Libertarians


#1

Observation:

The only one buying what AS is selling is RwNj (and maybe @csbrown28 now and then).

Which comes as no surprise, since both are Libertarians.

RwNj has found an ally.

Nether good nor bad; just an observation . . . which I’m sure others have noticed.


#2

I’m not a libertarian, I just don’t object to being called one as differentiating would be a distraction.

The closest label to what I’am is an Old Right Conservative.


#3

It would be more interesting than the obsession with illegal immigration you and nearly all the Trump fanatics here seem to have to find out what the difference is.


#4

The longer I engage in political debate the more I am convinced that there is no such thing as a “Libertarian”, just a bunch of people who don’t like the sound of “Other”.

But even those who call themselves Libertarian don’t buy what each other are selling most of the time.


#5

Libertarians have a lot of disagreements among themselves, anarchism vs. minarchism, abortion, copyright and patent law, a practical approach vs. an ideologically pure approach, borders, etc. And they have varying interest in different issues. And much more. Just like Republicans, Democrats, conservatives, self-described progressives who are really just regressives. There’s a whole lot more that libertarians pretty much agree on.


#6

I’m also on the same side as Judge Andrew Napolitano. And Forbes. And WSJ. And FEE. And AEI.

And Fr. Robert Sirico. And Thomas Sowell. And sometimes Glenn Beck.


#7

Given what he writes, I can’t see how @csbrown28 could be a libertarian. It seems like he wants the government involved in about everything, just like a liberal or a socialist.

All I can say about the Libertarian Party is that I darn glad they nominated Gary “Goof Ball” Brown as their presidential candidate in 2016. He was poorly informed on the issues and gave some goofy interviews that made him look like he had no interest in winning or even effecting the outcome of the race.

If Bill Weld had been at the head of that ticket (He was the VP nominee), it might have been a different story. I was living in Massachusetts when Weld was governor, and he was a darn good leader. He might have taken more votes away from Trump which would have given the presidency to Hillary.


#8

Here’s how to tell a True Libertarian:
(1) Are they for auctioning off the National Parks? and
(2) Are they for Open Borders?

If not, they’re just conservatives with a human face.


#9

^ Conservatives like Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan were for minimal immigration restrictions.
Goldwater explicitly stated the aim was to one day make our border with Mexico no different than our border with Canada.


#10

Ah, a non-illegal alien thread!

No, he is not. Don’t think Bob was suggesting that though. He sometimes agrees with AS – and me – because his ideology overlaps with ours. It overlaps with a lot of conservatives-Republicans too given their apparent preference for large deficits.His Modern Monetary Theory would neatly fit into current Republican fiscal policy – but not libertarian.

Are you talking about the Aleppo moment? That’s pretty thin.

BTW, his name is Gary Johnson. He was a popular Republican governor in New Mexico before running for president.

He all but endorsed Hillary. After much backlash, he apparently now regrets that moment – if I recall stuff I’ve read in passing correctly.

lol

  1. yes
  2. sort of – I like AS’s post below yours.

#11

Nothing there I’d violently disagree with.

I don’t internalize my ideas, which means I don’t make what I think part of my identity. This makes it easier to stay true to my principles rather than ensuring what I think is in line with how someone else defines a particular group. This is why I can agree with people like you and AS and even some of the other folks here, though to a lesser extent.

One small correction though. I don’t perfer large deficits, I just don’t fear large deficits if that’s what the economy needs.


#12

I’m teasing a bit and picking on conservatives/Republicans, the alleged party of small government and fiscal responsibility. It seems clear they prefer large deficits and large governments.


#13

Whoops!

I was confusing csbrown with j Anderson.

As for Gary Johnson I remember when he gave an off the wall interview where he stuck his tongue out at a reporter and generally look foolish. If the liberals were trying to sink him, that would have been pretty dumb on their part. His candidacy would suck a lot more votes from Trump than Hillary.


#14

Yeah, he wasn’t the greatest candidate. I found the fallout from Aleppo annoying and silly, but his behavior in a couple of interviews was pretty bad. One of them, he freaked out over some term like a stupid regressive-liberal. Was embarrassing. Not sure that one got a lot of play.

J.'s a pretty convincing libertarian. He clearly doesn’t want the government involved in everything. But I disagree with J. on a few points here and there. I understand and appreciate opposing sides of libertarian arguments – unlike my disagreements with dirty regressive-liberals and with conservatives. in those cases, the mainstream ideologies just seem illogical and wrong to me.

Probably, but it’s probably not as strong an effect as many seem to think. Not voting Libertarian doesn’t entitle either of those candidates to my vote. I would never vote for Clinton, but I’m also highly unlikely to ever vote for Trump. Without a decent candidate, I might choose not to bother.


#15

Like what? Virtually every position I take is in favor of less government. I could turn it around and point out that you appear to want a state with its tentacles in every aspect of our lives, especially any women unfortunate enough to ever have to live under your ideology.


#16

BTW, he is currently on the ballot for U.S. Senate in New Mexico. Last poll I saw put him in 2nd place, way ahead of the GOP candidate who has not campaigned at all, no signs, no flyers, no robocalls. He is so well known that Wikipedia can’t find a picture of him.


#17

This is my you’ve-got-to-be-pooping-me trigger…


#18

We will continue to have gigantanormous deficits as long as we fund the UN, fund foreign governments, and welfare. Welfare will never go away because that has become “reparations” for the people who claim to be descendants of slaves. It is owed to them.
Deficits will continue so long as we have federal funding of education, housing, and health care. Guess what… these are not going away.

We will never get rid of these things without term limits on all public offices that control money.

Oh, and don’t forget the additional burden of Non Tax Paying Illegal aliens.


#19

Would care to expand on that last ridiculous statement? Is it because I don’t buy into the “Me Too Movement” which says that any accusation made by a woman must be accepted on its face value? Is it because I questioned you precious Ms. Ford in the Cavanaugh hearings? I also didn’t buy in to the outrageous accusations that the porn lawyer and his disgusting client made about Cavanaugh’s “involvement in gang rapes.” Or Is because I have no use for your 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton?

Fess up! I’d like to hear you defend that last statement.


#20

The deficit, which has been yo-yo’ing since the housing crash has averaged $855 billion since 2008 and you believe that defunding the UN (or significantly reducing what we spend as a nation) will significantly reduce the deficit? Buy how much?

WTF? That’s pretty friggin racist my friend. And I don’t throw that term around and I’m not sure what’s worse, the fact that you feel it’s ok to be racist or the fact that you (and others who are likely to come to your defense) don’t realize it.

But, I guess that’s ok now that your pal Trump is in office.

BTW, there are more white people that collect welfare than “people who claim to be descendants of slaves.”

No probably not. Where do you suppose the money will come from to pay for the medicines and housing people need if these programs are eliminated?

Without these programs, where will all the people work that currently do jobs and earn incomes in Healthcare, education, and housing thanks to the billions of dollars the government provides to these programs, earn a salery? In other words, if you “save” that money (as if that were really possible), every dollar “saved” eliminates incomes to companies and ultimately the people that work at them. Now I’m not saying that alone is justification to dump money in these programs, but they do have benefits which you seem to be ignoring completely.

What would happen to all the sick people that couldn’t get medicine? They’ed become an overwhelming burden on the hospital system, that is, unless you think we should only open the doors at hospitals for people with money? What’s that son? Dying of a completely curable terminal medical problem but your parents can afford to pay for it. Awwweeee, too bad. Born into the wrong family.

Education? Yes, just what we need, more people with less education placing burdens on society rather than being productive members of it.

While you are it, why don’t you throw in tax subsidies for corporations? Oil? Phrma? Agro?

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not against lowering taxes and expenses for corporations, I just find it amusing that you’re so elective in your outrage…lol