Obama, GOP have pushed me to Libertarianism

It's not a matter of what I think, it's a matter of fact, e.g. the NSA's massive phone data storage program has been terminated.

 

The 2001 bill passed the Senate by a vote of 98-1. So don't try to pass it off a Republican bill when nearly every Democrat voted for it as well. Neither was it weakened over the years. It was abused over the years by Democrats when they took control in 2009 and beyond.

How Obama has abused the Patriot Act:

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/aug/19/opinion/la-oe-sensenbrenner-data-patriot-act-obama-20130819

 

Incidentally I agree with you that libertarianism is properly on the left. But what authors did you read that gave you that impression? What libertarian author said that humans are only motivated by economic considerations?

 

And that was dropped from the Patriot Act when....?

 

It wasn't a specific author, but I had subscribed to Reason Magazine for about 25 years, which is ground zero for Libertarian thought. The idea of humans behaving rationally based on their best interest was the basis of virtually every article I read on economics and public policy.

 

Did you ever read things by Ludwig von Mises? Or Rothbard?

 

I didn't read Mises, but of course I know of him. Rothbard I did read in college.

 

What's happened is the American citizen, in both parties, has become a spoiled child. He's voted himself the right to make a career out of unemployment along with an endless stream of entitlements. He entertains and distracts himself with complaints about the best color skin, which couple gets to call their partnership a marriage, or whether folks who believe in this or that invisible all powerful never present entity should be allowed to cross some equally invisible line so they can work in America. And when someone we don't like get's the thing we wanted, we throw a temper tantrum and shoot people.

Only about 1 in 20 American's actually put enough into the government to pay for the rights and privileges we receive. But everyone seems to believe he's paid his "fair share" and the lights should therefore stay on. The math doesn't add up. We've only made it this far because some of us are willing to write hundred thousand dollar checks to the IRS for permission to work and build on this particular rock. Or at least they used to.

Now the builders are just retiring or leaving the country and the other 19 folks, the ones who "paid their fare share" are gonna have to rely on each other. Their effort wasn't enough in 2012, the first year in decades America stopped being the number one economy in the world. We fell another notch in 2014. And the reason no one who can do the math will step to solve all our problems — no one from either party — because American's demand more than they are producing.

If America wants to start moving in the other direction, we need to get off our butts and start building more. Innovating, creating, and yes... we're gonna have to cut back and sacrifice while we do it. All that free stuff we just voted ourselves... it's not free. The check you hoped someone else would pickup, it's still on the counter. If we're willing to look at real solutions, we may be able to build a better America. Maybe even hire some decent middle management to step into the white house and congress.

But until we do, the only way to get elected in America is to promise simple, painless solutions. Something for nothing. Blame the other guy. The only ones dumb or dishonest enough to make those promises are folks like Trump and Sanders. There is no honest solution that the American public will accept. So there is no honest candidate.


​

​

 

It's interesting, because the idea of humans rationally trying to maximize their best interests is something I associate more with mainstream economists, who often have to make unrealistic assumptions to begin writing down mathematical models. Austrians like Mises and Rothbard don't do this.

Here's Mises on the subject: https://mises.org/library/human-action-0/html/pp/616

Long, but worth it.

Basically he says that, while human action is always "rational", it is just formally so. How, conventionally, would we judge a human action to be irrational? There's two ways: ends and means. Mises rejects the idea that you can judge someone's end to be irrational; at most you can disagree with an end a given person has chosen. With regard to means, he readily admits that humans can be in error, i.e. "act irrationally" towards an end, with regard to what they think will bring about their ends. But he doesn't call this irrational action, he just says humans can be in error.

I think this is a wholly realistic understanding of human action. It's dry, it's formal, but it makes no simplifying assumptions. It doesn't say anything about why humans behave the way they do, but that's not the point. Mises' science praxeology looks at form, not content (the latter being reserved for psychology, as Mises admits).

 

I like the Libertarian Party and I like Gary Johnson. But the problem is that when you vote for him it boils down to being the same thing as voting for Hillary Clinton. At least Trump is not anti-second amendment and at least he won't put another socialist goon on the Supreme Court. He could also negotiate better trade agreements for us and you can bet he won't be getting us into any more suicidal peace pacts like this horrible mess that that Obama and Kerry made with Iran. What is real and what is not? I would like for God Almighty to wipe out evil and create his heavenly kingdom on earth but that is not too likely. So we have to try to settle for what we can. You can feel good about voting Libertarian for about two hours and then reality sinks in when they announce Hillary wins in a landslide.

 

LOL...well it was a Republican bill. It was written by Republicans, and it was passed by Republicans. If Republicans didn't want the the bill to pass, they shouldn't have written it or have voted on it. But they did both, and they passed it. The two people who resisted it in the Senate were Democrats. In the House 62 of the 66 votes against it were Democratic votes. So it is very dishonest for you to blame Democrats for the Patriot Act as Republicans have done. It was a Republican bill, passed by a Republican controlled congress and signed into law by a Republican President.

LOL....that's rich, the guy who wrote and introduced the Patriot Act into congress blaming Obama for the Patriot Act. In the state where I reside, we've got a Republican governor who has been blaming Obama for his budget deficits. Republicans scapegoating Obama isn't new, it's just par for the course. And you obviously just mindlessly believe whatever a Republican official or entertainer tells you, no matter how absurd or untrue, that too is par for the course.

The unfortunate fact for you, per previous references, is Democrats have weakened the Patriot Act. The NSA is no longer data warehousing telephone call information as it was during the Baby Bush years. Obama inherited the Patriot Act, and he changed it to make it less onerous. As much as you dislike it, that is a fact.

 

It was dropped during Obama's presidency.

 

I'll ask again. That was dropped from the Patriot Act when...?

 

And I'll answer again, it was dropped during Obama's presidency. You can ask as many times as you want, they answer isn't going to change.

 

That means you don't know the answer. Thank you.

 

There were 59 House Democrats that voted against the 2001 Patriot Act, but there were 123 House Democrats that voted for it. So even the Democrats in the House gave it a 68% approval vote.

https://votesmart.org/bill/votes/8289#.V4fL0DU-7Yg

Regarding your other statement of denial, it's unfortunate for you that you think you know more about the bill than the person who actually wrote it. He didn't blame Obama for the Patriot Act, he blamed him for abusing the Patriot Act. It would appear that your factual knowledge on the subject is limited to the latest Democratic talking points on the matter.

 

LOL....per previous references there were 62 House Democrats who voted against the Patriot Act. Republicans overwhelmingly voted for the Patriot Act. Only 3 House Republicans opposed the bill. http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2001/roll398.xml

Sensenbrenner, Republican author of the Patriot Act, did blame Obama for using the Patriot Act. Unfortunately, it's not surprising that a Republican who has opposed everything Obama has done blames Obama for using the Patriot Act under the guise of "misuse". The fact is under the Obama administration, the Patriot Act has been weakened. It isn't as intrusive or overbearing as it once was. The fact is that aside from eliminating the more offensive provisions of the act, the Obama administration didn't do anything that the previous Republican administration didn't also do.

The fact is Sensenbrenner, the author of the article, is the Republican congressman who authored the bill and has steadfastly opposed everything Obama has attempted to do and has a long history of scapegoating Obama for virtually everything. Unfortunately, that's not new, nor is it surprising. It's just the way the Republican Party operates these days.

 

No, it just means you don't like the answer. The unfortunate fact for you is the provision requiring the NSA to data warehouse telecommunication information was ended under Obama's presidency.

 

Sucking up to liberal politicians in New York state is good business practice.
Now Trump has moved from the business realm into politics. Hence "Crooked Hillary".
Trump is not crazy. He just knows how to do and say "carzy things" that some how get him control of the media narative. Trump is crazy like a fox.
Trump is running because he is a patriot. And he's a fighter. That's enough to get my vote.

PS, here's one reason I wouldn't want to be caught dead at a libertarian meeting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d45x4OpMoow

 

Trump is not crazy like a fox. Trump is crazy like a Gary Busey.

 

You should have stuck with my numbers, because your numbers show House Democrats voted by an even greater margin to approve the Patriot Act, 70% of them, 145 out of the 207 that voted. And of course, only one Democrat Senator voted against it. Yet, you still seem to be in a state of denial that Democrats overwhelmingly voted for the Patriot Act, not just Republicans.

And you're still in a state of denial on the second part as well. Sensenbrenner did not blame Obama for using the Patriot Act, he blamed him for abusing it.

 

LOL...why should I have taken your bogus numbers? I'm not a Republican ideologue. The truth is what it is. And the unpleasant truth which you keep trying to evade is Republicans voted almost unanimously to pass the Patriot Bill. The fact remains 65 Democrats voted against the bill and only 3 Republicans voted against the Bill. Keep in mind Republicans controlled congress at the time. So there were more Republicans than Democrats in congress.

And just what makes you think I'm in a state of denial exactly? Have I denied any of the numbers? I just pointed out your errors. How many Republican senators voted against the bill? Not a single one, only 2 senators didn't vote for the bill and they were both Democrats, whereas ALL Republican senators voted for the Patriot Act. It's dishonest for Republicans to blame Democrats for the Patriot Act as they have done. It was a Republican bill passed by a Republican controlled Congress and signed into law by a Republican president.

Yeah, Sensenbrunner did blame Obama for enforcing the Patriot Act under the guise of nebulous claims of "misuse". Sensenbrunner and his Republican colleagues have and continue to scapegoat Obama for their transgressions. As I previously pointed out, even Republican governors have gotten on the game, blaming Obama for things Obama has no responsibility for or control of like their state budgets.

 

The truth is that 98% of Senate Democrats and 70% of House Democrats voted for the Patriot Act, by your own numbers, and you want us to think it is just a Republican Bill? That alone shows how out-of-touch you are with the truth, and the state of denial you keep putting yourself into.

Need I say more?

 

The problem is that Clinton was a moderate and willing to budge--Obama isn't a moderate nor was he willing to budge. It takes both sides to compromise.

 

The Patriot act was passed in 2001 by a veto-proof majority of both parties. There were a few dems against it (30%), but they were a minority in their own party. it was about as bipartisan a bill as I can recall.

Senate:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/L...ote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=1&vote=00313
House:
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2001/roll398.xml