Possible Paul Candidacy Sweeps the Blogs…

Since Lew Rockwell’s public posting about 2 hours ago, political blogs across the Internet have started buzzing about the possibility of a Ron Paul presidential campaign.

First up is Wonkette...

While Democrats and Republicans on the Hill continue their “Yeah but now I’m against it” routine, Texas Congressman Ron Paul doesn’t have to issue any apologies. He was always against the invasion and occupation of Iraq, and he’s running for president.

Paul is a libertarian Republican who constantly enrages the GOP because he actually believes in a small federal government and sound fiscal policies. He’s anti-death penalty, anti-drug laws, anti-police state, anti-Patriot Act and anti-anything that’s not authorized by the Constitution. Texas Dems now love him for his “principled anti-war stance,” while pro-abortion voters don’t need to worry about the obstetrician/gynecologist’s strong pro-life stance — he knows the federal government has no right to get involved in such stuff. And as California just proved, states can figure out universal health care and global-warming rules while the federal government can’t do anything.

In 1988, Paul got the third-most votes after Bush 41 and Dukakis. It was only 0.5%, but still! Plus, Ron Paul writes a great column and goes on the Alex Jones show now and then and freaks out everybody.

Antiwar.com states the following…

The news is good — for once. Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), the libertarian congressman whose dedication to principle is one of the wonders of the world, is running for the GOP presidential nomination (hat tip: Lew Rockwell).

At last — a Republican who opposes our interventionist foreign policy (consistently and articulately) and who has this to say about the Iraq war. Rep. Paul opposed this rotten war from the very beginning — and, what’s going to be delightful, is that he is not going to be outdone by any Democrat regarding the Iraq issue.

Better yet, this will exacerbate the split in the GOP over the war and give antiwar activists a banner around which to repair during an election season that would otherwise feature the same rogues gallery of warmongers, fence-straddlers, and all-too-familiar faces.

The Liberty Papers adds…

It’s not clear if this is an actual filing by or on behalf of Congressman Paul himself or a move by someone trying to convince him to run. Also unclear is whether Paul would run as a Republican or Libertarian. He probably wouldn’t have a chance, but he’d a great addition to the race.

61 Responses to “Possible Paul Candidacy Sweeps the Blogs…”

  1. Doug Craig Says:

    I talked to their office earlier today, from my understanding he will run as a republican.

  2. Eric Dondero Says:

    Breaking news…

    Hollywood Actor Michael Moriarty just announced for President. He’s calling himself a “libertarian conservative.” No word yet on whether he plans to run as a Republican, Libertarian, Constitution or Reform Party.

    We have a story up at www.mainstreamlibertarian.com on Moriarty’s candidacy.

  3. Andy Says:

    If Ron Paul running in the GOP primary would be one of the few things that would get me to vote Republican.

    Aaron Russo has talked about either running in the GOP primary or supporting a candidate to run in the GOP primary. I’m sure that Aaron would be happy to back Ron Paul.

  4. Jason Gatties » Blog Archive » Ron Paul Part Duex??? Says:

    [...] We must keep in mind that nothing has been made official yet. Please visit ThirdParty Watch.com for all the latest info regarding this breaking story. [...]

  5. Matt Sterba Says:

    Ron Paul - Jeff Flake 2008!

  6. Devious David Says:

    Paul/Barr ‘08?

  7. Chris Moore Says:

    Wow. Eric just mentioned a “celebrity” that I’ve heard of. Eric, you hyped the hell out of Wayne “Who the Hell is He” Root. Why not give Moriarty his “Law and Order” due?

  8. Mike N. Says:

    Paul/Barr would be interesting…

    I wonder if they could ran as Rep/Lib ticket?

  9. Trent Hill Says:

    Ron Paul is running as a Republican. Check Politics1.com.

    I’d vote for him if he won the nomination, but im not gunna piss in the wind pretending he will. He won’t. Duncan Hunter won’t. Not even Sam Brownback will (not that im a huge fan of him, but he’s at least conservative somewhat).
    Its gunna be McCain, Guliani, or Romney.

  10. Eric Dondero Says:

    Never heard of Wayne Root? He’s been on Fox News, HBO, ABC, ABC Sports, NBC, ESPN and CNBC in the last year.

    In fact, he was just on Fox News last week.

    Pretty hard to miss the guy, unless you’re totally oblivious to Sports.

  11. Devious David Says:

    More than likely the next President is being or has been negotiated beforehand. But of course, that is purely conjecture. If we just gave up and walked away, there would be no hope or chance of reform. The only alternative would be violent revolution.

    You don’t have to win the election to win, anyway. Look at what the communists/socialists achieved. Go watch Rocky I.

    What would likely happen if Paul had any level of victory is the nominee would talk the standard issue “limited government” rhetoric and how they “respect” Paul and woo the dumbasses that are still fervent Republicans to go throw their back out pulling the lever like they always do with some gullible expectation that there will be concessions, which will never pass. In other words, typical Republican fare. But things might be better than that.

  12. Jackcjackson Says:

    Sure, people who watch TV know who Wayne Root is, but that doesn’t make him a celebrity. I could probably name 30 people who have been on Fox News, but that doesn’t mean anything to the general public. I saw Lenny Dykstra on Fox News. He likes drugs and gambling, maybe we can findout if he is a conservative/libertarian.

    Also, Michael Moriarty was on Law and Order 15 years ago. Since then he kinda “disappeared” from mainstream acting roles and has a reputation as being a “weirdo/whacko/nutjob” type. If we want somone who was once in a kinda popular tv show for a couple years a long time ago, Maybe we can recruit Scott Baio or Dirk Benedict.

  13. Andy Says:

    “Devious David Says:

    January 12th, 2007 at 12:22 am
    More than likely the next President is being or has been negotiated beforehand.”

    I wouldn’t be suprised if it is already decided as to who the next President is going to be.

  14. Nick Wilson Says:

    “The only alternative would be violent revolution.”

    Yes, because violent revolution doesn’t violate every libertarian principle and wouldn’t end up with some military junta or the last, most brutal mob standing taking power and destroying freedom completely for everyone anyway…


  15. paulie cannoli Says:

    Violent revolution does not necessarily violate libertarian principle, because it can be viewed as retaliatory force rathet than initiation of force. That the regime has already initiated a great deal of force against us is hardly disputable.

    On the other hand, you’re probably correct that we would end up with yet another gang in charge, which would likely be even worse.

  16. Robert Noval Says:

    From the Declaration of Independence:

    “...That to secure these (unalienable) rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government…”

    After last night’s speech by bush, can there be any doubt that the system is completely broken? He stands there on national television and spits in the face of the public, defies congress, and all form of reason.

    Pelosi insists impeachment is “off the table”.

    But in fact, you yourself can PUT IT BACK ON THE TABLE:


    Hopefully, radical change can still come through peaceful means. But it would have to be on this scale to be effective:


    Personally, I think all this discussion of the 2008 election is pointless:


    But the issue has to be forced.
    —-The Bikemessenger

  17. Andy Says:

    “But in fact, you yourself can PUT IT BACK ON THE TABLE:


    This movement to impeach Bush should be pushed as much as possible.

  18. paulie cannoli Says:

    Where’s Ron Paul’s impeachment motion?

    He’s a sitting member of Congress and has the power to introduce one.

  19. Eric Dondero Says:

    Umm, Italian Pastry boy, Ron Paul and George W. Bush are good friends. Bush supported Ron heavily in his tough race in 1996 against a nasty Democrat assault on Congressman Paul. The Dems accused Ron of “wanting to legalize drugs and give crack cocaine to school children.” Karl Rove, Bush’s right hand man, worked behind the scenes to counter all that, and got RP the necessary funding to stop the Democrat onslaught. I know. I was the very one who coordinated this with Rove.

    Bush has had Ron Paul up to the White House on at least two occasions; one was to discuss Education issues.

    Ron Paul has a picture of that meeting up on his wall in his Congressional office.

    Don’t you think it would be a little odd for RP to turn around and call for the impeachment of his friend George W. Bush?

  20. paulie cannoli Says:

    Hey, Mexican Gigolo boy, I wasn’t talking to you, but thanks for giving me some reasons not to even consider supporting Ron Paul. Here I was under the impression that he won despite the NSGOP machine, achieving a heroic victory against the machine politics in his own party as well as the “other” big box one. For Karl Roverenfuehrer, Dubai-ya, and you to like him so much, he can’t be as much of a libertarian as everyone here thinks.

  21. Eric Dondero Says:

    Hey, “Mexican Gigolo boy” I like it.

    Only difference is Cannoli, I use my correct legal names on-line, unlike you who hides behind the Italian Pastry boy mantra for some reason?

  22. Nigel Watt Says:

    A quick poll…

    How much better would the world be if Eric Dondero never spoke again
    (a) A lot better
    (b) I think I need a towel

  23. paulie cannoli Says:

    Eric Estrada boy, do some research on (cyber)stalking as to why someone may not want to put their name all over the net in heated debates with strangers and weirdo lurkers.

    Just recently at Hammer of Truth I had a psycho freak making death threats against me. And it wasn’t the first time.

    The only reason to use any name online is to distinguish my comments from someone else’s. You know who I am, and now thanks to you and your anti-libertarian invasion of privacy, other people who have no business knowing do too.

    Now, please find some issue of substance to discuss. What was said is more important than who said it.

    I’m trying to be a good person and I’m trying to make the world a better place.

    Let it go, and we can disagree agreeably - what’s wrong with that?

    These things start as fun and games and they end up hurting people. Why go there? What good does it do?

    I don’t give a rat’s ass about “correct legal” bullshit and I’ll call myself whatever I want - it’s my perogative. Now, kindly please try being a decent human being if you are capable of it, or just fuck off and don’t talk to me.

    If you really want a fight, stop being a chicken and go re-enlist, or join the IDF or the mercenary companies with units in Iraq and Afghanistan that Andy hooked you up with forms for. There you can really fight the “Islamo Fascists” and no, you’re not too old, they will take you - I promise.

    By the way, the more you keep this shit up the more you prove you can’t possibly be a libertarian - not only because you actively support fascists, but also because you act like one in disrespecting people’s privacy.

    Just like the scumbag fascist politicians you support, who are responsible for wiretapping without warrants, opening people’s mail and email without warrants, proposing a stasi-like network of 12 million regime stool pigeons
    called Operation TIPS, and a citizen surveillance system that surpasses anything in Orwell’s novels called Total Information Awareness. You know, the ones who want to plant RFID chips to track people like cattle. You fit right in with those.

    No wonder you’re proud to have Bush as your Kommandant in Chief - you are a fascist just like him. The polar opposite of a libertarian.

  24. Andy Says:

    Paulie, Ron Paul has already called for Bush’s impeachment. Don’t you know by now to not believe everything that Eric Dondero-Rittberg says?

    Rep. Congressman Ron Paul: Impeach Bush For Violating Constitution - Not Partisan Payback
    Says American Union is bellwether for world government

    Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | July 10 2006

    Republican Congressman Ron Paul says President Bush has presided over a doctrine of violating the Constitution at every turn and that he should be impeached - but that likely Democratic efforts to do so will be in the interests of playing politics and not the health of the nation.

    During an interview with Alex Jones on the GCN Radio network, Paul outlined the likely scenario as to how impeachment proceedings would unfold.

    “I’d be surprised if they win both - I think they’re going to win one body and if they win the House right now they do not say they would have an impeachment but I think the way that place operates I think they probably will make every effort,” said Paul.

    “If they happened to have a ten or fifteen vote margin that would be a political thing - it would be payback time.”

    Paul said that Bush should be impeached not under the umbrella of partisan vengeance but for ceaselessly breaking the laws of the land.

    “I would have trouble arguing that he’s been a Constitutional President and once you violate the Constitution and be proven to do that I think these people should be removed from office.”

    Opining that the US had entered a period of “soft fascism,” Paul noted that the legacy of the Bush administration has been the total abandonment of Constitutional principles.

    “Congress has generously ignored the Constitution while the President flaunts it, the courts have ignored it and they get in the business of legislating so there’s no respect for the rule of law.” said Paul.

    “When the Presidents signs all these bills and then adds statements after saying I have no intention of following it - he’s in a way signing it and vetoing - so in his mind he’s vetoing a lot of bills, in our mind under the rule of law he hasn’t vetoed a thing.”

    Asked what the ultimate agenda was behind the American Union and the push on behalf of the Bush administration to homogenize the US with Mexico and Canada, Paul was clear in his response.

    “I think the goal is one world government - we have not only the U.N. - we have the WTO, the IMF, the World Bank, then we have all the subsidiaries like NAFTA and hemispheric governments, highways coming in.”

    “I just hope and pray that we can wake up enough people,” said Paul, noting that Texans in his own backyard were more aware of Bush selling out the country for an American Union than anyone in Washington.

  25. paulie cannoli Says:

    How much better would the world be if Eric Dondero never spoke again
    (a) A lot better
    (b) I think I need a towel

    Well, he is somewhat entertaining and he serves a useful purpose in being a clear illustration of everything wrong in the libertarian movement.

    He’s also a good illustration of everything which is wrong with reich wingers.

    All you have to do is listen to archives Eric on the radio with Phillies or Browne to see what a cheap, low rent wannabe rodeo clown TV rassler, foaming at the mouth rabid whacko Eric is, and how unlike anything even remotely close to a libertarian he can possibly be.

    Since Eric doesn’t respect people’s privacy, perhaps someone should dig up his State Slave Number (SSN) and start referring to him by it every time. Not even a name - just a number, just like the statist cog for his fascist Komandant in Chief of whom he is so proud Eric Estrada boy actually is.

    After all, that’s all he is to his masters that he is so proud of, so why should he be anything else to us?

    Not that I would so anything like that - but that’s the kind of reaction his actions might deserve.

    Hey, the more Eric talks the more he discredits the views of anyone who even comes close to agreeing with him.

  26. paulie cannoli Says:


    Hey, that’s good news - I’m looking forward to him actually introducing a motion for impeachment in Congress and making it an issue in the Republican primaries. I might do a little GOP primary work after all.

  27. Andy Says:

    Ron Paul: Next President of the USA?

  28. Andy Says:

    “paulie cannoli Says:

    January 12th, 2007 at 4:28 pm

    Hey, that’s good news - I’m looking forward to him actually introducing a motion for impeachment in Congress and making it an issue in the Republican primaries. I might do a little GOP primary work after all.”

    I don’t know if he plans to issue articles of impeachment or not. We know that former Democrat Congresswomen Cynthia McKinney did issue articles of impeachment against Bush but that it never went anywhere. I suspect that Ron Paul knew that it wouldn’t go anywhere and that doing such a bold move could have cost him his seat in Congress and that’s why he hasn’t done it. Maybe if he is not planning to run for reelction to Congress he will consider doing it this term.

    I think that Ron Paul is going for one final “hoorah” before he retires to save this country. Like a “Hail Mary” pass in football.

  29. Nigel Watt Says:

    If anybody would like to hear Eric Dondero try to claim that George Phillies isn’t a Libertarian and George being very reasonable - giving a good preview for what will happen if we can get him into the debates - listen to this.

  30. Chuck Says:

    Paulie - you are way way too strignet in your demands for someone to run, nobody could ever get more then a percentage if they met directly your demands.

  31. Lori Plum Says:

    I do believe that Ron Paul could win. It’s up to the Patriots of this nation to form grassroot movements. The only thing barrier is the fact that the “unclean swine” in Washington control the voting booths. How can we know that the elections are on the up and up. Seems like it’s all rigged.

  32. paulie cannoli Says:

    Nigel - wrong show. You linked to the one with Angela, not the one Eric made a screaming, bullying ass of himself on.

    Chuck- yes, you’re correct. That’s the nature of the system, unfortunately. A lot of people don’t understand the full extent of systematic barriers. Political participation is only one of the many tools in the toolbox in the fight for liberty, and parties and candidates are only one of the several forms of political participation. Use all of the different tools. If the sole purpose of my political participation was to “win” at any cost, I would have stayed a Democrat. The Clinton nomination (‘92) was a line I was not going to cross, and that was that.

    Victories are not always clear cut. Sometimes they amount to planting a seed somewhere. It sprouts, but not right away.

  33. Eric Dondero Says:

    Hey Frankel, want to get nasty, huh? One thing to criticize me on a public forum for my views; quite another to go as far as you just did.

    I’d be real careful Frankel if I were you. I understand you have a lot to hide.

  34. Mike N. Says:

    Why in the hell did Ron Paul vote for Price Fixing Prescription Drugs??


  35. Mike N. Says:

    Dondero - face it, you are a lunatic, fanatical, intolerant Repuglican. Why do you even visit third party sites?

  36. Eric Dondero Says:

    Wow! Andy. That’s news to me about Ron Paul calling for Bush’s impeachment. I wonder how many of RP’s constituents here in Texas know of this.

    He’s got one persona on crazy conspiratorial talk shows. Quite another in his District. In Dist. 14 he’s Mr. Republican. He’s Mr. Pro-Military. He’s Mr. Loyal Bush supporter.

    You should see some of the District mailings I get from Ron Paul’s office.

  37. Eric Dondero Says:

    Let’s see now, perhaps it could have a little something to do with the fact that I WAS A LIBERTARIAN PARTY ACTIVIST WHEN YOU WERE IN FRIGGINDIAPERS NEWBIE

    You’re talking to a guy that was petitioning for the Libertarian Party in bumfuck Western Nebrask way back in 1985. I’ve helped to get the LP on the ballot in over 20 states since, including 4,000 sigs collected right here in Texas in the 2004 drive.

    It sickens me to see all you Newbie fucks coming into my Libertarian movement and turning it into some America-hating Pacifist Hippie Islamo-Fascist loving group.

    Why don’t you all just leave. Go be Liberals. We true Libertarians don’t want you. Can’t you all understand that???

  38. [email protected] Says:


    What’s this about “if we can get [George] into the debates?” I understand that he has confirmed his intention to attend several conventions where candidate debates, or at least forums of some type, will be held.


  39. Mike N. Says:

    Dondero - make yourself useful and ask Ron Paul why he voted to Price Fix Prescription Drugs…. since you know him so well.

  40. matt Says:

    Why don’t you all just leave. Go be Liberals. We true Libertarians don’t want you. Can’t you all understand that???
    Speaking of “just leaving”, maybe a certain GOP operative who threatens well-meaning people, insults everything emerging parties try to do, and supports a known war criminal ought to leave.

    Go back to freerepublic.com. Eric. You fit in better with that crowd.

  41. matt Says:

    700 total posts on Ron Paul in the last 2 days at freerepublic,com

    That must be some kind of record.

    He’s driving the phony conservatives crazy and allowing true conservatives and principled libertarians to share his voice. He’s a special kind of statesman, and has all of my support.

  42. paulie cannoli Says:


    Eric, I’m not the only one who should be careful.

    Everyone has something to hide, whether they realize it or not.

    You’re continuing to violate and breach my privacy, after you have been specifically told you do not have my consent.

    I’m not a pacifist, Eric - I believe in retaliatory force.

    You’re issuing threats to shut me up now, as well - that’s really not cool.

    But it does speak to your character, further discrediting your views.

    Plus, you are using Austin’s property to breach my privacy, after you have been specifically asked by both of us not to do so, thus involving an innocent third party in the conflict.

    But, I guess that’s natural for a guy who supports warmongering and
    accepts collateral damage as necessary.

    But I also believe in diplomacy, so how about if we squash it right here and
    just stop talking to each other, or agree to disagree agreeably, like we were doing before?

    I think it would be in both our best interests, whether you realize it or not.

    Please make this the last time you violate my rights.

    I’m not threatening you, Eric - I really, truly do not want a conflict.

  43. Robert Noval Says:

    Eric Dondero Says:

    January 13th, 2007 at 1:27 am


    “...You’re talking to a guy that was petitioning for the Libertarian Party in bumfuck Western Nebrask way back in 1985…”(ad infinitum)

    “It sickens me to see all you Newbie fucks coming into my Libertarian movement and turning it into some America-hating…”(yada yada)

    And you were just a future encounter between your parents who hadn’t met yet when I was seeing through Truman’s Korea lies…(In all fairness, the first time a president lied to justify a war on TV).

    Try to learn from experience, Eric. You should remember from smallgov to not try to pull age rank on people who’s age you don’t know.

    Maybe the other commenters here are short on experience…no matter, I’ll vouch for what Pauli and Mike are saying.

    It sickens me to see you conflate political partisan activism with the promotion of an ideal.

    The Libertarian movement is in no way “yours”.

    You’re only interested in playing politics as a sport. It impassions you, as you’ve admitted more than once. That would be ok if you’d be consistently honest about it.

    But the reference to “my Libertarian movement…” I’m certain sickens all of us true Libertarians.

    I refer to those of us who are impassioned to promotion of a unique ideal; an ideal that is manifest in a political ideology unique in it’s consistency with the fundamental nature of man; which seeks to radically alter the fabric of the social structure to a state heretofore unachieved; a state of harmony and consistency with man’s nature.

    First you reduce the beautiful concept to a mere team color in a sport. Then you self-servingly coopt it for yourself.

    If there’s anyone in this discussion that the Libertarian movement doesn’t belong to, it’s you.

    It must make you fascists pretty uncomfortable to have us “America-hating Pacifist Hippie Islamo-Fascist lov(ers)” challenge you here in “your” own back yard.

    Of course, it isn’t really yours, is it?

    Remember the quote in my first comment in this thread?:


    Documents like the D.of I. must make you pretty uncomfortable too, I imagine.

    Ironic how you “Red State Fascists”:


    Have adopted the old communist’s color. Or are you too young to remember that?

    Highly appropriate as well, I might add.

    And still dragging your dead Shibboleth “Islamo-Fascists” around? I thought we killed that back on 29 Jul 2006?

    At least that’s what the death certificate says:


    Good thing for us we can’t smell over the internet!
    —-The Bikemessenger

  44. paulie cannoli Says:

    When Eric says that I want to get nasty, he must really misinterpret my intent.

    He’s already put me in danger from people who have specifically threatened to do kill me, and whose hands are not free of blood. All fun and games, huh?

    I didn’t suggest that his rights be violated, I suggested that would be the equivalent of what he is doing to me.

    I don’t want to be referred to by a “legal” name anymore than Eric would probably want to be referred to by his “legal” government identity number.

    I don’t want anybody to do that to him. I don’t want his privacy violated. Why can’t he grant me the same courtesy?

    I haven’t taken any action to violate Eric’s rights. So far, he is the only one who has violated mine.

    I’ve tried to explain firmly and politely why his actions have constituted a violation of my rights and a threat to my safety, and have asked him to stop.

    He has refused to do so. And I’m the one who has “gone too far”?

    Yeah, like Giuliani, O’Reilly, Lieberman, Zell Miller, and George and Jeb Bush are libertarians.

    I’ll also note for the record that I am asking Austin not to allow his property to be used to violate my rights and threaten my safety any longer.

  45. Eric Dondero Says:

    Politely my ass. You have viciously attacked me here on this forum. You have viciously assaulted some of the very politicians and political individuals who I count as my heros in this libertarian movement.

    You are absolutely NO RIGHT WHATSOEVER in deciding who is and who is not a libertarian. You are a punk. A Newbie to this Movement. You don’t have 1/10th the political activism on behalf of the libertarian movement, specifially the Libertarian Party that I do.

    Let’s review:

    First voted Libertarian absenteee in 1982
    Secretary Libertrarian Party of Florida, 1985/86
    Libertarian National Committee, 1986/87
    Ron Paul’s Advance Man/Travel Aide for President, 1987/88
    Libertarian Candidate for State Legislator, 1986
    Delegate, Two Libertarian Conventions, Seattle & Philadelphia, 1987/89
    Florida Chairman, Libertarian Republican Organizing Committee, 1989/90
    Founder, Republican Liberty Caucus, 1990
    First Chairman & Executive Director, RLC, 1991-95
    Personal Political Aide to 1976 Libertarian Party Presidential candidate
    Roger Lea MacBride, 1991-95
    Elected Libertaian Officeholder, Soil & Water Board, 1992-94
    Campaign Coordinator Ron Paul for Congress, 1995/96
    Senior Aide & Personal Travel Aide, US Congressman Ron Paul, 1997-2003
    Political Consultant, Michigan State Rep. Leon Drolet, 2004
    Petition Professional & Coordinator, Americans for Limited Government/Property Rights Movement, 2004-Present

    Further, over 20 ballot drives for the Libertarian Party over 22 years, including states like Florida, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Nebraska, Dakotas, and Texas. And most recently, Stop the Smoking Ban for Anchorage, Alaska, sponsored by the Libertarian Party - 3,000 out of 12,000 signatures collected.

    Match that Frankel.

    You have the audacity to say that I am “not a Libertarian,” and that the individuals I support are “not libertarians.”

    I’d say you need to get a little more practice in as a Libertarian activist before you start accusing one of the Top 3 Libertarian activists in the entire Nation of “not being a Libertarian.”

    There are only two other individuals in this country who can match my record of political activism on behalf of this movement: Scott Kohlhaas and Jake Wittmer. (Perhaps Bill Redpath and Paul Jacob, as well?) And those two individuals AND ONLY THOSE TWO INDIVIDUALS, have a right to tell me that I’m not “really a Libertarian” or that my “Libertarian judgement is screwed up.”

    Last time I checked your name was Frankel, NOT Kohlhaas nor Witmer, so I don’t give a damn what you have to say on the matter.

  46. Eric Dondero Says:

    Yes, you have gone too far. Calling Steve Kubby and George Phillies “Libertarians” is insane.

    Neither of them deserve the title. They are both Leftwing America-hating Anarchists. They have shown little proof whatsoever that they are true libertarians. All they’ve shown is that they’re loud mouth Bush bashers.

    Bush bashing does not equate to libertarianism sorry to say.

    Kubby has almost zero Libertarian credentials. Admittedly, Phillies has a few. But that’s only because Anarchists have been able to infiltrate my beloved libertarian movement and push us real libertarians to the side for the last few years. Thanfully, since Portland that is all changing and the libertarians are pushing back against the Anarchists.

    I honestly do not understand something. You Anarchists started your own Party a year and a half ago, called the Boston Tea Party. What gives? Why are you in the LIBERTARIAN Party, when you have your own Anarchist Party.

    What happened? The BTP didn’t quite work out? All that hype. All that on-line media attention you all got. All for naught, ‘eh? BTP now practically defunct, except for a poorly visited website?

    Looks like you America-hating Leftwing Anarchists posings as Libertarians don’t have that much support after all?

  47. Eric Dondero Says:

    Simple response Bessenger, or Bi-messenger, or whatever fuck your name is:

    He who works hardest for the libertarian movement, gets to decide what is and what is not really libertarian.

    In other words, those individuals who get to use the possesive pronoun “my” include Scott Kohlhaas, Jake Witmer, Bill Redpath, Paul Jacob, Richard Winger, Phil Blumel, Howie Rich, Bob Poole, Don Ernsberger, Jim Turney, Bruce Cohen, Aaron Starr (without a doubt here), Leon Drolet, Bob Hedlund, Scott Bludorn (without a doubt here), and a host of others.

    Sorry, but you’re not included in that List Newbie.

  48. Eric Dondero Says:

    Hey Bi-messenger. Whose the Fascist? You’re the one that wants to let the Islamo-Fascists invade my country. You’re the one who has aligned himnself with Muslim Radicals who want to impose Sharia Law on the land, who want to:

    Force my wife to wear a burqa from head to toe, push me down to kneel to Allah 5 times a day at the point of a gun, stone prostitutes in my town square, outlaw booze and gambling, burn all my rock music CDs and Hollywood DVDs, cut off the genitals of my Gay friends, and jail my Marijuana-smoking buddies for life.

    I’d call that Fascism.

    Not someone who wants to fight to the death to prevent all that.

  49. Eric Dondero Says:

    Explain to me Frankel just how is it when someone uses a real legal name as an address, just how is it that that’s a “violation of privacy”? What an insane comment.

    Do you think any Judge anywheres in the land would side with you on that? They’d laugh you out of the courtroom.

    For the record, I’m damn proud of my legal name, and don’t have nuttin’ to hide. Bring it on. Tell the whole damned world if you want:

    Eric Dondero Rittberg, 44 years old, born in NY City, raised in Delaware, went to college in Florida. Stationed in the Navy in California and Florida. Lived in Texas last 12 years of my life.

    Anyone wish to have more personal information? No problem. Just ask.

  50. Andy Says:

    “Eric Dondero Says:

    January 13th, 2007 at 9:12 am
    Politely my ass. You have viciously attacked me here on this forum. You have viciously assaulted some of the very politicians and political individuals who I count as my heros in this libertarian movement.”

    BAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Heros like Joe Lieberman, George W. Bush, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and Ruby Guiliani. I guess if you admire gun grabbers and New World Order parasites then I suppose so.

  51. Robert Noval Says:


    Statism is statism. Your particular preferences are not libertarian simply on the basis of your lame attempts to usurp the name.

    “Bush bashing does not equate to libertarianism sorry to say.”

    No, but under current circumstances, it is an essential aspect.

    “He who works hardest for the libertarian movement, gets to decide what is and what is not really libertarian.”

    No, Libertarianism is a Political ideology, not your team in a sport.

    You either adhere to and promote those principles, or you are not a Libertarian.

    Clearly, it matters not in the least how much time and effort you apply to the promotion of candidates who apply the label to themselves (accurately or inaccurately), if you do not believe in the Libertarian ideology, which you clearly do not, you are not a Libertarian.

    It’s integral to who you are, not an item of your wardrobe.

    “You’re the one who has aligned himnself with Muslim Radicals…”

    No YOU’RE the one that has aligned me with the “Muslim Radicals”.

    I have nothing in common with them except a common enemy who happens to be bent on destroying us both.

    It should never be forgotten that YOUR side started this conflict.

    You’re pretty good at listing all of the horrible violations of liberty that muslims would impose, but what about what your gang of facsist war criminals IS GOING to do to ME and the others in this discussion:


    But that’s ok, as you have pigeon-holed us as “Leftwing America-hating Anarchists”. (Sometimes I wonder if you’re capable of grasping that not everyone is an advocate of big government), and since we won’t toe the right-wing fascist line, we thus forfeit our humanity.

    Oh, and BTW:

    Legal name: Robert Noval, 57 years old, born in N.Y.C., raised in Miami. No education or military service. Lived in Miami last 30-odd years. In case anyone is curious.

    Anyone who thinks he can get on-line and say what gets said here and still obscure their true identity from government thuggery by just not using their real name is fooling themselves.
    —-The Bikemessenger

  52. Eric Dondero Says:

    Pardon me, Bi-messenger, if I accept the Pew Research’s definition or the Cato Institute’s definition of what constitutes “libertarianism” which they define as “fiscally conservative/socially tolerant” over yours.

  53. Robert Noval Says:

    More of what’s in store for real Libertarians in Eric’s “Amerika” in the near future:

    —-The Bikemessnger

  54. Trent Hill Says:

    Um, Eric, show me where the Cato Institute defines it as such.

    Furthermore Eric, Fiscally Conservative and Socially Tolerant does NOT mean Libertarian. It simply means you are…just that.

    A Libertarian is someone who advocates the principle of self-ownership. Libertarians view Life Liberty and Property as the ultimate rights.

    Guliani wants to assisst in creating a nanny state. He wants to go door to door seizing weapons and drugs. This is not libertarian at ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL. Its anti-liberty and (even if your definition WAS correct) not very socially tolerant.

  55. Eric Dondero Says:

    So then, by your logic, everyone who is not an Anarchist cannot call themselves a “libertarian.” If you don’t score 100/100 on the WSPQ, you are not allowed to call yourself a “libertarian.”

    You may have worked your heart out for the libertarian movement for 25 years. You may be a longtime dues paying member of the Libertarian Party. You may even have served on the Libertarian National Committee, or run for public office on the Libertarian Party ticket. But if you are not in the Anarchist wing of the Libertarian movement and agree with the Anarchists on 100% of the issues, you are not allowed to use the word “libertarian” to describe yourself.

    But of course, you are allowed to use the longwinded cumbersome label “fiscally conservative yet socially tolerant” to describe your views.

    So, next time some pollster dials your number, and asks you to describe your political beliefs, you can’t say something simple like Conservative, Liberal, Moderate, Libertarian. No Sir-ee. Youz gotta say “fiscally conservative/socially tolerant.”

    I gotcha now. I’ll inform the 98% of all the other Libertarians that they are no longer allowed to call themselves “libertarians” cause they are merely “fiscally conservative/socially tolerant.”

  56. Eric Dondero Says:

    I’m looking at two books in my library published by the Cato Institute:

    “Left Right & Babyboom” by David Boaz, VP of Cato

    and “Beyond Liberal & Conservative: Reassessing the Political Spectrum” by Univ. of Central Florida Professors William Maddox and Stuart Lillie, with Foreward by David Boaz.

    Both books outline in detail the definition of a “libertarian.”

    Throughout the latter book they describe some politicians who have called themselves “fiscally conservative and socially liberal.” They mention Gary Hart, John Anderson, Jerry Brown, Jack Kemp, former Republican Congressman Ed Zschau of California, former Republican Senator Bob Packwood, as “fiscally conservative and socially liberal, essentially our definition of libertarian.”

    Is that good enough for ya?

    Do you want me to go to my garage and dig out the Pew Research Center studies that said the exact same thing?

  57. Eric Dondero Says:

    So Trent, one is to take your views over the views of the London Times, LA Times, NY Times and National Review Magazine, all of whom have recently referred to Giuliani as a “libertarian” or “libertarian conservative” or “Ayn Randian.”

    I gotcha. You’re smarter than all four of those media outlets, with all their editorial boards, all their investigative reporters, all their copy editors.

    And never mind that the London Times is only 300 years old. And the NY Times has been around for nearly 200 years.

    No buddy. Ole’ Trent Hill knows more about politics than all those media publications combined.

  58. matt Says:

    Maybe Trent isn’t smarter, but he’s certainly more honest and less compromised by the military-industrial complex. Speaking of which, Eric, I wonder if you’d like to tell us where your money comes from? I’ve been curious for quite some time.

  59. Trent Hill Says:


    I find it amusing that you always result to personal attacks. It reflects an incredible lack of intelligence, and speaks volumes about your limited vocabulary (Especially when you call people like Paulie ‘Fuckhead!’).

    However, this is my agreement. I will agree that the NY Times and London Times have called Guliani a Libertarian (provisionally).
    If you’ll agree that the Media is FAR more likely to have a decietful reason to list him as a libertarian even though he is not.
    Furthermore, I have always said that “Libertarian” is just as large of a political spectrum as any other (Statist, Liberal, Conservative, Centrist). I am willing to say that Guliani is perhaps more Libertarian than..saay…George Bush or Ted Kennedy. However, he is on the fringes, and represents the centrist section of the Libertarian movement, which does not make him either
    a.)an ideal candidate to advance the movement, especially considering his anti-drug and anti-gun policies
    b.)Ayn Randian, as Ayn Rand was a near-anarchist.

    Matt, I appreciate the compliment.
    Eric, in order to get out of this round-robin-style-arguement. Exactly what are the accomplishments of the RLC, its estimated budget, and policies concerning the CP? These are not questions which are meant to provoke you, you can email me privately if you wish. [email protected]

  60. Newropeans-Magazine Blog Presse » Blog Archive » USA - Paul for President? Says:

    [...] Excitement spread like wildfire last week across the libertarian web: Ron Paul has entered the presidential race! Even the mainstream press took notice. As we’ll see in the interview with Rep. Paul (R-Texas) below, the excitement may have been premature. [...]

  61. Daniel P. McCall Says:

    I’ve already started a new line of Ron Paul for President gear and they have been selling like hotcakes. http://www.cafepress.com/libertymaniacs/2396673