Well, I suppose I must cease to call myself a libertarian. I am sure there are better terms out there for individuals who value the concepts of individual liberty, as libertarians far and wide have abandoned this idea. I met Walter Block over 20 years ago and considered him a hero in the libertarian movement then. However, the sudden trend of back-stabbing non-political libertarians that has been going on the in the name of the Paul Crusade is tragic to witness.

Far from "lying on the ground on [my] back" as Block gleefully exclaims, I am more a bemused spectator at the Millennialists who thunder the rallying cry around Paul. "He is our only hope in the face of darkness," we hear almost daily. David Gordon's letter, quoted by Block, states as a given that someone's stated convictions (skipping the small print where those convictions are uncomfortable) are enough to invalidate any taint of statism. This seems to say that the fact that someone avows to strip the state of power makes them a holy candidate for state power. Gordon raises the issue perfectly, and then dismisses it: "by participating in the electoral process, regardless of the program one advocates, one incurs some sort of pollution." I hold this as the crux of the matter, and say "Yes, you can oppose even then purest libertarian on intellectual and moral grounds who seeks political office."

I could list specific objections against elements of Paul's non-libertarian views, but in the end those are irrelevant. I would not support Ayn Rand for president, nor Murray Rothbard, nor Ludwig von Mises, to name libertarians of greater stature than Ron Paul.

To those who say that if not now, then never again will we have this opportunity, that's as much rubbish as Al Gore saying if we don't act now, then world will boil over in a few years, and anything done later is useless because we didn't act now. What hubris.