Posted on 02/10/2012 9:16:22 AM PST by Superstu321
Jonah Goldberg makes the case that Libertarians are a essential to the Republican party and that conservatives and libertarians aren't that different.
(Excerpt) Read more at media.aei.org ...
...and yet, strangely, the Borders in my town has closed...
Libertarians do not believe any of us could be responsible enough to know what is harmful to others and what is not which is why they continually push for no laws at all on issue after issue.
Libertarians would rather strip us all of our ‘right to representation’ and replace it with their utopian anarchical style rule.
Do whatever the hell you want to do as long as you don't make me pay for it. Period.
I blame it on the Bossa Nova. And my 2nd Kindle.
How hard is it to just FOLLOW THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND?
You can have a bug up your ass about the LP, I have a few bones to pick with them myself...
Just stop it with the rest of the BS though. It doesn't fly and only makes you look ignorant.
Liberterians are vocal, but have never polled more than 1% in any national election. They pretend to be republicans to fool people into voting for them because nobody takes the libertarian party seriously.
Being pro abortion and pro drugs aren’t particularly conservative positions despite their grand claims of being conservative.
Wow... So much fail in that first sentence. Especially since libertarianism is based on Objectivism and reason.
Most of the “l”ibertarians I know would be happy to just get us back to a Constitutionally limited Republic with a Bill of Rights that is enforced at all levels of government.
The leader of our local tea party patriots group is a Ron Paul supporter who spends his free time hanging out with the occupy wall street clowns.
Tell me which part of my post is BS and we’ll walk you through it.
If "what is harmful" is whatever a majority votes to be so, then those who claim to be "harmed" by you not giving them your money have won the day.
Many libertarians act as if they know better and want to deny you this right claiming that you need to have some sort of absolute proof that someones actions are directly harmful annd that all arguments that use a causation approach to showing the harm are not allowed to be used.
Libertarians are all for causation arguments - they just note that some such arguments are unfounded, for example, "some drug users harm others, therefore all drug use harms others."
My simple point is 100% objective. Libertarian sacrifice a person’s ‘right to representation’ in pursuit of their utopian ideals. It is like not seeing the forest through the trees. They become anti-liberty once they start telling me that I have no right to have repreesntation on making law in response to limiting behavior that I believe to be harmful to me or my family.
Just because you bel;ieve libertarian to be able to walk on water in regard to the Constitution doesnt make it so.
Demonstrably, pretty much every problem listed has been made worse by government. Social justice? The economy? Politics? Do you really think that just doing something, the Constitution says they aren't supposed to do anyway, YOUR way will have better results? This is just like the Dems saying Socialism will work, if we just give it one more try.
We need to get government back under the chains of the Constitution. Fecklessly denigrating the only folks even talking about it isn't helping things at all...
Tough sh*t cupcake...
We gotta have Libertarians to win? What a totally depressing thought. They have more books and pamphlets to push at you than the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons combined, do.
Oooh... Showtunes. There’s a winning argument...
http://www.televisiontunes.com/Mastermind_-_Theme_Tune.html
Seems like the tough sh!t applies to you loser since your dope is still illegal. Thanks for the incentive though to vote once again to make your lifestyle illegal.
“We need to get government back under the chains of the Constitution.”
“Man is born free, but everywhere he is chains.”
Who said that? Rousseau? Or was it .... Karl Marx! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1KvgtEnABY
(Don’t mind me, Dead—I’m just fecklessly denigrating you.)
St. Thomas Aquinas wrote about this in his Summa Theologica.
It is hard for some to get their heads wrapped around that view. To them, it is patently obvious that if something is bad, it must be outlawed. They either reject or ignore the unintended consequences of their position, and the fact that it ultimately leads to a conflict with the small government aspect of conservatism. This is why we have the massive government we have.
Mind you, I have disagreements with some self-identified "libertarians." I reject the idea that, for instance, allowing the state to enforce a mandate that others recognize same-sex unions as marriage is somehow libertarian. It isn't, and is actually precisely the opposite of libertarianism; it is statism, and denies people religious freedom.
One of the things Id like to see is getting rid of property taxes once the property is owned, in some way. Maybe an upfront tax or something. But to pay taxes on a piece of property that you have paid off means that the government is the property owner.
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.