How NOT to Win Votes for Ron Paul

I hate to give PR to someone I disagree with as
much, and as often, as Steven Kinsella. However,
his recent article at Lew Rockwell has me more
than a bit steamed.
Here's the link:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/017855.html

"I know you hate Ron Paul." is the theme
of his article, and it degenerates from there.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Ron Paul with a Pro-Life Baby

Kinsella's screed is quite rude and insulting.
Worse yet, I'm quite sure it will cost Ron Paul
votes, and not gain him a single one.

It's the very common Libertarian communication
style of preaching to the choir about what's 'right',
while turning off anyone not a insider.

This type of nastiness, and the fact that between one
third and one half of Libertarians are 'pro-defense', is
why the LP has shrunk so drastically in membership
since the war in Iraq.

That, and the shrill noise heard from the outside has
kept away new recruits.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.

.

Brian Holtz made quite a good case for the math on
this one, using the Badnarik campaign's very, very
low vote totals as one of his illustrating points.

I'm quite sure the Ron Paul campaign would never
put their foreign policy this way, as they are perfectly
aware that politics is a game of addition, not one of
subtraction.

Just a refresher for those of us in this for the long
haul: the war issue is what a Political Scientist
would call a 'losing issue'.

A losing issue is described as something that
divides your political group, and divides the voting
constituency from which votes are drawn.

This is a deep underlying failing of the LP and the
wider libertarian movement. They have alienated
and driven away their freinds, allies and potential
friends and allies with this kind of behavior.

This is especially dissapointing, considering we,
as a group, have so very many 'winning issues'.

A winning issue is one that unifies your political
group, and unifies voters in your elecoral area.
Preferably, this winning issue is one that your
opponents disagree with, as well.

Considering the party is unified on a laundry
list of issues that are also widely supported
by America, it's clearly immature and stupid
for us to have a corporate culture to hang on
to the 'anti-war' all the time banner.

I am not trying to talk people like Kinsella out
of their position on this matter. What I am
pointing out here is that using this issue itself
as a 'sales feature' is a failure and should be
left aside.

That is if you actually want to win some
elections and change American politics.

As a side note, Mister Kinsella's anti-semitism
and Jew-baiting make hims a less than credible
spokesman for the Ron Paul Camp.

I personally support Congressman Paul's
electoral efforts, and would love to see a
Ron Paul Presidency.

I for one, can overlook that we don't
agree on several issues, but instead, I
prefer to focus on where we do agree,
not only on the great majority of things,
as on the big picture as well.