Friday, January 18, 2008

Why the Beltway Libertarians are trying to Smear Ron Paul.

Here's a good article in response to a smear piece that was posted in the online edition of The National Review on Jan. 8th, just in time for the New Hampshire Presidential Primary. I've previously posted things on this blog in support of Ron Paul, since it's my belief that political and emotional freedom go hand-in-hand. In addition, I think that there is much to be learned from those in the political arena that don't stand for the truth. Which or whose kingdom (spiritually speaking) are they serving? Here's a few paragraphs from the article:
“If a person cared about liberty,” asks the blogger who calls himself “a former beltway wonk,” “why would they be eager to mindlessly repeat smears about the most popular libertarian candidate in decades on the very day of the most crucial ‘king-making’ primary in the United States?”

it’s no mystery, really: Ron Paul is, in many ways, the exact opposite of the Beltway fake-“libertarians.” He’s a populist: they suck up to power, he challenges the powers-that-be; they go along to get along – he has never gone along with the conventional wisdom as defined by the arbiters of political correctness, Left and Right. And most of all, he’s an avowed enemy of the neoconservatives, whom he constantly names as the main danger to peace and liberty – while the Beltway’s tame “libertarians” are in bed with them, often literally as well as figuratively.

In short, the Beltway fake-libs are in bed with the State, and all its works, while contenting themselves with the role of court jester and would-be “reformer” of the system. As long as they don’t challenge anything too fundamental to the continuation of the Welfare-Warfare State, the pet libertines of the neocon-led GOP “coalition” are deemed “urbane” and “cosmopolitan,” the highest compliment the Georgetown party circuit can bestow. Once they begin rocking the boat, as Paul insists on doing, they become fair game for the Smearbund.

To read the whole article, click here or on link above. It's somewhat long but worth reading.

No comments: