It's either the funny hats, or the fact that they weigh the same as ducks...
Mark W.
I give Nolan two thumbs up, for this article.
A constant mantra that Thomas Jefferson's writings mean that the fate of the Republic hangs on the right to smoke dope and do drugs anytime, anywhere.
Yeah riiight. Libertarians such as Harry Browne(Libertarian Presidential candidate in 1996 and 2000) basically say that the WTC atrocities were America's fault and we should sheepishly apologize to OBL.
As a small 'l' libertarian, I back away
from this right away. Taxes are necessary
to fund the military for national defense.
Taxes force me to provide a small
portion of my service to society.
No taxes=no government=anarchism,
not libertarianism.
The fifth and final key test of anyone's claim to
being a libertarian is their support for an honest money
system
Baloney. This is gold bug nonsense and has
got nothing to do with individual liberty.
I find this article of litmus tests to be
a strait jacket for the aluminum chapeau
crowd. Count me out. I'm not this
kind of Libertarian.
Inadequate nurturing during adolescence.
What, then, are the "indispensable five"-the points of no compromise?
Great article, I have personally struggled with libertarian concepts for quite some time, and it is good to see it so clearly written.
I currently classify myself as a reluctant conservative this alliance is founded on a single point of no compromise defined as pro-life that I share with other conservatives. Where do the libertarian’s stand on this issue and is it an uncompromising plank in the party? Politically I agree with the "indispensable five" if in fact one can be both libertarian and pro-life.
It's either the funny hats, or the fact that they weigh the same as ducks...
Mark W.
The founders had a fairly decent idea for taxation. They even put it into the Constitution. Tax the states in proportion to their population. How the states collected or assesed the tax would be up to the states. The fed.gov would have nothing to do with each individual taxpayer.
Other than that, not a bad essay.
Now there has been a lot of chatter about what Harry Browne said concerning 911. Sometimes the truth of the matter is hard to swallow. But those terrorist bombers didn't just bomb us because we were just sitting here lil ole innocent folk minding our own business. Anyone who would deny that denies the factual reality. It's an ugly truth and Harry had the balls to speak it. Our influence brought them here. That's a fact. Were they wrong? Of course. Did we deserve it? Of course not.
They hate us because we support Israel. And we support Israel because if you will recall, these are the folks Hitler tried to exterminate. We helped settle them there amongst their Arab cousins and helped them re-form their lost nation...continuing to do so...In a place they had been scattered from by other conquerors in the past. Nonetheless, a place their God, and our God too if you are Christian, had promised them.
But wait, there is a catch. You know the story of, was it Issac and Ishmael? Whoever they were, this war continues and we are smack dab in the middle of it at this juncture a few thousand years later. There is no end to this conflict...as it seems to be eternal. Heck, it probably will take the return of God to finalize.
So here we are, victims of this ancient conflict brought to our shores. Whether or not we believe we are at fault is not relevent. These muslim terrorists obviously believe we are and that is all that is relevent at this juncture. And I believe that was Harry's point.
Now I don't know if Harry said we owe Bin Laden an apology as has been postulated here by some. But I know that Roscoe can bring it here if he did because that is what Roscoe is most excellent at. How bout it Roscoe?
And before you ask, yes I am in favor of the actions being taken. We have been attacked. However, it would be in line with our Constitution if Congress declared war against the nations providing haven to the terrorists who attacked us rather than just giving the President a limited power to conduct some undeclared war.
This may be libertarian, but what does it mean? What does it mean to own your own body and mind? If it means anything, it means that we are responsible for ourselves. If it means that we can do with ourselves as we wish, I would reconsider. However much we may desire freedom from the constraint as in "no external power has the right to force you into the service of "society" or "mankind" or any other individual or group for any purpose, however noble" we should remember that first of all, the only way we reach maturity is to begin in life under the contraint of our parents, and if we mature, we are resposible enough to place those constraints on ourselves, apart from the constraint of others. In short, ourselves belong to the strictures of human life. There is no planet of pure freedom.
Others are not obligated to feed you, clothe you, or provide you with health care.
And then again, of course we are obligated to each other. Perhaps not under a political law, but certainly under a moral law, freely chosen. Again, parents are obligated. And the highest moral law is to love your enemy.
Without taxes, public highways would not exist (markets fail to provide public goods). And only a robber baron would be able to build private roads of any significance, in which case the interests of people who need a road would still not be served.
Libertarian non-taxation. Nice romantic idea --- like Knighthood. Unfortunately, we are well past the Middle Ages.
redrock--Constitutional Terrorist
Independent=Republican who swore to their father they would NEVER be a Republican
Libertarian=Independent who wants legalized dope
Pray for GW and the Truth
Simple.
Casteration and Frontal lobotomy.
Libertarians are simply democrats that support anarchy.
Semper Fi