Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Libertarian Harry Browne bashes President Bush and America's War on Terror
Fox News: Hannity and Colmes ^ | 11-21-01 | Cuban123

Posted on 11/21/2001 5:34:10 PM PST by Cuban123

What an outrage!, I just finished listening to the 2000 Libertarian Candidate for President Harry Browne on Hannity and Colmes. What an OUTRAGE!. Harry Browne said Bush was a liar that was lying to the American people, that we were bombing innocent civilians that did nothing when it cameto the terror attacks,that we did not try to solve the situation by negotiating with the terrorists, that America was a mean bully, that Tony Blair's document proving Osama did it was all a fraud, and the whole world hated us and most people did not like us!


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: harrybrowne
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-138 last
To: Texasforever
School yard tactics. LOL

This time you're wrong. It should have read "Preschool" not school. LOL

121 posted on 11/22/2001 7:38:58 AM PST by zip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Iscool
blah, blah, blah. Yeah, as if anyone cares what you .5 percenters think anyway. Go Pat Go -- away.
122 posted on 11/22/2001 10:59:01 AM PST by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Cuban123; sonofliberty2
While I have worked fer--and contributed financially to--and voted for Libertarian candidates in the past, I can honestly say that Harry Browne has made an A$$ of himself vis a vis the War on Terrorism. Harry Browne needs to step down from any Position of Power within the Libertarian Party if the LP is ever going to gain any credibility whatsoever...until that time, my support for libertarian political philosophy will continue to be strong, but I shan't support the LP.

Harry Browne is a PUNK, but he does not speak for most folks I know who support libertarianism!!!!

FReegards...MUD

123 posted on 11/22/2001 11:07:07 AM PST by Mudboy Slim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dpwiener
>> he has no official position within the LP, he is not a spokesman for the LP (and does not pretend to be), and he is not representative of most libertarians... (he openly admits that a great many libertarians have expressed their sharp disagreement with his views) <<

If his views on warfare are so incompatable with the 'mainstream' of the Libertarian Party, they shouldn't have flocked to him in droves and overwhemingly nominated him TWICE. The LP had the optinion of a fresh face, like Barry Hess or Don Gorman, to "head" THEIR ticket. I advised the Libertarians on this forum to do so over two years ago. They blindly followed Browne just as they had in 1996. Only the Arizona LP refused to embrace him. Since 1995, Browne has become the "face" of the party, reguardless of what his "official" role is.

124 posted on 11/22/2001 12:37:39 PM PST by BillyBoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: BillyBoy
The LP had the option of a fresh face, like Barry Hess or Don Gorman, to "head" THEIR ticket.

I listened to both Barry and Don, and I thought either of them would have been a good candidate. However I supported Harry in 2000 because I thought he'd done a good job (under the circumstances) in 1996, and he's generally quite good at articulating libertarian ideas. I don't agree with him on everything, however, and I strongly disagree with his pacifistic blame-the-US attitude towards the terrorist attacks. I'm very disappointed to see him take that position, which I believe contradicts the Libertarian Platform and obviates the whole concept of self-defense.

It's too bad, because I like Harry, but this is a life-and-death issue on which he is way off track. And I think my views are shared by the vast majority of Libertarians. Harry does not represent the Libertarian Party any longer, and at least he's made it clear and explicit in his recent articles regarding the war that he is speaking only as an individual and not on behalf of the LP.

125 posted on 11/22/2001 2:46:56 PM PST by dpwiener
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
Who am I to decide what the Constitution means? I'm a citizen who can read. And, since the Constitution itself enumerates the powers granted to the federal government, but does no such thing concerning the rights of the people, I would think that, well, the Founders were interested in severely limiting the power and scope of government. And that view makes me "sanctimonius?" Why, of course! Everyone knows that the Constitution wasn't written for the people. On the contrary, it was written for political activists and legalists who while away the hours, finding ways to improve society.

Of course! The so-called conservatives just hate to be reminded of these things when it doesn't agree with their pragmatic approach to politics. It isn't nice to remind them of certain principles, when the only principles they allow are the same ones the liberals have adopted - namely the principles of power.

But I understand how you must feel - and I feel your pain. I really do. And I know that the republicans just need time to implement their "agenda," and then they'll get back to limiting the power of the federal government, right? The important thing is to win, to play the game of power politics. Then, one day, they'll turn the tide.

And as for the Libertarians being such "losers," I guess the operative question is exactly what is "won" when everyone - whether on the right or left - seems to agree that big government is here to stay. And - getting back to the Constitution - you will notice that most everything the government does is nowhere to be found in the text. That's the uncomfortable reality that everyone doesn't want to address; that's the lawless character of your wonderful two-party "system." And that's why the republicans get so bothered when anyone brings it up.

126 posted on 11/22/2001 3:39:27 PM PST by Reactionary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: anniegetyourgun
(Browne). . doesn't really think about what matters.

Most importantly, when he does, it doesn't matter.

127 posted on 11/22/2001 3:47:49 PM PST by alcuin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Cuban123
My view of libertarianism.....

OH IT DON'T MEAN A THANG IF IT AIN'T RIGHT-WANG...DOOWAH,DOOWAH....

There ,I've settled your debate.

128 posted on 11/22/2001 9:12:55 PM PST by Church Lady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #129 Removed by Moderator

To: horsewhispersc
"I could vote for that party, is that the one Ron Pauls involved with?"

No, Ron Paul is a Republican but he's a strict constructionist (the Republicans could use more people like him).
130 posted on 11/23/2001 10:03:28 AM PST by Texas_Jarhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Cuban123
I consider myself more informed of political happenings than the average American. I vaguely recognize the name Harry Browne but wouldn't recognize a photo of him. The man has no credibility and neither does his party. They are both so far below the wavelengths in America they are non-entities.
131 posted on 11/23/2001 10:14:31 AM PST by not-an-ostrich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye
David Dukes

David Duke.

132 posted on 11/23/2001 10:19:11 AM PST by Hacksaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: LarryLied
Took me about three months after signing on the net before I realized Liberals and Libertarians were one and the same. Guess I was stupid not to see it earlier.

No, you're stupid for seeing it at all...

133 posted on 11/23/2001 10:25:33 AM PST by The Green Goblin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

Comment #134 Removed by Moderator

Comment #135 Removed by Moderator

To: Texas_Jarhead
I Like You, we think the same way! ; )
136 posted on 11/23/2001 8:47:45 PM PST by horsewhispersc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: zip; Eagle Eye
Thanks for the offer, zip.

Even if you sent me a clue, I wouldn't waste it forumulating a response to Eagle Eye. Anyone who decides that everyone in the entire state of California has no idea what they're talking about, isn't worth the effort.

There may be times I don't know what I'm talking about, but it has nothing to do with being from California. I think I just get rummy reading posts by mindless nutcases.

137 posted on 11/24/2001 12:09:51 PM PST by Calpublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: stryker
>>You have all become blind to the truth in one way or another.<<

O wise one, show us the way. Maybe some of us are choosing the "lesser of three evils" and not throwing our votes away.

138 posted on 11/27/2001 6:33:43 AM PST by SerpentDove
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-138 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson