was all about the total message with Dr. Paul. People loved his message.

 

[Natalie]

Mike Gravel is lame

 

[Rhys]

Since when does his support overlap with Ron Paul's? Just cause we don't hate Gravel like we do McCain, I guess.

 

[Kade]

Mike Gravel is lame

Coolest Member? wth is this...

 

[Joe3113]

Mike Gravel is a "civil libertarian", which is not a libertarian at all.

As Murray Rothbard has explained, you cannot believe in civil liberties and at the same time reject economic liberties. The two are inextricably connected.

He doesn't seem to understand that libertarian philosophy is not a matter of imposing your own morality on others, whatever that morality might be.

Ron Paul is morally opposed to prostitution and gambling, as am I, but we don't believe they should be illegal. We believe it is up to the individual to discover their own morality.

 

[RedLightning]

Mike Gravel is a fool and will never win the Libertarian nomination.

 

[Kade]

Mike Gravel is a "civil libertarian", which is not a libertarian at all.

As Murray Rothbard has explained, you cannot believe in civil liberties and at the same time reject economic liberties. The two are inextricably connected.

He doesn't seem to understand that libertarian philosophy is not a matter of imposing your own morality on others, whatever that morality might be.

Ron Paul is morally opposed to prostitution and gambling, as am I, but we don't believe they should be illegal. We believe it is up to the individual to discover their own morality.

There is one thing that can be uttered, and when asked, as if it were some sort of floating gas of noxious fumes in the room that nobody smelled, becomes the legitimizer and qualifier for all Rothbardians, and separates them like oil and water amongst the garbage of lay thinkers and traffickers of inane horseshit....

Do you oppose or support civil commitment?

 

[qh4dotcom]

People are saying McCain is too old at 71 years....Gravel will be 78 in May

If Gravel wanted to run for President...he should have done so decades ago

 

[garrettwombat]

Paul strongly supports the right to choose to participate in gaming. He's been a big advocate in the fight for Internet poker rights, for example.

you think?

 

[luis9343]

Mike Gravel is a "civil libertarian", which is not a libertarian at all.

As Murray Rothbard has explained, you cannot believe in civil liberties and at the same time reject economic liberties. The two are inextricably connected.

He doesn't seem to understand that libertarian philosophy is not a matter of imposing your own morality on others, whatever that morality might be.

Ron Paul is morally opposed to prostitution and gambling, as am I, but we don't believe they should be illegal. We believe it is up to the individual to discover their own morality.

where did you hear that gravel thinks prostitution and gambling should be illegal? as far as i know, he wants to legalize drugs, lower drinking age, and not make prostitution or gambling illegal. He also is pro-choice, and supports same sex marriage, that sounds pretty libertarian to me, i don't see what things hes trying to impose on us??

 

[crazyfingers]

where did you hear that gravel thinks prostitution and gambling should be illegal? as far as i know, he wants to legalize drugs, lower drinking age, and not make prostitution or gambling illegal. He also is pro-choice, and supports same sex marriage, that sounds pretty libertarian to me, i don't see what things hes trying to impose on us??

Socialized medicine, higher taxes, world government, etc.

 

[FireofLiberty]

I like Mike but he's full of it. He supports universal health care, an anti-Republic "national ballot initiative" and, worst of all, universal mandatory income (aka a "citizen's wage").

 

[Joe3113]

There is one thing that can be uttered, and when asked, as if it were some sort of floating gas of noxious fumes in the room that nobody smelled, becomes the legitimizer and qualifier for all Rothbardians, and separates them like oil and water amongst the garbage of lay thinkers and traffickers of inane horseshit....

Do you oppose or support civil commitment?

I support doing what is morally correct, but doing it of one's free will. This even applies to perhaps the worst of all acts, that is, murder. You cannot create a situation where it is a 100% certainty that nobody will get murdered, without creating a totalitarian state. I could go outside right now and stab 5 people to death, but I don't do it because I consider it morally wrong.

Without Liberty, life is worth nothing.