Texas Rep. Ron Paul hasn’t won any of the 23 Republican presidential primaries or caucuses already in the 2012 history books. He’s captured only 29 delegates, just 5 percent of those awarded in contests to date. (Front-runner Mitt Romney has 340 committed delegates, 58 percent of those officially allotted, according to NPR calculations.) And on Super Tuesday, Paul’s caucus strategy took a hit in North Dakota, where he had staked time, hope and money, and where Rick Santorum pulled out a win. But while Romney, Santorum and Newt Gingrich — or their surrogates, to be precise — continued to bicker over who should drop out, when and why, Paul keeps insisting he’s in the GOP presidential race to win the nomination in Tampa. Far-fetched? Jesse Benton, Paul’s national campaign chairman, begs to differ. He spoke with us Wednesday, as Paul prepared to head to events in Kansas and Missouri, which hold their GOP presidential caucuses in coming weeks. Here’s what Benton had to say about a range of issues, from campaign strategy to Iran and the political future of Paul’s son, Sen. Rand Paul. On how the campaign’s in-it-to-win-it posture seems highly improbable, given the post-Super Tuesday state of play It’s not far-fetched at all. Most of the delegate projection is simply that, speculation based on how people think delegates will be allotted based on performance in nonbinding straw polls. They’re going to be elected through the state convention process. It’s our strategy to attack those state conventions, move through that convention process and capture delegates that way. The reporting of delegate attainment is largely skewed by the media right now.

Ron Paul’s Path To the GOP Nomination

hipsterlibertarian: From the article: Women tend to vote for Democrats and non-libertarian Republicans over candidates who more consistently advocate limited government. On an anecdotal level, it’s not uncommon in the youth liberty movement where I work to joke about how an upcoming event will be awesome because there will be “at least one girl for every 30 guys!” (We do actually have a much better ratio than that, I promise.) Some of this discrepancy is perhaps due to a problem of messaging to which libertarians are especially prone: In focusing on the rights and value inherent to the individual, it’s easy for us to forget that the average citizen thinks of herself (and is thought of by those around her) as a member of a number of social categories: female, Muslim, middle class, Hispanic. And, for better or worse, these perceptions influence both the way a person thinks she “should” think about politics and the way others expect her to think about politics. So whether we like it or not, if the liberty movement seeks to continue to grow in popularity, libertarians must learn to speak to the many distinct audiences who may not yet support our message. With women, many say, this messaging problem is particularly tricky because apparently “women are natural socialists”: We want everyone to share and everyone to get along. We are nurturers, and we expect the “haves” to take care of the “have-nots,” the strong to take care of the weak, and the brave to protect the others. … We want everyone to like us and we want everyone to like each other. Men, to put it simply, are more independent in thought and action. Now, this “women are natural socialists” line is one I’ve heard a lot — and one which I don’t find particularly helpful in this or any political debate. After all, if the gentler sex just can’t help loving big government, why bother their pretty little heads arguing with them about it? No use fighting nature, and anyway, dinner will boil over while she tries to think! But the modern liberty movement was actually founded by three (or four?) women, so theoretically libertarianism shouldn’t be too much of a stretch for women today. What’s good for the gander should be good for the goose, and a visit to any Ron Paul rally will make clear that the ideas of liberty appeal to a very wide range of people from all walks of life — all social categories, if you will. Read the whole thing here. Lovely, as always, Bonnie! c:

Apropos to today apparently being International Women’s Day, I’ve got a new piece up at the Daily Caller about why women should be libertarians.

What’s said on the campaign trail, you know, those folks don’t have a lot of responsibilities. They’re not commander in chief. And when I see the casualness with which some of these folks talk about war I’m reminded of the costs involved in war. I’m reminded that the decision that I have to make in terms of sending our young men and women into battle and the impact that has on their lives, the impact it has on our national security, the impact it has on our economy. This is not a game. There’s nothing casual about it.

President Obama

Um… I’m assuming I don’t need to remind anyone of his 2008 campaign and how it was, you know, also an election campaign and, you know, just a better branded version of the GOP candidates’.

Just because you speak well, that by no means means that you care more. It means you are a fantastic orator.

An “anti-something” movement displays a purely negative attitude. It has no chance whatever to succeed. Its passionate diatribes virtually advertise the program that they attack. People must fight for something that they want to achieve, not simply reject an evil, however bad it may be. They must, without any reservations, endorse the program of the market economy.

Ludwig von Mises, Anti-Capitalist Mentality, Chapter 5.

Occupy Wall Street & The Tea Party take note. The rEVOLution? Carry on folks.

(via conza)

This is soooo crucial for recruitment. People don’t like to be around a bunch of cowardly whining; they want to be around people that stand for something and inspire them. And no one wants to be constantly reminded about how terrible things are, because it ultimately just causes you to feel helpless. It is a much more powerful tool to inspire others about how great things can be in the future, to give them hope, than to spread fear.

A good example of the contrast is Obama vs… most of the GOP right now. Obama ran an amazing campaign because he talked about hope and change. His challengers have been complaining about him and… well, most of them don’t do anything else, besides try to sell a pizza special as tax reform. Speaking to a vision of prosperity and innovation will almost always be more successful than harping on scapegoats.

So be for peace, not anti-war; for voluntary exchange, not anti-regulation; for charity, not anti-taxes; for communities, not anti-government. Any position can become a positive one if you just take the 3 seconds to think about it. That alternative phrasing goes a long way. And try smiling. Seriously, why do libertarians always look anxious, sad, stressed, and/or generally uncomfortable? Either something isn’t working with your body language or you need to chill out (or pretend, if all else fails).

coeus:

disobey:

lepus:

wearethe99percent:

I am 25 years old.

Very lucky to have a college degree and no debt.

But my career is in progressive politics — working for labor unions, campaigns and nonprofits — and I can’t afford to make ends meet in a Big City, on the $30,000 average salaries these jobs pay. Now I’m 1000s in credit card debt.

How can young people like me change the world, stand up for what we believe in, and still get ahead?

I am the 99%.  #occupywallstreet

 Look at your life.  Look at your choices.

This is fascinating. No debt, and having trouble making ends meet on 30,000 a year? Does this young girl have children or outrageous medical bills she forgot to mention? I only make 30K a year and I live pretty comfortably…. What is she squandering her money on that is causing this failure to “make ends meet”?

True story: there was a time when my family of 4 lived on about 13,000 US. Honey, please. 

“How can I change the world and get ahead in life?!” 

I think this is what is called #whitepeopleproblems and ‘I should have taken a class in finance or at least learned how to balance a checkbook while I was in college getting my totally useless degree’.

So let’s ignore the fact that this girl obviously doesn’t realize that non-profit means, um, ‘not for profit’, nor are labour union, campaign, and nonprofit jobs really consistent in goals or necessarily positively affecting the world, and look at that $30,000/yr salary.

First off, ‘these jobs’ is so insanely vague I cannot even begin to understand how she came up with an across-the-board figure.I used to work for a non-profit in high school, earning $8/hr (that’s above minimum wage in Texas; holla’ for skilled labour!) and in recent years looking into for-profit charity, I’ve read that a reasonable salary for CEOs of nonprofits is $100,000-200,000 (not that I think this is reasonable if you want to attract talent, but that goes back to the many reasons I’m for for-profit charity). So that’s a relatively large spectrum.

Working for campaigns. Well. The salaries for this range from $0 (volunteer) to hundreds of thousands, probably even millions for ones running high-profile, well-funded campaigns. That is a huge spectrum.

I don’t know much about the inner-workings of labour unions, because it makes me nauseated, but unions are insanely wealthy and are virtually hemorrhaging money which they extort from unwilling workers in non-right-to-work states (ahem Massachusetts).

If you know anything about mean (average) salary, you probably know that it can be extremely skewed in some cases, and that median salary might be a better reflection of earning potential (not that this girl clarifies whether this is average overall or average starting salary—the latter is pretty much always deceptively low, in most industries, because, uh, you have no experience and are therefore pretty useless). You should also know that there are far more people at the bottom than the top. Obviously, you can’t be the manager of half of a person. That means that the lower salaries drag down the mean, because they ‘count’ more than the higher salaries. This relates to what is called a ‘spread’ blah blah statistics blah blah percentile blah blah di-blah. So yeah, this girl is vague to the point of irrelevance.

I mean, if you want a $50,000/yr starting salary, get a degree in finance, engineering, computer programming, or some related field. But that’s a want, not a need—my dad used to give me that lecture all the time when I was younger, but maybe it takes a MA in Finance to prepare your kids for the real world. When I was considering selling my soul to work on Wall Street for a six figure starting salary, it was because I was planning on being $80,000+ in debt, not because that level of income is at all necessary for financial well-being—I would know, I’m an Economics major (a.k.a. a glorified Finance major with a slightly higher mean starting salary and more Indians/fewer white people).

To put this in perspective, my mother’s income is $12,000/yr, all from the  rental income of one apartment (because my mother cannot afford to support me, I have become financially independent at 19). My mother needs several surgeries, including a knee replacement, correction of a herniated disk in her lower back, and a brain tumor. Her insurance costs alone take up about half of her income. I am a full-time student earning $0/yr and pay all of my own bills, including insurance ($1,200/yr), which I cannot go without because my ADHD (and its comorbid OCD and depression) is too severe for me to forgo my otherwise $2,000/yr Adderall and my chronic (daily) migraines are too debilitating and frequent for me to forgo my otherwise $1,600/yr migraine medication. My rent is $525/mo +electricity. I am living relatively comfortably on the money I’ve saved since high school and while I worry sometimes, I am not complaining. People like the girl in this picture exemplify what is wrong with America; she probably wouldn’t know austerity or actual financial hardship if it hit her in the face.

One last thing: SHE NEVER MENTIONS THE FIELD IN WHICH SHE RECEIVED HER DEGREE. IF IT IS ZOOLOGY, MEDIEVAL WEAPONRY, OR GEOLOGY, SHE PROBABLY SHOULDN’T BE EARNING VERY MUCH IN POLITICS. Not all degrees are created equal. You are not entitled to not being laughed out of an employer’s office. 

(Source: http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/post/11593261584/i-am-25-years-old-very-lucky-to-have-a-college)

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3T9uQNzyPQ?wmode=transparent&autohide=1&egm=0&hd=1&iv_load_policy=3&modestbranding=1&rel=0&showinfo=0&showsearch=0&w=500&h=375%5D

hipsterlibertarian:

Looking for well-designed flyers to spread the word about Ron Paul?  My friend Justin explains which one (or two or three or more!) of his offerings (most of which were penned by yours truly) is the option for you.

UPDATE:  Shirts too!  Here at Zazzle.

Proof that we understand the importance of branding just as well as the Dems (not to mention, we do it purty damn well too). Absolutely lovely! ❤

(Source: http://www.youtube.com/)