The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewRon Paul Archive
Separate Tech and State
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) recently got in touch with his inner mobster and threatened Elon Musk — the new owner of Twitter and the CEO of electric car company Tesla and space ventures company SpaceX. He told Musk, “Fix your companies” or “Congress will.” As part of this threat, Markey referred to an ongoing National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) investigation into Tesla’s autopilot driving system and Twitter’s 2011 consent decree with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

Markey has done more than make threats: He is one of a group of Democratic senators who wrote to the FTC urging an investigation into whether Musk’s actions as the new owner of Twitter violated the consent decree or consumer protection laws. Since FTC Chair Lina Khan wants to investigate as many businesses as possible, it is likely she will respond favorably to the senators’ letter.

President Biden has also endorsed an investigation into the role foreign investors played in financing Musk’s Twitter purchase. Biden may be concerned that Musk is not likely to ban tweets regarding Hunter Biden’s business deals.

Concerns that Musk would allow tweets containing information embarrassing (or worse) to the Biden administration point to the real reason many Democratic politicians and progressive writers and activists are attacking Musk. They support efforts to suppress conservative, libertarian, and other “non-woke” speech on social media. They view the prospect of a major platform refusing to silence those who dissent from the woke mob or the Democratic Party establishment as a threat to their power. Musk further angered the left by committing what, to many Democrats (and Liz Cheney), is the ultimate hate crime — allowing Donald Trump back on Twitter.

The threat against Musk shows the threat to liberty is not just from big tech; it is from the alliance between big tech and big government.

Some conservatives think that increasing government’s power over social media is the correct way to make big tech respect free speech. However, increasing the US government’s power over social media can just end up putting more power behind government threats like those from Rep. Markey. Expanded government control over how social media companies conduct their business can also further incentivize the companies to work with the federal government to shut down free speech.

Once the government steps in with increased regulation, the risk is that greater government control over what is communicated on social media will follow. The question will just be who is calling the shots on the exercise of that control. Will the result be an increase of the liberal or “woke” pressure on social media companies to silence conservatives, libertarians, opponents of teaching critical race theory and transgenderism in schools, and those who question the safety and effectiveness of covid vaccines? Alternatively, will a new sort of pressure become dominant, maybe pressure to comply with conservative or Republican preferred limits on speech? Either way, liberty loses.

Big tech companies silence their users to curry favor with politicians and bureaucrats, often after “encouragement” from politicians and bureaucrats. Therefore, to end big tech’s censorship, Americans should demand that all government officials — including the president — not violate the First Amendment. We must work to put an end to government officials pressuring or even “encouraging” social media platforms either to silence any American citizen because of his opinions or to downplay or suppress any news story. The way to protect free speech online is to separate tech and state.

(Republished from The Ron Paul Institute by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Economics, Ideology, Science • Tags: Censorship, Elon Musk, Ftc, Twitter 
Hide 31 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Bro43rd says:

    As much as I respect Dr Paul I have to disagree. Separation has not stopped religion from using government & visaversa. It seems obvious to me that the source of the trouble is the government. A group that has a monopoly on the iniation of violence (in a determined geographical location) will never abide by the separation rule. The only way to prevent this is to weaken the power of the state to the point that they are issuing mere suggestions, with no power to enforce. Anything else is window dressing.

    • Agree: Realist, Ulf Thorsen
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    , @Exile
  2. Jokem says:

    I have to wonder how much clout Senator Malarkey has to initiate this.
    I have to agree with Bro43rd, big government needs to be put on a short leash.

  3. @Bro43rd

    The only way to prevent this is to weaken the power of the state to the point that they are issuing mere suggestions, with no power to enforce.

    While I agree completely with this statement Bro43rd, I don’t think you are disagreeing with Ron Paul this time either. I.e., I think he’d agree with you.

    While the NHSTA is one of the few handfuls of government agencies that I don’t particularly hate the whole idea of, the problem is that this Malarky asshole can have the power to make statements like “Congress will!” and carry through on that.

    In the Peak Stupidity post CDC v NOAA yesterday, I made the point that it’s the unConstitutional power that’s GIVEN to these Advisory/Research type agencies that is the problem. The CDC has been LET to have all the power to dictate Kung Flu Totalitarianism. So far, the NOAA publishes their weather and climate data, etc, and otherwise leaves us the hell alone. I like that. I like maps.

    • Replies: @Bro43rd
  4. An excellent idea; unfortunately it’s not going to happen any time soon.

    The reason is simple – as anyone, who’s not born yesterday knows, what passes for “government” in US is just a front office for the biggest american-based transnational corporations, which, in the current time period is what we call Big Tech, Big Pharma, etc. (and their military is just the advertisement division of the US MIC).

    So, how exactly one separates the State from Big Tech, since, for all practical intents and purposes, the Big Tech is vital part of the State; its Ministry for Propaganda and information, to be more precise.

    • Replies: @Greta Handel
  5. I think there was a time when the government protected free speech- it was called the “Fairness Doctrine.” I remember as a kid at the end of the news there was usually a response to the previous night’s editorial. That was required by the FCC. Also, I found that I usually agreed with the response rather than the original editorial. It was a real check on MSM overreach. Nowadays sites like this one are the only place to find differing opinion outside the Overton window, and the entire news program is a government propaganda piece rather than news (with the exception of the weather report, local news, and sports). Until sites like this one reach a percentage of the populous comparable to the MSM, we are shouting in a “sound proof free speech zone.”

  6. Bro43rd says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Kennedy had it right in regards to what should be done to the cia, smashed to pieces & scattered to the wind. That template should be applied across all government institutions. It’s a bunk system that needs to be voided & forgotten about except to document it’s misdeeds, the who, what, why & how. Voluntary organization is the way forward, I believe it’s common sense. The linchpin of the current system is money. Prior to the current era of fiat currency, money was an organic feature of the market. A return to a true free market whereby the traders name their terms instead of being forced to trade in fiat. How to get there, any ideas?

  7. the entire news program is a government propaganda piece rather than news (with the exception of the weather report, local news, and sports).

    Even ‘local’ news isn’t so local anymore and much, if not all, of their content is dictated by whatever major network they are a part of. They engage in the exact same lines of propaganda about the exact same subjects as their major network masters do.

    • Replies: @Skip Scott
  8. Driveby says:

    I’ll tell ya what Ed. Fix Congress, or the people will.

  9. @Ulf Thorsen

    By local news, I was referring to things like shootings, accidents and traffic, school board meetings, fires, and other real events. Of course now, even the local news will preview from the “national desk” on the upcoming “world news” to make sure they get the propaganda “message for the day” out to as many as possible.

    • Agree: Ulf Thorsen
  10. @George Kovachev

    Yep, look what pops up today at Wikipedia:

    Hi, this Tuesday your support is requested by the Wikimedia Foundation. Your donations support the technology that makes Wikipedia and other free knowledge projects possible. They also help us expand information access in countries struggling with censorship. Please donate $2 or what seems right. Thanks.

    Exceptional! hypocrisy.

  11. Exile says:
    @Bro43rd

    You can be ruled by government or ruled by a private entity, but you will be ruled. Every group has a power dynamic, leaders and followers. Refusing to call your leaders a government doesn’t change this, it just confuses the issue and lets bad leaders blame-shift, deny responsibility and otherwise obfuscate their abuses.

    If you weaken government to the point where it cannot regulate corporate excess, you will be governed by corporations.

    No serious conversation about how to distribute power and responsibility in a group should include anarchists of any stripe. Anarchists are childish LARPers wearing daddy’s clothes. With the exception of Hoppe, libertarianism has been far too accommodating to these poseurs.

    • Replies: @Durruti
    , @Bro43rd
  12. If you weaken government to the point where it cannot regulate corporate excess, you will be governed by corporations.

    Corporations have no real power over the citizenry but through the arm of Government. No Big Gov = no big corporate power.

    This seems pretty damned elementary, with an example that’s not before written history and right near us – the United States for about (arguably) 150 years. So, if you can’t understand that, there’s no way you can have a serious conversation with Libertarians, Constitutionalists, Conservatives, or ANYBODY other than your roommate at the facility.

    • Replies: @Bro43rd
  13. Durruti says:
    @Exile

    No serious conversation about how to distribute power and responsibility in a group should include anarchists of any stripe. Anarchists are childish LARPers wearing daddy’s clothes. With the exception of Hoppe, libertarianism has been far too accommodating to these poseurs.

    Risk a little humor here:

    How dare you sir! How dare you criticize Anarchists, or Anarchism. I resemble that!!!

    My kind of Anarchists fought for Republics, Durruti, Makhno, Sostre, and many others. Some who believe they are Anarchists, or Libertarians-(your point?), believe that the way construct a House, is to sit down, WHINE, and do nothing!! No House is perfect; (the roof may leak, it may be a bit small, need paint), therefore, why don’t you live on the Street, or wherever? You may not live under a Bridge, as that Bridge was built with societal organized, and often Governmental input. Just Whine, as too many on this website, and most other websites, and in personal discussions, do.

    I suggest that we go back, in order that we may move forward, and Recover our LIBERTY. Essentially, that is Statesman Ron Paul‘s approach.

    I advocate that we Restore our Republic, that Republic which was destroyed in a hail of bullets on November 22, 1963, along with the assassination of our –last Constitutional President, John F. Kennedy.

    Let’s Restore Our Republic, much weakened, highly imperfect, but functional, with all the Bells and Whistles of – Separation of Powers, a Constitution – with a Bill of Rights, and a (sometimes/occasionally honest Electoral Political Culture). Unless you have a Better Idea, (I refuse to countenance a false idea that is founded in despair, defeat, and SURRENDER). And who we surrender to convert us into SLAVES. I taught my students that Lincoln freed the Slaves – I know better now.

    In 2022, we are all SLAVES! I have written before, that Ron Paul has never surrendered. He, and a few others have my respect. They attempt different escapes from the Money Changers, different theories; they try to run for political office. Some even succeed – for a while. The good ones find themselves trapped in a Frightening Maze. They vote well once, AO Cortez,-and end up crying, and apologizing, and morphing into gauleiter puppets.

    Senator Rand Paul with 6 broken ribs & a punctured lung, Jesse Ventura (a decent Wrestling Governor), Cynthia McKinney (run out of town), Jimmy Dore (our Dieudonné), Tulsi Gabbard, Dennis Kucinich, Ralph Nader, and a few others have entered the fray, a struggle they have no chance of winning -in the absolute. But as with Durruti, who died in Madrid, fighting to save the Spanish Republic, (that Republic was almost as flawed as ours, and the cowards abandoned it, but the Brave stood their ground). Orwell fought there, on the same side as Durruti. Hemingway was also there.

    Many will not fight – without prior assurances of victory. To those, I say: It is not whether you win or lose that counts, but how you lose!

    Patria o Muerte! Venceremos!

    Dr. Peter J. Antonsen – nom de guerre, Durruti

  14. Idealogies are usefull as ideas. Not so much as governing principles. This because real economies are mixed economies. Public financing for public needs and private financing for private needs. How you do the mixing can lean left or right. Ideologues hate this reality. On paper, it seems to me that the Anarchists have the best of it.

    I admire Dr. Paul. I voted for him. I learned from him the importance of honest money and the case against the Fed. And the importance of the rule of law. By rule of law I mean the people obey the government and the government obeys the law. If I am a Libertarian I must be a Jeffersonian. I am most definitely not a Randroid. I describe my politics as Populist and Separatist.

    My father was a Libertarian. He trusted the invisable hand. But it didn’t stop him from taking advantage of FDR’s Civilian Conservation Corps when his father lost the farm to the depression and the drought. For a period of years my father and I worked for the same manufacturing company. He was a company man and I was a union man. We had some interesting conversations. But he knew that I was a Capitalist who just wanted his share of the loot. And he agreed that a worker should have a contract with his employer. It was the “collective” part of barganing he didn’t like.

    Neither did my father like “regulated” Capitalism. Specifically he objected to the confiscatory rates at the high end of progressive taxation. Also the estate taxes which he referred to as death taxes. It was and is my view that if the government allows individuals to become oliarchs it is no longer the peopels government. My father was Okay with anti-trust legislation because he recognised the importance of compition to innovation.

    All that was a long time ago. The only Capitalism we knew was industrial Capitalism. We were equally appalled by de-industrialization. My father said they must think we can all make a living taking in each others laundry. Back then left and right meant labor and capital respectively. What is left and right now? Perverts and Patriots? And our Constitution, battered by Lincoln, Wilson and the assholes who killed Kennedy was also misserved by succesive Supreme Courts who replaced it with the Living Document which made excuses for Imperialists and the consentration of power in the District Of Corruption. Questions of constitutionality should be decided by a jury.

    I like the idea of restoring our republic. But I don’t believe it can be done. You can’t turn a pickel back into a cucumber. The way forward if we would not be a people without a country is separation. We must remove ourselves from Washington’s juristiction. A confederation of red counties perhaps. Something like Greater Idaho.

    I am an old goat. I won’t live to see the other side of the depression that will follow the crash. If you are young and strong you may yet have an opportunity to build something new.

    • Thanks: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @Durruti
  15. Durruti says:
    @WorkingClass

    I like the idea of restoring our republic. But I don’t believe it can be done. You can’t turn a pickel back into a cucumber. The way forward if we would not be a people without a country is separation. We must remove ourselves from Washington’s juristiction. A confederation of red counties perhaps. Something like Greater Idaho.

    Separate? Dissolve our country? Render it into pieces, based on ‘pickels’ – over here, and ‘cucumbers’ -over there? That is your solution?

    That is no solution. That is surrender.

    I’ll remain with: “I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  16. @Durruti

    “I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all”

    Which flag would that be, Durruti, and where is this Republic of which you speak? The Potomac Regime there in Washington FS adopted the Pride Flag as its colors – it’s been a couple of years already. Actual patriotic Americans fly the Gadsden or Rebel flags.

    Neither side has a Republic at this point, but one wants Communism and the other would like something like the Republic you reminisce about. You need to pick a side, just like the Founders had to. What’s it gonna be, Mr. Durruti?

  17. Bro43rd says:
    @Exile

    I prefer to be ruled locally if at all. At least it should be more accountable. First rule is to know who’s your adversary. Noted Exile, ty. The one telling me I have to choose a ruler is not my ally or friend.

    • Replies: @Jokem
  18. Bro43rd says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Saved me the effort, as it’s probably not worth it for such a statist sheep but thanks anyway.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  19. Bro43rd says:

    A few additional observations, the way forward is usually not found by going backwards.
    Money creation is the linchpin of the current dynamic that we toil under.

    • Replies: @Durruti
  20. Jokem says:
    @Bro43rd

    Yes. Local rule has two advantages.
    1) Better control. People there are more likely to have common interests. This means people in, say, Connecticut do not have influence over those in Wyoming.
    2) It is easier to move away if someone thinks there are too many clowns holding public office.

    • Replies: @Truth Vigilante
  21. Durruti says:
    @Bro43rd

    the way forward is usually not found by going backwards.

    It is if Mike Tyson is coming after you.

    On the serious side – this from Germany. An admission.

    https://t.me/intelslava/42086?single

  22. @Jokem

    Local rule has … advantages.

    Indeed so.

    When all governments …. in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the centre of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another, and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated.

    …. Thomas Jefferson – letter to C. Hammond, 1821.

  23. onebornfree says: • Website

    R.P. “Separate Tech and State”

    No, separate _EVERYTHING_ and state!

    This is just another milquetoast, gradualist Ron Paul piece.

    Sure, get the government entirely out of big tech. Whoop de do!

    However, as Paul well knows, the federal government has literally 1000’s of entirely unconstitutional agencies, so why doesn’t he consistently, article by article, interview by interview, insist that all of those 1000’s of entirely unconstitutional agencies be closed down at the same time.

    Does he really believe in gradualism, which has a long record of total failure?

    Its pure fantasy to assume that getting the government out of big tech alone would accomplish anything much , except perhaps, in the very short term.

    Mr Paul is simply not radicle, or “extremist” enough, as far as I can see.

    What is desperately needed here is a true radicle for liberty:

    “Only when someone goes to Washington who is determined to clean the stables, who values freedom above political power, who has the will to stand fast against every politician, only then will the trend turn around — and only then will the political battle be won. But it’s obvious that there is no such person in two-party politics we can look to. ” Harry Browne

    “Government programs didn’t arise because the people demanded them or because the free market was unable to provide needed services. They arose because the politicians found them to be a convenient way to buy votes with other people’s money, a convenient way to enlarge their own power, a convenient way to reward their political cronies, and a convenient way to keep people dependent on government.” Harry Browne

    “So what is government? Very simply, it is an agency of coercion. Of course, there are other agencies of coercion – such as the Mafia. So to be more precise, government is the agency of coercion that has flags in front of its offices.” Harry Browne

    “The government is good at one thing. It knows how to break your legs, and then hand you a crutch and say, ‘See if it weren’t for the government, you wouldn’t be able to walk.” Harry Browne

    Book: “Why Government Doesn’t Work” :https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Why_Government_Doesn%27t_Work

    Regards, onebornfreeatyahoo

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  24. @onebornfree

    However, as Paul well knows, the federal government has literally 1000’s of entirely unconstitutional agencies, so why doesn’t he consistently, article by article, interview by interview, insist that all of those 1000’s of entirely unconstitutional agencies be closed down at the same time.

    Ron Paul is 87 years old. He writes columns weekly. Do you seriously think he’ll be around in this world long enough to write weekly about each of many thousands of unConstitutional Feral Government agencies?

    At 87, Ron Paul still does the Liberty Report, and he also has a homeschooling curriculum. Give the guy a fucking break, man!

    • Replies: @onebornfree
  25. onebornfree says: • Website
    @Achmed E. Newman

    A.E.N.:“Ron Paul is 87 years old………Give the guy a fucking break, man!”

    The “he’s old” defense would be fair and just if not for the fact that he’s been preaching the exact same, Reaganesque/conservative/gradualist mantra, particularly with regards to presidential candidates, since at least 2004, and probably even before that.

    I’ve always tried to give him the benefit of the doubt since around 2004 when I first discovered him, but I’ve finally had to admit that he’s just another pie in the sky conservative gradualist .

    Just like most libertarians and conservatives and associated,[including you?] he doesn’t even seem to be aware of the fact of the 100% unchangeably corrupt, criminal nature of all governments:

    “So what is government? Very simply, it is an agency of coercion. Of course, there are other agencies of coercion – such as the Mafia. So to be more precise, government is the agency of coercion that has flags in front of its offices.” Harry Browne

    “Taking the State wherever found, striking into its history at any point, one sees no way to differentiate the activities of its founders, administrators and beneficiaries from those of a professional-criminal class.”
    Albert J. Nock https://mises.org/library/our-enemy-state-2

    “Because they are all ultimately funded via both direct and indirect theft [taxes], and counterfeiting [central bank monopolies], all governments are essentially, at their very cores, 100% corrupt criminal scams which cannot be “reformed”or “improved”,simply because of their innate criminal nature.”
    onebornfree https://onebornfree-mythbusters.blogspot.com/

    A.E.N.“Do you seriously think he’ll be around in this world long enough to write weekly about each of many thousands of unConstitutional Feral Government agencies?”

    He doesnt need to write , or to have, up till now, written about about, each and every one of them. All he’d have to have done up till now is to consistently, LOUDLY, point out that they are nearly all unconstitutional, and all criminal [even if constitutional], and that at the very least, all of the unconstitutional ones need to be scrapped, all at the same time [i.e. no gradualism!] 🙂

    Regards, onebornfreeatyahoo

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  26. @onebornfree

    Do you not know that Dr. Paul was dubbed “Dr. No” in the US Congress, where he represented his district in Texas for many years? Why’d they call him that, OBF? I’ll tell you. That’s because he voted against any bills that were unconstitutional.

    I’m pretty sure he’s more than aware of corruptible government (the bigger the more corruptible) and he’d agree on denouncing all US Gov’t agencies since this place resembled a Republic.

    Ron Paul has not been in Congress for about a decade now. He covers the bigger picture of the problem with Big Government, and he gives examples. I know where he stands. For you to pick on the ONLY real Libertarian that’s been in US Congress – House or Senate – that I know of since Barry Goldwater is ridiculous.

    Coming on here and supplying quotes and songs is fine. I hope a few people get a clue from that. I don’t know why you’d criticize Ron Paul though, unless he actually writes something anti-liberty and anti-Constitution, which is like finding a 4-leaf clover.

    It takes lots of forbearance for Ron Unz to keep the very few Libertarian writers on his site, as I don’t think it’s truly his thing.*. You’ve got YOUR blog, so why don’t YOU get started on the 1,000s of government agencies to get rid of. I could read that, or I could support people who do their best to ACTUALLY get rid of them.

    One thing I agree with you on, regarding this comment of yours: Yes, it’ll have to happen at one time. The Potomac Regime is no longer considered a legitimate government of this country by a pretty big mass of Americans at this point.
    .

    PS: Why don’t you urge Ron Unz to add another Libertarian/Constitutionalist to the rolls. Paul Roberts comes close, but he doesn’t allow comments because people (such as me) told him he was a retard for getting his panties in bunch over the alleged Climate Calamity™. Lew Rockwell or one of his regulars would be great. I’d back you up on this, but then Ron Unz has me on “Ignore’, I think – a mutually beneficial arrangement, I must say. ;-}

    .

    * Ron Unz is against the Warfare State as Ron Paul, you, and I are, and he is also a true stalwart for free speech. However, he doesn’t give much of a rat’s ass about the US Constitution and keeping a country that has Constitutionalists IN IT.

    • Replies: @onebornfree
  27. onebornfree says: • Website
    @Achmed E. Newman

    A.E.N.:”One thing I agree with you on, regarding this comment of yours: Yes, it’ll have to happen at one time.”

    So, did Ron Paul ever state that, loud and clear, during any of his presidential runs, or at any other time during his political career, to the best of your knowledge?

    A.E.N.: “Why don’t you urge Ron Unz to add another Libertarian/Constitutionalist to the rolls. ……..I’d back you up on this, but then Ron Unz has me on “Ignore’,”

    I have no sway with Unz at all. I’m banned from commenting by at least 2 commie authors here, [Karlin and Hudson], presumably with Unz’s approval, and have been limited to 3 posts per 36 hrs by the commie-leaning moderators. Like yourself, I ignore practically everything Unz writes, its inevitably just more implied “the government can make this right if it does such and such” type nonsense, backed up with his “research” courtesy of the CIA controlled NYT and Wall St, Journal and similar. Unz is a big government technocrat, no more, no less, unfortunately.

    Regards, onebornfreeatyahoo

    • Replies: @Truth Vigilante
  28. @onebornfree

    I’m banned from commenting by at least 2 commie authors here, [Karlin and Hudson] …. and have been limited to 3 posts per 36 hrs

    Like you, I am also banned from commenting for two authors (Michael Hudson and Larry Romanoff), but had no idea that comments could be restricted to three posts per 36 hours for other threads where one isn’t banned.
    (I assumed everyone was subject to the 3 posts per hour maximum).

    Next time I have an exchange with Ron Unz I’ll mention that to him on your behalf if you like.

    It’s disgraceful that there isn’t a level playing field for all UR readers as far as posts allowed over a set period.
    Importantly, if this is happening to you, I’d be interested to know who else is being treated in this appalling manner.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  29. @Truth Vigilante

    Vigilante, I first guessed that “36” was a typo by OBF – supposed to be “3”, but I suppose the writer can make different settings. I’ve never experienced this, but then I try to avoid reading anything from the Commies, such as Romanoff.

    Ted Rall was this imbecile cartoonist YEARS ago, in paper newspapers. I thought I’d never see the guy’s name again, but, wahlah! (OK, viola!) he’s on The Unz Review. I greatly respect Mr. Unz’s publishing so many different views, but I only went to Rall’s column yesterday to put up my own cartoon. I don’t need my blood pressure up that high, as it would from actually reading his bullshit.

    This is more aimed toward OBF, but for both of you, I only disagree with Ron Unz on a few issues, but they are major. One is the immigration invasion, and the other is the Kung Flu PanicFest – both origins AND effect of the virus and vaccines.

    However, if you look at the top of the home page today, you’ll see the Mr. Unz has a review of 4 big American political history books by author Rick Perlstein along with his usual point-outs to his own “American Pravda” material. Some of that is very good stuff.

    The problem I have is that Mr. Unz cannot relate well to anyone who doesn’t agree with him 100%. There’s the name-calling, but more importantly, the fact that there’s no way he can possibly KNOW most of us commenters well enough to know where we are coming from. This hurts the conversation, especially when he skims and assumes a lot.

    • Thanks: Truth Vigilante
Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Ron Paul Comments via RSS