Posted on 12/18/2008 9:00:00 AM PST by Dada Orwell
Paul's Reaganite cheerleader Doug Wead continues his early bird crusade to get "Dr. No" in front of the nation's voters one more time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeGMQBe7_OU
Well, Ron Paul did say Reagan was a failure that made Carter look Conservative...
that’s why I’m not a libertarian. But I’m a lot closer to him than either of us is to Obama.
“Libertarianism is at the heart of modern conservatism.”
Ronald Wilson Reagan.
Did he ignore any problems?
I told you you understand neither conservatism nor libertarianism. You just set up straw dogs for what you THINK they are, and knock down the one, and build up the other. I think you need to do some reading of Milton Friedman, Walter Williams, and Thomas Sowell.
No video now, I’ll look later.
“I think you need to do some reading of Milton Friedman, Walter Williams, and Thomas Sowell.”
And Cato and Reason and don’t forget mises.org
...like the article from this thread
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2150972/posts
conservatives agree that 90% of the time there are no problems that require the use of govt. It’s the other 10% that we disagree: war on terror, abortion, illegals, reversing the effects of liberalism on our culture, etc.
Your point?
“It’s the other 10% that we disagree: war on terror, abortion, illegals, reversing the effects of liberalism on our culture, etc.”
Again, you’ve set up a straw dog. True, there are some calling themselves libertarians for whom that is true, but there are also some calling themselves conservatives for whom some or all of that is true - Buchannan, for one.
my point is that I’m a libertarian 90% of the time. but the other 10% still matters.
My take on government action is that the burden of proof should always be on the proponent of the action. As it is now, the opponent is one with the burden of proof that the actions should not be taken, and that is bass ackwards. Proponents of any government action should be able to demonstrate that the action is constitutional, necessary, will achieve its goals, and that any collateral damage is worth it. If they cannot do that, the government should take my advice and don't just do something, stand there.
“I know of no libertarian who wants no government. A true libertarian believes that government has a function, a small one, but that function it should perform well and powerfully, and do nothing else.”
ok in theory. But they never really tell you how they want to do it. They have plenty of ideas on what they oppose and repeal but they didn’t tell Reagan how to win the Cold War or Rudy how to reduce crime in NYC or Bush how to keep us safe after 9/11.
See, there you go again. You’ve set up the straw dog and knocked it down again. You have no idea what constitutes libertarianism and what constitutes conservatism, at least it isn’t evident in what you write.
You say “they this, and they that” and then you criticize what you imagine “they” do or say.
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.