Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 04/01/2013 10:39:17 AM PDT by crusher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: crusher

Talk about completely misunderstanding libertarian philosophy.......


2 posted on 04/01/2013 10:42:14 AM PDT by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: crusher
Our Founding Fathers deeply understood human nature.

They knew the importance of relying on God and they understood the weaknesses of man.

Today, there is minimal, if any, reliance on God.

Licentious activity is the standard.

3 posted on 04/01/2013 10:48:28 AM PDT by Slyfox (The Key to Marxism is Medicine ~ Vladimir Lenin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: crusher

Libertarians didn’t attach hundreds of benefits and penalties onto marriage, e.g., the estate tax break being considered by the Supreme Court.

The unintended consequence of these attachments is that gays are denied equal rights. My goodness, even Pope Francis, when a Cardinal, said there should be recognition of civil unions so gays could have equal rights.

Marriage pre-existed the state, but might not survive the state.

Libertarians didn’t erect a welfare program with benefits exceeding the earnings of people in neighboring countries.

The unintended consequences of these welfare benefits is to attract immigrants interested in welfare benefits.

Today, welfare as a right threatens to bankrupt the country.

Libertarians didn’t decide we should get into the business of “reconstructing” Iraq and Afghanistan. Even George W. Bush, as a candidate in 2000, said that would be foolish.

The unintended consequences of getting into the business of reconstructing foreign countries was the loss of the Republican majority in Congress in 2006 and of the White House in 2008.

We risked American Freedom on Iraqi Freedom and lost.

To misquote Rula Lenska, don’t hate us because we Libertarians are right all the time.


5 posted on 04/01/2013 11:01:09 AM PDT by Redmen4ever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: crusher

Excellent commentary, particularly with regard to foreign policy. I always thought there was a sensible position between Ron Paul and George W. Bush.


6 posted on 04/01/2013 11:02:57 AM PDT by GOP_Party_Animal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: crusher
I think the real differentiation between Republicanism vs Libertarianism is that, either its going to be the very libertarian Founders vision of 50 different States loosely coupled by a weak constitutional federal govt 1 nation with 50 slightly different subsidiaries. And yea, there's gonna be stuff every one of us doesn't agree with under the Founders version.

It's undeniable that the Founders saw themselves under the different States vision (they were Virginians and Pennsylvanians) and wanted people to mind their own damn business (see Franklin's Fugio Cent) and yea, that we should rely on God. But nowhere in the Const did they give the fed govt powers to force that reliance.

I think republicans and democrats (and you) agree with the 1 nation version that anything we dont agree with is automatically either unrepentant hedonism or theocratic autocracy and you're willing to completely ignore the Const so you can force your version of what's good for America.

14 posted on 04/01/2013 11:33:37 AM PDT by SwankyC (Democrats and Republicans agree, govt coercion is OK if it fits your idea of whats OK)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: crusher
Over the past forty-five years since becoming politically aware, I have vacillated between conservatism and libertarian thinking in contemplating the world around me.

Will there be a equally scathing diatribe on the unintended consequeces of "conservativism" forthcoming?

17 posted on 04/01/2013 11:52:31 AM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: crusher

Libertarianism is a quasi religious cult. It has its Holy Prophetess,(Ayn Rand); it has its revealed Holy scriptures(Atlas Shrugged, etc.)It has divided into various sects, it has its paradise where libertarians go to upon experiencing a type of Rapture, leave the world and then return again to rebuild paradise after the demons destroyed the earth as we know it. It has its devils and demons, see the “Looters” in Atlas Shrugged. It has its “Sign of the Cross” in the dollar sign John Galt blesses those going with him.


24 posted on 04/01/2013 12:44:52 PM PDT by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: crusher

Ive read your review of libertarians. What’s your take on what the republicans have accomplished and produced since Ike was a general?


27 posted on 04/01/2013 1:02:02 PM PDT by muir_redwoods (Don't fire until you see the blue of their helmets)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: crusher
You are actually right (at least in my opinion). But what are the practical consequences? Isn't it too late for marriage and immigration? The people you could conceivably shift from a libertarian to a conservative perspective wouldn't be enough to affect outcomes.

As for foreign policy, understanding that we have to have an exit strategy, that we can't just shoot up foreign countries and then leave, is something that might make us less inclined to intervene abroad.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry when people say we had to go into Iraq to take out Saddam because we didn't do so the first time, but we didn't have to hand around for "nation building."

If we did what they said and just left, they'd be the first to cry for a third intervention to "finish the job" when the next thing went wrong -- and they'd conveniently forget that it was their advice that we'd heeded earlier.

36 posted on 04/01/2013 2:12:11 PM PDT by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: crusher
Statists know no limits, obey no limits, and can justify imposing their yoke on the necks of anyone - in the name of "common good". Talk about not being able to comprehend "unintended consequences"!

When has intervention by the Fedgov fostered liberty? It only seeks to grow and impose their ideals on the masses while excluding themselves from the consequences.

Also, you speak as if once a "conservative" victory is accomplished, like DOMA, it's settled for good. No, the Fedgov is living in a swamp with ever changing ideals since they, with the blessing of Republicans, have thrown out the bedrock of the constitution (Nixon's New Federalism - EPA, OSHA, etc, Bush's compassionate consertativism - Medicare Rx, DHS, Patriot Act, etc).

37 posted on 04/01/2013 2:23:25 PM PDT by uncommonsense (Conservatives believe what they see; Liberals see what they believe.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: crusher
"The libertarians’ posture of gutting the military to purposefully weaken its capacity will accomplish the exact opposite of what they want."

So, libertarians want to weaken the military's capacity, but their gutting of it will actually produce a stronger military? I think your straw men are full of weeds.

38 posted on 04/01/2013 2:28:36 PM PDT by uncommonsense (Conservatives believe what they see; Liberals see what they believe.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson