A Question for "conservatives" (Zot!)

I have a serious question for the "conservatives" on here. Why do you assume the GOP is conservative and why do you continue to support them? In he past 10 years the GOP has done nothing to prove they are a conservative alternative to the leftist democrats. They crow about fiscal restraint but GWB pushed the national debt to 10 trillion( don't throw out the Obama raised it 16, we know and it's not an answer). He started wars without congressional approval, gave us the TSA, Patriot act, warrantless wiretaps, drones flying over the country. Expanded medicare the list goes on. The current GOP is on the same bandwagon but does the same as the D's do. The GOP complains that the D's want a nanny state but they are no less intrusive. It's just that they want to control and determine your morals and values. MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS, Please.

The GOP claims to be for smaller gov't and personal freedom but I haven't seen either. If you truly believe in these ideals, IMHO the GOP is lying to you. I have been a Libertarian member for years. Only the LP actually believes in the idea of leaving you alone to live your life as YOU see fit. The LP would cut the budget into balance TODAY not 10 years from now (aka NEVER).

Maybe if more "conservatives" would stop worrying about what I ingest, who I marry and the like and examine what their party represents there could be a sea change in the country with 2 true competing visions for America. One based on free people, free minds and free markets and one based on planned markets, less freedom.

The fact that a simple mind asks a simple question, does not make any of it pertinent to a meaningful conversation.

Yes, it’s a straightforward question - but it’s a question about an issue that does not have a straight forward answer.

Really, it is a very simple MINDED question, the kind that would appeal to one does not want their mind clouded with the reality of the situation.

It is also not relevant, because none of those leaders are part of the equation going forward. I will not play your little game. The answer to this question does not support your bigger thesis, so it is a waste of time.

You have not won your little “gotcha” moment, except in the shallowest of intelletual pools. I prefer the deep end.

Leagalizing drugs is just insane. Who pays for their care when they over dose?

Who pays for boozers' care when they overdose, or tobacco users' care when they get cancer? Should we ban alcohol and tobacco?

In a perfect Libertarian world they would have to pay higher premiums for their “lifestyle choice.” But in reality they want everyone else to share in the cost through premiums.

If you don't like your insurer's pricing policies, the conservative answer is to replace your insurer - not expand government to ban non-rights-violating acts.

I believe the solution is to have as small and unobtrusive government as constitutionally possible. Tobacco, booze, whoring, drugs or whatever behavior not withstanding, my question was what do Libertarians think should be done with the wretches that suffer the consequences of their own behavior.

I'm not a libertarian - but it seems clear to me that a small and unobtrusive government (which libertarians also favor) would not interfere in pricing or service under voluntary contracts such as insurance policies, and that someone suffering the uninsured consequences of their own behavior would be left to voluntary charity.

If you still maintain that "Legalizing drugs is just insane" my questions above still stand, and stand in need of answers.

Right now they are legal. (Booze and tobacco) Seems to me the answer is not to heap more problems on society by legalizing drugs.

Why shouldn't we take some problems off of society by banning the drugs alcohol and tobacco, which increase medical costs?

We don’t need drugs laying around for kids to have easier access to than they already do.

Since kids report that they can get pot more easily than beer or cigarettes, it looks like the most effective way to keep pot out of kids' hands is to legalize it for adults - so sellers have an incentive not to sell to kids (namely, the loss of their legal adult sales).

My point is that giving up and legalizing any dangerous behavior only leads to new laws and taxes societal problems.

It leads to new laws and taxes only if we let it - and it reduces or ends the problems aggravated or caused by illegality, notably the channeling of hyperinflated drug profits into criminal hands.

It is the nature of the world to tend toward chaos and self destruction, but I’d like to stop it or slow it down, somehow.

Why don't you want to not just slow it down but reverse it by banning the drugs alcohol and tobacco?

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.