Posted on 10/24/2004 10:37:30 AM PDT by Y2Krap
First, it's L. Ron, not H. Ron, and second, he founded Scientology, not the Libertarian Party. Thanks for playing, though.
What do you expect from someone who attributes quotes by Claire Wolfe to Che Guevera?
How did I miss THAT?
Different thread.
What do you expect from someone who attributes quotes by Claire Wolfe to Che Guevera?
182 tacticalogic
______________________________________
How did I miss THAT?
183 Xenalyte
______________________________________
Different thread.
184 TL
______________________________________
At one point years ago, someone posted a list of weird comments from our jihadic FRiend.
The project had to be abandoned when it grew too long.
The truth is that if the Libertarian Party is to succeed, its going to have to be from the ground up, which means local offices, then Congress, and then the biggie. The only thing the Libertarian Party accomplishes by fighting Bush is to piss off the libertarian Republicans who could be future allies.
Since you are a small-l libertarian, I'd imagine that you're quite pleased with this article.
I received this from the posted e-mail address for John Hospers:
"I did write the letter. Thanks for asking for authentication. My e-mail address is johnjhospers@aol.com. Phone 323
You seem unfamilar with the poster's agenda. Truth is no friend to his ilk.
The libertarian as envisioned by the party's founder Hopkins (and his ideological model Ayn Rand) would certain react with pre-emption when faced with an imminent attack. Today's Libertarian Party, however, is being run by people who are so pacifistic that they would not even dare to use force reactively, let alone pro-actively.
Kinda like pretending to be something one isn't.
"Dictatorship nations are outlaws. Any free nation had the right to invade Nazi Germany and, today, has the right to invade Soviet Russia, Cuba or any other slave pen. Whether a free nation chooses to do so or not is a matter of its own self-interest, not of respect for the non-existent "rights" of gang rulers. It is not a free nation's duty to liberate other nations at the price of self-sacrifice, but a free nation has the right to do it, when and if it so chooses."
"A slave nation has no national rights, but the individual rights of its citizens remain valid, even if unrecognized, and the conqueror has no right to violate them. Therefore, the invasion of an enslaved country is morally justified only when and if the conquerors establish a free social system, that is, a system based on the recognition of individual rights."
Who'd have thunk it? GWB is a Randian... :)
LOL! I'm pleased that this guy has a clue...what a shame the LP doesn't. I guess you haven't read their latest press release...where they gleefully acknowledge their whole game plan is to defeat President Bush.
I have a couple of Libertarian friends. I should send this to them.
All they seem to do is mumble about the Patriot Act. Yet NONE of them can say why they disagree with it in any detail.
I've got a few misgivings about the act myself, but still, it's a stupid reason to throw your vote away.
As opposed to outright lies by the self avowed soldier for the war on the American culture.
Needless to say, you will not be able to come up with a half a quote which even remotely implies I am at war with American culture, but don't let that stop your oh-so-principled fraudulent words.
Doesn't surprise me. The LP is a bunch of jackasses.
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.