“The Ruins of Detroit”

Ruins

Amazing stuff.

(h/t Joe Carducci.)

  • Share/Bookmark

11 comments ↓

#1 DrewJ on 02.24.10 at 7:20 pm

David,

I guess Ron Paul must be doing well now that you’re calling him “unserious.”

It’s interesting how much of American political writing has become not much beyond name-calling and smears, two things Paul doesn’t engage in.

No wonder you’re worried.

DrewJ

#2 DrewJ on 02.24.10 at 7:26 pm

David,

What kind of libertarian argues for a “robust and proactive” national defense?

That means perpetual war.

DrewJ

#3 Nathan on 02.24.10 at 9:15 pm

Dear David,

Thank you for making me even more of a supporter of Ron Paul after that smear attack of yours on Reason. Its one thing to offer a intelligent critique of his policies, but your article is just ignorant name calling.

#4 Eddie on 02.24.10 at 9:25 pm

Seriously, what’s with the anti-Ron Paul stance?
Limited government in the form of sensible foreign policy (no wars unless declared) and reigning in the Fed.
Sounds like a Libertarian stance to me.

#5 Matthew on 02.25.10 at 2:37 pm

Dear David,
Forget all of these other commentators. Your attack on Ron Paul was well written, well thought out, and well supported.
Keep it up,
Matt

#6 Quint X on 02.28.10 at 7:43 pm

Haha! Really, Mathew? No citations at all, none. Just a bunch of rehashed ad hominem, poorly written at that! It is no surprise to me that virtually NO ONE reads your blog. Hack!

#7 Me on 03.01.10 at 2:49 am

I don’t really write here, Quint, but thanks for checking in! You can catch my column in the Denver Post — or RealClearPolitics/Reason.com/TownHall.com/Washington Examiner, etc …

#8 Anna on 03.01.10 at 10:38 pm

Matthew,
well supported? Calling someone an anti-Semite and racist without backing it up with a single quote or another shred of evidence is not something I would call well thought out or well supported. In fact I can imagine fewer things in poorer taste.
Upon further examination I could not find anything that indicated that Ron Paul was an anti-Semite or a racist. In fact he regularly quotes Jewish economists so I doubt he has much of a problem with them.
I must say I expected more from someone writing for Reason Magazine.

#9 Me on 03.02.10 at 12:16 am

Anna, can you provide the quote in which I write that “Ron Paul was an anti-Semite or a racist” because it’s news to me.

#10 Anna on 03.02.10 at 3:14 pm

I never said that you wrote in quotes “Ron Paul was an anti-Semite or a racist.” I said that you called him an anti-Semite and a racist. This shouldn’t be news to you as you wrote “Paul’s newsletters of the ’80s and ’90s were filled with anti-Semitic and racist rants…”.

Were we to interpret this in some other way than that you find him anti-Semitic and racist? Or is saying or writing anti-Semitic or racist things not what makes you an anti-Semite or racist? I don’t see why you would distinguish between: “X is a racist.” “X writes racist things.” Or did you mean that he was a racist in the ’80s and ’90s but is not anymore? I didn’t get the point of that paragraph. Just looked like unsubstantiated ad hominem attacks to me which do not belong in “Reason Magazine”.

#11 Me on 03.02.10 at 4:21 pm

The fact that Ron Paul’s newsletters in the 80s and 90s were filled with racist and anti-Semitic rants is methodically substantiated. So substantiated, in fact, that Paul himself said, “I do repudiate everything that is written along those lines …”

Here is more: http://blogs.denverpost.com/thespot/2010/02/24/more-on-ron-paul/

And I never claimed Paul wrote them (Reason pretty much proved it was Lew Rockwell who did, which is no surprise).

At the time I wrote:

“It’s exceedingly difficult for me to believable that Paul was unaware of the content in a newsletter bearing his name. Judging from what I’ve read and heard from the man, I do not believe he wrote these things. But I’m not sure it matters.”

Leave a Comment