I could hardly get through the article because of all the errors

If your point is that Ron Paul is not a doctrinaire libertarian, then it is well-taken. His support for immigration quotas, documentation, etc. as well as his pro-life stance place him squarely in the Republican camp.

Which is good, considering he is running as a Republican. The smears against him that he is a racist are just that – smears. All the guilt-by-association links in the world come to nothing if they are one-way (racist supporters of Dr. Paul)

Now, the question becomes: who should I (a fairly doctrinaire (L)ibertarian ) support? Christine Smith (or whichever Libt candidate you favor) or Ron Paul?

The simple calculus is (amount of agreement * chance of winning)

We will give Ms. Smith (or any other Libt candidate) the benefit of the doubt and assume 100% agreement with the LP platform.

We will give Dr. Paul the opposite leeway, and assume only 75% agreement (I actually think it’s much higher: 80% – 95%)

Since Ms. Smith (et al.) and Dr. Paul cannot compete except on the general election ballot, we must assume that Dr. Paul wins the GOP nomination (a bit of a stretch at this moment in time, but not totally beyond the realm of possibility)

As for the Dems – who cares? Let’s assume Hillary, but the calculus is the same regardless. Assuming Ms. Clinton agrees with only 5% of the Libt platform – again, a very generous assumption.

So for the lineup of:
Dr. Paul (R)
Ms. Smith (L)
Ms. Clinton (D)
(plus the usual assortment of Greens, et alia)

The question becomes who is more likely to win? In this case, I would put Ron’s and Hillary’s chances at 50-50. But Ms. Smith has, at best, a mere 5% chance (and that is being very, very, generous as anyone who watches pres politics for any length of time knows full well.)

chance of | agreement
winning | with L.P.
Ms. Smith .05 * 1.00 = .05
Dr. Paul .50 * .75 = .375
Ms. Clinton .50 * .05 = .025

Clearly the support should go to Dr. Paul.

Now I am well aware that not everyone votes for the purpose of selecting a President. some vote to “send a message”, etc. To them I say, “go in peace – vote your conscience, and devil take the hindmost” but to those who are voting to turn this nation around, Dr. Paul is the clear choice.

If Dr. Paul should not win the GOP nomination, then the calculus changes drastically, and your average Libertarian should (and I will) switch support to Ms. Smith (or whomever the Libertarian party nominates at convention.)

Later.

I’ve said my fair share about Giuliani this year — to the point where we ended up having to ban a commenter who claimed that Giuliani was a libertarian when he started becoming abusive.

Including this:

http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/11/07/rudy-giuliani-pat-robertson-and-the-future-of-the-republican-party/

I don’t feel the need to address anything else that Robertson has to say because he’s basically an idiot.

The issues that tarran’s post address, though, have never really been discussed here before and its not something that I’ve seen many libertarians address in the past.

Now if you are looking for an important story…..it would be nice if someone at Liberty Papers devoted some attention to the implications of Pat Robertson’s endorsement of Rudy and Rudy’s embrace of that endorsement.

Rudy did this despite the fact that Pat blamed sinful Americans for causing 911. David Duke and his allies are just a bunch of economically marginal social outcasts living in trailers and shacks. Pat Robertson, on the other hand, has a whole network behind him and don’t get me even started on other well-healed pro-Republican nutballs like John Hagee.

Quite simply, Duke is too insignificant to be worry about at least compared to powerful threats to liberty and sanity such as Robertson and Hagee and the Republicans who seek and embrace their support. Priorities!!

I’ve always thought that racists like David Duke and the Stormfront guys are like cockroachs — show them the light of day and they go scattering.

I think tarran did an excellent job responding to Duke and others of his ilk that have found their way here recently.

I am of the opinion that you have never been to Arizona. I have no problem with imigration. An imigrant only needs 2 things. To speak english and to pay taxes (if they exist). Thats it. If they can do that I want them here in the US.

What I don’t like is the excessive spending that illegals get in AZ. Free school, Health care, welfare. The voters here passed a bill that requires Proof of ID when you apply, this does not go into effect though until next year.

I enjoy listening to the politically correct trying to define propaganda words like racist, neo-Nazi, etc.., words used selectively to harm European people.

Its like watching a Monty Python skit.

There is omnipresent group conflict on the planet, Zionists abusing Palestinians, Africans still keeping slaves, common terms like tribal chieftains, tribal conflict, tribal warlord, tribal homeland, etc., etc.,

A healthy race, an alpha race, works to maintain its power within a society, both in terms of its percentage and its power within the power structure.

A sick race, a beta race, accepts domination by other races, accepts being punished for discriminating, for trying to advance its ethnic interests.

This behavior is as old as our species.

Those in the West who call themselves “the minorities,” simply belong to a temporary tribal coalition, none of whom are against inequality or discrimination when it serves their own ethnic interests, countering the tribe they call “the majority”.