Skip to main content

View Diary: Ron Paul Hates You (464 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  true (7+ / 0-)

    It really depends on how you define "social policy". I suspect MB was talking about things like drug laws. FDA, no public hospitals, no public education, etc. Hard-liner Libertarians are dumber than Communists.

    It's like "60 Minutes" on acid!

    by nasarius on Tue Jun 05, 2007 at 05:12:38 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  I don't disagree. But libertarians are ... (5+ / 0-)

      ...just like other groups - there are moderates and radicals and extremists. The first time I interview one 35 years ago, he was all for eliminating the government military and putting defense into the private sphere. Looks like he's on the way to getting his wish.

      I consider regulation an economic/environmental issue. But, of course, public schools falls under that, and that's not a libertarian point of view I support.

      •  social issues (12+ / 0-)

        I saw Mr. Paul on Jon Stewart last night-- the only tv I ever watch. He said something about getting rid of medicare and then something about the free market regulating itself.

        Seems to me that's exactly how we're in the multiple messes we're in now: because we've let the free market regulate itself and regulate our environmental policy, our foreign policy, our social policy... and in that way I spose you could say social issues were economic issues.

        But to libertarians, the idea that everyone's child deserves an education even if the parents haven't got a few thousand dollars to spend on it is socialism.

        And in a way, that's just what it is...

      •  I voted for Ron Paul in 1988 (3+ / 0-)

        On my path from Reaganite to full-blown liberal Ron Paul was a normal step in the progression...

        •  Me, Too (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Odysseus, TastyCurry

          But I voted for him because he was running as a Libertarian Party candidate, not on his own merits, so much.

          I don't apologize for that vote, either. If Democratic candidates want my vote, they have to pass at least the bright line test. They have to be generally in favor of the Bill of Rights, for example. Most of them are really iffy on fundamental personal freedoms, like the freedom from unreasonable search. You know, those are freedoms you might not be able to ever get back once they're gone.

          And I shudder when the Democratic Party runs a candidate that I can't tell from the Republican challenger on any issue that matters to me.

          If they want my vote, then they have to get it the old fashioned way.

      •  maybe (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        phenry, AbsurdEyes, Simplify

        there are moderates and radicals and extremists.

        Back in the pre-blog days, Libertarians were the dominant force in almost any political discussion on the net. From what I've seen, the proportion of extremists is a lot higher than in other groups. Unsurprising, if you consider that the crazy is established in their platform.

        A few examples...

        We believe that respect for individual rights is the essential precondition for a free and prosperous world, that force and fraud must be banished from human relationships, and that only through freedom can peace and prosperity be realized.

        That sounds nice, until you realize that taxes are included in "force" (oh my god, men with guns steal your moneys!!!!111one).

        Only individuals and private entities have the full right to control, use, dispose of, or in any manner enjoy their property without interference, until and unless the exercise of their control infringes on the valid rights of others. Resource management and planning are the responsibility and right of the legitimate owners of land, water and other natural resources.

        Pollute your own land all you want. If it seeps into your neighbor's land...well, they'll have to take it up in court. Hopefully they're not dead by then.

        Therefore we oppose all intervention by government into the area of economics. The only proper role of existing governments in the economic realm is to protect property rights, adjudicate disputes, and provide a legal framework in which voluntary trade is protected.

        Labor laws? Ha! Anti-trust laws? No way.

        And so on.

        It really gives you some perspective to "debate" these purist Libertarians.

        It's like "60 Minutes" on acid!

        by nasarius on Tue Jun 05, 2007 at 07:52:16 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site