CATO Ariticle... Should economic conservatives boycott election? (with authors response)
Submitted by Roderic006 on Mon, 11/26/2007 - 09:21
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,312356,00.html
I'll be sending a letter asking why the author and CATO not support Ron Paul openly and feverishly.
They mention his name in passing in the article, and go on to complain about all the other candidates, and how "so far, believers in limited government and economic conservatism have been left out of this conversation."
HELLO!?!?!? Earth to CATO!!!
You have the perfect candidate...
»
RESPONSE from author
My original Email is below.
It may well be a reason to vote for Ron Paul. But that is up to individual voters to decide. As a 501©3 organization, the Cato institute cannot endorse or recommend any candidate.
Further, when writing as an objective observer of the political landscape, I must deal with the fact that Ron Paul is not yet among the major candidates. Nationally he still polls at 2-4 percent, far behind the frontrunners. In no state is he running better than fourth.
I actually have a pending op-ed on Ron Paul’s importance to the race. But you won’t like that one either. It frankly acknowledges that Rep. Paul is unlikely to win the Republican nomination. But, then my job is to report what is—not to be a cheerleader even for candidates I like.
Michael Tanner
Director
Health & Welfare Studies
---------------------------------------
Mr. Tanner,
I read your article on foxnews about how econimic conservatives may stay home this election cycle. You say at the end, "But so far, believers in limited government and economic conservatism have been left out of this conversation."
Yet you mention Ron Paul only in passing, but admitted he was the exception to all the other candidates.
Why not PROMOTE Ron Paul, rather than complain about the others?
If you and CATO are TRUELY looking for someone to stand for Individual Liberty, Free Markets, and Peace, as your BIO page (http://www.cato.org/people/tanner.html) claims, you should be feverishly promoting Ron Paul.
I am befuddled by your article.
Ron Paul is the only hope for America this election cycle, and if you truely cared about limiting the size and scope of government, and promoting market solutions to healthcare and S.S., I hope you and all the fellows at CATO take another look at RP.
Thank you,
-Roderic
polling is bunk
An argument based on polling numbers is the most idiotic excuse he could give. Does it really take a math degree from MIT to see through selection biasing?
I have asked CATO for the
I have asked CATO for the past seven months why they refuse to support, or even cover Ron Paul. Their answers were always lame. I actually removed CATO from my will. Seriously.
CATO is stupid
They had another article where they said Fred Thompson is the most fiscally conservative running.
I wonder if Ron Paul is being ignored by them because of his affiliation with the Mises Institute.
"Reason" Too
Reason Magazine has also lost its way. They are so jaded by the daily routine of dying civil liberties, they are all but blind to the principles they profess to espouse.
I disagree...
...at least about Reason. I've been pretty happy with their RP coverage. And their blog authors and commenters are overwhelmingly positive on him.
< www.voxpolitico.com >
Not bad
The article points out--twice--that Ron Paul is the only candidate who actually talks about cutting spending in any meaningful way, and it's quite critical of Romney's and Huckabee's fiscal records as governors.
Cato and the Abyss
In the interest of getting name brand staff, writers and speakers, CATO has become diluted. The original agenda has been lost.
Friedrich Nietzsche said, "When you look into an abyss, the abyss also looks into you." CATO has been looking into the Washingtonian abyss far too long.
Dave
"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty" TJ
"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty" TJ
Author's Email:
mtanner@cato.org
-Roderic
CATO is a non-profit group
and they cannot legally endorse any candidate as an institution. There are members at CATO who are behind Ron Paul. Just not all of them. However all this talk of people boycotting the election, from social conservatives to cato think tankers really will make a Ron Paul victory even more tangible.
One of my "laws"
Is a "Law of media antilibertarian-cluelessness."
The ability to contact the author of some BS story easily is inversely-proportional to the story's BS-level.
A high BS-level, as with this article which attempts to ignore us, forces a reader to go searching-around CATO's website for an email a clueful author would have left at the beginning of his/her story. This author specifically DOES NOT want to hear, or even hear-of, any critique -- especially one by the likes of me...But at least he mentioned us AT ALL, and that's a distinct improvement even if he makes himself hard to contact.
JMR
NeoCon Apologists
Cato has made it clear they will to ignore Ron a long time ago.
No idea why.
Might have something to do with the petty drama between Cato and LVMI (Mises Institute).
the STATO institute
They stopped being interested in liberty as soon as they melted into the beltway. True liberty would ruin their market. They only survive in a setting without liberty, and is generally the problem with 'free-market' think-tanks.
Only where there isn't a free market, do they make cash. The whole concept of a beltway libertarian think-tank is a fraud.