Gary Johnson, RP, and libertarian supporters......remember.

So you don't want to talk about what makes you a liberal, because you really aren't one are you?

 

Univarsal health care, government run vehicle insurance, socially responsible capitalism, laws that are fair to unions and their rights to organize, minimum wage laws set at above starvation levels, laws that forbid resaurant owners from cheating employees out of wages by making them rely on tips, laws that keep rasist haters under control, laws that limit the church's power, the rights of groups to express the reality of evolution and the fraudulence of creation, the right to abortion on demand throughout Canada, laws that forbid the carrying of handguns anywhere, laws that demand control over all guns, rehabilitation policy in our prison system as opposed to punishment, laws that keep the prison system out of private hands, and oh, probably just about anything that Americans don't like.

 

Ok, now pick one of these, and tell me why you agree with the idea, you know the rational for your support.

Or,

Explain to me what your view of life is that leads you to believe that this state control of our life is neccassary

 

I've already entertained your stupid conspiracy theory that tried to make me out as a rightie. That's all you get until you can show you are intelligent enough to bother with. I doubt you ever could.

 

Except that they believe in diametrically opposed things. Which is why it makes zero sense for them to merge.

 

Sure you don't want to just call me a racist some more?

Personal attack? Check

No substance to most of your posts? Check

Doesn't start threads that attempt actual discussion, but instead just throws bombs? Check

Won't describe in detail his political ideology? Check

Shill? Check!

 

Sorry, it doesn't work that way. You made the alegations, so you need to show the proof of all these racist signs being held up at Tea Party events.

 

Done, in .654 seconds!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/16/10-most-offensive-tea-par_n_187554.html

 

Lol ! That's really your evidence ?

 

What kind of liberal hates RP?

What kind of liberal has a hate for a man that wants to end the MIC?

Dislike? Sure

Obsession? Doesn't make sense

This would be like a Republican hating Bernie Sanders more then the rest of the Democrats. This does not exist.

 

So the extremely remote possibility that Ron Paul might be racist (I've never seen him act racist so, you know) immediately brands everyone who agrees with his principles racists? Hell, you obviously don't even understand what libertarianism is, or you'd know that by definition a libertarian cannot be racist. It's a contradiction, you cannot be for individual liberty and then simultaneously persecute people for having a different skin tone, that's hypocrisy. I'm not a racist. You can't call me one, I have never shown any inkling of racism, your accusations are just another pathetic attempt to try and trash the people who want to take away your precious welfare payments because we can't afford them anymore. Or you're just a brainwashed socialist, it's hard to tell the difference these days.

 

Well most Libertarians now days are not true libertarians, they are simply states right activists. If they were true libertarians they would be wanting state governments limited the same way they want the federal government. They have no problem with big government, as long as it is state government.

 

I think true libertarians distrust all centralized power, whether private or government.

 

I would go with the brainwashed socialist theory if I were you. It's close to the truth because I'm a reprogrammed commie Manchurian candidate.

 

I think the biggest thing is the 'pure' ideology isn't going to work, in this society, at least not in my life span. I believe if we find some common ground on various things, our numbers can strengthen. As soon as folks get the notion of 'no government' and 'anarchy rules' mixed in with 'libertarianism', the message is lost and we'll never see more than 1% of the vote.

I think 2016 will be a good year for libertarians. The Republicans are trying to use the message for their own political gain. The problem is, they mix it in with modern day Conservatism and the message gets even more diluted and no one begins to know what 'libertarianism' even means anymore. I'm hopeful for the future, just not sure what the end might bring.

 

I love how the mainstream media, or any other form of media, truly doesn't understand 'libertarianism' and then chalks it up as either 'extreme' or 'racist'. Why is that we always assume that its because its one race or the other? Do people always assume that it's only 'whites' who run companies? I know plenty of smart & intelligent folks from all walks of life. Everyday they have something new to teach me and even those who clean out my trash bins at work, I talk to, learn from, and thank them for doing their crappy job for me.

Now then, let's get into this a little bit here. I've debated this before and I agree with it. Do I believe we can abolish laws around civil rights? Absolutely not. Why? Because of the society that we currently have. The way I debated this argument is just like this, folks have jobs that wish to fill. They put out a wanted ad that might say 'Potential employee must have 5+ years of experience, with management skills, leadership capabilities, ability to work long hours, must know Office Project 2012, Visio 2012, must have a Bachelors in Computer Engineering' or something equivalent to it. Never once do we believe it is segregating us out from those who actually have that experience. You wouldn't sue the company for discrimination would you? Of course not because you don't have the experience they are looking for and they have a right not to hire you. Same comes in with anything else they wish to not hire someone for. We automatically tune in 'Black civil rights' and call all of us 'RACIST!', in yet, how many businesses do you think are run by any other race but white? They would be able to do the same thing. The only difference is, folks can't change the contractual agreement once the folks are hired. Meaning, if you hired someone and then decided you don't want to hire someone because of a certain race, that's when it becomes discrimination and illegal because they were already on the job and hired.

However, like I stated before, this type of legislation would never work in today's society for the exact reasons as I've stated above. People automatically jump on the 'racism' bandwagon for any little thing they don't like. It's the easiest and sure fire way to keep racism alive and well. Keep watering the plants guys, lord knows we never want that thing to die, especially us libertarians.

 

Paul does not fight for liberty. He fights for limiting the federal governent, while doing nothing against state corruption. He is a states rights activists. not a libertarian.

 

They, for the most part, agree on foreign policy, civil liberties, and economics. They both love big government.

 

If the MSM doesn't understand libertarianism then it's the libertarian's fault. It's never been expressed clearly as an agenda that could suit the mainstream. And if people equate libertarianism and the baggers with racism then that is an earned reputation.

Yes, I know you aren't a racist and I accept that, and I know that you have an agenda forumulated loosely in your own mind. But you are failing to understand that what you see as an agenda is not being identified with by libertarians in general. And so there is nothing cohesive around which to gather and work for.

You need to understand that most of those who profess to be libertarians are really only angry people looking for some alternative. They are present on this forum in the form of ElDiablo or valboy or taxcutter or others of the same ilk. That is not something that a meaningful movement can be built around. Add to that the fact that you may not even have one other soul on this forum who is genuine and honestly is libertarian in principle.

And so I continue with you because I want you to understand that. Maybe you do when you say that you won't see it coming in your lifetime. I would suggest that nobody will ever see it put into practice. The real agenda is not a workable solution that has ever been proven in practice. And in fact, as I've learned by searching it out with out, the bits and pieces of what you consider 'the' agenda are only scraps that are grabbed from socially responsible capitalism. A sort of capitalism that recognizes a blend of socialist policies and capitalism is the anwer for the 21st. century.

In short, I see you as a discontent who is really just searching for a new direction. Unfortunately, you have imagined a utopian state that is a collection of discontents running in all different directions and mostly motivated by fear, racism, and hate. What remains of your gang of misfits will finally disintegrate completely when your country's racism problem steps down and is replaced with a white president. And you will be even more alone in the dark.

 

Natty Bumpo, Consider this. Gary Johnson is not a popular choice because he has nothing that appeals to lots of angry people. They are looking for somebody like Rand Paul who will be more extremist and anti-gvernment. Someone who will give the hint of racism and be anti-immigrant. Rand Paul is willing to play that game but Gary Johnson isn't. He has no appel to the kind of people who make up the libertarian movement. He would survive and even succeed in a world where the masses were truely libertarian in principle, not just malcontents. He won't succeed with backers such as the creeps who claim a libertarian agenda on this forum and I say they are representative. It doesn't get any better and that's why we can't find them, save for perhaps Lib for our future. A political platform for president or any other elected office, that does not make.

Their support of Rand Paul or his father is the dead giveaway of what they are looking for. Ron paul came as close as anyone will come, and that was still miles off. Rand won't even come close to that!

 

I don't find this the case at all. I find that Progressives (both liberal and conservative from the respective parties) are what is attacking Libertarians. They are of no concern to me. They seem to be illogical, knee jerk reactionaries or agenda driven party shills. These folks do not merit my attention but do merit my ignore list as reading their posts impedes getting to more meaningful and thoughtful posts of good forum members.

 

You get it partly right Ted. The republicans don't like the libertarian/********** movement because it's splitting their party.

The Dems on the other hand would hate to see it go away for that exact reason. If you pay attention, any attacks against your persuasion by the left is done as comedy. Rand Paul insists on supplying it. The attacks are substantive, such as making mockery of his flip/flopping on the abortion issue. Re: the thousands of legitimate reasons. He's got to get it straight in his own head first before he can lead meaningfully. However, the problem arises again when he needs to be against "all" abortion to please the religious right.

It's a futile cause Ted, it doesn't need attacking because it's capable of destroying itself.

 

Not really. The left is pathologically anti-war. The right goes to war when necessary (cynics believe more often). The two sides have fundamentally different views on what constitutes a civil liberty. The most obvious example being the definition of marriage. And on economics, the left is pretty much full scale collectivist at this point. The right simply sucks at standing up to them about it. I suppose it depends on which part of the right we're talking about in whether or not you could say they really support big government. The establishment GOP certainly seems to support more of this. But the typical conservative voter is still very much a government minimalist - desiring government only where necessary. The left, on the other hand, wants the government involved in quite literally every facet of human life from where your money goes to what light bulb you can use to what size soda you can drink.

I don't usually argue too much with libertarians because we tend to agree on a good 80% of things. We're both rather hands off with our governing style, and most of them are pretty chill in demeanor. But I've noticed a lot of increasing uppity liberal style arrogance coming from some of the ones on this forum lately that has been quite lame. I think this thread is a good example. And this, of course, brings to the forefront all of our differences where they seem rather naively ideological and/or unacceptably morally nihilistic about some things.

 

I'm a leftist and I could be guilty of being pathologically against war. I think that has come from a long life of experience. I know about the Tonkin gulf incident, I know about Hill and Knowlton's incubator babies, their false claims of an Iraqi buildup along the Saudi border. I know about the false claims of WMD's told to the UN by a government that knew they were lying.

And so, as a leftist perhaps I can be excused for taking the pathological position against war. How could I have supported the last war against Iraq when I was fully convinced that it was perpetrated on phony reasons? I couldn't have slept at night with that kind of guilt?

Do you ever feel the same way? Or do you try not to think about it too much? Are you finding justification in some other ways? Is aggression by the strong against the weak a valid reason for your wars?

I won't argue your answer but I would be interested in hearing how you justify your position.