Posted on 09/30/2013 9:24:47 AM PDT by shego
Well, to be fair the Republican/Democrat collective pushed out laws that made the it far more difficult for 3rd party people to get elected when, even after some horrible waffling/inconsistency as to if he was running or not, he managed to rake in nearly 20% of the popular vote. This, I believe, terrified the Democrat/Republican establishment; especially because in the [summer] polls leading up to the election he reached 39%.
Also interesting is this previous election: Gary Johnson, former Governor of New Mexico, got 1% of the popular vote using just $2.5 million.
Consider that for a moment, that's an astoundingly good "return on investment" as far as campaign-finance goes… and this despite all the "you have to vote for Romney, Romney is the only one that can stop Obama" (despite that Romney, politically speaking, is Obama)* sort of vote-for-the-lesser-evil mega campaign that was being pushed (esp. here).
* That cemented my resolve never to vote "against" somebody again, which I promised myself after [to my everlasting shame] holding my nose to vote McCain. (Gech!)
^— The first paragraph of my reply is about Ross Perot.
Post 178 says nothing about homosexuality, marriage, immigration, abortion, or anything else that you screech about here.
what are you doing here among these conservatives?
See, that's exactly what I was talking about!
You dismiss me because I don't exactly agree with you regarding the War on Drugs. (I assume it's that, as that is what I used in my example.)
You condemn me, as supporting homosexuality, marriage, immigration, abortion
etc., because of it.
I knew I could count on you.
Burn the heretic, purge the unclean; remember that anyone who does not agree with you is an unclean heretic; this is:
The Tao of Republican Orthodoxy
[Direct Link]
I posted this libertarian success list.
“”You just got homosexuals and the recognition of gay marriage in the military, the libertarian dream of truly open borders is getting closer to a reality, and you have partial birth full term abortion, you must be in hog heaven seeing so many gains from the libertarian perspective.””
Your reaction is indifference, and no denial, so Yeah, I think we know where you are at, that and your war against conservatives at freerepublic such as on this thread.
“”And how is any of that different from the status quo — I can work with someone trying to convince them some legitimate government function is, well, legitimate… but have you tried convincing someone that illegitimate government function is illegitimate?””
I left out that you actually seem to be promoting and supporting the libertarian party, which says it all.
You have a misunderstanding of Libertarian. Libertarians are neither liberals nor Progressives.
Libertarians actually sit a bit more to the right than traditional conservatives when it comes to government control over peoples lives. Particularly where it counts — Federal Spending and Income redistribution. On social issues they’re a bit more pragmatic in that: Who cares if there is gay marriage — as long as the tax payers aren’t paying for it. Abortion is a bit trickier as there are pro-life and pro-choice libertarians — but they have one thing in common, the taxpayers shouldn’t be paying for it.
Another difference between Libertarians and Conservatives and Liberals is that Libertarians are a bit Isolationists. While not necessarily bad, there are times where we do have to deal with the rest of the world. I don’t think there are many Libertarian Hawks, there all Doves mostly — until we’re really pissed off, then it’s more of a ‘bomb the crap’ out of them and move on. Repeat as necessary.
Libertarians are often misidentified as liberal by the unknowing and uneducated. Primarily for the altogether stupid reason, they both start with “Liber”.
If they took every Rino and replaced them with a Libertarian, the Conservative party would be much much stronger it has been.
You’re not getting it. Republicans and Democrats are becoming one party — progressives. The new Conservative party is forming and it consists of Tea party and Libertarians.
This is bass ackwards. How do you propose to pay for all the police you need to enforce your live-like-me-or-else laws?
1. Print Money,
2. Raise Taxes, or
3. Borrow From China?
Note that the police requirement for your kind of laws is far higher than the requirement for legitimate laws (laws against actual crimes with actual victims) -- people spontaneously obstruct enforcement of the former while spontaneously assisting enforcement of the latter.
Repeating something over and over does not make it any less an assertion not in evidence.
Obvious nonsense.
Which of these acts is intrinsically evil?
1. Driving on the right side of the road
2. Driving on the left side of the road
Indeed. This is so evident on its face that arguing with someone who misses this point is like having a debate on whether the Earth is round or flat.
Labeling cutting a federal program "libertarian" works for the left. It intstantly gets them "conservative" allies in their quest to destroy the republic and place all power in the hands of a centralized, national government.
Worst mismatch of username and comment, ever.
I made my bones when you wore diapers my dear troll friend.. I’m not going to waste anymore time with you, except to bring your activity to the attention of the board..
Back to DU with you.. LOL
TROLL ALERT!!!
The best way to deal with that clown is to ignore him to death. Any time an article with the word libertarian in it is posted its like blowing a dog whistle. He’ll make up a offensive position homosexuals and post that it’s your position and you need to defend it. He’ll do the same with things he cuts and pastes here from the LP platform. He’s a troll and a liar. There is little more to say about him. He gets one word replies from me from now on and that’s probably one more word than he deserves.
Cutting federal programs would de-centralize the government. If you label cutting it "libertarian" and find some "moral" justification for keeping it, you get support from "socail conservatives", and you help advance the idea that everything needs to be a federal issue.
JR recognizes the difference in big and small’l’ libertarians.
Without even revisiting this thread, I can almost tell exactly who you are talking about.
Went almost 400 pages once arguing whether Libertarians for Life (l4l.org) were “real” libertarians or not.
It was like arguing with a Democrat when they are saying they believe in our Republic more than a Republican.
My main issues have ALWAYS been limited Art 1 Sec 8 government, Bill of Rights enforcement included real freedom for RKBA, and economic laisse-faire Capitalism. All the stuff this Country was Founded on.
If that makes me a “libertarian”, so be it. If the GOP ever re-discovers these basics, then I’d be a Republican again.
Well, maybe that isn't the best way to phrase it. I've been here since '01 and I cannot recall a single thread involving Libertarians where drug legalization did not eventually become the central issue, and where the most vigorous proponents of legalization were Libertarian posters.
Full disclosure: I was briefly a registered Libertarian. I made the error of getting involved with the local Libertarian activists. Big mistake. The people I met were universally pro-abort, pro-drug and anti-religious. I quickly left.
Hard to talk about other topics when your detractors glom on to just the one issue and won’t bother with any others.
Just like you are doing now, btw.
I am religious, but my faith is my own. I do not pretend to want my religion codified in Law. I am pro-life, “if it’s human, by definition then killing it is murder”. I do not do drugs, nor would I hire an addict, or associate with drug abusers.
None of which means a damn thing to the anti-libertarian types because I think the FedGov needs to stick 100% to their limited Art 1 Sec 8 powers. None of which allow them to have a DEA, FDA, BATFE, NSA, DHS, BATFE, DoE, or many of the powers they now claim.
Get stuck on the one issue. It makes it easier to ridicule you. You are missing the forest over one stunted tree.
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.