What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Libertarian Party vis a vis Tea Party?

Wry Catcher

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2009
Messages
51,322
Reaction score
6,468
Points
1,860
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
Discuss
 

uscitizen

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
45,940
Reaction score
4,923
Points
48
Location
My Shack
The TP is in no way the LIbertarian party.
The TP are virtually all ex Bush supporters.
War Mongerers are in no way libertarians.
 
Last edited:

Auxous

Rookie
Joined
Aug 9, 2011
Messages
364
Reaction score
29
Points
0
The TP is in no way the LIbertarian party.
The TP are virtually all ex Bush supporters.
War Mongerers are in no way libertarians.

The recently belated David Nolan, a co-founder of the LP, called Palin a shill and Beck a wannabe libertarian.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJKpE2jPuIY]Libertarian Party Founder David Nolan Calls Sarah Palin A Shill, Glenn Beck A Wanna-Be Libertarian - YouTube[/ame]
 

Sherry

You're not the boss of me
Joined
Mar 28, 2009
Messages
21,819
Reaction score
11,549
Points
960
Location
some beach
One is an official political party, and the other is still just a movement.
 
OP
Wry Catcher

Wry Catcher

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2009
Messages
51,322
Reaction score
6,468
Points
1,860
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
The TP is in no way the LIbertarian party.
The TP are virtually all ex Bush supporters.
War Mongerers are in no way libertarians.

Okay, so which party (or movement) is more aligned with the Republcian Party?
 

Sherry

You're not the boss of me
Joined
Mar 28, 2009
Messages
21,819
Reaction score
11,549
Points
960
Location
some beach
The TP is in no way the LIbertarian party.
The TP are virtually all ex Bush supporters.
War Mongerers are in no way libertarians.

Okay, so which party (or movement) is more aligned with the Republcian Party?

I would say TPM when considering some of the social issues....but also keeping in mind that there is a split in that regard, with some leaning more towards the Paul mentality than Palin.
 

uscitizen

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
45,940
Reaction score
4,923
Points
48
Location
My Shack
The TP is in no way the LIbertarian party.
The TP are virtually all ex Bush supporters.
War Mongerers are in no way libertarians.

Okay, so which party (or movement) is more aligned with the Republcian Party?

The Tea Party of course.

Libertarians believe in personal freedoms that Republicans make illegal.
That combined with the general libertarian belief of non interference in world affairs....
 

dblack

Diamond Member
Joined
May 21, 2011
Messages
47,626
Reaction score
10,106
Points
2,030
The TP is in no way the LIbertarian party.
The TP are virtually all ex Bush supporters.
War Mongerers are in no way libertarians.

Okay, so which party (or movement) is more aligned with the Republcian Party?

Clearly that would the Tea Party. It began as an offshot of RP's grassroots, but it was very quickly co-opted as a way to keep "libertarian-curious" Republicans on the reservation.
 

Sherry

You're not the boss of me
Joined
Mar 28, 2009
Messages
21,819
Reaction score
11,549
Points
960
Location
some beach
One is an official political party, and the other is still just a movement.

bwhahahaahhahahah you guys still pandering this bullshit?

shut the fuck up, the freshmen in the house belong mostly to the TEA PARTY. People RUN on TEA PARTY policies. Sure you have no DNC chairman or RNC chairman atm, but get real.

Make me, bitch.:lol:
 

Sherry

You're not the boss of me
Joined
Mar 28, 2009
Messages
21,819
Reaction score
11,549
Points
960
Location
some beach
Okay, so which party (or movement) is more aligned with the Republcian Party?

I would say TPM when considering some of the social issues....but also keeping in mind that there is a split in that regard, with some leaning more towards the Paul mentality than Palin.

oh god no, you are just wrong, wrong on everything. This we dont believe in social issue crap is...well crap. That was a five minute scam to try to fool people into the TP was something new and fresh.

Oh god, how will I carry on.....your opinion about my opinion means so much.:eusa_whistle:
 

Texanmike

Active Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
725
Reaction score
88
Points
28
The TP is in no way the LIbertarian party.
The TP are virtually all ex Bush supporters.
War Mongerers are in no way libertarians.

Okay, so which party (or movement) is more aligned with the Republcian Party?

I would say TPM when considering some of the social issues....but also keeping in mind that there is a split in that regard, with some leaning more towards the Paul mentality than Palin.

I found Palin was getting annoying so I kind of tuned her out for a while. A friend of mine actually told me that I needed to listen to her again. In a lot of ways she's starting to say things that I agree with more and more. I don't agree with the social issues and things but anyone who talks about small government gets support when they do from me. Of course whether she means it or not, I don't know.

On a side note, if she is really a small government kind of politician then running with McCain was the biggest mistake she could have made because the platform she represented is the example for why I am no longer a republican.

(This is not an endorsement, this is me talking about Palin and the fact that she should have turned down the opportunity to run for VP with McCain.)

Mike
 

Sherry

You're not the boss of me
Joined
Mar 28, 2009
Messages
21,819
Reaction score
11,549
Points
960
Location
some beach
Okay, so which party (or movement) is more aligned with the Republcian Party?

I would say TPM when considering some of the social issues....but also keeping in mind that there is a split in that regard, with some leaning more towards the Paul mentality than Palin.

I found Palin was getting annoying so I kind of tuned her out for a while. A friend of mine actually told me that I needed to listen to her again. In a lot of ways she's starting to say things that I agree with more and more. I don't agree with the social issues and things but anyone who talks about small government gets support when they do from me. Of course whether she means it or not, I don't know.

On a side note, if she is really a small government kind of politician then running with McCain was the biggest mistake she could have made because the platform she represented is the example for why I am no longer a republican.

(This is not an endorsement, this is me talking about Palin and the fact that she should have turned down the opportunity to run for VP with McCain.)

Mike

Mike, you're such a rebel.;)
 

Texanmike

Active Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
725
Reaction score
88
Points
28
I would say TPM when considering some of the social issues....but also keeping in mind that there is a split in that regard, with some leaning more towards the Paul mentality than Palin.

I found Palin was getting annoying so I kind of tuned her out for a while. A friend of mine actually told me that I needed to listen to her again. In a lot of ways she's starting to say things that I agree with more and more. I don't agree with the social issues and things but anyone who talks about small government gets support when they do from me. Of course whether she means it or not, I don't know.

On a side note, if she is really a small government kind of politician then running with McCain was the biggest mistake she could have made because the platform she represented is the example for why I am no longer a republican.

(This is not an endorsement, this is me talking about Palin and the fact that she should have turned down the opportunity to run for VP with McCain.)

Mike

Mike, you're such a rebel.;)

Brian Regan is the shiznit. I'm not sure I like the sarcasm though. If you want rebel you should read the controversial stuff I write. (There's plenty of it).

Mike
 
OP
Wry Catcher

Wry Catcher

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2009
Messages
51,322
Reaction score
6,468
Points
1,860
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
"Small government", means what?

It seems some see small government as isolationist; some as a repudication of the 'nanny state' and others as an effort to argue anew the issues of State's Rights vis a vis The Union., circa 1830.
 

Texanmike

Active Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
725
Reaction score
88
Points
28
"Small government", means what?

It seems some see small government as isolationist; some as a repudication of the 'nanny state' and others as an effort to argue anew the issues of State's Rights vis a vis The Union., circa 1830.

I see small government as a central government that is only given the authority that the states give it. I want different laws in different states. I want the states competing for my residency. I don't want to be subject to institutional laws and that is the product of big government. I do want a states rights like 1830 situation. I prefer that system to what we have today. If it weren't for a bunch of people who immigrated to a country (as opposed it immigrating to a state) during the industrial revolution we would likely would still have that system. Of course this is not an immigration debate, and I'm not trying to make one, so save that. The point is that when people immigrated to the America they did just that, they immigrated to America. That mentality lent itself to a stronger feeling of nationalism and made the voters more amicable to national solutions than prior to the 20's. Oh and this isn't a slavery debate either. I like the system from 1830, not all of the individual policies. For the record though, the states do have the right to leave and if the federal government feared that we would have more liberty.

Mike
 

Texanmike

Active Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
725
Reaction score
88
Points
28
Okay, so which party (or movement) is more aligned with the Republcian Party?

I would say TPM when considering some of the social issues....but also keeping in mind that there is a split in that regard, with some leaning more towards the Paul mentality than Palin.

oh god no, you are just wrong, wrong on everything. This we dont believe in social issue crap is...well crap. That was a five minute scam to try to fool people into the TP was something new and fresh.
Here's the thing. The TP isn't unified on anything. I actually like that. I'm not a "tea party". I don't know if I'm a Tea Partier or not. I've been to rallies in various places and there are some places I agree with and other places that I don't agree with things on. The TP has gotten a lot of publicity but I think it is more representative of frustrations across the country.

I guess I don't know if I'm a TP'er... but I can tell you that it is the frustration with the republicans is what drove me to read and research history and philosophy myself. TBQH I was pretty much a card carrying Republican. I got frustrated when I realized the election was age and race based. You had a young black guy who believes government is the solution to our problems who has very little if any experience that is remotely similar to mine and an old white guy who was basically the same. Neither one was fundamentally different from Bush (with whom I was becoming increasingly frustrated... his tarp and bailouts were the last straw. Neither party (the dems aren't even dems any more... JFK would not be a dem today, Ronald Reagan wouldn't be a Republican, Barry Goldwater wouldn't be a Republican and the founding fathers would have aborted the experiment decades ago...) represents anything different. They both want to tax you and spend your money in order to centralize power. Does that make me a tea party guy? I don't know. Some of them I agree with, some of them I disagree with, but I would discourage people from becoming too enamored with "party" anything.

Instead of listening to these hacks out there, and letting other people define what you think or what you believe sit down and read a little. Find out who influenced the movements you're following. I don't mean read a bunch of things written in the last 5 years, go back 100, 200, 500 years. Figure out why we have this system and what it was intended to do. Don't sit down with someone who will spoon feed you the same crap someone spoon fed them. Go read Marx, Hume, Plutarch, Bastiat, Jefferson, Locke and Madison.

/rant

Mike
 

C_Clayton_Jones

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
71,030
Reaction score
28,753
Points
2,290
Location
In a Republic, actually
"Small government", means what?

YouÂ’ll never get a clear, rational answer to that, IÂ’ve been trying for 40 years, with regard to libertarians. The TPM isnÂ’t any better.

What you may get is some vague nonsense about what the Framers ‘wanted,’ predicated on a blend of the Federalist Papers and a contrived fantasy of the Founders’ ‘original intent.’

You’ll also get no response when you ask a TPM/libertarian to find ‘small government’ in the Constitution, or case law in support. Or when you ask them to define the parameters of ‘small government’ in an economic context. They seem to have this naïve, inane idea that the government of the 18th Century can somehow be recreated in the 21st, but give no specifics as to how such a government might be able to function in conjunction with a modern, industrialized society.

‘Individual liberty’ means the right of the individual businessman to sell shoddy products or services, pollute the environment, or cheat his customers free from government regulation; it has little to do with the rights guaranteed citizens in the Constitution, much less enforcing those rights.

And of course you’ll hear about ‘states’ rights,’ a myth put to rest over 50 years ago by the Court. The TPM/libertarians will bemoan the alleged abuses of the Federal government yet you’ll hear nothing about the abuses of state and local governments. One can only infer the TPM/libertarians never heard of the 14th Amendment, and believe the states are authorized to violate their citizens’ rights with impunity.
 

Texanmike

Active Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
725
Reaction score
88
Points
28
"Small government", means what?

You’ll never get a clear, rational answer to that, I’ve been trying for 40 years, with regard to libertarians. The TPM isn’t any better.

What you may get is some vague nonsense about what the Framers ‘wanted,’ predicated on a blend of the Federalist Papers and a contrived fantasy of the Founders’ ‘original intent.’

You’ll also get no response when you ask a TPM/libertarian to find ‘small government’ in the Constitution, or case law in support. Or when you ask them to define the parameters of ‘small government’ in an economic context. They seem to have this naĂŻve, inane idea that the government of the 18th Century can somehow be recreated in the 21st, but give no specifics as to how such a government might be able to function in conjunction with a modern, industrialized society.

‘Individual liberty’ means the right of the individual businessman to sell shoddy products or services, pollute the environment, or cheat his customers free from government regulation; it has little to do with the rights guaranteed citizens in the Constitution, much less enforcing those rights.

And of course you’ll hear about ‘states’ rights,’ a myth put to rest over 50 years ago by the Court. The TPM/libertarians will bemoan the alleged abuses of the Federal government yet you’ll hear nothing about the abuses of state and local governments. One can only infer the TPM/libertarians never heard of the 14th Amendment, and believe the states are authorized to violate their citizens’ rights with impunity.

Well, for starters, case law is a terrible precedent and part of what is wrong with the country. See the indoctrination doctrine. Go find where it starts. Second, as for small government in the constitution, it IS in the Constitution. It is in the enumerated powers but most people these days (on all sides) are too lazy to sit down and read them. In fact, most people will use the Constitution for whatever they want by picking the parts they like and ignoring the parts they don't like.

The reason you won't find a definition of "small government" is because it is a relative term. That's like me asking you what is a lot of money. Of course your answer depends entirely on perspective. Of course judging by the tone of your post I gather that you're not really interested in exploring someone else's version of ideal governance.

There's a 14th amendment thread, you should go there and read some things I've written. I'm not asking you to agree with me, I'm asking you to read it and think about the origination of these judicial doctrines. The very idea that courts adopt "doctrines" is problematic because courts are not legislators.

Of course the exact same government from the 19th century wouldn't work but most of the system would work better than ours. Its laughable that with unemployment up, debt at 14T and unfunded liabilities between 60-210T depending on how you determine "liability"... and you're saying that there is a system of government that won't work?

You know the irony is right under your name right?

Mike
 
Last edited:

đź’˛ Amazon Deals đź’˛

Forum List

Top