Will Libertarianism Survive Ron Paul?

Can libertarianism survive Ron Paul? When Paul is introduced, his 1988 Libertarian Party presidential candidacy is always a prominent part of his resume, and his presence in the Republican debates is making him the most prominent self-identified libertarian in the country.

There is absolutely no question at all that in the South Carolina debate this week, Paul said that America invited 9/11. The exact exchange:

Wendell Goler: Are you suggesting we invited the 9/11 attack, sir?

Ron Paul: I’m suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us and the reason they did it.

The people who attacked us, obviously, felt that we invited the attack. Which is why Paul didn’t simply say “no.”

There are libertarians who hold every conceivable set of views on foreign policy, but Paul’s prominence threatens to make his blame-America instincts the defining characteristic of libertarianism in the public imagination. If libertarianism becomes inextricably associated with radical pacifism, will young people with classically liberal instincts be discouraged from serious political engagement? It seems worth worrying about.

—

“I love Hillary.”

With those kind words, Ms. Clinton got her biggest endorsement yet (at least measured in silicone): Retired porn star Jenna Jameson. Jameson, known for the trademark “heart breaker” tattoo on her butt — um, so I’ve heard — is the most successful porn “actress” in the world; her website brings in an estimated gross revenue of $30 million annually. Among her reasons for supporting the Democrats?

The Clinton administration was the best years for the adult industry and I wish that Clinton would run again. I would love to have him back in office.

If your livelihood depends on First Amendment protection, you probably shouldn’t be advocating unconstitutional candidacies. There is something charming about Ms. Jameson’s parochialism, though, which brings to mind the old joke about the actor who comes home to tell his wife that he’s been cast as a gravedigger in a play called Hamlet. “What’s it about?” his wife asks. “It’s about a gravedigger who meets a prince.”

—

Last year the City Council of Chicago voted to ban foie gras, the delicacy made from the fattened liver of a duck or goose. The fattening is done through a process called gavage, which involves force-feeding through a tube. Animal rights activists consider this cruel, though the scientific evidence that it hurts the birds is inconclusive.

Mayor Richard J. Daley has sought a repeal of the foie gras ban since it passed, accusing aldermen of making Chicago the “laughingstock of the nation.” Now it looks as if the ban will be ended. Going with it: The Alderman Ed Smith’s chairmanship of the Heath Committee. Upon hearing rumors that the Council would break precedent by releasing the repeal from committee over his objections, Smith submitted his resignation to the Mayor. Daley gleefully accepted Smith’s resignation and predicted the end of what he called “the silliest law that ever passed,” though as it turns out Smith jumped the gun: Though the repeal had been added to the agenda of a Council meeting, there was no vote scheduled. Smith’s resignation clears the procedural obstacle.

“My integrity is at stake,” Smith huffed as he submitted his ill-considered resignation. “My manhood is at stake. My character is at stake. It’s just not right for them to do this. I’m not going to let anyone walk on my integrity and my manhood.” As Smith was throwing his hissy-fit over the comfort of poultry, reports of his manhood remained unconfirmed.

John Tabin is a Maryland-based writer.