Colorado further evidence Ron Paul will challenge Romney in Tampa

[SniperFire]

Answer me first.

Pound salt. Answer me first.

I in fact already have. You have not gotten back to me.

Libertarian is more of a philosophy than anything else. I get that. I like much of it.

Hell, I voted for Ross Perot and would consider myself a Federalist. I just get very annoyed when you guys attack other conservatives under the pretense you have an actual governmental alternative that would function with actual real human beings.


You don't.

 

[Avorysuds]

SF I want an example now of a single “Republican” Government, completely unrestrained by a constitution that they themselves did not make that has ever existed and worked in the history of the world.

 

[LibertyForAll]

What if the majority wanted to kill off the beggars instead of feeding them? Should we allow that? No, because murder is a violation of the rights of the individual being murdered. The same goes for stealing money to feed them.

But what if the vast, vast majorities of people did not agree with you totalitarians that taxation = theft and they wanted to change the Constitution accordingly?

Would you deploy jackbooters to the voting booths with billyclubs to stop it?

You would really be forced to act just like any other totalitarian state which came before you to protect the 'purity' of your regime.

Else, Libertarianism would be voted into oblivion.

If a law is agaisnt the constitution should it be upheld even if the majority want it? So you are in favor of Obamacare being put to a popular vote? Careful your progressive stripe is showing.

 

[Full-Auto]

But what if the vast, vast majorities of people did not agree with you totalitarians that taxation = theft and they wanted to change the Constitution accordingly?

Would you deploy jackbooters to the voting booths with billyclubs to stop it?

You would really be forced to act just like any other totalitarian state which came before you to protect the 'purity' of your regime.

Else, Libertarianism would be voted into oblivion.

Why is what if the best you can produce?

Because there is no 'real world' examples of Libertarian government in action.

Reason being is that it couldn't hope but to work anywhere, and people know it.

Our last example was perhaps Deadwood, and it didn't work out so well then, either.

I think you are very misguided on what being libertarian means. I find that painfully obvious. We are currently running a governance experiment. The two current ideologies are failures. All I need t do to make that determination is look at the bottom line. You branch out from there.

Here you are, arguing that something can not possibly work with nothing to back you up but the faith, "its never been done before."

America was never tried before either. You come across as a big government repub.

We didnt come together as a nation for big government. I will sit the sidelines and watch.

Dont whine if you lose and say it was because of those guys......... The loss will be from not gaining enough support.

 

[SniperFire]

Why is what if the best you can produce?

Because there is no 'real world' examples of Libertarian government in action.

Reason being is that it couldn't hope but to work anywhere, and people know it.

Our last example was perhaps Deadwood, and it didn't work out so well then, either.

And there is no such thing as a Republican Government that has ever worked... There is the constitution, then there is the party trying to get around it.

Here is the difference. A Libertarian Constitution / government would necessarily have a totalitarian ban to the will of the people to change it, because with human nature being what it is, they would change it and legislate Libertarian government out of existence.

You let somebody build that crackstore and whorehouse combo next to a grade school and see how fast they hit the ballot box to change the laws.

 

[Avorysuds]

Pound salt. Answer me first.

I in fact already have. You have not gotten back to me.

Libertarian is more of a philosophy than anything else. I get that. I like much of it.

Hell, I voted for Ross Perot and would consider myself a Federalist. I just get very annoyed when you guys attack other conservatives under the pretense you have an actual governmental alternative that would function with actual real human beings.


You don't.

Neither does the Republican party. You start wars, you pass war powers acts that are unconstitutional as a way to start these illegal wars. You don't pay for these wars. You create unconstitutional programs that we can't pay for, like the DoEducation, SS and so on. You want to control people’s lives by taking away their constitutional rights based off your religion.

Libertarians simply represent what conservatives used to be. Today the Republican party is not more than a Religious Progressive liberal party. Meaning you love to spend more money than you take in or will ever be able to pay off as long as you can say God. Dems do it but don't care about saying God.


Republicans and Democrats have destroyed this country all the while blaming the other side for passing the same fucking laws and starting the same programs. OMG, Reps don't want abortion because of GOD!!!! But Iraq, Afghanistan and the millions that die there is "A-ok."

 

[SniperFire]

Why is what if the best you can produce?

Because there is no 'real world' examples of Libertarian government in action.

Reason being is that it couldn't hope but to work anywhere, and people know it.

Our last example was perhaps Deadwood, and it didn't work out so well then, either.

I think you are very misguided on what being libertarian means. I find that painfully obvious. We are currently running a governance experiment. The two current ideologies are failures. All I need t do to make that determination is look at the bottom line. You branch out from there.

Here you are, arguing that something can not possibly work with nothing to back you up but the faith, "its never been done before."

It would not work because you cannot change human nature. Even if you snapped your fingers and instantly made all laws in America libertarian friendly, people would band into affinity groups and change that. Once people band together and vote as majority groups, Libertarianism as a form of government ceases to exist.

I don't think you could argue that.

 

[Avorysuds]

Im done here. SF won't apply his on retarded question to his own retarded party so there is no point. Bye.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I told you not to feed the hyperbole puree troll....

 

[SniperFire]

I in fact already have. You have not gotten back to me.

Libertarian is more of a philosophy than anything else. I get that. I like much of it.

Hell, I voted for Ross Perot and would consider myself a Federalist. I just get very annoyed when you guys attack other conservatives under the pretense you have an actual governmental alternative that would function with actual real human beings.


You don't.

Neither does the Republican party.

You could argue that Republicans and Democrats often fail, but they have been practicing legislative bodies for over 100 years.

Libertarians as a practicing legislative body, not so much. Why?

Nobody wants it or supports it. It is pure theory.

 

[SniperFire]

Im done here. SF won't apply his on retarded question to his own retarded party so there is no point. Bye.

You guys fold under the tough questions regarding practical application of your purist theory.


Happens every time.

 

[Avorysuds]

Im done here. SF won't apply his on retarded question to his own retarded party so there is no point. Bye.

You guys fold under the tough questions regarding practical application of your purist theory.


Happens every time.

Just like you did. Grats!

 

[SniperFire]

What if the majority wanted to kill off the beggars instead of feeding them? Should we allow that? No, because murder is a violation of the rights of the individual being murdered. The same goes for stealing money to feed them.

But what if the vast, vast majorities of people did not agree with you totalitarians that taxation = theft and they wanted to change the Constitution accordingly?

Would you deploy jackbooters to the voting booths with billyclubs to stop it?

You would really be forced to act just like any other totalitarian state which came before you to protect the 'purity' of your regime.

Else, Libertarianism would be voted into oblivion.

If a law is agaisnt the constitution should it be upheld even if the majority want it? So you are in favor of Obamacare being put to a popular vote? Careful your progressive stripe is showing.

You do realize that you are deflecting by answering my question with another question?

Just say 'Yes. My Libertarian State would require a fundamentalist purity against change not unlike Nazism or any other Statist system of government.'

 

[SniperFire]

Im done here. SF won't apply his on retarded question to his own retarded party so there is no point. Bye.

You guys fold under the tough questions regarding practical application of your purist theory.


Happens every time.

Just like you did.

You ran off, just like you do each and every time I prove to you via simple illustration that Libertarian can never be an actual system of government, short of totalitarian implementation.

Human nature is its downfall.

It is nothing more than a personal philosophy

 

[LibertyForAll]

Im done here. SF won't apply his on retarded question to his own retarded party so there is no point. Bye.

You guys fold under the tough questions regarding practical application of your purist theory.


Happens every time.

Actually I answered your questions and you refused to acknowledge my answers because they prove your scenario faulty. You think you have this magic refutation of the Libertarian philosophy but in reality but it is grounded in a complete lack of understanding of what Libertarianism is or what we hope to accomplish. For one thing, in a libertarian society if a local government wanted to impose a tax that I disagreed with and the people voted for it then I could just move. That's right I could move away and find a place to live that suited me better. If the law was unconstitutional I could pursue my options with the federal government which would be there to make sure my rights were being protected even if it's against the majority. I still have the right to my property even if you and some other thugs want to take it.

Now if you get into whether or not a federal government should have the power to impose laws that would infringe upon my freedom then I would take issue with that as would most libertarians. It's much harder to move out of the country and therefore more of an affront to personal liberty. Then you have a choice you can work to change the laws or failing that you can change peoples minds about the law and sway the majority. This is what we are faced with today.

 

[SniperFire]

For one thing, in a libertarian society if a local government wanted to impose a tax that I disagreed with and the people voted for it then I could just move.

You could move to a place which did not, oh, charge you FICA deduction from your paycheck?

Or would your totalitarian Libertarian society block the ability of the people, via law or Constitutional amendment, to not permit taxation?

 

[nodoginnafight]

So you decry the "two Party System" and yet you are all too quick to bail on your party and try to join the two party system.

You defend your hypocrisy with namecalling and personal insults.

Sniperfire and I disagree early and often - in fact about the only thing we agree on, is how painfully obvious it is that your claims of higher inteliigence are vastly exagerated. Kinda like your assessment on your influence over the Republican Party. (Your boy has gotten 11% of the Republican votes cast).

 

[LibertyForAll]

For one thing, in a libertarian society if a local government wanted to impose a tax that I disagreed with and the people voted for it then I could just move.

You could move to a place which did not, oh, charge you FICA deduction from your paycheck?

Or would your totalitarian Libertarian society block the ability of the people, via law or Constitutional amendment, to not permit taxation?

Did you even read the second paragraph of my post?

 

[nodoginnafight]

All this Libertarian hot air and not one defense of Libertarians bolting on the Libertarian Party in order to tote the pi$$bucket for the Republicans.

But maybe no one had time to respond. Maybe all the Libertarians were just too busy hacking yet another online poll.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

You're feeding the hyperbole troll. You must understand this road goes no where.