Posted on 09/03/2013 10:13:59 AM PDT by Bigtigermike
People are tired of the Republican-Democrat alliance
<
Duh. Of course, “they want it to go away”. Are you an idiot?
The Left always uses these social issues to paint the Republicans as haters and intolerant while they convince younger voters it’s about “fairness”.
Why don’t you give us your brilliant ideas on how to fight against the entire popular culture, Democrat media machine and liars. This should be good.
It’s simple really. Go on offense instead of constantly playing defense. Ask the uncomfortable questions of the gaystapo. If they are saying marriage isn’t one man and one woman it is incumbent on them to define what it is. The Dems are totally let off the hook RE plural marriage, incest, etc. We all know this is the opening shot in the marriage wars. Lots more disgusting stuff on the horizon if we let them get away with this.
The reality is the beltway GOP doesn’t care about social issues. They happily surrender because their big donors don’t care and THEY PERSONALLY DON’T CARE. Why is that so hard?
Vote Sarah or Cruz IMO.
NO ONE WILL AGREE WITH YOUR ONE ISSUE EVERY TIME.
But the Democrats will DISAGREE with you EVERY TIME.
Thanks for proving you have no answers.
So your solution is to put more of them in jail where you will be paying somewhere between $30,000 to $60,000 a year for each of them? And I'm sure the government isn't going to feed, clothe and shelter those peoples' kids for free, either while the parents are locked up. And when they get out (I'm assuming you aren't going to insist on just executing them all on arrest) there is zero chance that they will ever be able to be a net gain on society with a criminal record.
I'm not trying to be obnoxious about this, but are you sure your policy is financially better? Seems like you want to spend more just really drive the point home that government isn't big and intrusive enough.
Mitt Romney, Deb. Or does the fact that he's registered in the Republican Party mean that HIS kind of authoritarian nationalized health care, global warming "save the planet" environtal tyranny, gay "rights" that punish free people for making the moral choice to peacefully, civilly reject open homosexuality in their businesses, schools, military, etc., is ONLY authoritarian when it's promoted by someone registered in the Democrat party?
“As far as social policy is concerned, all of this is in a sense hypothetical.”
See my #1 below. You are performing true to form. Abortions are not “hypothetical”.
“Every time a conservative calls this out, libertarians on this site either pretend that the social stuff is invisible (downplay it), scold conservatives that they really don’t understand libertarian ideology, or become “cafeteria Catholics” and tell us how we must pick and choose our issues.
I support free markets, which are the American tradition - not the post 1913 income tax/Federal Reserve scheme, which is a monetary cartel and abdication of Congress’ monetary duties as described in Article I Section 8.
On foreign policy, the libertarian view is the traditional view. Until the days of the Progressive Teddy Roosevelt, America minded its own business - we were a prosperous and free nation. From 1898 onwards, America became imperial, invading over 100 nations in that time. The support of empire necessitated a destruction of individual liberties, an avalanche of tax and regulatory burdens, and finally, undisguised Fascism. So no, I do not and will not support being world police.
It is not the job of the US federal government to meddle in every mess anywhere on the planet. Its duties are strictly limited by the political agreement which binds us together as a nation - the Constitution - and are described in the part of that document referenced above.
The definition of libertarian which you are describing isn’t correct. That description more properly fits with “progressives”, and while a handful (there really aren’t many) may fancy themselves libertarian, they are nothing of the sort. It’s not the government’s mandate to be involved in any of those social issues at all. It has no lawful role in them. If the States choose otherwise that is their right to do so, as individual states.
Maybe it's more honest to carry on in that vein than to pretend to be opposed to foreign adventures (or amnesty for illegals).
You obviously cannot read with any degree of accuracy, so I will spell this out even more clearly for the reading impaired. I never said that abortions were “hypothetical”. I said that political philosophy, in certain circumstances, was hypothetical. If you cannot understand the difference, I pity you.
In addition, on a separate issue, I never once mentioned abortion. But since you will only hear what you expect to hear, explaining further is pointless. It is people like you, incapable of rational discourse, which give conservatism a bad name. Good day.
Better yet
No, I prefer Sheriff Joe's system. Desert tents, bologna sandwiches, and workdays serving the public good. Chain gangs and P-farms, too, like the old south. As for their kids, we used to have a thing called charity that took care of the needy. We still would if government had not inserted itself into that role. But forced charity is simply robbery renamed.
Executing dealers would be very effective, but since it would get too many libs in an uproar, see my profile for an alternate proposal.
Something I've noticed about what passes itself off as "conservatism" lately is that they have no desire to just cut welfare and food stamps. And why should they? It's their perfect excuse for meddling in the personal lives of the entire US population and gives them what has in the past been an easy out when called on their hypocritical bulls**t about being for small government.
I am afraid Obama has pulled too much power with blackmail. It is worse then you think.
Just Kidding Grace.
You are 100% Right on! I couldn't have said it any better.
As a Fellow Libertarian I say the government Doesn't Know what is best for us and shouldn't be involved in regulating our lives.
Indeed WHY?!
“It is people like you, incapable of rational discourse, which give conservatism a bad name. Good day.”
Unable to address the social issues that divide libertarian and conservative ideologies (because you can’t), you throw a tantrum, hurl an insult and walk away pouting. Typical.
Bottom line, libertarians are not conservatives and are not the political allies of conservatives. I can only imagine you post on this site because the libertarian sites are lonely places to be.
“Unable to address the social issues that divide libertarian and conservative ideologies (because you can’t), you throw a tantrum, hurl an insult and walk away pouting. Typical.”
Because you continue to call him a Libertarian despite his repeated assertions of being a libertarian? What’s left to discuss. This argument that goes on, is about as ignorant as engaging a liberal who uses phrases like “teabagger” and “racist”. Might as well just walk away. You people in thread after thread continue to insist that everyone who even hints at being libertarian-minded as being a card-carrying member of the Libertarian party. No matter how many times the other person says they are not, the idiotic accusations continue.
Like I said I might as well be arguing with a sycophant liberal who says the tea party is racist. You both have about the same level of intellectual curiosity.
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.