The Hill raises the issue of whether Rand et al. should sue for libel

[sailingaway]

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-bl...lin-rand-paul-now-nikki-haley-palinhaley-2012

" The Wall Street Journal reported yesterday that a prominent blogger for Slate now begins to regret caricaturing the Tea Party as “racist.” This, just a day or so after MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow implied that Rand Paul was an extremist and a racist in his first television interview. Maddow led the way in creating the impression that the Tea Party was racist, conservative editor Andrew Breitbart reported on David Asman’s Fox Business show last night. The ground feeders in the political blogs went after Sarah Palin with the most guttural innuendo. Now, two weeks before her election, they are going after Nikki Haley, who is running for governor of South Carolina....

The ancient and subtle craft of destroying careers and lives through political chicanery reawakened in force with the arrival of Sarah Palin. President Obama should take the honors, joking on the David Letterman show that you can’t put “lipstick on a pig” in reference to Palin. Next up, Letterman referred to Palin as a “slut” and joked that her 14-year-old daughter got “knocked up” during seventh-inning stretch at a Yankees game.

Our political age is a trough between peaks and uncannily resembles the mid-to-late ’70s. Then, as now, there was a rash of personal journalism, as every big town had its own “underground newspaper” — anti-war journals in the residue of the Vietnam War, very similar to the blogs that popped up everywhere to oppose the war in Iraq. Then suddenly they all disappeared, and for one good reason: libel. Accusations of racism and sexual innuendo were standard slanders of the day, as they are again today in the blogs. Newspapers follow strict libel laws: You can say a good deal about a politician or a public figure, but if you libel her, the price can be high. ..."

I considered it worth a comment.

 

[Ilhaguru]

Libertarians don't believe in libel. Well, Ron Paul libertarians don't. I don't know about Rand.

 

[sailingaway]

Libertarians don't believe in libel. Well, Ron Paul libertarians don't. I don't know about Rand.

Well, I got my comment wrong, then,! But really I was focusing on the fact that libertarians DO believe in suing to enforce their rights.

This feeding frenzy of the press is the reason decent people don't want to go into public office, leaving us with indecent representatives.

I think libertarians should rethink their position on libel (I won't say 'ours' since I don't agree with that on a press level, when it takes minimum effort to fact check, given the internet, and the impacts are so irreversible, given the internet, so I guess I'm not as libertarian as I thought I was.)

I think individuals should have a lower level of care than NY Times which is reprinted everywhere. I think larger organizations have the funds and responsibility to not incorrectly broadcast matters stated as 'fact' which minimum effort would disprove.

However, I'd be interested to hear the other side of that.

 

[torchbearer]

if someone causes damage to you, and you can prove they caused damage, then retribution should be sought.
libertarian believe in tort law. it is what makes the free market work without federal regulation.
if a newspaper purposefully lies about you to the public, and those lies cause you damage that can be proven, you should get relief from the courts.
it will keep people honest. words do have consequences.
you are free to say what you want, you are also free to suffer the consequences of damaging speech.

 

[specsaregood]

Libertarians don't believe in libel. Well, Ron Paul libertarians don't. I don't know about Rand.

I wonder if that position changes depending on whether an outlet is using public resources. I bet the vast majority of those outlets use a public resource of sometype. Frequencies for example. Maybe its time for them to find out that argument cuts both ways.

 

[lnieves]

You don't have a "right" to your reputation or any such thing, since your "reputation" or your "image" are just perceptions "stored" on other people's minds. And you certainly don't have a claim to control what's on other person's mind.

 

[sailingaway]

You don't have a "right" to your reputation or any such thing, since your "reputation" or your "image" are just perceptions "stored" on other people's minds. And you certainly don't have a claim to control what's on other person's mind.

I'm not arguing for mind control, but for not publishing widely untrue matters. People believe larger journalistic orgs exercise care, which is why they are so widely repeated. People have a right to store correct images in their minds and not to be lied to, I should think. The impact is so great, it seems to me some care is reasonable..... I must admit I hadn't previously thought it through (sort of like rand on the cra) so I will noodle on it a bit.

 

[Cowlesy]

Well, libertarian view navel-gazing, radical or mainstream aside, I would comment that I don't think the campaign would pursue any legal action, as it would just further the distraction from the real issues facing the nation.

 

[lnieves]

People have a right to store correct images in their minds and not to be lied to, I should think.

I believe people have a right to not be forced to "store" any image they don't want to "store" in their minds. The rest whether true, correct, untrue or incorrect is up to them. Once you concede they have a "right" to truthful information, you have to concede there must be an ultimate arbiter as to what is or is not untrue. And that's a slippery slope.

 

[surf]

"Obama's an African Muslim..."

oh wait.

stupid argument, as we've all seen, the MSM is losing its influence. this CRA thing may further prove this

 

[sailingaway]

I believe people have a right to not be forced to "store" any image they don't want to "store" in their minds. The rest whether true, correct, untrue or incorrect is up to them. Once you concede they have a "right" to truthful information, you have to concede there must be an ultimate arbiter as to what is or is not untrue. And that's a slippery slope.

No. True and false may not always be absolutes, but where they are, as in 'he said x' or 'he said y', you don't need any arbiter of truth.

I agree the campaign won't sue .... so long as it wins, in any event.....

 

[Nathan Hale]

Libertarians don't believe in libel. Well, Ron Paul libertarians don't. I don't know about Rand.

Not true. Libel is a form of fraud. It's a fraud on the people consuming the information.

 

[BarryDonegan]

In some cases, speech can become a form of violence. For example, fraud.

 

[phill4paul]

Well, libertarian view navel-gazing, radical or mainstream aside, I would comment that I don't think the campaign would pursue any legal action, as it would just further the distraction from the real issues facing the nation.

No. I think that would be a great action. Ensured media coverage. Ensured exposure in more ways than one.

Truthfully, this would be perfect. Won't happen. But on a map it looks like a pincher strike to me.

Racism in the middle.

 

[jsu718]

What really bothers me is that people still talk about Letterman's joke as if he was referring to Willow (14, now 16) and not Bristol (18, now 20), especially since Bristol was the one that HAD a child.

 

[HPK]

Don't pursue libel and continue to be slandered. Great campaign policy, not! I dont' care what your philosophy is, welcome to the real world. Action is required. Fight back! Just my opinon as a republican voting for Rand!

 

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

Department of Belly Buttons:

 

[CheezItsRule]

Don't pursue libel and continue to be slandered. Great campaign policy, not! I dont' care what your philosophy is, welcome to the real world. Action is required. Fight back! Just my opinon as a republican voting for Rand!

As you're from Ky, can you tell us what the local reaction has been so far, HPK? I'm interested to know, especially since you are from the "bastion of KY liberalism"- Louisville.

 

[Paulitical Correctness]

You can't spell liberal without libel.

 

[HPK]

As you're from Ky, can you tell us what the local reaction has been so far, HPK? I'm interested to know, especially since you are from the "bastion of KY liberalism"- Louisville.

It is mixed. But I am from Louisville ,which is traditionally pretty liberal. Rand needs to come to Louisvlle and Lexington and defend himslef. Sorry, but that is a fact. He has to be competivie wil ConMan in these urban areas (as much as I hate to admit it).