Skip to comments.Sen. Orrin Hatch Threatens To Punch ‘Radical Libertarians’ In The Mouth
Posted on 05/23/2012 6:22:10 AM PDT by DManA
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) adopted a combative tone in a recent interview with NPR where he said that he is doggone offended by libertarians. He told NPR I despise these people and implied that he is happy to intimidate those that dump on him with threats of violence.
(Excerpt) Read more at mediaite.com ...
Hatch needs to slink off to that fancy lobbying job in the sky.
Hatch is a good example.
Let’s all say it together... TERM LIMITS!!!!!!!!!!!!
don’t get yer magic knickers in a twist!
He’s the poster boy for term limits.
The RIAA is breathing a sigh of relief, too.
What ARE you talking about? The headline and articles deals with liberals. Yet you say Hatch “despises conservatives”?
You need to know what a libertarian is.
This is the Libertarian Party Platform:
As Libertarians, we seek a world of liberty; a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives and no one is forced to sacrifice his or her values for the benefit of others.
We believe that respect for individual rights is the essential precondition for a free and prosperous world, that force and fraud must be banished from human relationships, and that only through freedom can peace and prosperity be realized.
Consequently, we defend each person's right to engage in any activity that is peaceful and honest, and welcome the diversity that freedom brings. The world we seek to build is one where individuals are free to follow their own dreams in their own ways, without interference from government or any authoritarian power.
In the following pages we have set forth our basic principles and enumerated various policy stands derived from those principles.
These specific policies are not our goal, however. Our goal is nothing more nor less than a world set free in our lifetime, and it is to this end that we take these stands.
This is not "Liberal" by any means at all.
I’m glad everyone else is so clear about the equivalency between conservatism and libertarianism. Myself I’m not so sure. For example, I wouldn’t be for blanket legalization of all possible vices. Does that make me not a conservative? And if Adam Kokesh is the kind of person he’s talking about, he gets my dander up too, and I don’t see him as remotely conservative. C’mon. Buddies with Code Pink? That’s where some “radical libertarians” have gone. National defense matters. So who was Hatch actually referring too? Anybody know?
Orrin Hatch has been a good man and a good senator for decades - including a good conservative. Now you can all flame me with the minutiae that “proves” the man who single handedly saved Clarence Thomas is really a liberal and has been there “too long”.
Hatch has always been pro life, less government, anti Clinton and Obama. And now endorsed by Sarah Palin, who has shown no fear of establishment republicans.
Palin just endorsed Hatch, and she normally only endorses those who are projected to win.
However, Hatch is relying on Salt Lake county, which is a bastion of liberals, and even radicals, and there his poll numbers have slipped. In the rest of Utah, Liljenquist may have a strong advantage.
As an interesting note, Liljenquist has some odd connections. After graduation from BYU, magna cum laude with a Bachelor of Arts in Economics, he attended the University of Chicago Law School graduating as a Juris Doctor in 2001.
He spent the summer between his first and second years of law school interning for the Institute for Justice (Libertarian) Clinic on Entrepreneurship. Between his second and third year, he interned for Kirkland & Ellis where Ken Starr was the lead counsel.
Before starting his final year of law school, he interviewed with Bain & Company.
So he has very indirect connections with Obama, libertarians, the opposition to Bill Clinton, and finally Mitt Romney.
Its obvious he's referring to those who would 'primary' him - TEA Party types.
America has a government. Without government and laws you have crime and chaos. The founders knew this. Is a libertarian anti-American?
Would it have been wise to stay out of WWII?
TERM LIMITS NOW!!
Support Chuck Woolery's effort
I was very disappointed that Palin endorsed this slug.
I suggest you spend 60 seconds learning a little about the Libertarians. They are HARDLY anti-American, they are all about liberty, especially the liberty to make stupid decisions. If you aren’t allowed to make stupid decisions, are you truly “free”?
You don’t need to read everything ... just 60 seconds to give you a good idea what they are all about. You may be shocked to find that you have quite a bit in common with them.
A “Libertarian” is a conservative.
That’s a lie. At the heart of a libertarian is social liberalism. From a personal standpoint and from a political standpoint.
They don’t want a government involved in setting standards on child porn, abortion, prostitution and drugs. They gravitate towards losers like Gary Johnson, Barney Frank and Ron Paul. As a result of libertarians, we have out of control spending, sky-high welfare roles and a debt that’s due to explode any time now.
I agree with Hatch. I despise Libertarians.
Lugar was a different story, and Lugar is gone, gone, gone.
No wonder Sarah supports him. (may be sarcasm)
In general, libertarians believe you have the right to run your own life, but not to harm others (self-defense excepted). That, and their individualism, marginalizes their impact on politics, a collectivist endeavor. Threats and intimidation sound like the tactics of anarchists, not libertarians. Hatch can’t seem to stand it that a few semi-libertarian/Tea Party types have held together enough to challenge his sinecure.
Please point out the social liberalism. There is a lot there, so have at it.
Hatch saw what happened to Sphincter when he defected, and how irrelevant he became, that’s why he got religion.
“They dont want a government involved “
“They dont want a government involved in setting standards on child porn,”
Libertarians DO want laws protecting children. It is a lie for you to say otherwise.
“As a result of libertarians, we have out of control spending, sky-high welfare roles and a debt thats due to explode any time now.”
That’s total BS. Libertarians are against welfare. Name a single Libertarian that setup the welfare state. I can name all kinds of Republicans and Democrats that did so.
Do you even know what a Libertarian is?
Fear is an excellent motivator.
When you peel away all the B.S. freedom is not a very popular concept.
There’s your problem. You think Barny Frank is a libertarian. You are just ignorant and looking for something to focus your inchoate hatred on.
I can’t be any more clearer. Libertarians are Social Liberals. Their values are opposite to those who are conservative. See post 17 where I listed 3 prime examples of libertarians.
And because Libs are socially liberal, they are responsible for idiot politicians who think like they do and then naturally escalate that thinking to an economic level of libertarianism. I’m talking more taxes and bigger government here. The dirty little secret is that Libs claim to be for smaller government, yet their actions (if unchecked) only INCREASE the size of governmet.
Case in point: Prop 19 in California. Libertarians WANTED to legalize marijuana. Why? To TAX it. And we all know what that leads to.
Look. I can spend hours explaining these fundamentals to you. But I can’t understand them for you. Try the DUmp for their liberal ideas and values.
Freedom of Choice is what you’ve got.
Freedom from Choice is what you want.
-DEVO (Freedom of Choice)
Hatch saw what the Tea Party did to his fellow slug Bennett and has been running scared ever since.
Theres your problem. You think Barny Frank is a libertarian.
Barney Frank teamed up with known Libertarian Ron Paul to introduce a pro-Libertarian ideal; legalization of marijuana.
“By their fruits (pun intended), ye shall know them.”
Ron Paul is homosexual in your ignorant world?
I dispute your claim libertarians are resonsible for the high taxes,big government and other ills all passed into law bt Democrat and Republican politicians.
It has become clear that present-day Americans actually FEAR the freedoms the Founders treasured.
How did Prohibition work out? Are you aware that in the history of mankind, no civilization, no goverment has ever been successful with it? Nada, not a single time in the recorded history of mankind. Never.
Now, let's be clear - I haven't ever smoked pot, or used drugs. I chose not to drink. I wouldn't drink or use drugs if they were legal - it's just my choice.
But, I don't care if you do. Drink yourself to oblivion, that's fine with me. As long as you do not drive or interject your life upon mine. Smoke pot, shoot up some heroin - I don't care. My view is that you are free to make any decision you opt to; you just do not have the right to interject your views upon me. That is the crux of the libertarian viewpoint. You are free to live your life, even make stupid decisions. But, you are not free to dictate to me how I live my life; so long as I do not harm, steal or negatively impact you.
The war on drugs has been a failure, utterly and completely. It has destroyed lives, it has resulted in new and more potent drugs that would likely never have been created if not for the "Prohibition" that has been artifically created. It has created immense profits, creating cartels that are slaughtering innocent people.
If you want drugs, my view is to make them available, as pure as we can economically make them; and we get ready to bury a lot of garbage. At some point in time, people will wise up the fact that drugs are bad, and they will avoid them. As-is; we have created a "coolness" about them - just like Prohibition did with alcohol. During prohibition, those with access to alchol consumed much more than people consumed when Prohibition was lifted.
hatch is simply a big government moron... you wanna punch a libertarian, bring it fattie.....
a libertarian is to the right of the hard core conservatives... another way to describe a libertarian is “Strict Constitutionalist”... Not all libertarians are ron paul nut jobs, just like not all republicans are conservatives.... small l libertarians have more in common with conservatives than mainstream republicans do...
It isn’t a “two-party system” at all..
Welcome to the United Soviet States of America..where the Pravda State Media vet the candidates to the pleasure and needs of the RinoCrat UniParty.
This election will be a non-election...featuring the state approved candidates-whose only distinction is whether they are black or white.
The two-PARTEY system merely means that the R & D in DC gang up on Flyover Country....and laugh all the way to the bank as they do so
Probably not. Sincere libertarians felt that laws prohibiting pot elevate the power of the government over individual freedom. Some sincere libertarians also thought it might be worthwhile to set up a 10th Amendment confrontation between California and the Federal Government. Certainly libertarians are not very good at collectivism, but they do seem to be able to form the most bizarre coalitions. This stems from libertarianism recognizing the right of each person to go to hell in there own handbasket as long as they keep it there. This means, for example, that totalitarians or pornographers who want the state to recognize their freedom of speech will find an ally in an honest libertarian.
Some Republicans feel the same way, heheh. I have to say I can't find it in my heart to recognize the innate right of the totalitarians to suborn the state to promote totalitarianism, since it's a one-way street that ends with an orgy of blood-letting.
27 Words. Two Sentences. Yet somehow you read that Ron Paul is a homosexual?
What else did your fevered little mind see? That I’m plotting to overtake the world? That I’m cornering the global market on cashews?
I LIKE libertarians a lot, I was reacting to the statement that without any government we would be completely free.
Except for foreign policy and maybe drug policy, I admire liberterians.
Just a failed joke?
I dispute your claim libertarians are resonsible for the high taxes,big government and other ills all passed into law bt Democrat and Republican politicians.
Disputation allowed. Thankfully there are so few Libertarians in power that they are basically ineffictive as they are laughable.
But the fact still stands, that their liberal values do infest both the dems and the repubs.
Typical. Was expecting this same lame screed - Equating the WOD to Prohibition. That argument has been shot down a million times. By logical sober minded voters who DO NOT WANT legal pot.
I’m sorry you want more dope smoking in the US. I’m sorry you are at odds with Conservatives over this and other conservative issues. But I’ve FReeped with you for years over these basic conservatives values and I’m convinced you will never learn.
You will never be a conservative.
Sorry, that is so not true. Look at any of the political tests on line that you can take...
“I was very disappointed that Palin endorsed this slug.”
I concur. She didn’t owe it to him like some say she did to McShame to justify her endorsing McShame over J.D. Hayworth. We all would be better off with Hayworth in the Senate instead of McShame and, likewise, Liljenquist instead of Orville.
How many unbalanced budgets has Orville voted for in 36 years?
Orville’s had his chance to show what he can do. Utah has given him 36 years. He doesn’t deserve 42 years.
It’s time for a change.
Foreign policy ... I'd like to see our foreign aide terminated. Pakistan is imprisoning a Doctor who aided us in getting Bin Laden; and Pakistan got $1.656 Billion and likely in excess of $1.4 Billion in economic aide from us last year. WTF? They hid a terrorist that killed 3,000 americans and are punishing a citizen for helping us get Bin Laden (he got 30 years).
We are not making friends when we "give" the money away, in fact we are creating enemies. Look how the world views Canada vs how they view us. We give money away, with strings. Countries hate the strings, but want the money. How about we keep our money, fix our problems at home, build a strong military, and alieveate the problems we have?
I'm not a drug user, I don't drink either ... my choice. But, I'm unwilling to have my life, my family, my possessions placed at risk by denying some idiot who wants to poison himself, the poison he craves. Want Crystal Meth? IMHO, help yourself. Make it cheap, and plentiful and pure - hopefully the dregs of society will OD and we can just toss the bodies in a landfill somewhere. Society will be better off (ie. return to where it was before the laws prohibiting drugs were in effect) and we won't have the crime we all enjoy today. Further, there will cease to be the efforts put into making more addictive and concentrated drugs - no profit in it. The criminal carels will go bankrupt, innocent lives will cease to be lost, gangs will disolve as their revenue stream will dry up. We won't have a prison population with 1/6 incarcerated for doing what our esteemed President did - numerous times, and wrote about in his book. He is only President because he didn't get caught; yet for those who were caught, their lives have been ruined.
Did you look at the graph?
Vertically you have Anarchy at the bottom and Totalitariansism on top.
Horizontally it’s Communism on the Left, and Libertarianism on the right.
This is a GRAPH, you take one of the test you linked to, and they plot your political leaning on this graph. I tested next to Friedman, which I consider a compliment.
In a vast majority of the US, Marijuana is illegal. Has the drug problem gone away now, or is it even worse?
And at the end of the day, the war on drugs is really just Prohibition under a different name. The same events are taking place, enriching the criminal element, demand is increased, more potent formulations are being invented, political corruption, violent gang activity, criminal underclass. Ludicrous profit margins are driving everything.
Prior to 1937, Marijuana was legal in the US. It was largely ignored. It was used by "low class" folk, it was not wildly popular, it wasn't the "gateway" drug it's been made out to be. Chances are your grandparents may have smoked it, and somehow society didn't come crashing down either. It didn't become popular until it was forbidden.
Just like underage drinking - when you make something "illegal" you create demand. I drank a lot in High School - because I wasn't supposed to. When I turned 21 and could legally drink, there went the fun. I don't drink now, never used drugs - simply no interest in them. However, there are areas of the cities near me that I dare not go into, for fear of my personal safety. These regions are populated by gangs, drug dealers, drug users and derelicts. If drugs were cheap, available and pure - the gangs wouldn't have a money revenue stream, the drug users would hopefully OD and we could bury that problem.
All we have to do, is look at countries who have decriminalized drugs.
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html My view is fairly simple - this should be a STATE issue, and largely it is.
“Libertarians are Social Liberals. Their values are opposite to those who are conservative”
You obviously know nothing about Libertarians. Your ignorance of them is simply on par with a liberal’s view of conservatives.
“Libertarians WANTED to legalize marijuana. Why? To TAX it.”
Um, no. That is how they sold it to the stupid masses. There are many people that simply want to smoke pot but a Libertarian wants to end government control over us. Name the Constitutional enumeration or the founding idea of this nation that says the government has the right to control what you use in or on your body? We now see the ObamaCare/RomneyCare system of wanting to control what we eat. Where is anyone’s right mind does the government get that power?
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.