Debra Medina is a Ron Paul Libertarian Says Wayne Slater of Dallas Morning News
 While on the road in Austin, Texas last Friday, January 22, 2010, Wayne Slater, a reporter for the Dallas Morning News, a Belo corporation company, spoke on KLBJ radio. During his interview, discussing the upcoming Texas gubernatorial debate, he described Debra Medina as a "Ron Paul libertarian." Glad I'm not alone in my assessment of Mrs. Medina and her crypto-libertarian supporters.
I'd really like someone to discuss Mrs. Medina's lawsuit AGAINST the Republican Party of Texas!
|
Renew 
Post to Twitter
crypto-crooks
Mrs. Medina's lawsuit AGAINST the Republican Party of Texas!
To see Medina's post-convention speech to her followers, go to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HPwJ2Idyr4 If you'll view the entire video, you will see the absolute link between Debra Medina, Ron Paul, and the Libertarian Party. They literally appointed every person at Medina's rally as members of the Nominating Committee for the National Libertarian Convention.
There is NO question that these people ARE Libertarians. I have NO issue with them being Libertarians, but why don't they spend their time and energy to organize their OWN Party instead of working so hard to invade the Republican Party???
Why Libertarians in Repo Party
I don't want to take words out of (or put words in) his mouth, but I am guessing that he probably realized that no third party or candidate is viable today. The process is simply not run on a level playing field, but is effectively rigged to guarantee the two ruling parties their exclusive control.
I will also guess that the Ron Paul people also learned that the neo-cons who now totally control the Repo party were our worst enemies during the campaign. They don't want and will not allow a conservative candidate to play in their game.
I will venture to say that you've just seen the last of the George Wallaces, Ross Perots and Ron Pauls.
So your complaint -- if that's what it was -- has been taken care of. You won't be seeing any more of that.
Wrong
To answer the other person's question about why Libertarians are in the Republican party it is this - the Libertarian Party was founded by Republicans who were upset with the party for flipping to William Kristol's neo-conservative ideas that infect and fester in the party today. So in essence the Libertarians in the GOP are actually trying to reclaim their original party and reinstate paleo-conservative ideas as a replacement for the very misguided Kristol style neo-conservatism that has destroyed the party.
Thanks but no, I was correct afterall
Before Dr. Paul ran for US Congress he was a Libertarian Texas legislator then ran as a Republican for US Congress. And you are wrong that "neo conservatism" has wrecked the party. Have you read nothing I've written? It has been proven repeatedly by study after study that the harsh and bigoted anti-immigration rhetoric of the crypto-libertarians, of whom Dr. Paul is the leader, alienated thousands of voters and caused the downfall of the Republican Party. You all may continue to delude yourselves and believe the non-sense of Dr. Paul, Debra Medina and Alex Jones but the rest of the party, who so soundly defeated Dr. Paul in 2008, know the truth. You all are largely to blame for Barry, Harry & Nancy, not us...neo-cons. Get over it.
property taxes must go
Yeah, that's right. Argue about Jefferson and who is more libertarian while nobody discusses the real issues.
The fact is, Medina wiped the floor with Perry and Hutch. I wonder how long it will take those two politicians to start the smear campaign against her.
So, what's your point?
Debra Medina is a woman of integrity, whose intention is to reduce the burden of government on Texans. If you have a problem with that, then it's up to you to justify why the government should continue to expand and infringe upon our liberty.
Libertarian Hypocrisy
Libertarianism is not Republicanism!
Despite what other writes have said here, Thomas Jefferson was the genius behind Republicanism which provided the impetus for the formation of a Constitutional (federal) Republic under which we all live today. Jefferson also wrote "The Declaration of Independence" which cited that among other principals that all mankind was created by a supreme being. That is a principal denied by the Libertarian platform and the main reason why Republicans cannot be Libertarians and visa versa. The Libertarian party espouses "Freedom from Religion!" The suggestion or assertion that the founding fathers were Libertarians is simply revisionist history.
Yet again you assume you know everything!
You fail to address the history of our great party and many key principle members. The Goldwater revolution was truly a revolution of the libertarian sympathies in the party against the RINO corporatist Rockefeller in 1964.
Might I also remind you that Reagan was one of Goldwater's biggest supporters. What did Reagan have to say about libertarianism:
Reagan Interview with Reason Magazine, July 1975:
Link: http://reason.com/archives/1975/07/01/inside-ronald-reagan
REASON: Governor Reagan, you have been quoted in the press as saying that you’re doing a lot of speaking now on behalf of the philosophy of conservatism and libertarianism. Is there a difference between the two?
REAGAN: If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.
Heck, what does Reagan or Goldwater know though...pffft...Mr. Garza speaks for all and knows all!
Know it now though sir...it will be the libertarian wing of our great party that will revive the party and restore this representative Constitutional Republic against the communist progressives and fascist neocons. If you do not understand...it matters not. The American libertarian spirit will prevail and save this great party and great nation.
Proved my point...thanks
Mr. Johnson: I respect your arguments and your intentions. I also appreciate that you are passionate about your sentiments as am I. However, I object to the inculcation of libertarian ideals upon the Republican Party. Your, and many others, continuously argue that Jefferson, Reagan & Goldwater were Libertarians is simply revisionist history but its goal is obvious. You all are attempting to ingratiate yourselves to Republicans and also trying to assimilate the Republican Party platform to the amoral agenda of libertarianism.
That is a problem for me and for Republicans. I object and will continue to object to persons claiming to be what they are not in order to infiltrate and assimilate. If you are a libertarian then go support Jeff Daiell. He's a good man and a real Libertarian and needs support.
Debra Medina gets my endorsement
Debra Medina clearly has a deeper understanding to the needs of Texans. She is sharp, aware, and appears to have the true interests of the people at heart. Our state would be best served by her and I will now spread the gospel of Mrs. Medina to my family, friends, church, my employees and fellow small business owners.
As far as Mrs. Hutchinson goes, I was totally turned off by her response to the abortion issue. Once I witnessed her response and listened to the same tone she used in answering other questions along with voting for the Prescription bill under GWB and also voting for the bailout, there is no reason whatsoever she should serve the people of Texas any longer. She, like Governor Perry, are prime examples of what we call BIG GOVERNMENT REPUBLICANS as they attempt to walk like little government (libertarian-leaning) conservatives, but instead their actions speak clearly to their true intentions. We Texans need to clean house and to establish a more Libertarian-friendly brand to our Republican party because I am now a Christian conservative who understands and appreciates the meaning of Libertarianism. If there is any one person to thank for my transformation, then you might as well give the ball to Congressman Ron Paul. He has been an incredible voice and has literally won me over from once being very supportive of former President George W. Bush to now realizing that GWB has done much more harm to our nation and to the Republican brand. Ron Paul and Debra Medina gives me great hope that our Republican brand can be marketable for the given future and I am very thankful for them and give them all my blessings.
My Gal Medina
In my dealings with Senator Hutchinson and here many offices, I have never been able to get a straight answer from her on positions. She showed that last night in the debate.
Medina is my choice.
Rod
Hold their feet to the fire!
Mr. McTaggart, I appreciate your desire to hold Mr. Perry's, and hopefully all elected officials, "feet to the fire" so to speak. It is our duty as voters and tax payers to do so. However, if an elected official has failed in their duty or has demonstrated poor descision making, is that cause to abondon the party and its platform? I don't think it is and while I will readily agree that Governor Perry has made numerous mistakes I assert that Mrs. Medina does not represent the Republican Party and that support for her agenda is support for libertarian ideals which are not, despite what the crypto-libertarians say, compatible with the Republican Party platform.
Compromise on a Principle and it is no longer a Principle
It is not just the name of a third party, Lauro. We Republicans need to understand the root of this fact.
Revisionist history
Mr. Reed, you are correct, it is not just the name of a third party...I understand that. However to suggest that simply because Ronald Reagan suggested in a discussion of liberalism vs conservatism that Republicanism is comparable to libertarianism does not mean he was a Libertarian! To suggest otherwise and many writers below have said is revisionism! That's the root of crypto-libertarianism Republicans need to know.
The chinless wonder exposes himself...
Jefferson & Reagan: libertarian...I think NOT!
Thanks for your comments her Mr. Reed but I must disagree...heartily! If either of those men were libertarian then they would have been very bad examples of libertarianism. Let's examine the facts. Thomas Jefferson, among other things, was the prinicipal architect of the Federal govenment which, if he truly were a libertarian, would have opposed vehemetly. Reagan, on the other hand, also would have been a very poor libertarian as he was a strong interventionist President who challenged both the Soviet Union and communists in the New World directly. Lastly, our Constitutional Republic was not founded upon libertarian ideals as neither any form of libertarianism yet existed and if it had and it were prevelent, it is doubtful, as I stated above, if any republic in America would exist at all! I strenuously doubt the validity of your assertion about history. I assume you intend with your misrepresentation of facts to sway the good and conservative folks of the Republican Party to vote crypto-libertarian (Medina) which is, afterall, really a vote for the Democrats!
Jefferson, principal architect of the Federal government!?
Well thank you Mr. Jefferson or should I say, Mr. President!
Since you were there Mr. President, I shall readily admit to making an egregious error in my typing and instead of saying "were the principal architect of the constitution..." I should have written "were one of the architects of the constitution..." You were; however, Mr. President, the principal genius behind Republicanism and not Libertarianism as asserted by my vociferous detractors, is that not true?
Jefferson WAS NOT the principle architect of the Federal Govt.
And just what is a "crypto-libertarian" anyway. Are you trying to create your own insult? It didn't work.
Mr. Adams...love your beer
Mr. Adams, thank you for the revisionist history lesson. If you examine the "Anti-Federalist" papers on line you will find that is is an anthology of essays and it is debateable if Jefferson had actually contributed. Secondly, if Jefferson is this great libertarian thinker then why did he finally agree to the constitution and to become the third President of that federal government? Thanks for your time and I really love that Samuel Adams beer...maybe you could send over a case?
Cannot reply to the posts below?
I'm not trying to be a jerk, but you need to know history to make informed decisions. The below posters are correct. Don't worry, I was where you are a number of years back. I educated myself and continue to educate myself even today. I'm a proud Republican, but I will tell you that we have been taught many lies in school, on the t.v., and even in our own party.
There is a false web or Matrix all around us...wake up and go down the rabbit hole and find the truth...it is scary. Ms. Medina is trying like thousands of others around this country to wake people up to the truth. Is she perfect...nope...but she's not a slimy lying tool/lapdog of the elite either.
Oh, and here is an excerpt from an interview with Reagan in 1975:
REASON: Governor Reagan, you have been quoted in the press as saying that you’re doing a lot of speaking now on behalf of the philosophy of conservatism and libertarianism. Is there a difference between the two?
REAGAN: If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.
Read the whole article and interview here:
http://reason.com/archives/1975/07/01/inside-ronald-reagan
Peace out!
Here's a simple queston?
Why is it then that Ronald Reagan is seen as a model of Republicanism and not Libertarianism? Hmmm? Pointing out that Reagan recognized certain values in Libertarian principals does not make one a Libertarian or else he and I, both, would be Libertarian instead of Republican.
Sorry, forgot to address this
Very, very, wrong.
Jefferson wrote the declaration of Independence. The chief architect of the constitution was Madison.
Jefferson was the founder of the democratic-republican party, which he founded to oppose the federalist party of Hamilton.
he was the writer of the Virginia and Kentucky resolutions, which allowed those states to nullify a federal law on constitutional grounds.
During his time, there was nobody who was a stronger supporter of states rights than Jefferson. This is an irrefutable fact.
I stand corrected, thank you.
I readily admit that I should not have written "...was the principal architect of the federal government..." and, instead should have something more like "...was a contributor..." or "was among the architects..." of the federal government which you are very correct in pointing out that he, Jefferson, was a states rights supporter. However, that is not at issue. What is at issue was whether or not President of the US (federal)government was actually a Libertarian or not? I think not still stands as Jefferson, while very concerned about the individual rights later quantified in the Bill of Rights, was reluctant to agree to the US Constitution but still agreed to the formation of a federal government. Crypto-libertarians would have us all think that the greatest Republican thinkers were actually Libertarians is simply revisionist history.
Wrong on both counts
-Ronald Regan interview with Reason Magazine, 1975
This should not be a surprise though, as the founder of modern conservatism, and Reagan's inspiration, Barry Goldwater, often described himself as a "classical liberal", another phrase for libertarian
jefferson & libertarianism
<cite>A wise and frugal government which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government</cite>
Reagan, on the other hand, talked a good game but unfortunately didn't deliver.
This country was founded on three principles that match very closely with libertarian beliefs; life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Very hard to argue otherwise. I suggest that you review the history of our nation prior to 1913, when the progressives came into power and changed our country. Additionally, I challenge you to name one platform subject that Debra Medina shares with Democrats.
Thanks for reading.
Not dishonest, simply a mistake.
You are correct Mr. Rairigh to qualify that President Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence, was not the prinicpal architect of the Constitution as I have readily admitted was an error. It is also true that he was a supporter of states rights. It was not dishonest of me to say so but merely a mistake on my part. "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness" are human freedom principals and most political parties subscribe to them. Lastly, I have never suggested that Mrs. Medina shares any platform or plank with the Democrats but that her plan is to take her support with her to a third party after she fails to win in March 2010. That will only support the Democrats.
Shame on you! Medina is NOT a vote for the Democrats
The lesser of two evils is still evil, and those who vote for evil deserve to suffer it's effects. Don't waste your vote on traitors.
Got that right
And then we'll get to see if Senior Garza really knows the Constitution better than she.
Who knows what?
That’s Señor Garza. And yes, I do know the Constitution better than either of you.
Facebook Comments
Make sure to also check out the Facebook comments: http://www.facebook.com/#/posted.php?id=78019793630&share_id=27731442245...