A rising tide of libertarianism?

[Mainecoons]

I found this perspective from Financial Times, a U.K. publication, to be very interesting reading.

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/cc9a31b8-7928-11e3-b381-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2qJjlObNR

Please read before posting, thanks.

[Ethereal]

Can't read article without giving them my email.

[Mainecoons]

You're right. First time I followed the link, I got the article. Now I don't.

I'll see if I can fix it.

First part:


http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/cc9a31b8-7928-11e3-b381-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz2qJmmp5Y0

Robert Nozick, the late US libertarian, smoked pot while he was writing Anarchy, State and Utopia. He would applaud the growth of libertarianism (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/8537d776-664f-11e3-aa10-00144feabdc0.html) among today’s young Americans. Whether it is their enthusiasm for legalised marijuana (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/aa5e5dbc-76f9-11e3-a253-00144feabdc0.html) and gay marriage – both spreading across the US at remarkable speed – or their scepticism of government, US millennials no longer follow President Barack Obama’s cue. Most of America’s youth revile the Tea Party, particularly its south-dominated nativist core. But they are not big-government activists either. If there is a new spirit in America’s rising climate of anti-politics, it is libertarian.
On the face of it this ought to pose a bigger challenge to the Republican party (http://www.ft.com/topics/organisations/Republican_Party_US) – at least for its social conservative wing. Mr Obama may have disappointed America’s young, particularly the millions of graduates who have failed to find good jobs during his presidency. But he is no dinosaur. In contrast, Republicans such as Rick Santorum, the former presidential hopeful, who once likened gay sex to “man on dog”, elicit pure derision. Even moderate Republicans, such as Chris Christie (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b4ae4732-7a14-11e3-a3e6-00144feabdc0.html), who until last week was the early frontrunner for the party’s 2016 nomination, are considered irrelevant. Whether Mr Christie was telling the truth last week, when he denied knowledge of his staff’s role in orchestrating a punitive local traffic jam, is beside the point. Mr Christie’s Sopranosbrand of New Jersey politics is not tailored to the Apple generation.

[Mainecoons]

Next part:



The opposite is true of Rand Paul (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/684be25a-3d92-11e3-b754-00144feab7de.html), the Kentucky senator, whose chances of taking the 2016 prize rose with Mr Christie’s dented fortunes last week. Unlike Ron Paul, the senator’s father, who still managed to garner a large slice of the youth vote in 2008, Rand Paul eschews the more outlandish fringes of libertarian thought. Rather than promising an isolationist US withdrawal from the world, he touts a more moderate “non-interventionism”. Instead of pledging to end fiat money, he promises to audit the US Federal Reserve – “mend the Fed”, rather than “end the Fed”. Both find echo among the Y generation. So too does his alarmism about the US national debt (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/867094a0-77b8-11e3-afc5-00144feabdc0.html). Far from being big spenders, millennials are more concerned about US debt than other generations, according to polls. They are also strongly in favour of free trade. More than a third of the Republican party now identifies as libertarian, according to the Cato Institute. Just under a quarter of Americans do so too, says Gallup.
All of which looks ominous for Ted Cruz (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f7a6b6b2-3d76-11e3-9928-00144feab7de.html), the Texan Republican whose lengthy filibuster against Obamacare last year lit the fuse for the US government shutdown. Mr Cruz, also a 2016 aspirant, leads the pugilistic wing of the Republican party that is prepared to burn the house down in order to save the ranch. Although also a Tea Partier, Mr Paul is cultivating a sunnier Reaganesque optimism that draws on the deep roots of US libertarianism. His brand of politics also strikes a chord with those who fear the growth of the US surveillance state (http://www.ft.com/indepth/us-security-state) – the types who view Edward Snowden (another millennial) as a hero rather than a traitor. Last year the US House of Representatives came within 12 votes of passing a bill to defund the National Security Agency. Mr Paul led the bill in the Senate. Next time they could succeed.

[Mainecoons]

Final part:



What does it mean for the Democrats (http://www.ft.com/topics/organisations/Democratic_Party_US)? In terms of social values, libertarians are almost identical to liberals. Smoking pot and same-sex marriage both meet with big approval. The same is not necessarily true of guns. In spite of recent school massacres, 40 US states now have “concealed weapons” laws – many passed in the past 12 months. Again, millennials are surprisingly sceptical of gun control, say the polls. But it is on economic policy where they really part company with liberals. The Great Depression helped forge a generation of solid Democrats. The same does not appear to be true of the Great Recession. Franklin Roosevelt helped dig people out of misery in the 1930s by providing direct public employment. Mr Obama, on the other hand, has stuck largely to economic orthodoxy. He may have missed a golden opportunity to mould a generation of social democrats.
He has also inadvertently fuelled scepticism about the role of government. Mr Obama came to power in 2008 on a surge of voluntarism. He did so in part by appealing to youthful idealism about public service. That now feels like a long time ago. Distrust in public institutions has continued to rise during his presidency – most strongly among the youngest generation. The share of voters who identify as independents, rather than Democrats or Republicans, recently hit an all-time high of 42 per cent, according to Gallup. This is bad news for established figures in either party – and, indeed, in any walk of life. Hillary Clinton should beware. So should Jeb Bush.
On the minus side, libertarians have no real answer to many of America’s biggest problems – not least the challenges posed to US middle-class incomes by globalisation and technology. Nor are they coherent as a force. Libertarianism is an attitude, rather than an organisation. It is also potentially fickle. Young Americans disdain foreign entanglements. That could change overnight with a big terrorist attack on the homeland. They feel let down by Democrats and hostile to mainstream Republicans. Yet they could flock to an exciting new figure in either party. Theirs is a restless generation that disdains authority. Establishment figures should take note. Tomorrow belongs to them.

Sorry I had to do it this way but following the link will not get you the article.

[Chris]

Some more:


The opposite is true of Rand Paul, the Kentucky senator, whose chances of taking the 2016 prize rose with Mr Christie’s dented fortunes last week. Unlike Ron Paul, the senator’s father, who still managed to garner a large slice of the youth vote in 2008, Rand Paul eschews the more outlandish fringes of libertarian thought. Rather than promising an isolationist US withdrawal from the world, he touts a more moderate “non-interventionism”. Instead of pledging to end fiat money, he promises to audit the US Federal Reserve – “mend the Fed”, rather than “end the Fed”. Both find echo among the Y generation. So too does his alarmism about the US national debt. Far from being big spenders, millennials are more concerned about US debt than other generations, according to polls. They are also strongly in favour of free trade. More than a third of the Republican party now identifies as libertarian, according to the Cato Institute. Just under a quarter of Americans do so too, says Gallup.

All of which looks ominous for Ted Cruz, the Texan Republican whose lengthy filibuster against Obamacare last year lit the fuse for the US government shutdown. Mr Cruz, also a 2016 aspirant, leads the pugilistic wing of the Republican party that is prepared to burn the house down in order to save the ranch. Although also a Tea Partier, Mr Paul is cultivating a sunnier Reaganesque optimism that draws on the deep roots of US libertarianism. His brand of politics also strikes a chord with those who fear the growth of the US surveillance state – the types who view Edward Snowden (another millennial) as a hero rather than a traitor. Last year the US House of Representatives came within 12 votes of passing a bill to defund the National Security Agency. Mr Paul led the bill in the Senate. Next time they could succeed.

What does it mean for the Democrats? In terms of social values, libertarians are almost identical to liberals. Smoking pot and same-sex marriage both meet with big approval. The same is not necessarily true of guns. In spite of recent school massacres, 40 US states now have “concealed weapons” laws – many passed in the past 12 months. Again, millennials are surprisingly sceptical of gun control, say the polls. But it is on economic policy where they really part company with liberals. The Great Depression helped forge a generation of solid Democrats. The same does not appear to be true of the Great Recession. Franklin Roosevelt helped dig people out of misery in the 1930s by providing direct public employment. Mr Obama, on the other hand, has stuck largely to economic orthodoxy. He may have missed a golden opportunity to mould a generation of social democrats.

He has also inadvertently fuelled scepticism about the role of government. Mr Obama came to power in 2008 on a surge of voluntarism. He did so in part by appealing to youthful idealism about public service. That now feels like a long time ago. Distrust in public institutions has continued to rise during his presidency – most strongly among the youngest generation. The share of voters who identify as independents, rather than Democrats or Republicans, recently hit an all-time high of 42 per cent, according to Gallup. This is bad news for established figures in either party – and, indeed, in any walk of life. Hillary Clinton should beware. So should Jeb Bush.

On the minus side, libertarians have no real answer to many of America’s biggest problems – not least the challenges posed to US middle-class incomes by globalisation and technology. Nor are they coherent as a force. Libertarianism is an attitude, rather than an organisation. It is also potentially fickle. Young Americans disdain foreign entanglements. That could change overnight with a big terrorist attack on the homeland. They feel let down by Democrats and hostile to mainstream Republicans. Yet they could flock to an exciting new figure in either party. Theirs is a restless generation that disdains authority. Establishment figures should take note. Tomorrow belongs to them.

[Ethereal]

I decided to sign up anyway... :grin:

I think the author is definitely on to something about the libertarian streak that is running through this generation. With continuing advancements in technology, it will only expand and deepen, ushering in a golden age of decentralization and globalization.

[Chris]

"Unlike Ron Paul, the senator’s father, who still managed to garner a large slice of the youth vote in 2008, Rand Paul eschews the more outlandish fringes of libertarian thought. Rather than promising an isolationist US withdrawal from the world, he touts a more moderate “non-interventionism”. Instead of pledging to end fiat money, he promises to audit the US Federal Reserve – “mend the Fed”, rather than “end the Fed”."

First part is wrong, Ron Paul is not an isolationist but a non-interventionist. But, yes, I believe Rand is a milder, more moderate version of Ron.

[Codename Section]

I decided to sign up anyway... :grin:

I think the author is definitely on to something about the libertarian streak that is running through this generation. With continuing advancements in technology, it will only expand and deepen, ushering in a golden age of decentralization and globalization.

The BBC is doing an hour long documentary on it. Andrew's the producer. :D

There may be a super good looking guy in the documentary with a thick southern accent.

[Chris]

I decided to sign up anyway... :grin:

I think the author is definitely on to something about the libertarian streak that is running through this generation. With continuing advancements in technology, it will only expand and deepen, ushering in a golden age of decentralization and globalization.


Agree. I hear that quite a bit. Ron Paul sure has a following.

I get the impression from Codename libertarianism has a strong following there too.

The libertarians over at reason.com have been proclaiming this the time for libertarianism too.

[Chris]

He has also inadvertently fuelled scepticism about the role of government. Mr Obama came to power in 2008 on a surge of voluntarism. He did so in part by appealing to youthful idealism about public service. That now feels like a long time ago. Distrust in public institutions has continued to rise during his presidency – most strongly among the youngest generation. The share of voters who identify as independents, rather than Democrats or Republicans, recently hit an all-time high of 42 per cent, according to Gallup. This is bad news for established figures in either party – and, indeed, in any walk of life. Hillary Clinton should beware. So should Jeb Bush.

Yes, that is good news.

[Mainecoons]

I view Jeb Bush with the same jaundice that I view Hillary Clinton.

The Republicrats and Demicans only offer more of the same failure and cancerous growth of government. That should be obvious to anyone by now but the most deluded, a few notable example of which we do have on this board.

I'm a reformed Republican. This should be viewed as very similar to being a reformed drunk.

[Chris]

Republicans seem to cozy up to libertarians right on up to convention time, and then shove them to the side.

[Codename Section]

I decided to sign up anyway... :grin:

I think the author is definitely on to something about the libertarian streak that is running through this generation. With continuing advancements in technology, it will only expand and deepen, ushering in a golden age of decentralization and globalization.

Yes, but the older generation doesn't see it. I look at workaround apps like Ugo the fake taxi service or kitchenly or some of these other tools to get around regulations as a positive. The more innovations like Bitcoin the less they are necessary.

[iustitia]

I'm not a libertarian. That said I count myself among those 42% of independents. It's funny, the wording of the article. It's just interesting the way our politics gets described by foreigners. It's curious though the focus on the two-party system. We blatantly have a Libertarian Party and the writer acts as if the libertarians have no choice but Dems and Reps.

[Chris]

I'm not a libertarian. That said I count myself among those 42% of independents. It's funny, the wording of the article. It's just interesting the way our politics gets described by foreigners. It's curious though the focus on the two-party system. We blatantly have a Libertarian Party and the writer acts as if the libertarians have no choice but Dems and Reps.

Libertarian Party and libertarian principles are two different things, but the article was about how libertarianism and moderate libertarian like Rand Paul could affect the two parties/

[Mainecoons]

I think the piece is making a point that the independents are rather leery of political parties in general.

This is a catch 22 situation. How do unaffiliated people get those whose ideas they share nominated and elected?

[iustitia]

Libertarian Party and libertarian principles are two different things, but the article was about how libertarianism and moderate libertarian like Rand Paul could affect the two parties/


I know that, it just strikes me as odd that the party named after the ideology, one of the larger third parties gets no mention. It's almost as if the author can't fathom what these lead astray souls will do without "dinosaur" Democrats and Republicans. The article comes off slightly disingenuous. Then again, a foreigner may very well not know of our politics. But then why write about it if you only choose to scratch the surface?

[The Xl]

The media is still pushing that crap about Ron Paul being a isolationist, huh? Jesus.

Anyway, yeah, I think the 35 and under crowd is and will continue to trend more libertarian leaning. Their will be young liberals and young libertarians, young modern conservatives will cease to exist, generally, and I think that's a good thing.

[Peter1469]

FT is a decent enough site to give your email address to in order to get some access.

[Green Arrow]

Anti-statism in general is growing. It's beautiful.

[Codename Section]

Anti-statism in general is growing. It's beautiful.

Could anyone have imagined Bitcoin a decade ago?

Its like in Star Wars when Leia tells Vader that the tighter they grip, the more star systems slip through their fingers.

[The Xl]

Could anyone have imagined Bitcoin a decade ago?

Its like in Star Wars when Leia tells Vader that the tighter they grip, the more star systems slip through their fingers.

Thank you based webernetz

[Chris]

Could anyone have imagined Bitcoin a decade ago?

Its like in Star Wars when Leia tells Vader that the tighter they grip, the more star systems slip through their fingers.


"Liberty must be limited in order to be possessed."
-Edmund Burke

[nathanbforrest45]

Yes, the younger generation wants less government, just enough to take from the rich and give to them. Give me my pot, give me my breakdown of cultural norms, give me my porn but also give me my government healthcare, my $20.00 an hour minimum wage and all my free shit. The "millennials" are just embracing the same old progressive socialism under a new name

[Codename Section]

Yes, the younger generation wants less government, just enough to take from the rich and give to them. Give me my pot, give me my breakdown of cultural norms, give me my porn but also give me my government healthcare, my $20.00 an hour minimum wage and all my free shit. The "millennials" are just embracing the same old progressive socialism under a new name

Wrong. We're not hypocrites. We're social liberals (meaning social liberty) and fiscal conservatives (meaning economic liberty), ie "smaller government".

Republicans say "small government" but what they really mean is small entitlement programs. They don't care if the military spending is the exact total of all the countries of the world combined, or that the CIA's budget is blacked out and its mission spread even to our own people, they don't care about the NSA as long as a Republican is in charge, and the war on drugs can lose money for 40 years and be totally useless but because "drugs are bad, mmmkay" all sense of fiscal responsibility is thrown out the window so they can mind other people's business for them.

[nathanbforrest45]

Occupy Wall Street comes to mind as those "non hypocrites. Social liberals are just another name for liberals. When you can tell me you are for the most basic of freedoms, the right to own what you have created then I will believe you. Until then you are really no different from what we have now, just under a different name.

[Codename Section]

Occupy Wall Street comes to mind as those "non hypocrites. Social liberals are just another name for liberals. When you can tell me you are for the most basic of freedoms, the right to own what you have created then I will believe you. Until then you are really no different from what we have now, just under a different name.

I'm sorry, you think that Occupy Wall St is a "libertarian" group?

[Codename Section]

Does this guy look like an OWSr?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7e/MurrayBW.jpg



Voluntarists are free market types. Because some of us have created voluntary cooperatives doesn't mean we're communists. LOL

Your bank may be a cooperative. Your feed store is usually a cooperative. Many electric companies are cooperatives.

[Chris]

Does this guy look like an OWSr?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7e/MurrayBW.jpg



Voluntarists are free market types. Because some of us have created voluntary cooperatives doesn't mean we're communists. LOL

Your bank may be a cooperative. Your feed store is usually a cooperative. Many electric companies are cooperatives.



http://i.snag.gy/o6yr8.jpg


( Codename Section start reading some of the work by Hans-Hermann Hoppe! )

[Codename Section]

( @Codename Section (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=866) start reading some of the work by Hans-Hermann Hoppe! )

You don't like Murray?

:)

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/29573346.jpg

[Chris]

I'm sorry, you think that Occupy Wall St is a "libertarian" group?


Not initially, no, they weren't. They raged against corporations expecting government to take up their cause. But government turned against them and toward the end they seemed to wake up to the fact the problem is the crony, corrupt collusion of big government and big business = corporatism.


‘NOBODY 2012′: OCCUPY WALL STREET TURNS ON OBAMA (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/07/31/nobody-2012-occupy-wall-street-turns-on-obama/)
Occupy Wall Street Protesters Targeting Obama At Democratic Convention (http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/07/31/occupy-wall-street-protesters-targeting-obama-at-democratic-convention-)
Occupy Wall Street Turns on Barack Obama

[Chris]

You don't like Murray?

:)

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/29573346.jpg


Oh, no, he's great! Hoppe goes further. Mises > Hayek > Rothbard > Hoppe.

[Codename Section]

Oh, no, he's great! Hoppe goes further. Mises > Hayek > Rothbard > Hoppe.


In five years: Mises>Hayek>Rotherbard>Hoppe>Mr. Freeze

The dude is the king of barter based free markets. I am amazed how he always come out on top with more "currency".

[monty1]

The teabaggers actually think they have a chance of their man Rand Paul being nominated for the Repub choice? Or even better, the libertarian choice??

If so then they are starting to froth at the mouths in their dreams too.

If they ever got their shit together and started to look at a mainstreamer like Bush3 they would be taken seriously!

[Chris]

The teabaggers actually think they have a chance of their man Rand Paul being nominated for the Repub choice? Or even better, the libertarian choice??

If so then they are starting to froth at the mouths in their dreams too.

If they ever got their shit together and started to look at a mainstreamer like Bush3 they would be taken seriously!



http://i.snag.gy/GYE8M.jpg

[jillian]

do you think that meme is effective, chris? i think it's kind of sad.

[Chris]

do you think that meme is effective, chris? i think it's kind of sad.

It seems to have bothered you, jillian, why?

Besides, monty invoked the meme, I just responded to it.

[Kalkin]

do you think that meme is effective, chris? i think it's kind of sad.
Meh, it's appropriate in context. Do you drive a Volt?

[Mainecoons]

The teabaggers actually think they have a chance of their man Rand Paul being nominated for the Repub choice? Or even better, the libertarian choice??

If so then they are starting to froth at the mouths in their dreams too.

If they ever got their shit together and started to look at a mainstreamer like Bush3 they would be taken seriously!

This thread isn't about the TP, genius. It is about the not so dumb young beginning to realize that small "l" libertarianism makes sense.

The still dumb young think liberalism, that has made many of them unemployed or underemployed, is still a great idea. I suspect you fall into this category.

[Green Arrow]

do you think that meme is effective, chris? i think it's kind of sad.

I think people who use "teabagger" are kinda sad, for multiple reasons. It's childish and it's hilarious because they clearly don't understand what it means to "teabag."

[Codename Section]

Meh, it's appropriate in context. Do you drive a Volt?

She drives a BMW that she's leaving me when she dies for cleaning her pool. She also doesn't claim to have worked on a squid can during 911 or call herself saara.

In fact, her real name is Natasha, she owns a vineyard and pays me to pick olives without a shirt on. She's a feisty Italian firebrand and we shall have many children together that will all be named Rinaldo.

[Green Arrow]

Meh, it's appropriate in context. Do you drive a Volt?

She's not this Saara person, so take your trolls back to Trinnity's forum and tell Commissioner to fuck off. Jillian's a member of our forum, and we won't be tolerating this bullshit any further.

[The Sage of Main Street]

We get a rising tide from a tsunami too. These crackpots want to take us back to the days of sweatshops.

[nic34]

She drives a BMW that she's leaving me when she dies for cleaning her pool. She also doesn't claim to have worked on a squid can during 911 or call herself saara.

In fact, her real name is Natasha, she owns a vineyard and pays me to pick olives without a shirt on. She's a feisty Italian firebrand and we shall have many children together that will all be named Rinaldo.

Damn, now I'm jealous....:laugh:

[Chris]

So back to the topic. There might be something to the rise of libertarianism and it might be more than Rand Paul.

Not too long ago, Republicans embracing libertarian priorities (http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/poll-republicans-libertarian-96576.html)


...

The GOP dominated politics for a generation with a coalition of libertarians, social conservatives and defense hawks that Ronald Reagan successfully cobbled together in 1980. The tea party-affiliated FreedomWorks argues in a 23-page report that the so-called three-legged stool has become lopsided.

The poll asked Republican voters what they are most interested in: 40 percent said “individual freedom through lower taxes and reducing the size and scope of government,” 27 percent picked “traditional values” and 18 percent chose a “strong national defense.”

Republican pollster Kellyanne Conway, who ran the poll, said she’s seeing a spike in voters who feel the government is too expensive, invasive and expansive.

“The perfect storm is being created between the NSA, the IRS, the implementation of Obamacare and now Syria,” she said. “People are looking at the government more suspiciously. They’re looking with deeper scrutiny and reasonable suspicion.”

FreedomWorks, which is among the groups leading the controversial push to defund the federal health care law even if it risks a government shutdown, argues that GOP voters have limited appetite for grand bargains that would raise taxes. Two-thirds of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents said they want their member of Congress to “keep their promises and stick to principles” as opposed to “compromise in a bipartisan way to get things done.”

“From Obamacare on down, sticking to principle is where the Republican base is today,” said David Kirby, vice president of opinion research at FreedomWorks. “It’s an example of how off the Republican establishment is from their base.”

...

[Max Rockatansky]

Rand Paul eschews the more outlandish fringes of libertarian thought. Rather than promising an isolationist US withdrawal from the world, he touts a more moderate “non-interventionism”. Instead of pledging to end fiat money, he promises to audit the US Federal Reserve – “mend the Fed”, rather than “end the Fed”. Both find echo among the Y generation. So too does his alarmism about the US national debt. Far from being big spenders, millennials are more concerned about US debt than other generations, according to polls. They are also strongly in favour of free trade. More than a third of the Republican party now identifies as libertarian, according to the Cato Institute. Just under a quarter of Americans do so too, says Gallup.

Libertarian is 21st Century for Moderate. Fiscally responsible while maximizing freedoms.

[monty1]

I think people who use "teabagger" are kinda sad, for multiple reasons. It's childish and it's hilarious because they clearly don't understand what it means to "teabag."

Sad or not, it's just that those baggers keep hooking into it. And as long as they do they'll be called what they are. Let them froth at the mouth like rabid swine. They work so hard to get the reputation!

[Chris]

Sad or not, it's just that those baggers keep hooking into it. And as long as they do they'll be called what they are. Let them froth at the mouth like rabid swine. They work so hard to get the reputation!

As a baggee, you seem to be the only one foaming at the mouth, monty.

[Codename Section]

So back to the topic. There might be something to the rise of libertarianism and it might be more than Rand Paul.

Not too long ago, Republicans embracing libertarian priorities (http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/poll-republicans-libertarian-96576.html)

It was Ron Paul. He's the Jesus to Rand's Peter.

Which sadly means that even if he becomes President it will be perverted.

[jillian]

I think people who use "teabagger" are kinda sad, for multiple reasons. It's childish and it's hilarious because they clearly don't understand what it means to "teabag."

except that they DO understand what it means. the idiots who hung teabags from their hats didn't.

hahahaha

[jillian]

It seems to have bothered you, jillian, why?

Besides, monty invoked the meme, I just responded to it.


your canned responses are kind of boring. that's why. perhaps personally, i don't use it. but you might want to recall where the term came from...

so you can blame the absurd people who hung tea bags from their hats.

[jillian]

Does this guy look like an OWSr?

Voluntarists are free market types. Because some of us have created voluntary cooperatives doesn't mean we're communists. LOL

Your bank may be a cooperative. Your feed store is usually a cooperative. Many electric companies are cooperatives.

"volunteerists" are no different than the hippies in 1968 who grew up and took over wall street. as if any of this were new.

[jillian]

Wrong. We're not hypocrites. We're social liberals (meaning social liberty) and fiscal conservatives (meaning economic liberty), ie "smaller government".

that's false. there are plenty of pretend libertarians who think it's ok to penetrate a woman without her consent in order for her to exercise her constitutionally protected right to choice.

what most mean by "small government" is they are going to stamp their feet about anything *they* don't like.... but they love government when it's something they want.[/QUOTE]

[jillian]

Meh, it's appropriate in context. Do you drive a Volt?

one month old BMW 528ix. why?

[jillian]

She drives a BMW that she's leaving me when she dies for cleaning her pool. She also doesn't claim to have worked on a squid can during 911 or call herself saara.

In fact, her real name is Natasha, she owns a vineyard and pays me to pick olives without a shirt on. She's a feisty Italian firebrand and we shall have many children together that will all be named Rinaldo.

heh...

[Codename Section]

"volunteerists" are no different than the hippies in 1968 who grew up and took over wall street. as if any of this were new.

You never have faith that each generation does it better than the last, and yet they do. :D

[jillian]

You never have faith that each generation does it better than the last, and yet they do. :D

they do... within the confines of moving our attitudes and government forward. the hippy types raise good issues... and questions... and then they grow up.

[Chris]

that's false. there are plenty of pretend libertarians who think it's ok to penetrate a woman without her consent in order for her to exercise her constitutionally protected right to choice.

what most mean by "small government" is they are going to stamp their feet about anything *they* don't like.... but they love government when it's something they want.[/QUOTE]


I see you're back to inventing pretend libertarians as straw men to argue.

And inventing what most mean by small government.

[jillian]

I see you're back to inventing pretend libertarians as straw men to argue.

And inventing what most mean by small government.

or you could read your own posts.

[Ransom]

one month old BMW 528ix. why?

Because it's time for your next whining session on income gaps in America, that's why.

[nic34]

Because it's time for your next whining session on income gaps in America, that's why.

Yes, we know, we can only do that if we are poor....

[Chris]

your canned responses are kind of boring. that's why. perhaps personally, i don't use it. but you might want to recall where the term came from...

so you can blame the absurd people who hung tea bags from their hats.

What are you defending, teabag, teabagger or teabaggee?

[Chris]

"volunteerists" are no different than the hippies in 1968 who grew up and took over wall street. as if any of this were new.

Obama was and ran on volunteerism. That's quite different than voluntaryism. One is statist and the other nonstatist.

[Chris]

You never have faith that each generation does it better than the last, and yet they do. :D


they do... within the confines of moving our attitudes and government forward. the hippy types raise good issues... and questions... and then they grow up.

Ever the statist, it's always all about advancing government. Code is talking the opposite, funny how you twist and distort that.

[nathanbforrest45]

I'm sorry, you think that Occupy Wall St is a "libertarian" group?

No, they are not, which is exactly my point. The so called millenniums are identical to the OWS crowd in my opinion. You don't want less government, you want less government fucking with you but its ok to legislate everything else out of existence.

[iustitia]

I don't think it's fair to conflate all young rebellious types. OWS were largely anti-capitalist hippies. But the Ron Paul youth seemed very dedicated to limited government, not free stuff. Both opposed the banks but for different reasons.

[Kalkin]

one month old BMW 528ix. why?
Just curious. You ever hear the one about the difference between a BMW and a porcupine?

[jillian]

Just curious. You ever hear the one about the difference between a BMW and a porcupine?

can't say i have.

[Chris]

I don't think it's fair to conflate all young rebellious types. OWS were largely anti-capitalist hippies. But the Ron Paul youth seemed very dedicated to limited government, not free stuff. Both opposed the banks but for different reasons.

I think that was true of OWS initially. They all too soon discovered government was not their friend bu t stood against to protect their crony corporatist friends.

The libertarian Ron Paul youth started where OWS ended up.

[Chris]

Just curious. You ever hear the one about the difference between a BMW and a porcupine?

Let's hear it!

[Codename Section]

No, they are not, which is exactly my point. The so called millenniums are identical to the OWS crowd in my opinion. You don't want less government, you want less government fucking with you but its ok to legislate everything else out of existence.

What legislation do we libertarians call for?

Please provide the example or admit you're just being salty.

[Trinnity]

your canned responses are kind of boring. that's why. perhaps personally, i don't use it. but you might want to recall where the term came from...

so you can blame the absurd people who hung tea bags from their hats.Blame them for what? Tea-bagging is a slang term for a perverse homosexual act. They'd never heard of it because DECENT people wouldn't know about nasty shit like that.

[iustitia]

Blame them for what? Tea-bagging is a slang term for a perverse homosexual act. They'd never heard of it because DECENT people wouldn't know about nasty shit like that.

Are saying Democrats are... homophobes? :grin:

[jillian]

Blame them for what? Tea-bagging is a slang term for a perverse homosexual act. They'd never heard of it because DECENT people wouldn't know about nasty shit like that.

one would first have to assume homosexuality is perverse.

i don't. *shrug*

nor do i consider the act in question any different when done by a heterosexual or a homosexual couple.

but like i said... perhaps they shouldn't have hung teabags from their hats.

[jillian]

Are saying Democrats are... homophobes? :grin:


about as accurate as anything else you make up.

[Trinnity]

Are saying Democrats are... homophobes? :grin:No, that wasn't my point. LOL

[Trinnity]

one would first have to assume homosexuality is perverse.It is. But I'll just go with "abnormal" for you. :grin:

i don't. *shrug* nor do i consider the act in question any different when done by a heterosexual or a homosexual couple. Fine.

but like i said... perhaps they shouldn't have hung teabags from their hats.Yeah, cuz the gay mafia and liberal bullies had a hey day.

They couldn't have known. So.......the bullies and perverts win. Life isn't fair or equal. Go figure.

[iustitia]

about as accurate as anything else you make up.

Make up=state that's factual and you can't rebut.

[monty1]

Libertarianism (small l) is seeing a small resurgence in popularity because of the economic mess America has slipped into in the years since Bush2 destroyed so much. But make no mistake, Rand Paul or his ilk will always be on the fringe and will never be a real challenge to either the right or the left. The reason being, it's a touchy, feely, feel good agenda of impossibilities that is expressly designed to attract the more shallow thinkers who are only looking for easy answers.

For instance, their idea of completely abandoning the war on drugs isn't thought out with any kind of social responsibility in the least. They have no concept of a nuanced approach to the problem, rather they would barge ahead with their ideas and cause immense damage.

But of course, it sounds so simple to them because they aren't deep thinkers who understand that answers aren't simple. And that's why calmer heads will prevail and libertarianism will quickly slip back to the nothing scale to which Ron Paul built it. 10% or 15% support by those who are fooled by his pie in the sky rantings.

Look to Canada or other countries that understand that socially responsible capitalism is the answer and the sort of government that has proven to be the closest to ideal over many years of practice. And understand that the US brand of irresponsible and greedy capitalism is what is destroying your country.

[Kalkin]

Porcupines have the pricks on the outside...

[Kalkin]

And "deviant" is a good word for it, as in "it deviates from the norm".

[Chris]

What legislation do we libertarians call for?

Please provide the example or admit you're just being salty.


Glad you asked that! Been sitting on this piece from libertarian Reason.com.


Virginia Bill Would Expand Farm and Food Freedom (http://reason.com/archives/2014/01/11/virginia-bill-would-expand-farm-and-food)


The bill would expand the list of covered foods that can be sold from the home or the farm and permit the direct-to-consumer sale of foods like meat that have been viewed by regulators to be potentially hazardous. Specifically, according to the official summary, it would permit direct-to-consumer sales "by a farm operation employing 10 or fewer people or by a private home" of virtually any otherwise legal food, including but not limited to foods made with "any fruit, grain, herbs, honey, meat, milk, mushrooms, nuts, poultry, seafood, or vegetables[.]"

But perhaps that's an anti-bill, anti-legislation, for it frees the people from state regulation.

[Chris]

Libertarianism (small l) is seeing a small resurgence in popularity because of the economic mess America has slipped into in the years since Bush2 destroyed so much. But make no mistake, Rand Paul or his ilk will always be on the fringe and will never be a real challenge to either the right or the left. The reason being, it's a touchy, feely, feel good agenda of impossibilities that is expressly designed to attract the more shallow thinkers who are only looking for easy answers.

For instance, their idea of completely abandoning the war on drugs isn't thought out with any kind of social responsibility in the least. They have no concept of a nuanced approach to the problem, rather they would barge ahead with their ideas and cause immense damage.

But of course, it sounds so simple to them because they aren't deep thinkers who understand that answers aren't simple. And that's why calmer heads will prevail and libertarianism will quickly slip back to the nothing scale to which Ron Paul built it. 10% or 15% support by those who are fooled by his pie in the sky rantings.

Look to Canada or other countries that understand that socially responsible capitalism is the answer and the sort of government that has proven to be the closest to ideal over many years of practice. And understand that the US brand of irresponsible and greedy capitalism is what is destroying your country.


Libertarianism (small l) is seeing a small resurgence in popularity because of the economic mess America has slipped into in the years since Bush2 destroyed so much.

Agreed, but it goes back further. And let's be clear, it is caused by government--left and right--intervention into the free market.


But make no mistake, Rand Paul or his ilk will always be on the fringe and will never be a real challenge to either the right or the left.

Probably true since the establishment left and right are backed by monied interests, corporatism is too well established.


The reason being, it's a touchy, feely, feel good agenda of impossibilities that is expressly designed to attract the more shallow thinkers who are only looking for easy answers.

Yes, and libertarians are hampered by touchy, feely, feel good agenda and shallow thinking in the established left and right.

[The Sage of Main Street]

I don't think it's fair to conflate all young rebellious types. OWS were largely anti-capitalist hippies. But the Ron Paul youth seemed very dedicated to limited government, not free stuff. Both opposed the banks but for different reasons.

Lizardtarians freeload off Daddy's money or their own powerless employees. Just like all the rest, Randy Paul would have been a nobody if it weren't for his Daddy's connections.

As for the Occupuppies, people must be subconsciously aware that these self-indulgement movements are just media creations to humiliate us with class supremacy. The similarity of "Hippie, Yuppie, Preppie" reveals what these plutocratic puppet shows are all about. Also, the Occupuppy toy poodles purposely act disgusting in order to give Wall Street a good name in contrast to this slime that oozed out of rich pigs' trophy wives.

[zelmo1234]

Libertarianism (small l) is seeing a small resurgence in popularity because of the economic mess America has slipped into in the years since Bush2 destroyed so much. But make no mistake, Rand Paul or his ilk will always be on the fringe and will never be a real challenge to either the right or the left. The reason being, it's a touchy, feely, feel good agenda of impossibilities that is expressly designed to attract the more shallow thinkers who are only looking for easy answers.

For instance, their idea of completely abandoning the war on drugs isn't thought out with any kind of social responsibility in the least. They have no concept of a nuanced approach to the problem, rather they would barge ahead with their ideas and cause immense damage.

But of course, it sounds so simple to them because they aren't deep thinkers who understand that answers aren't simple. And that's why calmer heads will prevail and libertarianism will quickly slip back to the nothing scale to which Ron Paul built it. 10% or 15% support by those who are fooled by his pie in the sky rantings.

Look to Canada or other countries that understand that socially responsible capitalism is the answer and the sort of government that has proven to be the closest to ideal over many years of practice. And understand that the US brand of irresponsible and greedy capitalism is what is destroying your country.

Can you explain why you are thriving under Harper and he is installing many of the programs that people like Rand are supporting?

[zelmo1234]

Lizardtarians freeload off Daddy's money or their own powerless employees. Just like all the rest, Randy Paul would have been a nobody if it weren't for his Daddy's connections.

As for the Occupuppies, people must be subconsciously aware that these self-indulgement movements are just media creations to humiliate us with class supremacy. The similarity of "Hippie, Yuppie, Preppie" reveals what these plutocratic puppet shows are all about. Also, the Occupuppy toy poodles purposely act disgusting in order to give Wall Street a good name in contrast to this slime that oozed out of rich pigs' trophy wives.

How is it that all of these people have kept you from succeeding again? or is it possibly you!

[The Sage of Main Street]

Blame them for what? Tea-bagging is a slang term for a perverse homosexual act. They'd never heard of it because DECENT people wouldn't know about nasty shit like that.

Typical nonsense told to you by Diploma Dumbos with a 6th Grader's knowledge of language. All freak groups use slang terms that copy terms normal people use. The ruling class assigns their scribbling prostitutes to look things up that might seem to discredit champions of democracy, but are actually believed to do that only by useful idiots who hope that supporting rich trash will make them rich too.

[monty1]

Can you explain why you are thriving under Harper and he is installing many of the programs that people like Rand are supporting?

I'll try to get back to you on that. I'm not avoiding the question but I just can't continue now. Other commitments. Please remind me of this post if an answer is important to you.

[The Sage of Main Street]

No, that wasn't my point. LOL

Yours wasn't a point, it was a pout.

[The Sage of Main Street]

How is it that all of these people have kept you from succeeding again? or is it possibly you!

I wouldn't call getting ahead by becoming a brown-nosing, bootlicking Boytoy for the Bosses "being successful." Capitalists are economic pedophiles. If you have no self-respect, go for it, but I couldn't live with myself if I were you.

[zelmo1234]

I wouldn't call getting ahead by becoming a brown-nosing, bootlicking Boytoy for the Bosses "being successful." Capitalists are economic pedophiles. If you have no self-respect, go for it, but I couldn't live with myself if I were you.

I own my own business actually 3 of them, I don't boot lick anyone. I have some of my employee's that are finally going to start there business. (They should have done it a while ago)

Why is it that you can't be successful in a country that has so many opportunities? Are you not willing to work for it!

[Heyduke]

I own my own business actually 3 of them, I don't boot lick anyone. I have some of my employee's that are finally going to start there business. (They should have done it a while ago)

Why is it that you can't be successful in a country that has so many opportunities? Are you not willing to work for it!

"Y..ya...y'know... you didn't build that"

[Heyduke]

I don't think it's fair to conflate all young rebellious types. OWS were largely anti-capitalist hippies. But the Ron Paul youth seemed very dedicated to limited government, not free stuff. Both opposed the banks but for different reasons.

OWS was a bunch of narcissists who wanted to take selfies in the streets to have something interesting to post on their Fakebook timelines. That's why OWS New York quickly devolved into a T-shirt selling website. The only hardcore OWS dudes were the homeless. They don't make protestors like they used to. In 1990 I was part of Redwood Summer where the Maxxam corp. did a junk-bond leveraged takeover of the family owner Pacific Lumber Company, and we sent them packing back to Houston. But today, if a corporation invaded NorCal again and started liquidating the forests and selling raw logs to China, I think people would just have a flashmob or something, or do a bunch of Tweeting.

The problem with the Ron Paul Revolution was that libertarians put all their faith in a political candidate. That kind of top-down stratergery isn't going to work, especially when computers count the votes.

[Green Arrow]

except that they DO understand what it means. the idiots who hung teabags from their hats didn't.

hahahaha

Actually, I'd argue both sides had no idea, but it doesn't do "teabaggers" a disservice to be called "teabaggers," and the people who call them "teabaggers" would know that it is only an insult to themselves if they understood what "teabag" means.

[Heyduke]

Actually, I'd argue both sides had no idea, but it doesn't do "teabaggers" a disservice to be called "teabaggers," and the people who call them "teabaggers" would know that it is only an insult to themselves if they understood what "teabag" means.

I'm a green teabagger.

"Master betrays us... tricksy, false, filthy nasty Bagginses"- Smeagol

[Green Arrow]

I'm a green teabagger.

"Master betrays us... tricksy, false, filthy nasty Bagginses"- Smeagol

I'm only a black teabagger (Darjeeling, specifically) because I can't always afford to go loose leaf.

[Cthulhu]

Lizardtarians freeload off Daddy's money or their own powerless employees. Just like all the rest, Randy Paul would have been a nobody if it weren't for his Daddy's connections.

As for the Occupuppies, people must be subconsciously aware that these self-indulgement movements are just media creations to humiliate us with class supremacy. The similarity of "Hippie, Yuppie, Preppie" reveals what these plutocratic puppet shows are all about. Also, the Occupuppy toy poodles purposely act disgusting in order to give Wall Street a good name in contrast to this slime that oozed out of rich pigs' trophy wives.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIOHGrYCEJ4

Just sayin' man...

[GrassrootsConservative]

I like a nice, strong, weed tea.

Stems and seeds and other scrappings in a tea bag... pure joy.

[Heyduke]

I like a nice, strong, weed tea.

Stems and seeds and other scrappings in a tea bag... pure joy.

I don't smoke two joints in the morning, two joints in the afternoon or two joints at night anymore. I like it too much, so I don't keep it around.

Liquid tea, man, it's cheesy, but I'm a sucker for Constant Comment (probably a good tea for forum writing, no?)

[Max Rockatansky]

It was Ron Paul. He's the Jesus to Rand's Peter.

Which sadly means that even if he becomes President it will be perverted.

True, but that's the way of the world, amigo.

They can only influence people, but they can't make them do exactly as they want.

[monty1]

Libertarian fringe candidates are the next extremists to fall and it appears that it's going to be evident they will long before the election for pres. Christie has made his bed and he's toast already and Rand Paul will shoot his face off and make a fatal mistake too. The Repubs need to have their ducks lined up well before the election and that means throwing their full support behind a mainstream candidate.

Just as Romney rose above all the batshit crazies, they will find one to do the same. With a little luck they will find one who is a better bet than Romney.

But first, destroy the teabagger fringe and that is already in progress as is evident with Cruz's big failure. Rand Paul shouldn't even be a serious concern as he doesn't even have the smarts his daddy had. And that proved to no better than a dismal 10% support. Amazing that the rabid right wankers take so long to learn.

[Green Arrow]

Libertarian fringe candidates are the next extremists to fall and it appears that it's going to be evident they will long before the election for pres. Christie has made his bed and he's toast already and Rand Paul will shoot his face off and make a fatal mistake too. The Repubs need to have their ducks lined up well before the election and that means throwing their full support behind a mainstream candidate.

Just as Romney rose above all the batshit crazies, they will find one to do the same. With a little luck they will find one who is a better bet than Romney.

But first, destroy the teabagger fringe and that is already in progress as is evident with Cruz's big failure. Rand Paul shouldn't even be a serious concern as he doesn't even have the smarts his daddy had. And that proved to no better than a dismal 10% support. Amazing that the rabid right wankers take so long to learn.

The fact that you name Christie as a "libertarian fringe candidate" shows that you don't really know what libertarianism is.

[Mister D]

The fact that you name Christie as a "libertarian fringe candidate" shows that you don't really know what libertarianism is.

Odd description of Christie.

[monty1]

The fact that you name Christie as a "libertarian fringe candidate" shows that you don't really know what libertarianism is.

No, no, no, you misunderstood or I didn't make myself clear. Obviously Christie wasn't a libertarian candidate. He was hated by the teabaggers who comprise most of the libertarians. It's the teabaggers who are pretending to be libertarians but most thinking people already know they aren't. They're nothing but racists and haters with their only cause being hating the uppity black guy who would presume to be their president.

[Green Arrow]

No, no, no, you misunderstood or I didn't make myself clear. Obviously Christie wasn't a libertarian candidate. He was hated by the teabaggers who comprise most of the libertarians. It's the teabaggers who are pretending to be libertarians but most thinking people already know they aren't. They're nothing but racists and haters with their only cause being hating the uppity black guy who would presume to be their president.

Well, I think the racist hater stuff is partisan nonsense, but you're right, the Tea Party is mostly not really libertarian but they think they are. It's extremely annoying.

[monty1]

Well, I think the racist hater stuff is partisan nonsense, but you're right, the Tea Party is mostly not really libertarian but they think they are. It's extremely annoying.

Good, you're getting it!

And when Obama's term is over I would expect the teabaggers to naturally fall back to being the stupid faction of the Dems. They're obviously mostly little people, poor and lower middle class who have lost their way due to racism trumping politics. All their phony buzzwords like , 'big government', etc. will soon be lost to them as that kind of bullshit doesn't mean a lick to their overall needs and wellbeing. Their fucking vacant heads will spin when they start wondering how they could have ever supported the rabid right such as the Koch brothers. That was one marriage that was made in hell!

[monty1]

No, it's too much of a coincidence for the racism to be nonsense. I don't have to look at where the Obama haters are holing up anymore. I know that 9 out of 10 are going to be southerers. I think their biggest problem is that they never got over losing the civil war. They have to come to terms with that before they can learn to accept black people as their fellow citizens.

It's just too overstated and obvious on this forum for an example. Most try to conceal it but many don't even try anymore.

[Codename Section]

No, no, no, you misunderstood or I didn't make myself clear. Obviously Christie wasn't a libertarian candidate. He was hated by the teabaggers who comprise most of the libertarians. It's the teabaggers who are pretending to be libertarians but most thinking people already know they aren't. They're nothing but racists and haters with their only cause being hating the uppity black guy who would presume to be their president.

Obama's not black. Ask Morgan Freeman. He's biracial.

[Chris]

No, no, no, you misunderstood or I didn't make myself clear. Obviously Christie wasn't a libertarian candidate. He was hated by the teabaggers who comprise most of the libertarians. It's the teabaggers who are pretending to be libertarians but most thinking people already know they aren't. They're nothing but racists and haters with their only cause being hating the uppity black guy who would presume to be their president.


And there's that pretend meme again. Seems to be infesting progressive teabaggee these day.

The tea parties are in part comprised of libertarians because the United cause is libertarian: less taxes, smaller government and more liberty.

I think you confuse them with sound byte caricatures you pick up from the Progressive press and repeat here thoughtlessly.

[Chris]

Obama's not black. Ask Morgan Freeman. He's biracial.

Oh the irony.

[nic34]

Obama's not black. Ask Morgan Freeman. He's biracial.

Really? Freeman is your authority?

So if he's not black, what is he... gray? :wink:

[monty1]

Libertarianism? Seriously? LOL

I'm outta this rat's nest for today.

[Codename Section]

Really? Freeman is your authority?

So if he's not black, what is he... gray? :wink:

Morgan Freeman is the man. Sorry, Nic, sometimes you can be the man, but you're not as much the man as Morgan.

Obama is "biracial".

[Chris]

Libertarianism? Seriously? LOL

I'm outta this rat's nest for today.


Always amazes me how partisans have disdain for libertaianism/voluntaryism, but just can't seem to articulate it.

[nic34]

Morgan Freeman is the man. Sorry, Nic, sometimes you can be the man, but you're not as much the man as Morgan.

Obama is "biracial".

And if you didn't know him, he'd be "black".

[The Xl]

And if you didn't know him, he'd be "black".


And if you did know him, he'd be white. Raised in Hawaii with his white family, going to Harvard, legislating for corporate America and whatnot.

[nathanbforrest45]

No, no, no, you misunderstood or I didn't make myself clear. Obviously Christie wasn't a libertarian candidate. He was hated by the teabaggers who comprise most of the libertarians. It's the teabaggers who are pretending to be libertarians but most thinking people already know they aren't. They're nothing but racists and haters with their only cause being hating the uppity black guy who would presume to be their president.

The Tea Party members are not libertarians. See folks this is what happens when foreigners convince themselves they know American politics.

[Chris]

Why does anyone really give a crap what race he is? Why are progressives always bringing it up?

[Chris]

The Tea Party members are not libertarians. See folks this is what happens when foreigners convince themselves they know American politics.

Yea but he gets it from the American media. It's the same nonsense liberals spout.

[nathanbforrest45]

And if you didn't know him, he'd be "black".



No, he would be biracial. It doesn't matter if I know him or not. He is now and has always been biracial. Its your side that wants to play the race card and deny him his white heritage.

[Cthulhu]

No, he would be biracial. It doesn't matter if I know him or not. He is now and has always been biracial. Its your side that wants to play the race card and deny him his white heritage.

The media did make a fairly big huzzah over his 'blackness' and being the first black president.

Not sure why it matters. He is still a corporatist whore like all of his predecessors in office. Up to Kennedy that is. But he had a bullet allergy apparently when he wrote a few executive orders.

[The Sage of Main Street]

I own my own business actually 3 of them, I don't boot lick anyone. I have some of my employees who are finally going to start their business. (They should have done it a while ago)

Why is it that you can't be successful in a country that has so many opportunities? Are you not willing to work for it!

Becoming a workohic Greedhead fanatic, sacrificing my personal life and personality? That's as self-destructive as working without pay in college, the ruling class's other "opportunity" to scratch, grovel, and claw in order to classclimb. Someone as sick and conceited as you should not have power over anyone.

You don't run any businesses; your employees make the businesses run. Owners aren't earners. If you own a man's work, you own the man. Am I "jealous" of a heroin addict because he gets higher than I ever could? There's no way I would want to be you either, so quit giving me advice on how I should have run my life. You have nothing to be proud of. Your goal is to be accepted at the Country Club and have the Heirhead guillotine-fodder snobs there pat you on the back and say, "We forgive you for not being born rich." Your trophies are tinsel.

[Max Rockatansky]

The fact that you name Christie as a "libertarian fringe candidate" shows that you don't really know what libertarianism is.

Even the Libertarians don't agree on what they are. I mentioned the Libertarian Party platform to a couple on another forum and they fell all over themselves saying "That's not Libertarianism" When I asked what it was, I got a mishmash of references. Nothing clearly defined.

Maybe you can give it a go for us. :D





P.S. I agree that Christie isn't one. He's a moderate Republican.

[The Sage of Main Street]

"Y..ya...y'know... you didn't build that"

He didn't and the government didn't either, which proves that's not the only alternative for who creates everything. Steve Jobs didn't build the I-Pod; he can't even write code. Some unknown and outrageously underpaid Cash Cow for the Corpies did it and a parasite like Jobs got all the wealth and fame it created. But geeks are willing boytoys who like to get raped by corporate pedophiles.

High IQs create all the wealth but are humiliated and emasculated from childhood on so that the subhuman rich can steal it from them without a fight. High IQs also created anthrax, but there's no reason the 1% should be afraid of such wimps.

[Chris]

Even the Libertarians don't agree on what they are. I mentioned the Libertarian Party platform to a couple on another forum and they fell all over themselves saying "That's not Libertarianism" When I asked what it was, I got a mishmash of references. Nothing clearly defined.

Maybe you can give it a go for us. :D





P.S. I agree that Christie isn't one. He's a moderate Republican.


Libertarian Party and libertarian principles are two different things is probably why.

[The Sage of Main Street]

OWS was a bunch of narcissists who wanted to take selfies in the streets to have something interesting to post on their Fakebook timelines. That's why OWS New York quickly devolved into a T-shirt selling website. The only hardcore OWS dudes were the homeless. They don't make protestors like they used to. In 1990 I was part of Redwood Summer where the Maxxam corp. did a junk-bond leveraged takeover of the family owner Pacific Lumber Company, and we sent them packing back to Houston. But today, if a corporation invaded NorCal again and started liquidating the forests and selling raw logs to China, I think people would just have a flashmob or something, or do a bunch of Tweeting.

The problem with the Ron Paul Revolution was that libertarians put all their faith in a political candidate. That kind of top-down stratergery isn't going to work, especially when computers count the votes.


Both the Occupuppies and the Libretardians are led by the spoiled and worthless slime that oozed out of the 1%'s trophy wives.

[The Sage of Main Street]

Libertarian fringe candidates are the next extremists to fall and it appears that it's going to be evident they will long before the election for pres. Christie has made his bed and he's toast already and Rand Paul will shoot his face off and make a fatal mistake too. The Repubs need to have their ducks lined up well before the election and that means throwing their full support behind a mainstream candidate.

Just as Romney rose above all the batshit crazies, they will find one to do the same. With a little luck they will find one who is a better bet than Romney.

But first, destroy the teabagger fringe and that is already in progress as is evident with Cruz's big failure. Rand Paul shouldn't even be a serious concern as he doesn't even have the smarts his daddy had. And that proved to no better than a dismal 10% support. Amazing that the rabid right wankers take so long to learn.

Rom and Koch,
And I hope they choke.

[The Sage of Main Street]

No, no, no, you misunderstood or I didn't make myself clear. Obviously Christie wasn't a libertarian candidate. He was hated by the teabaggers who comprise most of the libertarians. It's the teabaggers who are pretending to be libertarians but most thinking people already know they aren't. They're nothing but racists and haters with their only cause being hating the uppity black guy who would presume to be their president.

That's why the 1% bought their lawn jockey Obama the nomination. The ruling class of thieves and traitors to their race were hoping to get economically cheated White people to feel so insulted by a Black president that they would vote for economic slavery in a self-destructive reaction to his Affirmative Action power over them.

[The Sage of Main Street]

Good, you're getting it!

And when Obama's term is over I would expect the teabaggers to naturally fall back to being the stupid faction of the Dems. They're obviously mostly little people, poor and lower middle class who have lost their way due to racism trumping politics. All their phony buzzwords like , 'big government', etc. will soon be lost to them as that kind of bullshit doesn't mean a lick to their overall needs and wellbeing. Their fucking vacant heads will spin when they start wondering how they could have ever supported the rabid right such as the Koch brothers. That was one marriage that was made in hell!

Only inferior people believe in racial equality. "Racism" should more logically be termed "Fittestism." You really think these people are inferior economically because they are inferior in intelligence? Just look at the opposite: Dumbo Dubya was superior economically but without his Daddy's money, he would have wound up living in a trailer park. It is an upside-down system, so someone now living in a trailer park deserves to be in the 1%.

[The Sage of Main Street]

No, it's too much of a coincidence for the racism to be nonsense. I don't have to look at where the Obama haters are holing up anymore. I know that 9 out of 10 are going to be southerers. I think their biggest problem is that they never got over losing the civil war. They have to come to terms with that before they can learn to accept black people as their fellow citizens.

It's just too overstated and obvious on this forum for an example. Most try to conceal it but many don't even try anymore.

The Rich Hate All Other White People. That's the only reason you can get away with tolerating obviously feral races.

And what's this selectivity about Southerners? The vast majority of White people in the rest of the country share the South's contempt for Blacks. You don't really know your fellow Americans very well if you say that 90% of "racists" are Southerners. You live in a bubble of upper-class snobbery and ignorance.

[The Sage of Main Street]

Really? Freeman is your authority?

So if he's not black, what is he... gray? :wink:

He's a spoiled, sheltered, conceited, and ignorant rich kid, just like Bush.

[Peter1469]

A repeat of the poisoning of the well. Here we go again.

Some Asshat says that thinking X is racist. People stop talking about X so Asshat doesn't think that they are racist.

Dude, that doesn't work with people who can think. Get a new gig.


No, no, no, you misunderstood or I didn't make myself clear. Obviously Christie wasn't a libertarian candidate. He was hated by the teabaggers who comprise most of the libertarians. It's the teabaggers who are pretending to be libertarians but most thinking people already know they aren't. They're nothing but racists and haters with their only cause being hating the uppity black guy who would presume to be their president.

[Chris]

A repeat of the poisoning of the well. Here we go again.

Some Asshat says that thinking X is racist. People stop talking about X so Asshat doesn't think that they are racist.

Dude, that doesn't work with people who can think. Get a new gig.


But such race-card playing is common among progressives. They must see some value in it. If only to divert discussion from issues.