Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
you're not a libertarian if you think it's ok for government to interfere with my right to dominion over my own body.
Well Gary Johnson is pro-choice, but I might suggest that allowing libertarians to define libertarianism for ourselves is probably the wisest course.
the POINT of libertarianism is to leave people alone to make their own moral choices.
so no.. .you don't get to "RE-define" libertarianism to suit the religious right....
I also wasn't referring to Gary Johnson... I was referring to the pretend libertarians on this board.
Among supporters of LFL, some of us are members of the Libertarian Party, some are not.
Whooaaa right there...
Among supporters of LFL, some of us are members of the Libertarian Party, some are not.
News to me.. Since when does LFL -- where SOME of it's members are NOT in the Lib Party - get to summarize the inner workings and thinking of the party?? I welcome their existence, but I want to know more about number and composition of those NOT IN the freakin' party...
Last thing we need is outside radicals PRETENDING to be interested in Libertarian politics for the sake of their own agenda.
you're not a libertarian if you think it's ok for government to interfere with my right to dominion over my own body.
you're not a libertarian if you think it's ok for government to interfere with my right to dominion over my own body.
Two-term Governor, Gary Johnson, says both parties are indistinguishable from one another.
The national discord rest in their differences not their similarities.
On alll the things that govt is SUPPOSED TO DO -- like foreign policy, immigration, monetary policy --- ain't an ounce of Coke or Pepsi difference.
It's only when you look at the things that they SHOULDN'T be doing where there's a solid diff. (Buying car companies, defunding Soc Sec (BOTH PARTIES), mucking with your lightbulbs, giving GE candy, ect)
There's absolutely nothing contradictory about being a pro-life libertarian.
The national discord rest in their differences not their similarities.
On alll the things that govt is SUPPOSED TO DO -- like foreign policy, immigration, monetary policy --- ain't an ounce of Coke or Pepsi difference.
It's only when you look at the things that they SHOULDN'T be doing where there's a solid diff. (Buying car companies, defunding Soc Sec (BOTH PARTIES), mucking with your lightbulbs, giving GE candy, ect)
Shouldnt be doing according to what authority?
.
By that measure Romney is far the better candidate. Did New Mexico ever elect a bunch of bumblers like Ted Kennedy, Barney Frank, John Kerry, or Mike Dukakis? No. Mass did though. Which tells you what Romney had to work with.
Is ROmney a conservative? No. NEver claimed he was.
But Romney has something Gary Johnson doesn't have: The nomination of the GOP (coming) and the possibility of winning. And if the GOP is so awful why did Johnson run in their primaries?
How about the GOP adopts a few libertarian policies, then asks libertarians to vote for them?
Until this happens the Dem-lite Party can go fuck themselves
Don't let the door hit you where the Lord split you.
you're not a libertarian if you think it's ok for government to interfere with my right to dominion over my own body.
Funny, I don't recall ever saying that.
On the other hand, I don't see how you think abortion is simply a matter of you and that it has no impact on anyone else.
How about the GOP adopts a few libertarian policies, then asks libertarians to vote for them?
Until this happens the Dem-lite Party can go fuck themselves
Don't let the door hit you where the Lord split you.
No problem: I'll be watching Dem-Lites continue to lose elections until they wake the fuck up.
On alll the things that govt is SUPPOSED TO DO -- like foreign policy, immigration, monetary policy --- ain't an ounce of Coke or Pepsi difference.
It's only when you look at the things that they SHOULDN'T be doing where there's a solid diff. (Buying car companies, defunding Soc Sec (BOTH PARTIES), mucking with your lightbulbs, giving GE candy, ect)
Shouldnt be doing according to what authority?
.
U.S. Constitution.
We gave republican party a try in the 21st century with Bush...most think he failed. We gave democrat party a try with obama...most think he failed. Why not try libertarianism next? It seems logical to try something new rather than go back to something that didn't work.
We gave republican party a try in the 21st century with Bush...most think he failed. We gave democrat party a try with obama...most think he failed. Why not try libertarianism next? It seems logical to try something new rather than go back to something that didn't work.
Bush isn't running this time.
And if you think you can elect someone who will magically turn the clock back to 1800 singlehandedly you're sadly mistaken.
We gave republican party a try in the 21st century with Bush...most think he failed. We gave democrat party a try with obama...most think he failed. Why not try libertarianism next? It seems logical to try something new rather than go back to something that didn't work.
Bush isn't running this time.
And if you think you can elect someone who will magically turn the clock back to 1800 singlehandedly you're sadly mistaken.
Bush and Romney are the exact same ideologically...what will be different? Why are you such a chicken shit? What's this 1800 nonsense you are spewing?
Bush isn't running this time.
And if you think you can elect someone who will magically turn the clock back to 1800 singlehandedly you're sadly mistaken.
Bush and Romney are the exact same ideologically...what will be different? Why are you such a chicken shit? What's this 1800 nonsense you are spewing?
Not really.
But I'll go back to 4.5% unemployment, 2% inflation and 4%+GDP growth any day.
We gave republican party a try in the 21st century with Bush...most think he failed. We gave democrat party a try with obama...most think he failed. Why not try libertarianism next? It seems logical to try something new rather than go back to something that didn't work.
Bush isn't running this time.
And if you think you can elect someone who will magically turn the clock back to 1800 singlehandedly you're sadly mistaken.
