The New York Times vs Libertarians

[Lumi]

We Win the NY Times Prize

The New York Times, whistling past the financial graveyard, paused over the weekend to smear the Mises Institute, Ron Paul, our other scholars, hardcore libertarianism, and me. Why? Because our ideas and our youth movement are gaining real traction. It is in effect a compliment. They have never faced opposition like ours before, and Ron Paul?s tremendous resonance with young people has only made things worse from the Times?s point of view.

The Times wants opponents who play the game, who accept the presuppositions of the regime, and who are willing to confine themselves to the narrow range of debate to which the Times would prefer to confine the American people.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/01/lew-rockwell/the-new-york-times-doesnt-like-me/

 

[Duff Miver]

We Win the NY Times Prize

The New York Times, whistling past the financial graveyard, paused over the weekend to smear the Mises Institute, Ron Paul, our other scholars, hardcore libertarianism, and me. Why? Because our ideas and our youth movement are gaining real traction. It is in effect a compliment. They have never faced opposition like ours before, and Ron Paul?s tremendous resonance with young people has only made things worse from the Times?s point of view.

The Times wants opponents who play the game, who accept the presuppositions of the regime, and who are willing to confine themselves to the narrow range of debate to which the Times would prefer to confine the American people.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/01/lew-rockwell/the-new-york-times-doesnt-like-me/

Oh, horse-shit. I read the entire NYT article. It was factual and fair about Rand Paul; it did not "smear" him. Did you read it? Of course not.

As as for that lying cocksucker Lew Rockwell - he wasn't even mentioned.

Tell you what, Lumi: instead of posting what some turd like Rockwell, or some shit site like WND says, why don't you just read decent primary sources like the NYT, Forbes, The Atlantic, Christian Science Monitor and RS and see for yourself what they really say?

Lew Rockwell. Lying. Cocksucker.

 

[Lumi]

Oh, horse-shit. I read the entire NYT article. It was factual and fair about Rand Paul; it did not "smear" him. Did you read it? Of course not.

As as for that lying cocksucker Lew Rockwell - he wasn't even mentioned.

Tell you what, Lumi: instead of posting what some turd like Rockwell, or some shit site like WND says, why don't you just read decent primary sources like the NYT, Forbes, The Atlantic, Christian Science Monitor and RS and see for yourself what they really say?

Lew Rockwell. Lying. Cocksucker.

I did read the article and Rockwell was mentioned
Did you read it?
Apparently not

 

[Duff Miver]

I did read the article and Rockwell was mentioned
Did you read it?
Apparently not

You're right, Lumi. The mentions of Lew Rockwell are so minor that I didn't remember them. From that quite long article, here's what it says about Rockwell:

"Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr., a former book editor who had brought out new editions of Ludwig von Mises? work."

"Another might be that his* hostility to Lincoln and the North was not so different from the views of close associates of the elder Mr. Paul, Mr. Rothbard and Mr. Rockwell.:

*his refers to Hunter, not Rand Paul.

"Mr. Rockwell and Mr. Rothbard, both Northerners, became sympathetic to the Old South and its politics of states? rights. Mr. Rockwell continues to praise the South?s resistance to civil rights legislation,"

So you're right, Lumi: Rockwell was mentioned. Now kindly explain how the above mentions of Rockwell "smear" him as he clams. Looks to me like the reporting of known facts about Rockwell. He claims he was smeared? I call him a lying cocksucker.

I'm glad you read the entire article. Rockwell claims that it "smears" Rand, and proves that the NYT "hates" Rand. He says that the article atttempts to "demonize" and "destroy". Can you find those things in the NYT article? I can't.

Lew R, LC.

But thanks for actually reading the article.