I like Ron Paul, but some of his followers are flat out creepy.

May 8, 2008, 10:33 am
A Gated Community for Ron Paul Supporters?

By Robert Mackey

A group of ardent backers of Ron Paul, the maverick congressman and Republican presidential candidate, are flocking to Paulville.org, a Web site that promises to help them set up exclusive residential enclaves open only to the like-minded — presumably to help them replicate in the physical world the comfortable feeling they’ve experienced online, of being fenced-off from the rest of us.

The site’s founders explain:

The goal of Paulville.org it to establish gated communities containing 100% Ron Paul supporters and or people that live by the ideals of freedom and liberty.

The process is forming a co-op of people buying shares in the community and these people would be granted land use at a minimum of 1 acre per share for as long as they homesteaded the land. The community would be privately held by the co-op to establish private property for the general community, thus preserving the community is 100% freedom and liberty lovers.

The community votes on all community efforts, such as utilities etc. However no one is forced to consume these utilities and or pay for them, AKA people can be off grid on their share of land. This is in line with the ideals that you’re free to live your life the way you want and not be forced to do or pay for other people’s life styles you may not agree with.

These communities are not for the faint at heard they will start as undeveloped land in non city locals, as this is the way to secure large tracts of land needed for these efforts.

However the goal is a minimal financial outlay of around $500 per share to establish this community.

If you want to start your very own local Paulville based community. Post in the forums under potential Communities and see if you can form a group of buyers in your local group.

(Evidently the Paulville people take as libertarian a view of the laws of grammar, spelling and punctuation as they do of the statute books. -Ed.)

As word of the Paulville project has spread around the Web, reaction has been mixed. On his blog on The Atlantic’s Web site, Andrew Sullivan commented simply:

Ugh. Who wants to live around people who agree with you on everything? Not my kind of libertarian.

A blogger for The Stranger in Seattle, identifying himself as “Ryan S. Jackson, Unpaid Intern,” meanwhile, gently mocked the idea as one that would appeal to someone who is upset that his landlord “won’t accept my Ron Paul gold dollars as payment” for the rent.

Across the spectrum, at RonPaulTelevision.com — “24/7 television for the revolution!” — the idea seems to be taken a bit more seriously. While secession from the Union is ruled out, the discussion soon turns to the merits of a tract of land near Dell City, Texas, that is offered for sale on Ebay, and to whether the community would welcome a Starbucks or would have to start their own “Paulbucks.”

Please. Like HM's Obama obsession isn't WAY more creepy than this.

Actually, haven't the Libertarians been kicking around the idea of moving en masse to a sparsely populated state so that they could have an entirely Libertarian state and local government for a while now? If they pick Montana (which is the logical choice given Montana's current view of the Federal Government), I'd move a couple states over in a second.

A lot of western states (Montana, Wyoming, etc.) have a strong libertarian streak.

I think a libertarian state government would run best in a sparsely populated state that has low crime (because it's primarily rural) with an agrarian economy or at least one run on natural resources.

The real test would be to have a large city with sprawling suburbs and run it according to libertarian principles.

I agree. That's why Montana, Wyoming, and maybe a midwestern state or two (though they tend to be more bible-beltish than Libertarian) would be perfect. We may get ourselves to Montana anyway just because we like the place.

I've made that same point but in reverse to FalconBeast before about ideaologies working best in areas with fairly homologous (sp) populations. The same thing that would make a Libertarian run state government work in Montana is what makes vast social programs work in Europe. It's much easier to get a bunch of people to cooporate on something if they all have similar racial and socio-economic backgrounds, and therefore largely the same goals.

I was thinking more about the need for government services being limited where there is little crime, less need for fire and ambulance services, not a lot of traffic, and where most people live in houses in rural areas that don't require constant health and safety regulations. Also, with rural, sparsely populated areas the effects of poverty are not as noticeable. People can grow food and survive on limited means in the country. In a crowded city, that's not possible and so there's a greater incentive to steal or deal drugs or some other criminal activity?

A limited government ideology works best when the need for government services is greatly limited. That's why I think the real test for libertarian ideology would be a large industrial city with sprawling suburbs and large numbers of working-class commuters.

Those whacky librarians :lol:

http://www.freestateproject.org/

You are a little late to vote. New Hampshire was chosen. Wyoming was runner up. I suppose you could start a Western version but the original probably wouldnt appreciate the competition.





WND
New Hampshire wins 'free state' vote
Thousands of libertarians to move to state, work for more liberty
Posted: October 01, 2003
5:00 pm Eastern

© 2008 WorldNetDaily.com



A group of 4,500 libertarians who all agreed to move to one state to work toward restoring certain personal liberties and limited government has voted to choose the state of New Hampshire as a new home.

The Free State Project, which has been collecting commitments from members to move to the winning state for two years, announced the results of its balloting this morning. Ten states were under consideration, with New Hampshire prevailing over Montana, Wyoming, Delaware, Vermont, Maine, Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota and Alaska.

Leaders of the Free State Project now hope to recruit another 15,500 people to migrate to New Hampshire, hoping to "reinforce and enhance the 'sphere of individual liberty' in the Live Free or Die state," said a statement by the group. It is the participants' goal to "preserve one bastion of freedom in the age of intrusive government."

As WorldNetDaily reported, Jan Helfield, a Falls Creek, Va.-based attorney and Libertarian Party activist, is one of the group's leaders.

"The Free State Project proposes to identify the easiest state in the union to free, and then relocate 20,000 people to implement the liberation," he wrote last year. "The people interested in moving will sign up with FSP and vote on the state selected to be freed."

The 20,000 newly relocated activists "would permit Libertarians to register large numbers of new voters to vote Libertarian, a factor that could easily make the difference and lead to a Libertarian victory," Helfield said.

"We could end state redistribution of wealth, repealing state taxes and wasteful government programs. We could privatize education and utilities. We could repeal laws regulating guns, drugs and other victimless crimes. We could abolish asset forfeiture, abuses of eminent domain, inefficient regulations and state monopolies."

The group's statement said organizers expect the first wave of movers to migrate to New Hampshire by year's end.

The runner-up state was Wyoming.

"New Hampshire is clearly the consensus choice of Free Staters," commented FSP president and Yale political science professor Jason Sorens on the group's website. "New Hampshire won a plurality of first-preference votes from every region of the country except the West."

"It's not difficult to see the reasons for New Hampshire's victory," said FSP Vice President Elizabeth McKinstry, who is originally from New England. "The state boasts the lowest state and local tax burden in the continental U.S., the leanest state government in the country in terms of government spending and employment, a citizen legislature, a healthy job market, and perhaps most important, local support for our movement."

According to the group, New Hampshire Gov. Craig Benson pledged to support the aims of the FSP, and several members of the legislature have signed up as members.

The group says if current recruitment trends continue, organizers expect to reach 20,000 commitments by 2006, after which point members would have five years in which to move to New Hampshire.

Noted Tim Condon, FSP director of member services, "The member survey shows that 53 percent of members plan to move within three years, not waiting for the 20,000-member benchmark. Early movers should help recruitment by building a record of success."

Not all in New Hampshire were thrilled with the prospect of thousands of libertarians moving in.

"I like to be left alone by the government. But I need my trash picked up. I need police protection," Dennis Pizzimenti, a lawyer in Concord, told the Associated Press.

The news service reported Kathy Sullivan, state Democratic Party chairwoman, said project members "can best be described as anarchists."

I don't really find it creepy. Communes are nothing new, and are built by people who share ideology. I've considered moving to one a few hours north of me (decided since then it's better to just own rural property). Contrary to Sullivan's opinion, all commune members don't "agree on everything".

That's good, because the world is full of bastards, the number increasing rapidly the farther one gets from Missoula, Montana......

I like Helena and Bozeman a little more than Missoula, but anything in the western part of the state is great. About the only city in Montana I don't like is Billings. All there is to Billings is a bunch of refineries, and they stink to high heaven.

Tell me you recognized the quote......hell, lie to me!

Never heard it.

It's from "A River Runs Through It," and if you've never seen that movie, they'll kick your ass out of Montana nr6