Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

George Will: ‘What I did see at CPAC was the rise of the libertarian strand of Republicanism’ [VIDEO
Daily Caller ^ | March 17, 2013 | Jeff Poor

Posted on 03/17/2013 11:13:56 AM PDT by Rufus2007

On this Sunday’s broadcast of ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos,” Washington Post columnist George Will criticized a New York Times article by Jim Rutenberg and Richard Stevenson that suggested the Conservative Political Action Conference revealed deep divisions in the conservative movement.

“First, here’s The New York Times headline on the CPAC conference: ‘GOP divisions fester at conservative retreat,’” Will said. “Festering an infected wound — it’s awful. I guarantee you, if there were a liberal conclave comparable to this, and there were vigorous debates going on there, The New York Times headline would be ‘Healthy diversity flourishes at the liberal conclave.’”

“Republicans have been arguing — social conservatives and libertarian free-market conservatives — since the 1950s, when the National Review was founded on the idea of the fusion of the two,” he continued. “It has worked before with Ronald Reagan. It can work again. What I did see at CPAC was the rise of the libertarian strand of Republicanism, which has an affected foreign policy that is a pullback from nation-building

...more (w/video)...

(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...


TOPICS: Government; Politics
KEYWORDS: 2013cpac; cpac; georgewill; homosexualagenda; libertarians; randpaul
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201 next last
Too many of these guys in conservative media circles are caving on the gay marriage front and George Will is another casualty.

Libertarianism is now civil libertarianism, I suppose. And that used to reserved for the kooks at the ACLU.

1 posted on 03/17/2013 11:13:56 AM PDT by Rufus2007
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Rufus2007

People should be VERY cautious when it comes to the libertarian view. I do not buy this idea that a massive majority of people are socially liberal and fiscally conservative. If this were the case, the Libertarian Party would get more than 1%. They don’t. Are there a lot of social liberals nowadays? Yes. But they’re usually either too dumb or stoned to vote, or they’re moochers like Sandra Fluke who need fiscal liberalism to fund their social liberalism.


2 posted on 03/17/2013 11:17:21 AM PDT by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rufus2007

George knows what he likes ~ expect an announcement any day now.


3 posted on 03/17/2013 11:22:11 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rufus2007

I’ve been meaning to ask this question here for a long time now: Issue for issue, what are the true differences between Conservative and Libertarian viewpoints?

As a follow-up question: For each issue, which viewpoint best matches those of the Founders?

I’m not altogether for or against either position, necessarily, but I am curious to hear how fellow FReepers sort out the distinctions.


4 posted on 03/17/2013 11:23:40 AM PDT by dagogo redux (A whiff of primitive spirits in the air, harbingers of an impending descent into the feral.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rufus2007

Some people want drugs and penis. When you stand against that they get nasty. That is where the problems will come.


5 posted on 03/17/2013 11:26:09 AM PDT by Berlin_Freeper (http://userstyles.org/users/180132)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dagogo redux

“I’ve been meaning to ask this question here for a long time now: Issue for issue, what are the true differences between Conservative and Libertarian viewpoints?

As a follow-up question: For each issue, which viewpoint best matches those of the Founders?

I’m not altogether for or against either position, necessarily, but I am curious to hear how fellow FReepers sort out the distinctions.”

You’ll probably get as many different answers as there are freepers. Some GOP around here look at any leaning toward libertarianism as akin to inviting the anti christ into your house.

Now, you can use different barometers...let’s take ACU for instance. They give Rand Paul & Rubio 100% conservative, but don’t give it to Ted Cruz.

So, it all depends on who you’re asking. I believe it more in line with the founding fathers than GOPe.


6 posted on 03/17/2013 11:29:25 AM PDT by AuntB (Illegal immigration is simply more "share the wealth" socialism and a CRIME not a race!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Rufus2007
I see this more as a needed pullback from the nanny state and big, all-knowing government that regulates every aspect of our lives.

Regulating morality, if ever a good thing by people with unlimited resources and the very power of life and death, is constitutionally up to the various states.

Social engineering and nation building by crony capitalist bureaucrats has got to end sometime, either by choice or by natural collapse.

7 posted on 03/17/2013 11:31:01 AM PDT by uncommonsense (Conservatives believe what they see; Liberals see what they believe.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dagogo redux

Libertarians are socially and morally liberal. The Founding Fathers were big on private morality, seeing such people as the only ones that the US Constitution can govern successfully. Libertarians are unaware (or perhaps not) that the Constitution cannot govern amoral and immoral people; I do not see them believing that the welfare of the USA depends on whether the majority in the USA is a moral people who look to God for protection, nor believing that an amoral/immoral people will have God removing His protection from them.


8 posted on 03/17/2013 11:32:33 AM PDT by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Rufus2007

I consider myself to hold many libertarian views but I fail to see why any self described libertarian, people whose fall back position tends to be “get the government out,” would want to creat a whole other area of government to regulate and administer gay marriage. Since “gay marriage” is not real marriage, the current laws governing the act would not be sufficient to govern what the homosexuals propose and the result woud be more government and laws added.

I for one would support removing marriage from the realm of government all together and returning it to the church.


9 posted on 03/17/2013 11:35:40 AM PDT by RightOnTheBorder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: uncommonsense

“I see this more as a needed pullback from the nanny state and big, all-knowing government that regulates every aspect of our lives.

Regulating morality, if ever a good thing by people with unlimited resources and the very power of life and death, is constitutionally up to the various states.

Social engineering and nation building by crony capitalist bureaucrats has got to end sometime, either by choice or by natural collapse.”

Well said.


10 posted on 03/17/2013 11:36:25 AM PDT by AuntB (Illegal immigration is simply more "share the wealth" socialism and a CRIME not a race!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: dagogo redux
The libertarian viewpoint is the classical liberal viewpoint of the Founders.

Where matters go astray would be the fair number of Libertarians who are in fact libertine, on the one hand. Not all are, there are pro-life socially conservative Libertarians. But to the libertines who at times appear to predominate, they're openly hostile to any sort of social sanction or taboo pertaining to morals or behavior. This is unlike the Founders who more or less institutionalized an ability to shape the public square and acceptable behavior from the State level on down the line. Freedom of association also means not being forced to associate with those of whom you disapprove.

On the other hand, we have very ardent social conservatives who become decided champions of authoritarian heavy-handedness pertaining to certain moral issues. They don't like it or believe it to be immoral, they immediately want to bring the coercive power of the state to bear, in order to stamp it out. This is very unlike the Founders as well.

There is middle ground to be found, and the Founders exemplify it. Freedom of conscience doesn't mean just what the oddly lockstep “Free Thinkers” say it does. Freedom of association does not only apply to individuals and groups historically marginalized, it applies to all.

11 posted on 03/17/2013 11:37:42 AM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper

I tend to wind up on many of the libertarian-centric threads and have found it to be the anti-libertarian crowd that gets nasty. This thread is new but I bet within 25 posts there will be someone referring to libertarians as “brain dead” or using some other pejorative with drug connotations.


12 posted on 03/17/2013 11:42:51 AM PDT by RightOnTheBorder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Viennacon

The Libertarian view is utterly disastrous for Conservatism. No, the enemy of my enemy is NOT your friend.


13 posted on 03/17/2013 11:48:21 AM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry; Olog-hai

Thank you for your replies. Nicely balanced, and helpful in sorting all this out.

I’m happy to get other input people might have, and TIA.


14 posted on 03/17/2013 11:48:42 AM PDT by dagogo redux (A whiff of primitive spirits in the air, harbingers of an impending descent into the feral.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Rufus2007

Marriage is about KIDS... Gays cannot have kids.. unless they buy them..
-OR- lie to some heterosexual women(man) about their preference..

Marriage is about KIDs not Love..


15 posted on 03/17/2013 11:49:45 AM PDT by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rufus2007

I place great importance on both fiscal and social conservatism — but if forced to choose one over the other, I would choose social conservatism as primary. The Libertarianism doesn’t do it for me.


16 posted on 03/17/2013 11:50:16 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (The ballot box is a sham. Nothing will change until after the war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightOnTheBorder

Not really. The Conservative people tend to be older Christians, respectful and patient.

Often I feel sorry for them as they get rudely pounced on by Libertarians who use the keywords for exactly that purpose.


17 posted on 03/17/2013 11:52:13 AM PDT by Berlin_Freeper (http://userstyles.org/users/180132)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: dagogo redux
As a follow-up question: For each issue, which viewpoint best matches those of the Founders?

In my opinion, the libertarians are right on, but in our culture it wouldn't work anymore. America was built on personal freedoms, but without self accountability, those personal freedoms become a burden on everyone else. The masses become slaves to the fallen.

IF the libertarians were to end all social programs today, so people would be held personally responsible for their own choices, it would be great, but I don't see that happening.

Social liberalism leads to destroyed lives. People don't always make the right choices. Today, those who choose to destroy their lives are rewarded with a life time of care. They not only get what they need - they even get those things they want. It's destroying the nation rather than strengthening it.

IF libertarians were able to free people from being held responsible for other peoples bad choices, we'd have the country our founding fathers left for us. We'd all be free.

18 posted on 03/17/2013 11:54:35 AM PDT by concerned about politics ("Get thee behind me, Liberal")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: dagogo redux

While I don’t claim this to be any definitive answer, it’s a point to consider that, if you really think in depth about it, holds completely true... One of my political mentors described modern libertarianism (paraphrased) as thus: “The quest for drugs”.

Modern Ls ALWAYS have drug legalization somewhere in the mix. When you look at their border stance, you get the free movement of drugs on the backs of illegals. When you look at their opposition to conservatism, even though they share a great number of our views, the drug legalization issue ALWAYS comes up as a bargaining chip. ALWAYS.

I could go on with examples, but just look at any time a libertarian gets a podium. Drug legalization is always in the mix. And the nanosecond anyone speaks against it, the ‘libertarian’ suddenly becomes a ‘moderate’ who ‘sees the other side’...AKA LIBERALISM.

We all have various views on the drug war. But the Ls have codified this as their line in the sand and will put all other issues subservient to their progress relating to it. History has shown that to be the case. Just look at RonPaul’s army. It was ALL ABOUT the drug issue. And they are the core of modern libertarianism.


19 posted on 03/17/2013 11:56:57 AM PDT by Norm Lenhart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai; dagogo redux

The people who created this nation would have lynched a libertarian calling for homosexualizing the military, abortion, gay marriage, and legal prostitution etc., etc.

America was so social conservative the it is difficult for even a conservative to imagine it today.


20 posted on 03/17/2013 11:57:07 AM PDT by ansel12 ( “I would not be in the United States Senate if it wasn’t for Sarah Palin,” Cruz said.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: RIghtwardHo

I believe Ronald Reagan spoke highly and considered himself a libertarian (small l). On the role of government, the libertarian and small government conservative have a great deal in common. The Libertarian Party has little in common because it is widely focused on drugs, leftist social issues and isolationist policies. I believe a great deal of the conservative base, many independents and a lot of disaffected voters would be attracted to more ‘small l’ libertarian ideas in the Republican Party.


21 posted on 03/17/2013 11:59:10 AM PDT by ilgipper (Obama supporters are comprised of the uninformed & the ill-informed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

No, Democrats lynch. Conservatives, in cases where hanging is called for, hang legally after due process.

People back then calling for everything on that list would have most likely been banished west, or simply have shut up and vanished into New York’s libertine street society.


22 posted on 03/17/2013 12:01:41 PM PDT by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper

If you want a Federal government big enough to control every citizen’s penis then you bet, I am prepared to get nasty.


23 posted on 03/17/2013 12:01:50 PM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry

What a crock, 1790 America would have had libertarians hanging from trees.

Sodom and Gomorah was full of libertarians, America wasn’t, that is a recent occurrence of the last 50 years as libertarianism swept America and has given us this destroyed culture and created an atmosphere where the Christians and God are to be weeded out of our ever more “libertarian” culture, the culture that first came to dominate in the Ghettos.


24 posted on 03/17/2013 12:04:32 PM PDT by ansel12 ( “I would not be in the United States Senate if it wasn’t for Sarah Palin,” Cruz said.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: DManA

I don’t want it waved in my face and forced to subsidize it.


25 posted on 03/17/2013 12:06:24 PM PDT by Berlin_Freeper (http://userstyles.org/users/180132)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper

That is a perfectly libertarian attitude.


26 posted on 03/17/2013 12:07:15 PM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: RightOnTheBorder

“I tend to wind up on many of the libertarian-centric threads and have found it to be the anti-libertarian crowd that gets nasty. This thread is new but I bet within 25 posts there will be someone referring to libertarians as “brain dead” or using some other pejorative with drug connotations.”

Exactly...REALLY nasty....then they brag what superior Christians they are and tell us that Rand Paul is the anti christ. Paul likely lives a more Christian life than most of them. The founding fathers didn’t form a Theocracy. And for good reason.


27 posted on 03/17/2013 12:08:32 PM PDT by AuntB (Illegal immigration is simply more "share the wealth" socialism and a CRIME not a race!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: RIghtwardHo

“the enemy of my enemy is NOT your friend.”

You are wrong. Social conservatives alone don’t have the numbers to win national elections anymore. That’s just reality.

The democrats are adding hispanics at a rapid pace to their ranks and republicans will have to add young libertarians. There is no alternative. The demographics are changing and the formula that worked for republicans in the past will not work again in the future.


28 posted on 03/17/2013 12:08:38 PM PDT by BarnacleCenturion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
The people who created this nation would have lynched a libertarian calling for homosexualizing the military, abortion, gay marriage, and legal prostitution etc., etc.

Yes, because the culture at the time was wise enough to realize certain actions have consequences. They were a moral people, and there was a good reason for it. They had thousands of years of wisdom behind them.
IF all social programs and controlling laws were eliminated today, people would be falling like flies - but the country would re-learn from it. They'd quickly learn certain actions and behaviors lead to bad ends, and they'd learn not to tolerate it as a nation.
Those who, after the enlightenment, still chose to do these things, would be outcasts. That alone would force them to re-learn the errors of their ways. If they even tried to FORCE their behaviors on anyone else, it would be THEM who denied other people their right to be a moral, wiser, and freer people.

29 posted on 03/17/2013 12:10:49 PM PDT by concerned about politics ("Get thee behind me, Liberal")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: RightOnTheBorder

Well said. Like you, I want the government out of my private life as much as possible. Marriage is first, and foremost a private issue, best handled privately.


30 posted on 03/17/2013 12:13:00 PM PDT by txnativegop (Fed up with zealots)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: DManA

You got that perfectly wrong. Libertarians will give the married homosexuals tax and economic benefits they don’t deserve. Costing the rest of society. While misidentifying who we are as a people to future generations.


31 posted on 03/17/2013 12:14:34 PM PDT by Berlin_Freeper (http://userstyles.org/users/180132)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Norm Lenhart

“Just look at RonPaul’s army. It was ALL ABOUT the drug issue. And they are the core of modern libertarianism.”

Norm, I think you’re wrong about that. I was never a big Paul for President fan, but of all the people I know (hundreds) that did, NOT one did so because of ‘drugs’. He didn’t just get support of young people. One thing, anyone should be able to admit is that the so called ‘war on drugs’ is just another huge expensive failure.


32 posted on 03/17/2013 12:14:37 PM PDT by AuntB (Illegal immigration is simply more "share the wealth" socialism and a CRIME not a race!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: BarnacleCenturion

Actually the democrats are adding Hispanic libertarians to their ranks, which is natural since they are the party of effective libertarianism.

Hispanics who are not libertarians vote as the social conservatives that they are.


33 posted on 03/17/2013 12:14:45 PM PDT by ansel12 ( “I would not be in the United States Senate if it wasn’t for Sarah Palin,” Cruz said.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

You don’t ever read past the first line, do you?


34 posted on 03/17/2013 12:16:19 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: txnativegop

What does that mean? Your post didn’t say anything.


35 posted on 03/17/2013 12:16:56 PM PDT by ansel12 ( “I would not be in the United States Senate if it wasn’t for Sarah Palin,” Cruz said.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper

See posts #20 and #24. While not yet reduced to name calling, the poster is asserting that our founding fathers would have ignored due process and murdered libertarians. And within my 25 post estimate I might add.


36 posted on 03/17/2013 12:16:58 PM PDT by RightOnTheBorder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

“The people who created this nation would have lynched a libertarian calling for homosexualizing the military, abortion, gay marriage, and legal prostitution etc., etc.”

Don’t miss a chance to bitch about the ‘libertarian demons’, Ansell2! Now, go find me ONE, just ONE reference to any of the things you mentioned above...those issues didn’t EXIST then, not in the discussion to form this nation.

Some of you are dense. If Libertarian leaning citizens are all Liberals, they’d be democrats instead of republicans!


37 posted on 03/17/2013 12:18:00 PM PDT by AuntB (Illegal immigration is simply more "share the wealth" socialism and a CRIME not a race!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry

Yes I do, and I read your entire post and responded to it.

It was a crock of nonsense promoting the left’s agenda that conservatives have been fighting for 50 years.


38 posted on 03/17/2013 12:19:26 PM PDT by ansel12 ( “I would not be in the United States Senate if it wasn’t for Sarah Palin,” Cruz said.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: AuntB

I agree. It is a total failure.

RE: Paul...

I also agree that there were many supporters who were not drug centered. I did indeed overstate this. Many were in his camp over the war and financial issues. But his hardcore wing, the ones that got all the press, marched with potleaf signs etc, were indeed all about the drugs. And I believe that wing made up the majority of his support.


39 posted on 03/17/2013 12:19:53 PM PDT by Norm Lenhart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

“Sodom and Gomorah was full of libertarians, America wasn’t, that is a recent occurrence of the last 50 years as libertarianism swept America and has given us this destroyed culture and created an atmosphere where the Christians and God are to be weeded out of our ever more “libertarian” culture, the culture that first came to dominate in the Ghettos.”

You give a lot of credit to a group who never held office! Your good republicans are more to blame than libertarians.


40 posted on 03/17/2013 12:20:01 PM PDT by AuntB (Illegal immigration is simply more "share the wealth" socialism and a CRIME not a race!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: dagogo redux

The reason Conservatives have strayed from the Founder’s view on international affairs is because today’s world lives in instant worldwide communication, not to forget communications with those outside our atmosphere; bioengineered plagues, and ballistic missiles, all of which the Founders couldn’t dream of in their time. I, like the libertarians, and I’m sure most here, would prefer to live in a world where bio-weapons and nukes aren’t needed, but that will never be the case, and as such, strong deterrents like that are needed, as well as a properly-funded, standing military.


41 posted on 03/17/2013 12:20:37 PM PDT by wastedyears (I'm a gamer not because I choose to have no life, but because I choose to have many.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Norm Lenhart

I can agree with that.


42 posted on 03/17/2013 12:20:39 PM PDT by AuntB (Illegal immigration is simply more "share the wealth" socialism and a CRIME not a race!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper

A libertarian would not give ANYONE tax benefits. A libertarian would eliminate the whole question by eliminating the income tax.


43 posted on 03/17/2013 12:21:00 PM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Berlin_Freeper
You got that perfectly wrong. Libertarians will give the married homosexuals tax and economic benefits they don’t deserve.

After what I've read, there are 2 types of libertarians. Social liberals who just don't want to pay for the clean up after the party themselves, and true libertarians. The true libertarians wouldn't have a "special" tax for any reason. Everyone would pay a small amount to keep the military and highways working, but that's it. The feds power would be strictly limited to what's written in the Constitution and nothing more.

44 posted on 03/17/2013 12:22:11 PM PDT by concerned about politics ("Get thee behind me, Liberal")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

My post was a reply to post #9 and specifically the last line in that post.


45 posted on 03/17/2013 12:22:16 PM PDT by txnativegop (Fed up with zealots)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: AuntB

Plenty of rappers, hippies, homos etc never held office, yet their influence created the culture we live in.

And Republicans are indeed complicit for allowing them to run wild.


46 posted on 03/17/2013 12:22:33 PM PDT by Norm Lenhart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: BarnacleCenturion

“Social conservatives alone don’t have the numbers to win national elections anymore. That’s just reality.

The democrats are adding hispanics at a rapid pace to their ranks and republicans will have to add young libertarians. There is no alternative. The demographics are changing and the formula that worked for republicans in the past will not work again in the future.”

And that my friend, IS the bottom line!

Happy St. Paddys to all, I’m outta here for Corn beef and cabbage for the day.


47 posted on 03/17/2013 12:23:36 PM PDT by AuntB (Illegal immigration is simply more "share the wealth" socialism and a CRIME not a race!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: RightOnTheBorder
"See posts #20 and #24. While not yet reduced to name calling, the poster is asserting... blah blah blah"

48 posted on 03/17/2013 12:24:03 PM PDT by Berlin_Freeper (http://userstyles.org/users/180132)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics
"In my opinion, the libertarians are right on, but in our culture it wouldn't work anymore. America was built on personal freedoms, but without self accountability, those personal freedoms become a burden on everyone else. The masses become slaves to the fallen."

That sounds reminiscent of the argument for government's regulation of markets in order to make them free. Once government is involved, freedoms are curtailed, not enhanced. Regulators will always be highly susceptible to regulatory capture (run by those being regulated) and therefore ineffective.

I agree that society has been so distorted that it would be a shock to about half of Americans if true liberty would prevail. But government would no longer be able to rob Peter to pay Paul. Unions and churches alike would be free to create any type of safety net or assistance programs they see fit. But it would no longer be coerced from producers by the IRS.

49 posted on 03/17/2013 12:24:36 PM PDT by uncommonsense (Conservatives believe what they see; Liberals see what they believe.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

Something still tells me you glossed over the second paragraph of my reply. Maybe your knee jerking distracted you?


50 posted on 03/17/2013 12:25:43 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

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