Clint Eastwood: I'm A Libertarian

Libertarian Party press release ^ | 2/18/97 | Not sure

[Admin Moderator]

You too, cool it.

[Nanodik]

Another Libertarian from Canada - that makes two of us. Where you from?

[headsonpikes]

B.C. born and raised, presently in a relatively remote valley in the Kootenays about 6 miles off pavement. ;^)

[Nanodik]

Not too surprising that a libertarian would come out of BC - I think that is where all the Canadian radicals like to hang out. I'm from Ontario, but residing in Arizona having retreated from the snow.

[headsonpikes]

...but residing in Arizona...

Lucky dog! I've camped around AZ and the south-west extensively. I love the North Rim - esp. Point Sublime. Check out the Gila Widerness in NM some time - that's a beautiful, rugged area - like B.C. but with no real winter.

[xrp]

You've never responded to my emails. Grow up!

[Ohioan]

For example, he wrote: "At Waco, was there really an urgency to get those people out of the compound at that particular time? Was the press going to make it look heroic for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms? At Ruby Ridge, there was one guy in a cabin at the top of the mountain. Was it necessary for federal agents to go up there and shoot a 14-year-old in the back and shoot a woman with a child in her arms? What kind of mentality does that?"

What kind, indeed! It is high time that we came again to respect the right of American eccentricity. The idea of murdering people, who are keeping to themselves, because the wacked out "liberal" totalitarians hate them, ought to be repugnant to anyone who understands what America is all about.

And to suggest that there is any conflict between traditional Jeffersonians--who were Libertarians--and modern Conservative values, is to display ignorance of what Jeffersonian Libertarianism is all about. Jefferson justified the Louisiana Purchase--a controversial idea--on the basis of keeping Mexicans and other Spanish speaking peoples off of the fronteir. Does that sound like he would have tolerated the present open immigration? His penal code in Virginia, explained in the only book he ever wrote, provided very severe penalties for homosexual acts. Does that sound like he would have tolerated "same sex marriages?" Could any person who understands what the term marriage means?

With the Bush Administration running roughshod over the values of the American tradition, the only rational alternative is to encourage new political endeavors that might, in time, offer a viable alternative.

And, please, don't anyone suggest that a Libertarian President would encourage wider drug use. It would be inconceivable that anyone advocating strict construction of the Constitution, could ever support anything like the Medicare Drug Bill, which is going to subsidize the application of mind and mood altering drugs to millions of elderly Americans. Is the moral principle, involved, radically different if you can find a doctor to prescribe the drugs, rather than presecribe them for yourself? I thought that the real questions were impaired capacity & addiction--not whether the Medical profession get a cut of the proceeds. (I am not anti-Doctor, not at all. But anyone who imagines that there are not many Doctors out there who will medicate a patient's attitude, rather than listen to endless complaints that simply reflect one's unhappiness with getting old, is a dreamer.)

William Flax

[Capitalism2003]

"If the LP was really interested in advancing libertarian thought they would try rather harder to reach out to conservatives - and the majority of Americans - and first work on areas where Libertarian philosophy is widely held; tax cuts, gun rights, limiting enviromental laws, etc" We have tried. It aint working...especially not with the group in power at the moment. Domestic NON-defense spending up 37% since 2001. Bush begged for a new multi trillion dollar drug entitlement and got it. Tarrifs...farm subsidies...Kennedy's education bill...enthusiastically approved by the GOP. Sorry..I think our only hope now is to cause the so-called "conservatives" in congress a little pain. It is the only way to bring them back to the right...back to truely Constitutional government. Need an example of how a 3rd party can effect major politics? Look at what Ralph Nader did to the democrats. They are pissed over his taking 50,000 Floriduh votes in 2000...They think HE caused Gore to lose...What have they done to compensate? They have gone EXTREME LEFT. Today's Greens feel right at home in the Dean/Kucinich/Hellary democratic party. They have gone back to their BASE for this election. In the same way, I'm hoping we as Libertarians can pull the Republican party back to their base...back to the side of limited government.

"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?"--Thomas Jefferson

[swilhelm73]

You see the problem is twofold, first of all as a group libertarians are rather small. Within the Republican fold the religious right, real moderates, traditionalists, members of the military, and even the RINOs are far more common.

Further, libertarians as a group have shown time and again they will betray the party, and especially conservatives, for whatever temporary gains they can make, especially in regards to drug policy.

The recent sodomy decision was a benchmark, something I've yet to see any libertarian proponents here answer. The LP signed on to the notion judges can write legislation by fiat in return for the hope that they will rewrite drug laws in the same manner.

One can see a sterling example here of how a libertarian leaning conservative - Thomas - is busy propounding libertarian thought in the face of Libertarian party opposition.

Bush right now is playing to the Reagan democrats and moderates (to much so in my opinion) and these people are nominally anti-libertarians. They don't mind farm subsidies, tariffs, or government spending in general. They do oppose abortion on demand, gay marriage, and a weak kneed response to the terror threat.

If libertarians were more numerous - which they could be if they weren't such fundamentalists - he wouldn't have to.

The two parties in America should be one certain around conservatism and one centered around libertarianism when you look America's philosophical and political history and development.

So again, I would suggest to people who consider themselves first and foremost libertarians, find the issues the American public agrees with you on and advance them. Striking out on your own and saying your immediate goal is to close down the IRS and legalize crack isn't going to get you any political power - *whether such a position is correct or not*.

[xrp]

Further, libertarians as a group have shown time and again they will betray the party, and especially conservatives, for whatever temporary gains they can make, especially in regards to drug policy.

This is because L/libertarians view the War on Drugs as one of the biggest threats to freedom and liberty in this country. L/libertarians may betray the party, but they are very consistant with being loyal to limited government and freedom and liberty, whereas the Republicans have not. Which do you think is better?

[Capitalism2003]

I don't think Libertarians betray any party. They put principle above all else...party is a Libertarians will support ANYONE who fights for less government, lower regulation, lower taxes, and all around limits on government interference with personal matters. They want to reduce the role of government across the board, expanding every level of freedom in the process. Political parties (including theirs) are not as important as the advancement of this cause.

[swilhelm73]

Then again, for the fourth time or so, explain the Libertarian Party's support of Lawrence v. Texas, the sodomy decision?

Why didn't the LP, and libertarians in general, side with the Libertarian position as advanced by Justice Thomas?

I join Justice Scalia’s dissenting opinion. I write separately to note that the law before the Court today “is … uncommonly silly.” Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479, 527 (1965) (Stewart, J., dissenting). If I were a member of the Texas Legislature, I would vote to repeal it. Punishing someone for expressing his sexual preference through noncommercial consensual conduct with another adult does not appear to be a worthy way to expend valuable law enforcement resources.

Notwithstanding this, I recognize that as a member of this Court I am not empowered to help petitioners and others similarly situated. My duty, rather, is to “decide cases ‘agreeably to the Constitution and laws of the United States.’

Supporting leftist judicial tyranny for the potential bone of drug legalization is a horrific betrayal of both conservative and *libertarian* beliefs.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

I really have no problem whatsoever with Hobbes; in fact, he has been a major influence on my political philosophy.

Hobbes is maligned by many, not because he is untruthful, but because in terms of Biblical principal he is accurate much more than the sectarian dogma coming from the churches. The idea of a Sovereign not having the 'divine right of kings' but - - a divine right of a Godly king to rule by consent of a Godly people = The Leviathan.

--

Give me some reference, any, that demonstrates that you have read even a few chapters of that work.

phantastical images...

Read Of Demonology and Other Relics of the Religion of the Gentiles.

Hell, Read Aristotle's Poetics or Rhetoric. Or, read Kierkegaard's Sickness Unto Death. Many of the same ideas concerning idols, conceits and phantasms are found there. Like Kierkegaard's despair and phantasien, Hobbes speaks of 'motions of the brain and their 'phantastical inhabitants' OR fantasy. Like Kierkegaard, he sees human representations of their own fancies as idolatries, gods of their own making, like morality. Human morals are nothing more than a pantheon of pagan gods. Socrates, in Plato's Euthyphro, asked a similar question...

Anyway, to hell with that. Consider the etymology of the word "fan." We know one definition is a 'sports fan' (another form of modern idolatry). We know another to be one that is mechanical and moves the air...

Consider the etymology of 'fanatic.'

Consider Beelzebub is prince of phantasms or Satan is prince of the powers and spirits in the air(according to the Bible).

Think about the words fan, fanatic, fantasy - - then consider the Aristotle's idea of pthonos from Rhetoric... I understand the Left and where they get their power.

[The Libertarian Dude]

Why are you comparing libertarians to the French? I've never supported the U.N. or any other dictator.

Are you one of those "two-party-only" types?