No need to bring them back by force, just eliminate the taxes that made them move and they’ll return.

Yikes.

With her simple-minded “Just Say No” campaign.  What followed was a deluge of militarization, incarceration, drug potency, and crime.

A country you forgot we were intervening in.

From FEE.  Applying the characterization that Hayek gives to conservatives from his essay, “Why I Am Not a Conservative”, Horwitz argues that both Sanders and Trump harbor the same distrust of liberty, and both are eager to make use of the American State to coerce their plans onto Americans.  From Hayek’s original 1960 article:

“They typically lack the courage to welcome the same undesigned change from which new tools of human endeavors will emerge.… This fear of trusting uncontrolled social forces is closely related to two other characteristics of conservatism: its fondness for authority and its lack of understanding of economic forces.… The conservative does not object to coercion or arbitrary power so long as it is used for what he regards as the right purposes. He believes that if government is in the hands of decent men, it ought not to be too much restricted by rigid rules.”

That seems to describe, not only Trump and Sanders, but every candidate vying for the nomination.  They all distrust the outcome of “uncontrolled social forces”, which means they want to pick the winners and losers, rather than the free market.  However, “conservatism” is such a woolly term.  Does it even have a definite meaning?  Advocates for liberty have a hard time pinning down one label for themselves, it inevitably comes to be used by opportunists who don’t share their affinity for liberty, and destroys its meaning.

Free speech-hating professor who called on some “muscle” to rough up a student journalist, Melissa Click, has been fired.  There’s plenty where she came from.

Or, imagine the Surveillance State erected under Obama and Bush put to use by a President Trump, or President Clinton, as The Guardian’s Trevor Timm asks.  It’s too easy to grant greater power to government, while much too hard, vanishingly so, to decrease government power.  And if that power ever is wrested from the hands of government, think of all the damage that power will inflict in the meantime.  A sufficiently politicized fear, void of reason or fact, directs the population into accepting decreased liberty, but once that power exists, almost no amount of reason and fact will be enough to reverse what has occurred.

…but why no war crimes charges for destroying Libya?  From Ron Paul’s Liberty Report.

Should we rely on the goodwill of politicians to deliver us our daily bread, or the “greedy” self-interest of profit-seeking entrepreneurs?  The Democratic candidates believe the poisoned water of Flint could be remedied by increasing the size of that distant, uncaring bureaucracy, while private companies continue to deliver clean water to that city’s residents.

The revolution advanced by Ron Paul will not be completed if activists focus on Presidential or party politics, but by working together for liberty in their home states, outside the torpid realm of the two major parties.  Indeed, party politics is where principled movements for liberty go to die.  The latest CPAC is a perfect example.  The GOP Establishment ignored and pushed away the young, enthusiastic Paul supporters who could’ve grown their party.  They deserve Trump.