Is it time for a legitimate third party?

[The Sage of Main Street]

But the air is owned by government. Aren't there no fly zones? So air is treated as land property. One could get shot down if one violated the zone law.

Atta Boy!

Not if the pilot is a special immigrant demanded by the oil companies to please the Arabs they do business with.

 

[dblack]

Libertarians don't believe in "no government'.

Joe knows all that. He's just trolling you. He doesn't like Libertarians because he thinks we make him look stupid. But in reality, he does that himself.

 

[JoeB131]

Libertarians don't believe in "no government'. They believe that the constitution provides the rights and liberties that define the role in the government which is very limited.

Point out one thing in the following platform you're against: I know it's a long read. Pick one out and focus on that one topic.

TLR

Here's a good one.

3.5 Rights and Discrimination
Libertarians embrace the concept that all people are born with certain inherent rights.

Nope. There's no such thing as "rights". There are only privileges that society has grudgingly decided you should have. Any fool who thinks people have "rights" need to look up "Japanese-American, 1942" to find out how quickly "Rights" can vanish if people are scared enough.

Now, admittedly, that's horribly cynical. But it's realistic.

3.3 International Affairs
American foreign policy should emphasize peace with all nations, entangling alliances with none. We would end the current U.S. government policies of foreign intervention including military and economic aid; tariffs; economic sanctions; and regime change. We recognize the right of all people to resist tyranny and defend themselves and their rights. We condemn the use of force, and especially the use of terrorism, against the innocent, regardless of whether such acts are committed by governments or by political or revolutionary groups.

That's fucking retarded. We did that after WWI. We got WWII.

2.14 Retirement and Income Security
Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. Libertarians would phase out the current government-sponsored Social Security system and transition to a private voluntary system. The proper and most effective source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals. We believe members of society will become even more charitable and civil society will be strengthened as government reduces its activity in this realm.

Wow, this is really fucking retarded. I mean, seriously, do they let you guys go outside unattended?

 

[JoeB131]

Joe knows all that. He's just trolling you. He doesn't like Libertarians because he thinks we make him look stupid. But in reality, he does that himself.

No, Libertarians make themselves look stupid. The sad thing is, they've corrupted the GOP with their stupid ideas.

 

[dblack]

No, Libertarians make ...

 

[progressive hunter]

I would love at least three parties if not four parties.

around here we usually have 6 on the ballot for POTUS,,

its time we ban parties and promote states,,

 

[Curried Goats]

Joe knows all that. He's just trolling you. He doesn't like Libertarians because he thinks we make him look stupid. But in reality, he does that himself.

You guys do a pretty good job of that yourselves.

 

[JoeB131]

You guys do a pretty good job of that yourselves.

The sad thing about Libertarians is that they are anti-Government, but their big goal in life is to get 5% of the vote so they can qualify for matching funds.

Taxpayer Dollars At Work: Libertarian Candidate Poised To Qualify For Matching Funds

<b>Under a complex federal program, Gary Johnson could receive as much as $21,025,000 in from the FEC for his campaign.</b>

www.buzzfeednews.com

What makes that even more absurd is that Trump and Harris have forgone Matching Funds (In fact, both parties have since 2000) because they limit the amount of money they can spend.

 

[LibertyKid]

TLR

Here's a good one.

Failed the first test. I said, pick one. So I'm going with one to keep it simple.

Nope. There's no such thing as "rights". There are only privileges that society has grudgingly decided you should have.

You have a misunderstanding of constitutional rights, either intentional or ignorance, or both. The founding fathers did not want our rights to be given by anyone or system. That is why rights are natural rights bestowed on all american citizens, they are birthrights. That is why the constitution says that these rights cannot be taken away by any given person of system of gov't. This are unalienable rights, rights that cannot be taken away.

Any fool who thinks people have "rights" need to look up "Japanese-American, 1942" to find out how quickly "Rights" can vanish if people are scared enough.

You use an example of American born Japanese, who were interned during WWII. Most, except for stupid racists would agree, that this action was a terrible mistake. Which, it was addressed and formal apologies made. The best we can do is learn from this mistake and, hopefully not repeat those mistakes. And if an unjust gov't were to propose such atrocities again, or try to remove other unalienable rights, we the people should stand up against the said gov't.

HOWEVER, this does historical, inhuman mistake, does not take away from the intrinsic rights and the meaning of the constitution. You use an illogical fallacy of throwing the baby out with the bathwater, once again.

 

[LibertyKid]

Joe knows all that. He's just trolling you. He doesn't like Libertarians because he thinks we make him look stupid. But in reality, he does that himself.

That's all he does. TrollB131 is his name and trolling is his game.

 

[JoeB131]

You have a misunderstanding of constitutional rights, either intentional or ignorance, or both. The founding fathers did not want our rights to be given by anyone or system. That is why rights are natural rights bestowed on all american citizens, they are birthrights. That is why the constitution says that these rights cannot be taken away by any given person of system of gov't. This are unalienable rights, rights that cannot be taken away.

No, I just point out the reality. There are no rights. There are just privileges that the majority begrudgingly grants you. It's what the society as a whole tolerates.

You use an example of American born Japanese, who were interned during WWII. Most, except for stupid racists would agree, that this action was a terrible mistake. Which, it was addressed and formal apologies made. The best we can do is learn from this mistake and, hopefully not repeat those mistakes. And if an unjust gov't were to propose such atrocities again, or try to remove other unalienable rights, we the people should stand up against the said gov't.

We didn't learn shit. The way Trump is demonizing immigrants today says, "We've always been like this". But the point is that rights can disappear that fast.

Trump isn't going to be able to carry out his mass deportations without running roughshod over the rights of immigrants... and you will be cheering him on all the way.

HOWEVER, this does historical, inhuman mistake, does not take away from the intrinsic rights and the meaning of the constitution. You use an illogical fallacy of throwing the baby out with the bathwater, once again.

No, it just shows that rights are what society decides they are. I guess the bill of rights is good as a guideline, but mileage will vary.

 

[dblack]

No, it just shows that rights are what society decides they are. I guess the bill of rights is good as a guideline, but mileage will vary.

Nah.. it just shows you have a vested interest in squashing rights. They get in the way of your statist wet dreams.

 

[JoeB131]

Nah.. it just shows you have a vested interest in squashing rights. They get in the way of your statist wet dreams.

No, it shows that I'm not a libertarian child like you and Couger

Except Couger is pretty clear on which privileges he wants to revoke.

 

[Curried Goats]

Nah.. it just shows you have a vested interest in squashing rights. They get in the way of your statist wet dreams.

Kind of funny to call someone a Statists as you beg for the acknowledgment of rights that come from the State.

 

[dblack]

No, it shows that I'm not a libertarian child like you and Couger

Except Couger is pretty clear on which privileges he wants to revoke.

The child thing again. Weird.

 

[JoeB131]

The child thing again. Weird.

Just pointing out Libertarians have a child-like view of the world

 

[sapphiregirl]

I would not mind seeing a third party.

 

[LibertyKid]

No, I just point out the reality.

The reality that exists in your own mind. You can have your own opinions, not your own facts. That is not how this works. Everything else you state is moot then because you only speak from what you believe is your own self bloated, egotistical and narcissistic viewpoints.

 

[JoeB131]

The reality that exists in your own mind. You can have your own opinions, not your own facts. That is not how this works. Everything else you state is moot then because you only speak from what you believe is your own self bloated, egotistical and narcissistic viewpoints.

Your concession is duly noted.

You don't believe in liberty.

If you did, you wouldn't be trying to ban gay marriage, transgender care, and abortion.

 

[dblack]

If you did, you wouldn't be trying to ban gay marriage, transgender care, and abortion.

Libertarians support all of those things. You're just lying again.