Skip to comments.
Targeting Libertarians with Clever Humor…and Not-So-Clever Humor
Townhall.com ^
| September 15, 2014
| Daniel J. Mitchell
Posted on 09/15/2014 8:33:27 AM PDT by Kaslin
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140, 141-154 next last
To: BenLurkin
Now....what to do about other malum in se behaviors such as drug use and prostitution? So far, society ( American society) has refused to be left defenseless against those particular offenses against society. How well has that "defense" worked and with what unintended negative consequences?
And are those behaviors less malum in se than the Biblically-condemned practice of neglecting the needs of the poor? What ought the governmental arm of society do regarding that wrong?
101
posted on
09/15/2014 11:38:11 AM PDT
by
ConservingFreedom
(A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
To: ConservingFreedom
This is a conservative forum, it is not a libertarian magazine, and I am not a candidate.
102
posted on
09/15/2014 11:39:17 AM PDT
by
ansel12
(LEGAL immigrants, 30 million 1980-2012, continues to remake the nation's electorate for democrats)
To: morphing libertarian
Most are drug dealing, addict, whores, big government, tax raising, socialists. Arent you following along?You forgot "God-hating." Please make a note of it.
103
posted on
09/15/2014 11:39:21 AM PDT
by
ConservingFreedom
(A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
To: ConservingFreedom
Thanx
God hating peaceniks.
To: ansel12
Reagan was trying to win them over to conservatismWas he right to do so? Are you following in his footsteps?
This is a conservative forum, it is not a libertarian magazine,
But it seems there are libertarians here - so an FR-posted outreach would address at least some of its intended audience.
and I am not a candidate.
So it's good for conservative candidates to reach out to libertarians but not for conservatives in general to do so? OK ... but that would make the candidates sound kind of disingenuous and sleazy IMHO.
105
posted on
09/15/2014 11:43:36 AM PDT
by
ConservingFreedom
(A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
To: ConservingFreedom
Harry Reid loving. Most Losertarians will do/say anything in order for the donkeys to keep him in power.
106
posted on
09/15/2014 11:45:25 AM PDT
by
Drango
(A liberal's compassion is limited only by the size of someone else's wallet.)
To: ConservingFreedom
Welcome to freerepublic and your short time here, if you are not a conservative, then you may find it annoying to be here.
107
posted on
09/15/2014 11:46:32 AM PDT
by
ansel12
(LEGAL immigrants, 30 million 1980-2012, continues to remake the nation's electorate for democrats)
To: Drango
Harry Reid loving. Where do you get that? Has anyone posted on FR in support of Reid?
108
posted on
09/15/2014 11:46:53 AM PDT
by
ConservingFreedom
(A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
To: ansel12
if you are not a conservative, I am a conservative.
then you may find it annoying to be here.
Never annoyed, often amused (such as by blatant evasions of posted points).
109
posted on
09/15/2014 11:49:19 AM PDT
by
ConservingFreedom
(A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
To: ConservingFreedom
Peeling of a % of voters from the flank of the GOP in tight senate races just gives the election to the donkeys.
Then the Losertarians come on FR and smugly assert it wasn’t them that lost the election, it was the GOP platform. Watch. It will happen on this thread or the next.
LOSERTARIANS FOR REID 2014
110
posted on
09/15/2014 11:53:08 AM PDT
by
Drango
(A liberal's compassion is limited only by the size of someone else's wallet.)
To: ConservingFreedom
A conservative that likes to argue against conservatives, in support of an anti-conservative political movement.
I don’t think so.
111
posted on
09/15/2014 11:54:32 AM PDT
by
ansel12
(LEGAL immigrants, 30 million 1980-2012, continues to remake the nation's electorate for democrats)
To: ConservingFreedom
| Most are drug dealing, addict, whores, big government, tax raising, socialists. Aren’t you following along? You forgot "God-hating." Please make a note of it. |
And retread newbie trolls. How could you - of all the liberal trolls on this thread - forget that?
112
posted on
09/15/2014 12:12:15 PM PDT
by
Responsibility2nd
(NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
To: morphing libertarian
Do libertarians believe that prostitution and drugs should be legal?
If so, then they are defending drug addiction and prostitution. That’s not me saying that — it’s them.
I am curious as to why you suggest an “honest exchange” Do you really have any intention of changing your mind on this subject?
113
posted on
09/15/2014 12:17:50 PM PDT
by
BenLurkin
(This is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire; or both.)
To: ConservingFreedom
Look, all you need to do is convince society that Biblically-condemned practices are okay.
Then people will flock to the banner of dismantling the penal codes.
114
posted on
09/15/2014 12:19:12 PM PDT
by
BenLurkin
(This is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire; or both.)
To: BenLurkin; morphing libertarian
Do libertarians believe that prostitution and drugs should be legal?If so, then they are defending drug addiction and prostitution.
Do conservative believe that tobacco should be legal? If so, does it follow that they are defending tobacco addiction?
115
posted on
09/15/2014 12:21:40 PM PDT
by
ConservingFreedom
(A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
To: BenLurkin
Now....what to do about other malum in se behaviors such as drug use and prostitution? So far, society ( American society) has refused to be left defenseless against those particular offenses against society.How well has that "defense" worked and with what unintended negative consequences?
And are those behaviors less malum in se than the Biblically-condemned practice of neglecting the needs of the poor? What ought the governmental arm of society do regarding that wrong?
Look, all you need to do is
All you need to do is address a few straightfoward points.
Or you could continue to dodge, squirm, and evade.
116
posted on
09/15/2014 12:23:54 PM PDT
by
ConservingFreedom
(A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
To: ConservingFreedom
What exactly do you want me to tell you?
117
posted on
09/15/2014 12:30:00 PM PDT
by
BenLurkin
(This is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire; or both.)
To: ConservingFreedom
Now you’re getting the idea!
118
posted on
09/15/2014 12:30:25 PM PDT
by
BenLurkin
(This is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire; or both.)
To: BenLurkin
So you defend tobacco addiction. Um ... OK; have fun with that.
119
posted on
09/15/2014 12:31:31 PM PDT
by
ConservingFreedom
(A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
To: ConservingFreedom
I’m sorry.
You’re still not getting it.
My bad.
120
posted on
09/15/2014 12:32:18 PM PDT
by
BenLurkin
(This is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire; or both.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140, 141-154 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson