Libertarian...

[dogtowner]

the Libertarian philosophy is that the purpose of government was expressed in the Declaration of Independence: It is to secure these rights (life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness) that governments are instituted among men.

Any law, therefore, that doesn't protect our liberty is a bad law. Government actions that don't serve to protect our liberties are not necessary.

Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans follow a philosophy like that. Both are all about increased government authority and less individual liberty.

yes, parties have effectively steered government away from what the people wanted mainly by means of keeping the public fat dumb and happy. works pretty well at least for a while. see the collapse of the roman empire for the eventual termius.

 

[cashmcall]

the Libertarian philosophy is that the purpose of government was expressed in the Declaration of Independence: It is to secure these rights (life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness) that governments are instituted among men.

Any law, therefore, that doesn't protect our liberty is a bad law. Government actions that don't serve to protect our liberties are not necessary.

Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans follow a philosophy like that. Both are all about increased government authority and less individual liberty.

well said..

 

[Saxon]

Libertarians are nothing more than retarded anarchists who love chaos. All Libertarians/Anarchists should be crushed underfoot.

 

[Gipper]

Re open borders, I suppose the new libertarians that came on board with Ron Paul may not support this but it really is a key element to the core of it. Its a tough one for people as it will demand competition at a very personal level. People whether being aware of it or not kind of like the government offering up this level of protectionism. Kind of sounds different when you think of it in libertarian terms. But think back a hundred years or more and you will see that this policy made this country the productive dynamo it was. People even then fought it as they wanted that level of protectionism.

Our nation has changed dramatically over the past few decades. We no longer need unskilled laborers immigrating here. We did 100 years ago and as such, many who came here found work easily and assimilated quickly. Most immigration today comes from the Latin third world and most who come are unskilled. Our economy does have jobs for them. They will and are going on the government dole and voting Dem.

The real reason why we have so much legal and illegal immigration of unskilled immigrants is to increase the Dem voter base. This is exactly what Fat Teddy intended when he pushed through immigration reform in 1965. California exemplifies this perfectly.

 

[PLC1]

Our nation has changed dramatically over the past few decades. We no longer need unskilled laborers immigrating here. We did 100 years ago and as such, many who came here found work easily and assimilated quickly. Most immigration today comes from the Latin third world and most who come are unskilled. Our economy does have jobs for them. They will and are going on the government dole and voting Dem.

The real reason why we have so much legal and illegal immigration of unskilled immigrants is to increase the Dem voter base. This is exactly what Fat Teddy intended when he pushed through immigration reform in 1965. California exemplifies this perfectly.

Is that why Reagan signed amnesty into law 20 years later, or why McCain and Kennedy tried again more recently?

 

[Gipper]

Is that why Reagan signed amnesty into law 20 years later, or why McCain and Kennedy tried again more recently?

Grammatical correction to my post above...

Our nation has changed dramatically over the past few decades. We no longer need unskilled laborers immigrating here. We did 100 years ago and as such, many who came here found work easily and assimilated quickly. Most immigration today comes from the Latin third world and most who come are unskilled. Our economy does NOT have jobs for them. They will and are going on the government dole and voting Dem.

Reagan signed the amnesty bill (1986), which he later admitted was one of his biggest mistakes because he did not think the Ds were so unethical, with the agreement by the D Congress that they would pass a bill and apportion funds to monitor the southern border. Of course, this was never done.

Our current group of Rs, in case you haven't noticed, are a bunch of worthless progressives. They know more Americans on the dole will expand government, so they are for amnesty too. They do not care if a few years from now, when they are out of office, we become a one party nation.

 

[dogtowner]

Is that why Reagan signed amnesty into law 20 years later, or why McCain and Kennedy tried again more recently?

touche

 

[cashmcall]

Like all political beliefs, Libertarians have varying beliefs. The three 'sticky points' you mentioned need further explanation.
Legalized drugs - I used to be against, but have changed my opinion. The war on drugs has been a dismal failure resulting in making the nation a police state and expanding government.
Isolationism - this is commonly misunderstood...libertarians are not isolationist, but non-interventionists...big difference.
Open borders - most libertarians are not for open borders, if the result harms the nation. I think open borders does harm the nation and as such, am against it. Immigration is fine if it is done in an orderly basis.

Gip..I'm glad to see you loosen up a little on the war on drugs..dismal is an under-statement..

 

[cashmcall]

gipper..I heard that Cannibus College Graduates always pay back their loans. In cash.

 

[PLC1]

Grammatical correction to my post above...


Reagan signed the amnesty bill (1986), which he later admitted was one of his biggest mistakes because he did not think the Ds were so unethical, with the agreement by the D Congress that they would pass a bill and apportion funds to monitor the southern border. Of course, this was never done.

Our current group of Rs, in case you haven't noticed, are a bunch of worthless progressives. They know more Americans on the dole will expand government, so they are for amnesty too. They do not care if a few years from now, when they are out of office, we become a one party nation.

Did Reagan become president while still being so naive as to think politicians actually keep their promises?

And to think I thought Obama was somewhat naive about the realpolitik of Washington when he was elected. Go figure.

 

[Gipper]

Did Reagan become president while still being so naive as to think politicians actually keep their promises?

And to think I thought Obama was somewhat naive about the realpolitik of Washington when he was elected. Go figure.

Reagan is not the only POTUS duped by unethical and deceitful Democrats. In fact, Reagan was duped more than once. He agreed to a tax increase (Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982) with the Ds promising to cut spending...later. Of course, the spending cuts never materialized. Daddy Bush got duped badly by the Ds when he agreed to raise taxes based on the D's word that they would reduce spending. Of course, the Ds word is worthless, as we know, they will lie to get what they want...the ends justify the means. Nixon gave America's word that we would support S. Vietnam, if the commies resumed hostilities...never realizing the Ds would renege on his promise, dooming millions of Asians to certain death and suffering.

I am sure if you did a little research, you would find many more examples of Rs getting duped by Ds.

 

[dogtowner]

Reagan is not the only POTUS duped by unethical and deceitful Democrats. In fact, Reagan was duped more than once. He agreed to a tax increase (Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982) with the Ds promising to cut spending...later. Of course, the spending cuts never materialized. Daddy Bush got duped badly by the Ds when he agreed to raise taxes based on the D's word that they would reduce spending. Of course, the Ds word is worthless, as we know, they will lie to get what they want...the ends justify the means. Nixon gave America's word that we would support S. Vietnam, if the commies resumed hostilities...never realizing the Ds would renege on his promise, dooming millions of Asians to certain death and suffering.

I am sure if you did a little research, you would find many more examples of Rs getting duped by Ds.

one would think they would learn over time...

 

[Dr.Who]

--scratches head--
IMO libertarian is the perfect ideology for Christians. Now I doubt society can handle libertarianism given how its let itself become a society of parasites. The safety net has gone from hammock right to pillowtop kingsized bed.

God seems quite content to let Christianity exist within a system of gov that is socialistic, or capitalistic, or libertarian or whatever.

That being said I agree that libertarianism is quite consistent with Christianity. Even Ayn ran's position is consistent in that she did not say that people could not have moral positions just that they did not need to make their decisions based on moral positions (paraphrasing a lot).

Libertarianism respects individual rights and Christianity yearns for governments and people to respect them too. However, one's own individual rights are something that Christians are not supposed to consider too highly and should give up willingly for the glory of God. The rights of others should be championed by Christians. Forced collectivism is not consistent with Christianity but a voluntary collectivism could be.

 

[PLC1]

Reagan is not the only POTUS duped by unethical and deceitful Democrats. In fact, Reagan was duped more than once. He agreed to a tax increase (Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982) with the Ds promising to cut spending...later. Of course, the spending cuts never materialized. Daddy Bush got duped badly by the Ds when he agreed to raise taxes based on the D's word that they would reduce spending. Of course, the Ds word is worthless, as we know, they will lie to get what they want...the ends justify the means. Nixon gave America's word that we would support S. Vietnam, if the commies resumed hostilities...never realizing the Ds would renege on his promise, dooming millions of Asians to certain death and suffering.

I am sure if you did a little research, you would find many more examples of Rs getting duped by Ds.

Wow. You'd think Reagan, that mighty symbol of conservatism, would have learned his lesson when he signed the biggest tax increase in California history into law as governor of that state. Republicans just keep getting duped, over and over.

or, could it be that Republicans are complicit, rather than dupes, in the ever increasing power of government?

 

[cashmcall]

Wow. You'd think Reagan, that mighty symbol of conservatism, would have learned his lesson when he signed the biggest tax increase in California history into law as governor of that state. Republicans just keep getting duped, over and over.

or, could it be that Republicans are complicit, rather than dupes, in the ever increasing power of government?

Reagan raised income and business taxes–the largest tax increase in state history at the time. So many conveniently forget several facts. First, the total tax burden in California at that time was less than 6 percent of personal income, and the economy was booming. Today the total tax burden in California is close to 12 percent of personal income (a reflection of the runaway growth of government), and the economy is in the tank.