Posted on 08/03/2013 6:35:31 AM PDT by Kaslin
The very first bit of anti-libertarian humor I ever posted was this clever video about the anarcho-capitalist paradise of Somalia.
I then shared two cartoons, one on libertarian ice fishing and the other showinglibertarian lifeguards.
That was followed by a very funny list of the 24 types of libertarians.
But I haven’t shared anything making fun of people like me since this “think I do” montage last year.
Thanks to Buzzfeed, however, we now have something new for our collection. They came up with “23 Libertarian Problems” and here are two of my favorites from the list.
(Excerpt) Read more at finance.townhall.com ...
In your post about me probably not remembering anything of the 1960s when abortion was being eased in by the left on an unaware, pre-prolife movement America.
You described your own memories very positively.
“”Though pretty young, I remember the shock that accompanied the ruling. I remember my parents being stunned. My mother explained it to me.””
So in January of 1973, were you 4 years old, or 5 years old?
It is one of those two.
Which one would make it better for you, 4 or 5? I’ll tell right after you identify that leftwing social position I’m promoting. Hahaha!
But seriously, I was 5 years old. I guess my parents were just oddballs for being informed on the subject. They never seemed like oddballs, or extraordinarily informed on any subject. We were pretty much a regular middle-class family in the South. I’ll ask around some more. I’m not really willing to take your word for it, since you have demonstrated a willingness to lie.
So you say...I’ve seen the very same retort more times than I can recall every single time someone mentions that “L” word...
I agree that there are only traces (depending on where you hang your hat) of conservatism in the ranks of republican elected officials, but where else are YOU looking???
I bet it gets even more thin wherever that may be...
You keep looking...We’ll keep working...
You are a bit of an ass, aren’t you?
*””I was 5 years old.””*
I never lie, but you sure are caught up in an awkward tale and calendar.
So you were five when “”Though pretty young, I remember the shock that accompanied the ruling. I remember my parents being stunned. My mother explained it to me.””
Then you post a desperate mess here, “”I guess my parents were just oddballs for being informed on the subject. They never seemed like oddballs, or extraordinarily informed on any subject. We were pretty much a regular middle-class family in the South. I’ll ask around some more.””
The five year old, you is claiming that they were informed for some odd reason on the topic that you say I wasn’t, yet in the same sentence you admit that normally they were not informed very well, but of course at age five you are clearly recording and absorbing all this, so that 40 years later you can use it on this thread.
A lot of what you are was uncovered tonight.
No, no, no, no. You are the one who consistently goes straight to the Libertarian party platform as a reference as if one single person arguing with gives a rat’s behind what the LP platform is.
I stand by my thoughts, perhaps you didn’t understand my point and I’ll say another way. I am merely pointing out that conservatives on social issues do not bother me unless, of course they create a worldview full of logical fallacy like you do.
I am in a very right-wing world as far as work, my kids school, most of my friends, etc. and I speak freely this way, none of my friends think of me as a leftist. Rather they think I am a little too far right. I will vote for Social conservatives. As long as they are not candidates who come from the tree of Bush-Cheney-Rove-Kristol etc. No matter what they think about gay marriage, I will never ever vote for one of these big-government statists.
You have a top priority as do I, mine is anyone who voted against de-funding the NSA is out. Anyone defending prism or bashing Snowden, out. I’d also love to see DHS cut, but am not holding my breath. Do you see any reason why I wouldn’t vote for Ted Cruz or Sarah Palin? Bachmann, no freaking way, she attacked Snowden and went against Amash she is dead to me. I can’t put another big government statist back in office. Rand Paul or Cruz, otherwise I’ll be sitting this one out.
So what about you?
It works in Northern Nevada. Outside of calling Libertarians “Liberals”, (which they are not), your other points are right on.
Legalized Prostitution is a simple Financial Transaction between an Employee / Business Owner and a Customer. Perhaps you should have included Legalizing Illicit Drugs is non negotiable instead, but even that point is up to debate. Alcohol (a drug) Abuse damages the Family and the Country, but making it Illegal didn't quite work out.
Just my Opinion. Liberals are the Left. They want to render the Constitution invalid.
Libertarians take the Constitution at face value. You could say they are Originalists, not Liberals.
You have lied and prevaricated consistently.
Nothing awkward at all about it. We were watching the news, the decision was announced. Both of my parents reacted to it in disbelief. Then my mother explained to my brother and me what it meant. My parents certainly knew it meant killing the baby. While I loved them very much, I don’t think they were extraordinarily informed on the subject. Granted, they watched the news, read the papers, went to Bible studies where such things might have been discussed, and Mom was a former Biology teacher. Maybe they were more aware than most, but it certainly never seemed that way. My memory of that event and the Fall of Saigon a couple of years later on the news are very clear, and stand out for some reason. Probably the parental reaction. Some kids are just advanced.
Point me toward something other than your memory that will demonstrate that people were generally unaware that abortion meant the baby dies, because everything else seems to contradict you.
You are assuming that I base everything on my memory of over 40 years ago. Again, you assume a lot, and get it wrong. That’s a theme for you. Make an assumption based on nearly nothing, then lie, evade, and backtrack to cover it up.
How’s that digging through my posting history coming along?
You were born in what, 1968, yet you offer up your memories of January, 1973 as though they were golden texts.
All this as part of your reaction to conservative efforts to end abortion. Like I said, you are dedicated to your undefined, but never ending war against social conservatism.
If nobody knew what abortion was before Roe, why did the Right bother to paint McGovern as the “acid, abortion, and amnesty” candidate? That is puzzling, seeing as how nobody knew what abortion even was. Care to comment?
Born in 1967. The “golden texts”, like so much else, are your invention. I remember the event well. Those two news events stand out, probably because of the strong reactions.
All of this is my reaction to your weak reasoning and poor knowledge of facts. You are not social conservatism. Identify the position of social conservatism I am attacking, or the leftwing social position I am promoting. Hahaha!
Full stop right there.
I have never put that up as an argument and have no clue how that can be derived. Please enlighten me.
I have said "equality under the law". If marriage is defined as being between one male and one female, then all get to partake of it under the law. You don't get to deny someone because they're black or gay or yellow or too short or too fat. They meet the qualifications -- they get it.
You can't deny a homosexual under the law, as it stands with that, but really, would they under those requirements? That's not what they want and its YOUR position.
Care to try again? You guys seem to be inventing a whole lot of things nobody is saying. While amusing, it is very irritating and shows a lack of comprehension on your part. It is also amusing that people on this site are running about bashing people WHO ARE ON THEIR SIDE. Way to go, folks. Any more supporters you want to drive away while you're at it by being stupid?
I have said in the past a good end-run around any legal argument is to send marriage back to the Churches and get the Government out of it.
With THIS Government, which seems to be minting libertarians (small-l) left and right out of both Republicans and Democrats alike, that may end up being the only viable option once they get going.
Murder of the unborn is non negotiable. Libertarians completely agree with you, since there is no liberty without life. You can not be pro murder and a libertarian.
Age of consent laws are non negotiable. Mostly agree if the age of consent set at some reasonable age. My mother was married at 16 as were a lot of her friends. So anything over 16 does not seem reasonable to me.
Illegality of prostitution is non negotiable. Prostitution is legal in Nevada. I say leave this up to local government.
Controlling our borders is non negotiable.I completely agree, this issue is one that I (and Rand Paul) have serious problems with a lot of libertarians. "Open borders are incompatible with the welfare state" Rand Paul
Really, you were only five years old?
That was in 1973, you know nothing of the 10 or 15 years before that (in reality you don't remember the details of 1973 politics either).
Why do you go to such extremes in reaction to social conservatism and a pro-life position of trying to end abortion?
I note that you avoided the “acid, abortion, and amnesty” thing. Good move, because it cuts against your position.
Again, you assume that I base everything off of a memory of 40 years ago. My parents knew it meant killing a baby. There were laws on the books forbidding it, so there must have been some knowledge that it was a bad thing. McGovern was tainted by his support for it. All of those things and more make me tend to not believe you. Point me toward something that backs up your contention that the public didn’t know that abortion meant the baby dies.
You still can’t come up with one leftwing social position I’m promoting, or one social conservative position I’m attacking. My reaction is not to social conservatism. You are not social conservatism.
Where did that come from? As usual, you are misreading me and making an ass of yourself.
It was only 1994 when Clinton made it legal for a homosexual to try to pass in the military for as long as he could until caught, it was only this year that Obama made it legal for them to serve, and then fully equal with “marriage”.
DADT is how it should be. If they can comport themselves as Military Soldiers, then there should be no issue with them serving. If they cannot comport themselves as Military Soldiers, then they have no business serving.
Why is this so difficult? Is "equality under the law" such a hard concept for people to understand? Why is that?
So you are a part of this new world for the American military, you reject all that was before in regard to homosexuals in the military.
Only in your dreams, my FRiend, but don't let that get in the way of your misrepresentations and lies. I would suggest repentance, but I know my exhortation would fall on deaf ears.
The young guy who googles a campaign slam from when he was 4 years old thinks that it is equal history to a politically active voter (even activist, yes dearheart!), soldier, and husband of a pregnant wife during that campaign?
The five year old:
" Though pretty young, I remember the shock that accompanied the ruling. I remember my parents being stunned. My mother explained it to me."---"Again, you assume that I base everything off of a memory of 40 years ago. My parents knew it meant killing a baby. There were laws on the books forbidding it, so there must have been some knowledge that it was a bad thing. McGovern was tainted by his support for it. All of those things and more make me tend to not believe you."
Point me toward anything that backs up your assertion that the public didn’t know abortion meant killing the baby.
Oh, and would you also identify a leftwing social position I am promoting, or a social conservative position I am attacking?
You can’t do any of the three, can you?
It seems that you are running out of credibility steam.
Would you care to steer us to your threads defending social conservatism, or that remotely resemble the anti-social conservative threads that I can link to, such as this one?
I was in my 20s went abortion became legal, I remember well all the stories about wire hangers and back room abortions and how it was killing young women. Everyone knew abortion meant killing an unborn child and most people were against making abortion legal.
1) A single leftwing social position I am promoting.
2) A single social conservative position I am attacking.
3) Anything that backs up your assertion that the public didn’t know abortion meant the baby dies prior to Roe.
You can’t do any of the three. Not a one. Pitiful.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.