Posted on 08/03/2013 6:35:31 AM PDT by Kaslin
The very first bit of anti-libertarian humor I ever posted was this clever video about the anarcho-capitalist paradise of Somalia.
I then shared two cartoons, one on libertarian ice fishing and the other showinglibertarian lifeguards.
That was followed by a very funny list of the 24 types of libertarians.
But I haven’t shared anything making fun of people like me since this “think I do” montage last year.
Thanks to Buzzfeed, however, we now have something new for our collection. They came up with “23 Libertarian Problems” and here are two of my favorites from the list.
(Excerpt) Read more at finance.townhall.com ...
“Has it ever occurred to you that the reason libertarians hate you more than they hate statism”
Thank you for confirming my point. It has been said, “Libertarians hate statism more than they hate conservativism.”
Now, we have proof this is not so.
It has been said, “we cannot win without them”.
Now, again, we have proof that this is not so.
Insofar as libertarians hate conservativism more than they hate statism, we shall see statism prevail.
It is not the duty of conservatives to abandon core conservative principles in order to woo libertarians. It is the duty of libertarians to finally abandon statism.
“Are you so sure it is because of policy disagreements”
Nope. It’s because of prejudice. Pure and simple. Calling conservatives on a conservative site, ‘supporters of sharia’, when they defend protecting the borders is plain prejudice. Pure and simple.
Libertarians say they hate statism but they don’t, not really. They are willing to side with statism because they hate them less than social conservatives.
I was conservative on all of those issues but felt that healthcare was ballgame for the country in terms of maintaining some sort of commitment to the notion of limited government.
You’re saying I should have supported Bush who was really good on borders and conservatism and stuff?
“supported Bush who was really good on borders and conservatism and stuff?”
As opposed to your usual straight party line D vote for Kerry, Obama, Obama and Gore?
Sounds like the DNC agenda. Odd that.
I would argue that ‘conservative’ economics argues in favor for the preservation of the traditional family as an economic benefit.
It’s been overlooked by present theories how the breakdown of the family contributes to our economic problems - single mothers are vastly more expensive for the state than a married mom.
Don’t libertarians ever look at the voting data?
Conservatism in voting is a social conservative thing, social liberals are overwhelmingly liberal voters.
The libertarian social agenda creates liberal voters who love the libertarian social agenda, and then vote themselves economics that makes it easier for them to live it.
You really don’t know how social liberals and atheists vote, versus Evangelicals?
Wasn’t it team liberaltarian that argued we needed a ‘moderate’ like Romney in order to defeat Obama? That worked out SOOO well for team us, btw.
Didn’t they also push for Juan McCain because ‘it was his turn’?
“They are willing to side with statism because they hate them less than social conservatives.”
I don’t agree with much else you have said on this thread, but you are absolutely right on this when it comes to the people who make the Libertarian Party go. That’s why they can’t get more than a couple of percentage points of the vote. They HATE Rand Paul for being pro life, and wanting to put troops on the border, and opposing gay marriage.
The difference between the libertarian agenda listed in post 93, and the DNC agenda, is that the DNC knows that it creates more of the liberal voters who will seek big government and liberal economics, the goofy libertarians claim to think that somehow that ghetto list creates right-wing, Christian right type voters, voting away welfare and food stamps.
The libertarian fantasy is a bizarro land delusion.
You are correct. The Dark Side (NeoCons) will never allow a non-statist to be elected. Let the smears begin!
...a history revisionist. You can’t be serious.
Evangeocals didn’t vote in the last presidential election....
The libertarian party represent true libertarians, the smarter libertarians want to take over the GOP and make it a part of the liberal DNC, except with conservative economics.
We can expect to see more Romneys, and rinos in the future.
“The libertarian social agenda creates liberal voters who love the libertarian social agenda, and then vote themselves economics that makes it easier for them to live it.”
That doesn’t make any sense. Liberal economics makes it easier to live with the results of the Left’s social agenda. You seem to say that libertarianism is like a gateway drug to liberalism. They are indoctrinated with liberalism from an early age. Why would they need to explore libertarian philosophy, which would chip away at some of that indoctrination? Young people who take up libertarianism are far more likely to embrace conservatism.
The problem is that they are kneecapping us on important issues like the preservation of marriage - they oppose the constitutional protections when it opposes the things they want, and then they refuse to act against the intervention when the statists impose things.
It’s like a rachet that slides only one way. We saw plenty of them here champion the campaign to remove DOMA, while other folks (like myself), warned that we’d see ‘instant immigration visas (which surprise surprise they like) for gay ‘couples’.
They would rather see the eradication of marriage licenses in society altogether than admit that maybe, just maybe, they are wrong about the connection between laws and society. Even in saying that marriage is a private good seems like a decent argument until you get to the questions like, “how then do we regulate bigamy?” “does a wife have a right to know if her husband has another wife”? “Does a child have a right to know their father and mother”, “should we issue visas to people who claim to be married, but arent”, and we see the libertarians strangely silent. It’s as if they believe that once they eradicate marriage altogether that the consequences go away.
I’ve been voting nearly straight ticket Republican since the 2000 election. I ended up voting for Bush in that election, changing my mind literally at the last second in the voting booth. I knew it was going to be close and I couldn’t make myself throw my vote away. I knew the Democrats were the real enemy so I held my nose and pulled the lever for Bush. 2000 was the beginning of the end of my dalliance with the Libertarians. It was then that I decided it made more sense to support the Republicans, as impure as they are, because they are actually in the game and have some hope of winning.
“Young people who take up libertarianism are far more likely to embrace conservatism.”
Unlikely. I just don’t see it. If they embrace the social agenda then they are going to end up being 100 percent DNC supporters who call themselves ‘libertarian’.
It’s all about where they stand on social issues. A young person who is libertarian because he believes in constitutional protections like free speech, will in all likelihood become conservative, if he is exposed to conservative principles.
A libertarian who is a libertarian because of free dope and free condoms isn’t going to become conservative.
You are a kooky conspiracy theorist when it comes to libertarians.
I hope you understand my frustration with liberaltarians over social issues.
We can’t win if we surrender social issues, because the economics flows from them.
I started to mention this up thread with one of your goofy posts, but you just don't know much.
""A national post-election survey commissioned by the Faith and Freedom Coalition last night found that the evangelical vote increased in 2012 to a record 27% of the electorate and that white evangelicals voted roughly 78% for Mitt Romney to 21% for Barack Obama. This was the highest share of the vote in modern political history for evangelicals, Reed said. “Evangelicals turned out in record numbers and voted as heavily for Mitt Romney yesterday as they did for George W. Bush in 2004,” Reed observed. “That is an astonishing outcome that few would have predicted even a few months ago. But Romney underperformed with younger voters and minorities and that in the end made the difference for Obama.”""
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.