Web Letters | The Nation

Ron Paul's Strange Bedfellows

Cheap shot

Ron Paul sucks, yeah, but highlighting what little he has right as Greenwald and a sparse other few rational people have dared to do, knowing full well they would be lambasted for doing so, is more important than serving up to the prickly liberal elite the hypocrisy of our erudite first black president. The primary importance is that someone, anyone, even if it’s a nut like Paul, is saying these things in an otherwise utterly fatuous horse race.

Pollitt’s off-handed smear of Greenwald, for instance, who took great pains keeping discrete the foreign policy ideas Paul has right from the numbskull overall policies of the man (and who pointed out more than once how his daring to praise some aspect of the nut was going to be conflated with complete and total and absolute support for the man and bring about the very sarcasm Pollitt believes she’s entertaining us with)—it was cheap on her part, that’s all.

Look, I’m done with the Democrats except for local politics. I’m indeed throwing my vote away on some arcane candidate who has no chance in hell, even if i have to write in somebody like Nader. Obama is the tombstone of a corpse buried a long time ago, Chris Hedges’s “liberal class.” My little vote means nothing. The take of great institutions like The Nation does matter, and i feel for the tough spot you’re in. Not voting for Obama (indefinite detention, self-defeating laughable foreign policy, Wall Street cabinet positions and giveaways, things like the new defense authorization nonsense)—not voting for all those things because the other side is vocally and openly more extreme about the same things is an understandable position. The Nation will probably take it. But it’s just low to make caricatures out of people who point out Obama’s substantial failings. Only a clueless capitulating Democrat could codify and make bipartisan consensus out of the legacy of the right-wing nightmare preceding him.

Tim Ashby

Scottsdale, AZ

Jan 8 2012 - 1:14pm

Ron Paul's Strange Bedfellows

Ron Paul: adolescent senior citizen

Libertarianism is a philosophy, not a means of governance. And as such, it really is based on an adolescent selfishness and rationalization for one’s own self-centered behavior. I suppose someone can act like they are living a libertarian-oriented life; but no one can govern pursuant to the principles of that philosophy.

Our most recent example of libertarianism at work was set by Alan Greenspan, sycophant of Ayn Rand herself. His belief that the “free markets” would “self-regulate” against fraud led us to the eventual finanical calamity we still suffer from. He recently gave pathetic testimony in front of Congress admitting his beliefs in this regard were proven totally wrong.

Sure, the libertarian believes in absolute freedom; that means that absolutely there will be something on everyone’s wish list.

But the freedoms enshrined in the Constitution are not derived from adherence to freedom as an absolute goal but rather out of a shared responsibility of the government and its citizenry to each other.

Asher Fried

Croton-on-Hudson, NY

Jan 6 2012 - 3:27pm