Teller donated $2,300 to Ron Paul

[Cain]

Read deeper into those topics. I was being sarcastic, and said so.

The sad thing is, despite initially acting like a doofus, I got one or two PMs of people telling me they agreed with me. Ick!

Really? You mean you were being sarcastic when you said you hated Ron Paul (and his followers) for their love of liberty, rainbows and children. Why, I had no idea... When I said you are a clumsy troll I meant as a pro-Paul troll. In other words, you're about as subtle as Don King.

 

[gtc]

I think that the difference between Penn & Teller and the usual net libertarian and Ronulan that we see around here is that they would be able to mount an argument as to why the allegations against Ron are wrong or why Ron is worth supporting anyway. Failing that they seem like the sort of people who would manage not to give a **** about what other people think about their support for Paul.

I suspect more people would admit to having libertarian leanings if it wasn't for the sort of libertarian you meet on the internet and if only they stuck to insisting that government shouldn't regulate private morality and insisting that all government actions (whether it be expenditure, taxation or regulation or even regulation designed to promote equal rights) be justified.

Sadly most internet libertarians seem to feel the most important right is either the right to be a cranky bastard or the right to be king of their own slice of America (witness the number of pro confederate libertarians).

 

[CFLarsen]

Just an observation, Claus.

How about this observation?

Guess he's no longer a skeptic now, right guys? Because's he's a "political woo"? Perhaps if you see him at another Amazing Meeting you'll sneer at him because he's not a Democrat? Is it time to rebuke him and excommunicate him from the Holy Church of Skepticism?

(Emphasis mine)

Did you not indicate that his donation to the Libertarian candidate was something new to people, and that it should make people change their stance on Teller?

I know. Ignore my registration date, it doesn't tell you how long I lurked these forums. These forums have a lot of lurkers as well as members; I was one of the lurkers for a long while.

In which case you are perfectly aware of how shanek's Libertarianism was countered.

http://www.pennandteller.com/03/coolstuff/tellerspeaks/telleressayarrivewash.html

Here is a quote from his latest essay:

"I love Washington. Yes, I know it’s the seat of hateful bureaucrats blowing my tax dollars for chewing gum. But it’s got great bookstores and great food, the gorgeous subway system (the Metro) the Smithsonian, the Archives, the Washington Monument, and all that other stuff that I own part of. Since I paid for it at the point of a gun, I might as well enjoy it."

And again, he did donate to that "crazy" Ron Paul.

I take it you are a Libertarian. Do you agree with Ron Paul on everything?

 

[BPSCG]

Teller speaks but not on stage or while on TV shows.

I heard him speak on stage last week.

Well, actually, it was an altar, at a Lutheran church.

Really.

He was giving a lecture about the production of Macbeth he's involved with at the Folger Shakespeare Theater here in DC. Had some very interesting views on the play - considers it first and foremost a horror story, albeit with really great writing. More here (click on "Teller's Macbeth Diaries" on the right). Mrs. BPSCG and I have tix for the show March 27.

And I got his autograph on my copy of Cruel Tricks for Dear Friends.

 

[332nd]

Yeah? So? Nancy Cartwright donated $10 mil to the church of Scientology. I didn't throw my Simpson Dvds out.

 

[HarryKeogh]

You are aware that this type of idiotic statement is what I'm complaining about, right?

I was talking about his assertion that he was absolutely positive that Ron Paul didn't write those newsletters. He had blinders on regarding that not that "Libertarians wear blinders".

But rant away.

 

[OneShotKi11]

Yeah? So? Nancy Cartwright donated $10 mil to the church of Scientology. I didn't throw my Simpson Dvds out.

NO, not the Simpson's!!!

 

[timhau]

But this subforum, and these forums in general, are particularly hostile to libertarians... and then, Ron Paul, who both he and his supporters get a very special type of vitriol.

Actually, I think that 'very special type of vitriol' is reserved for people who are bat crazy.

 

[JoeEllison]

I think that the difference between Penn & Teller and the usual net libertarian and Ronulan that we see around here is that they would be able to mount an argument as to why the allegations against Ron are wrong or why Ron is worth supporting anyway. Failing that they seem like the sort of people who would manage not to give a **** about what other people think about their support for Paul.

...or, as Penn used to do all the time on his radio show, describe his libertarian viewpoints as "stupid" and "crazy" and based in not really knowing all that much. Once he does that, there's not much else you can do to argue with him, is there?

 

[volatile]

Yeah? So? Nancy Cartwright donated $10 mil to the church of Scientology. I didn't throw my Simpson Dvds out.

Are you sure you meant "donated"?

 

[KingMerv00]

Dr. F,

Why did you only address the posts you saw as hostile?

A couple of us said that we did not see all Ron Paul supporters as crazy but you insist on painting this forum in broad strokes.

 

[davefoc]

I voted for Ron Paul.

I realize there are many in this forum that think that Ron Paul is pretty much in wacko land.

I don't know much about Paul, so I've never been quite sure what was going on with all that.

There are a few possibilities that I see:
1. Classic Democrats (which is the largest definable political group in this forum I think) generally, IMHO, ignore the unintended consequences of various regulations of the free market that they tend to like (if wages are too low pass a law and make them higher, if rents are too high pass a law and make them lower, etc.). Often, classic Democrats tend to categorize people that don't agree with their ideas about government interventions in the free market as libertarian nutjobs. So, maybe the Ron Paul bashing is just routine Democratic bashing of people that advocate free market solutions.

2. Ron Paul is pro-life, and people in this forum see that as pretty much of a nutjob view so Ron Paul is per force a nutjob to them.

3. Ron Paul doesn't think the job of the US is to muck about in the middle east and people who have decided that it is a good idea for the US to be the grand peacemaker in the middle east despite generations of screwing up that role (if that ever was a real goal of US middle east policy) think that people that disagree with them are wackos or at least leftist, Clinton loving, American hating nutjobs.

4. Ron Paul really is some kind of wacko and if I knew more about him I wouldn't have voted for him.

 

[gtc]

I voted for Ron Paul.

I realize there are many in this forum that think that Ron Paul is pretty much in wacko land.

I don't know much about Paul, so I've never been quite sure what was going on with all that.

There are a few possibilities that I see:

5. Ron Paul really is some kind of whacko and if you knew more about him you might still have voted for him as his non-whacko policies were better than the policies of his opponents.

This isn't my point of view as I am not a committed libertarian but I can see how some people feel this way.

 

[OMGturt1es]

i suspect that penn and teller support ron paul because they think he is the candidate that is most libertarian. in reality, however, ron paul is not a libertarian. ron paul is a conservative, moral authoritive who borrows from the worst of libertarianism and hasn't the spine to campaign with honesty. a breif view of paul's own, sponsored legislation reveals that he is pro-life, anti-gay and ant-church/state seperation.

penn and teller both seem to be strictly against infringements of the establishment clause, and seem to despise government legislated morality. ron paul does not even believe that the establishment clause requires a seperation of church and state. ron paul's own legislation would allow local governments to interprete the establishment clause as they see fit, while barring federal courts from hearing cases regarding infringements of the establishment clause. ron paul's own legislation would bar funding for those organizations that even mention homosexuality as a healthy alternative lifestyle.

it seems very likely to me that penn and teller have simply not spent hours and hours reading about paul's past legislation. paul's own words are often very, very different from paul's legislation.

penn and teller are human. i find them entertaining, and i sometimes agree with them, but that doesn't make them immune to failure. even i fail often, and i kinda have to agree with myself...

 

[BPSCG]

i suspect that penn and teller support ron paul because they think he is the candidate that is most libertarian. in reality, however, ron paul is not a libertarian. ron paul is a conservative, moral authoritive who borrows from the worst of libertarianism and hasn't the spine to campaign with honesty. a breif view of paul's own, sponsored legislation reveals that he is pro-life, anti-gay and ant-church/state seperation.

penn and teller both seem to be strictly against infringements of the establishment clause, and seem to despise government legislated morality. ron paul does not even believe that the establishment clause requires a seperation of church and state. ron paul's own legislation would allow local governments to interprete the establishment clause as they see fit, while barring federal courts from hearing cases regarding infringements of the establishment clause. ron paul's own legislation would bar funding for those organizations that even mention homosexuality as a healthy alternative lifestyle.

it seems very likely to me that penn and teller have simply not spent hours and hours reading about paul's past legislation. paul's own words are often very, very different from paul's legislation.

penn and teller are human. i find them entertaining, and i sometimes agree with them, but that doesn't make them immune to failure. even i fail often, and i kinda have to agree with myself...

Archy was a cockroach, so he had an excuse.

 

[KingMerv00]

I voted for Ron Paul.

*snip*

I don't know much about Paul...

Why did you vote for him?

 

[KoihimeNakamura]

You mean, if a lot of libertarians weren't like htis:

http://www.xkcd.com/386/

 

[Mister Agenda]

5. Ron Paul really is some kind of whacko and if you knew more about him you might still have voted for him as his non-whacko policies were better than the policies of his opponents.

This isn't my point of view as I am not a committed libertarian but I can see how some people feel this way.

It's like you've known me forever.

 

[davefoc]

Why did you vote for him?

The current edition of the Republican Party has sold out to special interests (agribusiness, pharmaceutical, military-industrial, etc.), is anti-science, fiscally irresponsible, favors torture, and the continuation of the involvement of the US in a terrible civil war for cynical political reasons. They allowed the president to use the Iraq War as a giant pork trough for his crony corporations. And they supported their president when he attempted to use the US Attorney's office to shield his political friends and punish his political enemies. This was the most blatant abuse of power by a president in my life and the most blatant attempt to undermine the rule of law by a president in my life.

If the US ends up with a president similar to the current one and a Republican Party as deeply entrenched in corruption as the current one is, the US will continue its decay into bankruptcy and chaos.

I thought Ron Paul might offer an alternative to this.

I'm not going to vote for any Republican on the national level this year and probably won't again until the Democrats are firmly entrenched and the country is greatly suffering under the weight of the unintended consequences of the laws they pass to satisfy their various interest groups.

 

[volatile]

The current edition of the Republican Party has sold out to special interests (agribusiness, pharmaceutical, military-industrial, etc.), is anti-science,

Whoa. Stop right there.

You know Ron Paul doesn't believe in evolution, right?

fiscally irresponsible,

RP wants to get rid of the Federal Reserve and re-instute the gold standard. That sounds about as fiscally irresponsible as it might possible to get to me.