Posted on 10/18/2010 9:10:24 AM PDT by Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus
I have come to believe that Libertarians are worthless. Before them, a crop of wonderful, small government candidates sit and will likely win–scores of points of optimism in a political sky that has been bleak and black. To coin a word from the opposition, there’s Hope.
Now, most of us watching this election realize that the exhausting work over the last two years has hardly begun. Once this new crop become part of the system, they’ll have to be watched and held accountable.
The most optimistic change, then, hasn’t really been these candidates. It’s been the heart of the American people. Citizens have decided that they’ve sat on their duffs long enough. It’s time to get involved. It’s time to stay involved.
The candidates aren’t perfect. No politicians are perfect. Hells bells. They’re human and mere vessels for the expression of the voters’ will.
So, I read Doug Mataconis’ piece about why Libertarians are still disenchanted even with the best electoral hope in a generation presents itself. I feel absolute disgust.
Kvetching about the social issues of a Christine O’Donnell while ignoring the economic liberties that Mike Castle would have assuredly stripped had he had his way makes no sense. How on earth can a true Libertarian even worry about such irrelevance?
(Excerpt) Read more at libertypundits.net ...
C’mon you apes, you want to ping forever?
Personally I think that mainstream conservatives are scared sh**less of small 'l' libertarians and that's why they spend so much time trying to tear down a group which is actually an ally.
But you go right ahead there, Missy.
Kvetching about the social issues of a Christine O’Donnell while ignoring the economic liberties that Mike Castle would have assuredly stripped had he had his way makes no sense. How on earth can a true Libertarian even worry about such irrelevance?Because "true Libertarians" aren't really "Libertarians" at all. They're more like a crop of pedantic Librarians, out to score debating points in front of an audience of 3 teachers and 3 students on a rainy Wednesday night in their empty high school gymnasium.
So if Libertarians are irrelevant why do you waste ink analyzing them, sweetheart?
The smell of victory is in the air, and the squabbling over the spoils has already begun.
If having principles and standards makes one worthless then I’m worthless.
“I read Doug Mataconis’ piece about why Libertarians are still disenchanted even with the best electoral hope in a generation presents itself. I feel absolute disgust”
I feel agreement. Not that I vote Libertarian. But come on. Do we really believe a handfull of apparently small-government Republicans will change anything? What did ‘94 accomplish, in the long run? Or Reagan, for that matter?
Obamas will not disappear, and it’s only a matter of time before another Bush comes along. That’s all I’m saying. Which is to say nothing of the irreversible trend of central government expansion that has been with us since, when, exactly? Certainly the New Deal, perhaps the Progressive Era. Since the Civil War, even? Nevermind where you pinpoint the beginning. The Servile State, or socialism, or fascism, or the Capitalist State, or whatever you want to call it is here to stay.
“the Capitalist State”
Or, rather, let’s call it state capitalism, which is more accurate.
because they are wolves in sheep’s clothing
they are telling each other to LIE about their views to INFILTRATE the GOP and get elected
And the latest Libertarian Messiah, Peter Schiff, was one camel whose nose was shoved under the tent in Connecticut, I use HIS OWN WORDS as the perfect example:
WHAT THE TEA PARTY IS NOT TELLING YOU ABOUT PETER SCHIFF
Peter Schiff at the 2008 libertarian Convention, saying that libertarians must insult GOP members to show they are not like them, and that Libertarians must INFILTRATE the GOP and run as GOP members in order to win
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ncLTFoTFa8&playnext_from=TL&videos=gKm7t4j9Wgc
Why do the Ron Paul guys support gay marriage?
http://www.queerty.com/ron-paul-on-gay-marriage-20071210/
http://www.schiffforsenate.com/index.php?q=news/constitutional-candidates-congress
Schiff’s own website endorses Adam Kokesh, the anti-war traitor who also tried to tell people he was a Republican, all after leading anti-war marches across the WORLD!
SCHIFF himself admits he believes the Iraq War is a QUAGMIRE in 2009!!
http://www.freespeechmonster.com/?p=103
Schiff has said this many times
http://peterschiffsays.com/defense.htm
Aug 7, 2009, Iraq is a quagmire
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9t741ewbGA
Schiff blamed Iraq on bankers? Not on Saddam?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zo81QDSuixk
What the Tea Parties are not telling you about Peter Schiff:
Libertarians need to infiltrate the GOP
http://belowthebeltway.com/2009/06/02/peter-schiff-libertarians-need-to-infliltrate-the-gop/
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=110955225375
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=19285
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message808505/pg1
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090707200009AAzSQfB
Peter Schiff admits on camera that he has ZERO money investigated in American corporations or industry. If Peter Schiff refuses to invest in American companies, how can Peter Schiff say he is helping Americans keep their jobs?
http://ameriborn.com/shifty/
Peter Schiff repeating talking points of the lunatic left, listen yourself. He says in 2009 that Iraq is a QUAGMIRE when we already won!! He blames the war on bankers and whoever, and not a word about blaming it on terrorists! listen yourself, Schiff repeats left wing talking points to his radio audience about the Iraq war!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zo81QDSuixk
Peter Schiff has made open statements that are quite like the statements of the anti-war leftists, to include the OTHER Ron Paul endorsed candidates Rand Paul and Adam Kokesh
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=schiff+%2B+isolationist&aq=f&aqi=g10&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGIC_enUS220US220&q=peter+schiff+isolationist
Peter Schiff is pro-choice on abortion
http://www.google.com/search?num=20&hl=en&newwindow=1&rlz=1T4GGIC_enUS220US220&q=Peter+schiff+%2B+abortion&aq=f&aqi=g-c1&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=
SCHIFF’S OWN WEBSITE CONTAINS AN ENDORSEMENT FOR KOKESH WHERE KOKESH IS NAMED AS AN ANTI-WAR PROTESTER
http://schiffforsenate.com/index.php?q=news/constitutional-candidates-congress
Adam Kokesh
Adam Kokesh is best known as an Iraq War veteran who returned opposed to the war and was a keynote speaker at Ron Paul’s “Rally for the Republic” that competed with the Republican National Convention in the summer of 2008.
Peter Schiff is pro-choice on abortion
http://www.google.com/search?num=20&hl=en&newwindow=1&rlz=1T4GGIC_enUS220US220&q=Peter+schiff+%2B+abortion&aq=f&aqi=g-c1&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=
pro-immigration and said that there are too many jobs in the US we NEED to let in immigrants???
Peter Schiff admits on camera that he has ZERO money investigated in American corporations or industry. If Peter Schiff refuses to invest in American companies, how can Peter Schiff say he is helping Americans keep their jobs?
http://ameriborn.com/shifty/
This is SCHIFF in his own words!
video of Peter Schiff saying that LIBERTARIANS must infiltrate the Republican Party
http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/1583738
You cant download it directly, I tried, but hey, you can record it! :)
Peter Schiff appears at a Rand Paul/Adam Kokesh/Peter Schiff fundraiser
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYwb_P-ssK0
Rand Paul, Adam Kokesh, Peter Schiff, and others holding a fundraiser at Webster Hall in New York.
http://www.randpaul2010.com
http://www.schiffforsenate.com
http://www.kokeshforcongress.com
So if Libertarians are irrelevant why do you waste ink analyzing them...Because they are a small but steady drain on votes and it never hurts to remind libertarian voters what it is (and who it is) they are voting for... a reminder that is esp important this election cycle.
And I know, I know, I know, I know, I know, I know, I know, I know, I know, I know, I know, I know, I know, I know, I know, I know, I know, I know, I know, I know, I know, I know, I know, I know, I know they have a right to run.
I'm not saying they don't.
I'm just answering your question.
I would like to have some libertarian explain to me any aspect of social conservatism that is anti-liberty. Conservatives ask for everyone to have an equal right to representation on how issues of life, sexuality, etc… are dealt with in public. It is the federal court that has ruled to dictate that innocent life can be murdered and that no law can be made to stop it, and it the alliance between the progressives and the libertarians that claim that all types of sexual behavior must be specially protected by the government and any opposition to that must be punished. That is hardly a pro-liberty position.
I thought the piece was dead on accurate. Describes a lot of other conservatives as well.
It's just their toke on things.
:-\
and a point is often being missed. What some call “small government” repubs, are often more than happy to decide the smallest personal details of citizens lives.
Thats not really small government. It’s time for Government to wane, and not just in economics.
raht on raht on raht on...
The thing about “libertarianism” is that it would be completely workable if the individual had INTERNAL behavioral controls, which would preclude the need for “societal” controls on behavior.
Another aspect is that the total removal of all government alleviation of consequences for dumbass individual decisions would lead to a lot fewer of said dumbass decisions being made.
I thought the piece was dead on accurate...
_____________________________________
All I read was the excerpt. I saw nothing of substance except for the 1st sentence:
I have come to believe that Libertarians are worthless.
You nailed it. The most vocal “libertarians” on the net these days (incl here at FR) are concerned about one issue and one issue only... and they’ll go on ad nauseum about it... until their munchies call them away.
For being so irrelevant, they sure are being talked about a lot these days. Especially here on FR.
...I’d much rather have a Free State.
As much as many seem to be adverse to the idea of violence, I do not think that such a free state shall be secured without bloodshed; history itself has taught us that those in power are disinclined to give it up voluntarily, much more so if that power is illegitimate.
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
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.