Get PJ Media on your Apple

PJM Lifestyle

On 9/11 and Benghazi’s Anniversary, We End Conservative Pessimism and Right-Wing Apocalypticism

The world may look bleak as we mourn those we've lost, but America's greatest days lie ahead and James C. Bennett and Michael Lotus's America 3.0 provides the blueprint for getting there.

by
Dave Swindle

Bio

September 11, 2013 - 3:30 pm

Sunset on 9/11

For season 2 of the 13 Weeks Radical Reading Regimen each afternoon I juxtapose book excerpts with a collection of PJ Media’s headlines and links to the 10 most interesting stories I find each morning from other sites around the web. The goal is to make fresh connections between the events of the day and the bigger picture of humanity’s place in the universe. This series’ current focus also begins each day through highlighting the contributions of an important writer.

My original plan for today’s 9/11 reflection had been to write something very mean about Barack Obama and the Shadow President who actually makes his decisions, Valerie Jarrett.

I was angry at the president over Syria and particularly the way he had knocked off the radar his other scandals: the IRS targeting of his political opponents, his NSA’s unconstitutional surveillance of all internet traffic, the myriad of corruptions in Eric Holder’s racialist Justice Department, and, finally, what I still believe and pray will someday emerge in full clarity for all Americans as what it is, Obama’s Worse-Than-Watergate for which he should be impeached. His abandonment of four American heroes to die as they called for help, the still mysterious circumstances of just why Ambassador Chris Stevens was there on the anniversary of 9/11, and then the administration’s denial of a terrorist attack, asserting against all evidence that the attack was the result of “spontaneous uprisings” provoked by a YouTube video whose filmmaker was promptly arrested. (Think any Muslim in the Middle East has any idea he technically sat in jail for a parole violation, instead of for blaspheming the Prophet?)

But enough of all that. Or it’s “goodbye to all that” that’s the cliché of choice for previous generations, right?

Throughout Obama’s presidency I’ve called him just about every name in the book short of the Birthers’ “Kenyan.” But what’s the point any more? There’s no longer an election to win. There is no one left to try to convince of Obama’s stealth-socialist, Alinskyite strategy for “fundamentally transforming America.” Now all that’s necessary is to stand back and quietly mutter “I told you so” as our Democrat, progressive, and leftist friends watch in horror as Obama’s agenda collapses across the board. What will be left to brag about at the end of eight years? A healthcare law that doesn’t work and that Obama himself has delayed implementing?

Valerie_Jarrett_82

The Syria speech last night crystallized the confusion of the era. President Jarrett has no idea what she’s doing—and neither does Obama. No matter how malevolent their goals, regardless of postmodern indoctrination distorting their sense of right and wrong, very real limits exist to limit how much damage they can actually inflict. I arrive at this conclusion for two reasons, one that is becoming more apparent even to Democrats, and another that is more hidden, particularly to those like me whose public school and undergraduate history education was so inadequate.

  1. Obama and Jarrett are not geniuses. They are corrupt Chicago machine politicians, schooled in Saul Alinsky’s Al Capone-inspired methods, once allied with low-level crooks like Tony Rezko and still utilizing the intimidation tactics of New Black Panther Party and Al Sharpton-style agitators. All they know and can do is intimidate their opponents and deceive their way into power. (Obama really had no idea that his mentor of 20 years was a conspiracist antisemite?) But once having seized power, even if the goal is to “fundamentally transform America,” that task remains an Everest peak. Why:
  2. As I’ve ideologically shifted from the postmodern-progressive-nihilism of my college-educated early 20s, I’ve begun my own education into both American and global history. I strive to read on everything from ancient Egypt and the Jews, through Rome and Greece, the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, the Enlightenment classical liberal revolution, and then the Big Narrative of the rise of America into the most dominant power and culture on the globe. Paul Johnson’s histories in particular have become my literary cocaine, ecstasy, and heroin rolled into one. Read them to inspire excitement at the possibilities of the West’s rise, a joy at the growth of culture, and finally a relaxing contentment inspired by Johnson’s elegant prose.

The tendencies of even many patriots to embrace pessimism and nihilism, proclaiming the impending collapse of America, are refuted through both an understanding of world history broadly and our American history specifically. In my research I have further come to more conclusions:

  1. The cultural degradation that has occurred over the last decades is nothing new. Counter-enlightenment, Romantic, feelings-based ideologies like those of President Jarrett and her Obama mask have arisen before. And they have managed to take control of political parties and the presidency. (See Michael Walsh’s Encounter Broadside making the case that historically the Democratic Party is better understood as a criminal organization.) Many of America’s presidents can reasonably be described as amoral men who did more harm than good. We survived.
  2. Our Constitution and the government were built by the brightest lights of the Enlightenment. As stated, but in need of emphasizing repeatedly: Obama and Jarrett are not geniuses. But the men who fought for our freedom and designed our government were.  Someone not smart enough to grasp what the founders built is ill-equipped to disassemble it.

The balancing of powers between the branches of government can be thrown off – as it has been over the past 80 years thanks to FDR and his communist- and fascist-inspired agenda. Yet American history has demonstrated that the excesses and failures of ideological programs inspire push-backs to correct them. We’ve seen that throughout American history bad decisions and mistakes can be reversed. Obama’s damage to America’s economic growth, and the backwards turn he’s taken for preventing future 9/11s – these can and will be corrected. The big government built by FDR that has dominated American life for 80 years and whose accumulated debt prepares to come crashing down on us — what James C. Bennett and Michael Lotus call “America 2.0” – will not be with us for much longer.

America-3-1.0-550px

Today, as we remember the fallen, as we fear for a future of America’s decline and ponder the possibility of destruction – we must reject those defeatist calls, recognizing their often cynical, profit-driven, 501©3-funding motives. There’s always been a lot of money in scaring people and then selling them the snake-oil panacea. The formula has worked for decades for both Right and Left since the end of the Cold War scrambled everyone’s ideological priorities: exaggerate the threat, focus just on seeing America’s challenges through political media almost exclusively, and let the Left/Right liberal/conservative model ascend to one’s primary tool for understanding the world.

But no more. The gradually intensified fever-pitch fear-mongering on the Right is both unnecessary and emotionally destructive. People get burnt out by staying in a constant state of crisis. Concrete solutions and practical ways to overcome America’s problems over the course of the next 30 years – not just thinking in four-year election cycles – are needed instead. And it turns out they’re now available.

I’ve been waiting for a book like Bennett and Lotus’s America 3.0: Rebooting American Prosperity In the 21st Century—Why America’s Greatest Days Are Yet to Come for years. We’ve needed a book that proclaims with confidence and literary elegance both how we got here and how to move forward to bring about unimaginable levels of prosperity.

While I anticipated a book of futurism at first, America 3.0’s first 170 pages – after the first chapter’s quick jaunt to an ideal 2040 – are an invigorating history, explaining the components of the Western value system that led to America’s founding and evolution into a global power and economic engine so wealthy that her poor suffer not starvation but obesity.

Chapters 2, 3, and 4 describe the cultural inheritance – particularly our English and Germanic influences — that formed the key values that shaped America. Bennett and Lotus also rightfully name and make the case for the Absolute Nuclear Family as the foundation, an institution that nurtures the individual and thus promotes economic growth and a rejection of tribal war. A culture whose people’s primary concern is giving their children the skills and value systems to live free and create their own family will grow, thrive and innovate their way to great, glorious future. (As I blogged about when first starting America 3.0 in July, their vision of 2040 is tantalizing – though they admit that their technological predictions are very conservative. We’ll probably be much further along technologically than they suggest. But there’s no need to distract from the main thesis and serious policy propositions by initiating a debate about the optimism of Ray Kurzweil’s ideas. This Singularitarian radical who plans on living forever forgives them both and understands.)

shutterstock_136550555

If the book’s beginning its its soul, the middle is its beating, optimistic heart. Bennett and Lotus argue that the United States has developed in two stages that they call America 1.0 and 2.0. Through understanding how these first two stages developed and why we can work through what’s happening now, the transition to 3.0.

America 1.0 was the country of the end of the 18th century and the first half of the 19th. In a scattered, frontier America still striving to tame a continent, what need was there for a large federal government?

One finds the roots of America 2.0 in 1861 with the Civil War, when, as Bennett and Lotus argue, the federal government needed to assemble an army for defeating the Confederate slave nation that seceded. From these origins the components and ideas of America 2.0 gradually came into place as the industrial revolution transformed the country. When a train can take you across the country in a few days in a trip that used to take six months and a telegraph can transmit information rapidly, it’s a different world.

For a time the solution accepted was the continued rise of federal government bureaucracies. This reached its apex with Franklin Delano Roosevelt and was institutionalized fully with World War II’s victory. America 2.0’s triumph over Nazi, Fascist, and Japanese imperial totalitarianism gave it legitimacy for generations.

But as we now know, the big government programs originally conceived in the worlds of 60, 70, and 80 years ago are not sustainable. People are living much longer and federal government welfare no longer goes to people who are really poor:

SNAP has a monthly average of 46.7 million participants, or 22.5 million households.  Food stamps alone had a budget of $88.6 billion in FY 2012.

rand_paul26a00d83451586c69e200e54f82518b8834-800wi

Bennett and Lotus’s concluding chapters are the book’s serious brain. For millennials and Gen-Xers who are readying to ascend to economic, political, and cultural power, America 3.0 should serve as the blueprint for the next two decades. The coming bankruptcy of a federal government too big to pay what it has promised is a scary proposition. But in Chapter 8 the authors articulate seriously how this process could actually work. “The Big Haircut,” as they call it, will finally be the time limited-government advocates will have their opportunity to do away with the Goliaths of government power, returning more responsibilities to states, local governments, and individuals. (Really want single-payer, New England “liberals”? Go for it. By all means, let Texas and other Red states grow faster economically, thus proving the validity of their people’s traditional values as the fuel of their success.)

America 3.0’s last chapter concludes with where most American minds are at today as we debate the lessons learned from the bloodshed of 9/11 and Benghazi. We can set the country back on a Reaganite, “Peace through Strength” approach that recognizes Assad’s Syria, the mullahs’ Iran, KGB man Vladimir Putin’s Russia, and Kim Jong-un’s North Korea as what they are: evil slave states. Their policy prescriptions seem to me an institution of the principles that David P. “Spengler” Goldman names Augustinian Realism, which I described a few weeks ago in this piece here in this ongoing series of my favorite writers and intellectual influences – ranks which Bennett and Lotus now join. (This list was originally intended to start with PJM’s writers; I make an exception given I’ve extended the authors an invitation to contribute to PJ Lifestyle…) Just as today’s government is a product of America 2.0, so is our military today. In restructuring the government it will also be time to evolve our armed forces to succeed in fighting today’s enemies.

And so today, we must stop dwelling in a scared paralysis when confronted with the world’s most evil ideologies – both those in the White House and their allies running wild in the Middle East. Faced forward with eyes open, America 3.0 and the amazing technology we create to enable its birth will overcome both our economic and totalitarian threats. The sun will continue to shine on our nation and again we will prove by our military might and capitalist ingenuity the superiority of our value system, the resilience of our nation, and the Truth of our Creator’s watchful providence over our quest to stand as the City on the Hill, proclaiming the triumph of the Enlightenment through American word and deed.

*****

Addendum:

The great Glenn Reynolds (another important writer I’ll include in this series soon) linked to another review of America 3.0 by David DesRosiers at the Washington Times today. He excerpted the same quote that I would have, albeit for a different reason:

While “America 3.0” should be eagerly consumed by the political class and concerned citizens alike, it needs a champion. Twenty years ago, Newt Gingrich saw the future in Alvin Toffler’s “The Third Wave” and brought it to the political mainstream. It was a book tailored to fit its bullish, technocratic times. “America 3.0” is a more serious book written for more serious times, and it deserves a serious booster. Sen. Rand Paul — and his supporters — should make “America 3.0” their book of ideas.

I didn’t name any specific right-wing apocalypticists in my review — it didn’t seem necessary, the trend is so pervasive and a bad habit among even the best of us. Now I will. The Ron/Rand Paul cult is the worst — the most destructive segment of the far Right.

Rand Paul will not take up America 3.0‘s ideas and he will not be the Republican presidential candidate in 2016. (On this latter point it’s something I as an activist intend to make sure of.) The foreign policy vision articulated in the book’s final chapter is not at all compatible with Paul’s stealth embrace of his father’s paleo-libertarian, “non-interventionist” anarchism. Yes, that is the proper word that must be understood regarding the Pauls. They are not libertarians. As I write about regularly and will continue to do so, Ron and Rand Paul are the revival of an evil political movement that is just as intolerable, anti-American, antisemitic and racist as Barack Obama’s: the Old Right.

Here’s a video of Rand Paul in 2010 talking fondly about his memories driving his father’s guru Murray Rothbard (the one who advocated allying with conspiracists, antisemites and racists, perhaps really because he was all three himself) to the airport after a trip to Washington D.C.:

As the controversy with the Rand Paul staffer and co-author of Rand’s book, the Southern Avenger — not fired and still defended by Rand — demonstrates, the poison apple did not fall far from the tree when it comes to welcoming horrible people into the movement.

Rand Paul is a lousy choice to carry forth the message of a limited government and an intelligently targeted, hawkish foreign policy. He and his movement don’t actually believe in limited government. They believe in no government. I’m so tired of baby-boomer conservatives describing the Pauls and the libertarians as “great on economics, just too bad they’re leftist in their foreign policy.” Both of these claims are wrong. Anarcho-capitalism is not an economic system any conservative could praise — it’s the world of the Articles of Confederation. That’s what Rothbard actually advocated. And it’s why I’ll continue to call the Paul cult anti-American.

Anti-Americanism’s older brother is antisemitism. And Rand’s father is, as others have noted, his Jeremiah Wright. Ron Paul made over a million dollars selling antisemitic and racist conspiracy theories in his newsletters. He made more money than most people make in a lifetime by trafficking in hate. If that doesn’t make someone an antisemite then what does? Speaking for an antisemitic group? Saying Iran, which has made clear its intent to obliterate Israel, should be allowed to have nuclear weapons and they are not a threat to us?

A much better candidate to move forward an America 3.0 agenda is John Bolton. He’s a real libertarian-conservative hawk instead of a libertarian-anarchist utopian.

******

Book Excerpt of the Day, From America 3.0

45038_10101409789806928_346122022_n

Today’s link collection will only feature stories and blog posts related to 9/11.

PJ Media Story Round Up

Lead PJM Stories

Allen West: Col. Allen West: Remembering 9/11

Michael Walsh: Twelve Years Later…

Charlie Martin: What if We Actually Had a War on Terror?

Ed Driscoll: 9/11: A Look Back

PJ Lifestyle Stories on the Home Page

Megan Fox: Lost Innocence: The Day I Had to Tell My Children about 9/11

Sarah Hoyt: When the Nation Won’t Cry

Kathy Shaidle: Takin’ the Freight Elevator to the Incinerator: Joe Strummer and 9/11

Paula Bolyard: On September 11, Another Pilot Died in His Seat

pjlifestyle

New at PJ Lifestyle

Charlie Martin: The Lesson of 9/11

Paula Bolyard: 9/11 as the Chilling Details Unfolded Online

Charlie Martin: ‘We’re Not Going Anywhere’

I love this so much. Thanks, Charlie. Today hasn’t been a day of many laughs — this one’s cathartic.

tatlerlogo

New at PJ Tatler

From the PJ Tatler’s Editor Bryan Preston

‘Million Muslim March’ Attracts, Like, 24 People Plus Cornel West

From PJM’s Washington D.C. Editor Bridget Johnson

Holder Names Benghazi Victims in 9/11 Memorial Remarks

King: ‘We Just Have to Never Forget’ Islamic Terrorism of 9/11

7 Posts on 9/11 Today From Around the Web

At News Aggregators:

Via Drudge:

John Nolte at Breitbart: Esquire Bungles 9/11 ‘Falling Man’ Photo

At Mediaite:

Noah Rothman: Surprise: ‘Million Muslim March’ Really Was ’9/11 Truther Convention’

Left of Center News and Opinion Sources:

At Politico:

James Arkin: Ron Paul: U.S. triggered Sept. 11

Ron Paul posted a message on Facebook on Wednesday calling the September 11 terrorist attacks “blowback for decades of US intervention in the Middle East.”

“We’re supposed to believe that the perpetrators of 9/11 hated us for our freedom and goodness,” Paul wrote on the 12th anniversary of the attacks. “In fact, that crime was blowback for decades of US intervention in the Middle East. And the last thing we needed was the government’s response: more wars, a stepped-up police and surveillance state, and drones.”

What’d I tell you? The man who raised Tea Party infiltrator Rand and who received his son’s diligent support for all of his presidential campaigns.

At The Nation:

Rick Perlstein: Our Other September 11

Yes, seriously. That’s what The Nation chooses to run on the anniversary of 9/11. A lament for Salvador Allende.

At Media Matters:

Fox Host Remembers 9/11 By Saying That Obama Hates America

Right of Center News and Opinion Sources:

At Twitchy:

Lowe, Sinise, Cyrus, other celebs tweet remembrances on 9/11 anniversary

‘Both 2001 and Benghazi 2012′: Buzz Aldrin honors victims of 9/11 attacks 

Monday Morning Book Reading

There remains much evil in this world: 43% of women in Mali are in polygamous marriages. Page 147 of Robert Spencer’s Not Peace But a Sword, the next book I’ll review for PJ Lifestyle and the next writer I’ll celebrate as one of my most important influences for understanding history.

66972_10101417184482938_432973263_n

******

See the first nine weeks of reading and headline round-ups:

Week One

Week Two

Week Three

Week Four 

Week Five — The Beginning a Series Highlighting My 6 Primary Foreign Policy Influences

Week Six — A Continuation of the Series, now Focusing on my 5 biggest cultural influences

Week Seven

Week Eight — Now beginning to name by biggest historical influences

Week Nine

******

images courtesy shutterstock / Daboost

David Swindle is the associate editor of PJ Media. He writes and edits articles and blog posts on politics, news, culture, religion, and entertainment. He edits the PJ Lifestyle section and the PJ columnists. Contact him at DaveSwindlePJM @ Gmail.com and follow him on Twitter @DaveSwindle. He has worked full-time as a writer, editor, blogger, and New Media troublemaker since 2009, at PJ Media since 2011. He graduated with a degree in English (creative writing emphasis) and political science from Ball State University in 2006. Previously he's also worked as a freelance writer for The Indianapolis Star and the film critic for WTHR.com. He lives in Los Angeles with his wife and their Siberian Husky puppy Maura.

Comments are closed.

All Comments   (21)
All Comments   (21)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Dave, I'd like to be an optimist, but ain't easy.

Today I asked a 20 year old unwed mother, studying to be a medical assistant, "If someone bashed your head in and stole your purse, would that be a moral act?" Answer: "Yes, moral."

I recently asked a pre-med student, "Are you morally superior to Hitler?" Answer: "I can't say, it's all relative.

One more bourbon, make it a double please!
30 weeks ago
30 weeks ago Link To Comment
It's easier to be optimistic about moral relativists when we realize that it's not a new phenomenon at all. Cultures and societies have always struggled against those who rejected the idea of Good and Evil. But we've been winning.
30 weeks ago
30 weeks ago Link To Comment
This was a reassuring article to read. I'd like to believe it. We'll see going forward. I'll try to keep an open mind.

I also believe we can recover from Obama. But Obama by himself is not THE problem. He is A problem. The REAL problem is the infrastructure that allowed him to get into power. We need to address that. If we don't, it is hard for me to see a way out of the damage he and his enablers are doing for the remainder of my lifetime (I'm 52 this month).

Space here does not permit me to expand on this as I'd like, but I am convinced that more than any other single factor, the interest segment that got Obama into power was the Gulf Arab Petrodollar Pimp Empire. They in relation to the U.S. is roughly akin to WW1 Germany vis-a-vis Czarist Russia at that time, sending Lenin into Russia in order to weaken their country, take them out of the war, and free up German resources for their Western front.

They manipulated the price of oil in order to force the market crash of '08 so as to scare the American people into electing Obama in the first place. Remember, McCain was on track in the polls to win until the crash. Their purpose was to install a president who would go where no president had gone before in terms of the lengths he would go to in order to screw Israel in particular, and withdraw the U.S. from the Middle East generally, so that their Islamist political culture would no longer be perturbed by the example we set for their populations in terms of modern liberal secular values, and so they could finally dismantle an isolated, besieged Israel that could no longer avail itself of the support of the world's leading power. So far, they have largely gotten what they paid for. Israel may yet confound them, and their own internecine disunity and squabbling may lead to them confounding themselves, but Obama is serving his purpose in the greater scheme of things.

Once in, Chicago thug tactics combined with a bought and paid for media ensured that he would get a second term. I have no doubt whatever that the election itself was massively rigged. I could write volumes about this, but for now, I ask one question: How could it be really plausible that given the stakes involved, Romney got two and a half million votes less than even McCain did in '08? How was it that, according to official figures, voter turnout in '12 was not only less than in '08, but even '04, despite the fact that there were 18 million MORE registered voteres in '12 than in '08? I live in the swing state of Ohio...it was so, so obvious...support for Romney was VERY strong here; there is no way, no how, that Obama won this state - and probably many others - legitimately.

With this last election, at the level of presidential elections, we have sunk to about the level of Venezuela. How do we overcome this? Without serious electoral reform, it is hard for me to see a way to a bright "America 3.0.". With the help of the Petrodollar Pimp Empire, Rand Paul might get a lot farther than he deserves to.

For a start, I would suggest that to find our way out of this, we have to look at potential political successors to Obama through this lens: Where are they getting their money, really? How supportive are local surrogates for Islamist interests of particular candidates? If, for example, NPR, the NYT, or the Atlantic Monthly start running a bunch of gushing puff pieces on Rand Paul, that would be a big red flag right there. There is a reason why the likes of Sarah Palin was demonized the way she was; she is clearly out of this orbit, and HAD to be stopped.

Such are my two cents on this. Stout Hearts, everybody...
30 weeks ago
30 weeks ago Link To Comment
This is to reply to Megan, b/c I am such a tech retard that I've only gotten reply to work once.

Anyway- history belongs to who shows up. Right now, that's a mixed bag. Leftists really don't have functional kids, and they don't really have that many- one per couple, is what I've seen. Then they get a divorce, and the kid is jacked up for life- which means- lame, not - influential job, low- pay, no marriage, maybe one kid after that. They've pretty much killed off that branch of the family tree, in two or three generations. They tend to be short generations, too. That's about half of all the news in alternative medicine books- divorce in childhood jacks you up by the time you're forty.

While conservative, more religious types have kids. Healthy, sturdy, literate, polite kids. Plural. This means they know how to navigate in a family, one way or another.

What I think is interesting right now is the social distrust- everyone has their carefully raised kids- but they don't know that their nice kid is going to meet up with a nice girl/ nice boy to get married. It's everyone- even at churches with strong youth groups. I mean, I've got three kids. When I carpool, they've got their friends- and these are middle-school boys- first set of pimples, never been kissed, young-- and they are already planning on college, and jobs, and buying houses in the suburbs and wives and kids. Concrete plans- they check each other's grades and papers- did you do this? They talk about being like their grouchy old man neighbor. They sort their toys- keeper for future kid- tosser- and what's interesting is that they are keeping the quality toys- wooden train sets- and tossing the plasticrap. They are already considering what sort of dad they'll be, too.

And yet, when I talk to mothers and grandmothers of daughters- they don't know that these guys are out there. They hope they are- but they don't know. They aren't sure their daughters will find these guys.

I'm thinking cotillion and "the season" isn't the worst thought ever. I mean, movies all sort of agree that Prom, run by a public school, is the best match-maker. What if debutante season, with its teas and dances and socials and picnics, among a great big group of nice kids- with parents and such sort of supervising---wouldn't that be at least a good start? I know it's tarred as elitest and retrograde, but I don't know that it has to be.
30 weeks ago
30 weeks ago Link To Comment
Thanks for the recommendation. America 3.0 goes on my To Buy list. Thanks, also, for pointing out the dangers of apocalyptic thinking on the right and for voicing my fears of the Rand Paul cult. If he were to be elected president he could prove to be as destructive as Obama himself. Paul seems to be using the most pernicious tactics of Democrats, an appeal to the emotions through fear, and I hope people realize this and refrain from spending political capital in trying to get this guy elected president. We can do much better.
30 weeks ago
30 weeks ago Link To Comment
I like Rand Paul. He's one of the few voices I hear that consistently echoes the ideas of the founders. We could use a lot more voices like his. And a lot fewer lying, class-warfare/racial hatred stoking socialist tyrants.
30 weeks ago
30 weeks ago Link To Comment
His free-market domestic agenda is fine with me, but his fear-mongering about drones was silly and a waste of time when there are so many truly egregious acts that have been perpetrated by the O administration to be concerned about. The withdrawal of American influence from the world stage he advocates is really troubling, especially now that the administration has done so much damage. As a nation we're going to need a sure hand on foreign policy, and that's not Rand Paul.
30 weeks ago
30 weeks ago Link To Comment
Even his free market agenda is still nuts. He focuses most of his economic energies on the Fed and the gold standard rather than issues that are really causing the problems. He's not a limited government advocate, he's a NO GOVERNMENT advocate.
30 weeks ago
30 weeks ago Link To Comment
Wait, are we talking RAND Paul or RON Paul? The latter I definitely see there.

And honestly, if he's an anarchist as you seem to imply, I don't see why he shouldn't support Rousseau and Robespierre? They were anarchists. Heck, the entire point of the French Revolution was tearing down government and order. Otherwise, why kill the king and his nobles? One of his commanders, Grignon, even stated when raiding Vendee that they kill anyone they find, even fellow revolutionaries.
30 weeks ago
30 weeks ago Link To Comment
The only meaningful difference I've come to see between Ron and Rand is the same as the difference between Jeremiah Wright and Obama: he's smart enough to shut up and pretend to be reasonable so he can dupe people into voting for him.

There are a number of varieties of anarchism that don't all agree. Rand Paul derives from Murray Rothbard's anarcho-capitalism.
30 weeks ago
30 weeks ago Link To Comment
I respect you Dave but I gotta ask what's your proof about Rand being just like dear old dad? I mean if mushy(albeit smart) moderates like Micheal Medved like him(and he sure didn't like his father) I start to wonder if you're the one off base here.

No disrespect meant, just an honest question.
30 weeks ago
30 weeks ago Link To Comment
Michael Medved is a naive fool. He embodies everything that annoys me about corporatist baby boomer conservatism-lite. I turn off the radio everyday as soon as his show is about to start. But I really doubt that uber-neoconservative Medved is all that crazy about Paul when he disagrees with his foreign policy views so much.

The fact that Rand Paul has perpetually supported his father's presidential campaigns and utilized his father's movement and network of supporters to get elected are big proofs that he has not broken with his father in any meaningful way. I am not aware of any time he has criticized his father or said in any serious way that he disagrees with his father's naked antisemitism.

I gave further proof in my article's addendum. Did you not see it? I'll copy and paste for you:
http://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2013/09/11/on-911-and-benghazis-anniversary-we-end-conservative-pessimism-and-right-wing-apocalypticism/5/

Here’s a video of Rand Paul in 2010 talking fondly about his memories driving his father’s guru Murray Rothbard (the one who advocated allying with conspiracists, antisemites and racists, perhaps really because he was all three himself) to the airport after a trip to Washington D.C.:


As the controversy with the Rand Paul staffer and co-author of Rand’s book, the Southern Avenger — not fired and still defended by Rand — demonstrates, the poison apple did not far from the tree when it comes to welcoming horrible people into the movement.

Rand Paul is a lousy choice to carry forth the message of a limited government and an intelligently targeted, hawkish foreign policy. He and his movement don’t actually believe in limited government. They believe in no government. I’m so tired of baby-boomer conservatives describing the Pauls and the libertarians as “great on economics, just too bad they’re leftist in their foreign policy.” Both of these claims are wrong. Anarcho-capitalism is not an economic system any conservative could praise — it’s the world of the Articles of Confederation. That’s what Rothbard actually advocated. And it’s why I’ll continue to call the Paul cult anti-American.

Anti-Americanism’s older brother is antisemitism. And Rand’s father is, as others have noted, his Jeremiah Wright. Ron Paul made over a million dollars selling antisemitic and racist conspiracy theories in his newsletters. He made more money than most people make in a lifetime by trafficking in hate. If that doesn’t make someone an antisemite then what does? Speaking for an antisemitic group? Saying Iran, which has made clear its intent to obliterate Israel, should be allowed to have nuclear weapons and they are not a threat to us?
30 weeks ago
30 weeks ago Link To Comment
He bugs the hell out of me too. I listen to him sparingly in the car, I turn to Hannity instead. Sorry I'm using a chromebook and it hasn't loaded some of the pages on PJM all that well, especially those with embedded videos, so no, I didn't see the video(and if you included it in your reply to me it's still not there). Admittedly I know nothing about Murray Rothbard, I'll have to do some research but if what you say is accurate, and I have no reason to believe it's not, then supporting Rand Paul becomes very hard.
30 weeks ago
30 weeks ago Link To Comment
The site's been having some issues lately so it might not be you. But thank you for your consideration. I don't say these things lightly. This is an issue that I've had to deal with for years as an editor and activist. And these are the conclusions that I have come to. Rand Paul has clearly demonstrated that he still embraces his father's ideology and still reveres repugnant people like Rothbard. And yes, check out Rothbard's books and read for yourself his anarchism. The think tank he helped found offers most of his books as free downloads. I might end up going through and blogging some of them at some point.
30 weeks ago
30 weeks ago Link To Comment
"Someone not smart enough to grasp what the founders built is ill-equipped to disassemble it." This is the money quote for me. You were right, this DOES make me feel better. I need to read this book. But I do have one concern...you know I want to believe we can find the upswing again, but with the hoards of useful idiots that put this imbecile in office AGAIN, do you really think there are enough of us who inherited the American values of "hard work, get up and try again, ingenuity...etc." type stuff? I fear we are outnumbered by those who have been corrupted by the socialist/commie takeover of our educational system. The low-information crowd is killing our values and regard for freedom. Do you really think we can overcome the sheer numbers?
31 weeks ago
31 weeks ago Link To Comment
"Do you really think we can overcome the sheer numbers?"
Yes. Their numbers are not as high as one might think. The number of people in this country who are neither Right or Left and just trying to get on with their lives is much higher than a lot of conservatives think.

Obama's victory was more a result of defeating Romney and sabotaging opposition efforts against him, not winning on the issues. Obama won by duping America both times -- not because they really accepted his agenda.
30 weeks ago
30 weeks ago Link To Comment
He won by 'duping' people who were most willing to be duped. The only possible alternative is massive, telling voter fraud. If that did in fact happen, then Romney and the GOP caved utterly, proving the existence of a de-facto one-party state. Your inadvertent comments about getting high off the writings of Johnson and others are telling - America as a Freedom Drug. Torah goes out from Jerusalem, not Washington. Not really a political statement, per se, but good to keep in mind when worshiping Rome - America is closer to Rome than to Jerusalem, though we in and around Jerusalem often seem to pine for Rome. The fact remains that, after a disastrous four years of being led by a man nurtured on Marxist ideals and with obvious devotion to Muslims, with whom he promised to stand if the winds changed, Americans elected Obama a second time. You're a fantasist, Dave.
30 weeks ago
30 weeks ago Link To Comment
What is the fantasy I am allegedly embracing?
30 weeks ago
30 weeks ago Link To Comment
That America will come to a different fate from Rome as described in prophesy, I assume.........
30 weeks ago
30 weeks ago Link To Comment
"Do you really think we can overcome the sheer numbers?" Once the current government goes bankrupt... Yep. Atlas won't be shrugging but the American makers will.
31 weeks ago
31 weeks ago Link To Comment
True, and I wish it were not, for the consequences of bankruptcy
will be measured in mega-deaths in this country, and there is no
guarantee that the 'Good Guys' will win out in the effort to rebuild
and reform the USofA.
30 weeks ago
30 weeks ago Link To Comment
View All