Why I Could Never Be GOP or Libertarian

[gipper]

Very Interrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrresting.


So what set of PRINCIPLES have motivated you to vote for Hillary?


.

We hate you and your candidate worst than her.

Thanks, much oblige.


.

Did you hear a lot of Brits still want to put Tony Blair on trial for clearly lying them into the iraq war? Not only was the reason for invading shaky at best, the war was poorly planned out. I say that was on purpose but that's another conversation.

But like hillary and bush, we don't put people like Tony blare or bush on trial. Even if they lied us into a war. History is judging though and bush is as guilty as oj Simpson in retrospect

It would be great to put W on trial and in prison...but then we would also try BO and imprison him too. Imagine how that would prevent pols from lying in the future.

What would we try Obama for?

the numerous unconstitutional acts along with the many impeachable acts, along with the many wars he caused,....and of course, the many lies he has told. If W can be tried for lying, why not Big Ears...Oh I forgot, he is like Cankles, above the law.

I would guess none of this makes sense to you, since your media has not informed you.

 

[sealybobo]

We hate you and your candidate worst than her.

Thanks, much oblige.


.

Did you hear a lot of Brits still want to put Tony Blair on trial for clearly lying them into the iraq war? Not only was the reason for invading shaky at best, the war was poorly planned out. I say that was on purpose but that's another conversation.

But like hillary and bush, we don't put people like Tony blare or bush on trial. Even if they lied us into a war. History is judging though and bush is as guilty as oj Simpson in retrospect

It would be great to put W on trial and in prison...but then we would also try BO and imprison him too. Imagine how that would prevent pols from lying in the future.

What would we try Obama for?

the numerous unconstitutional acts along with the many impeachable acts, along with the many wars he caused,....and of course, the many lies he has told. If W can be tried for lying, why not Big Ears...Oh I forgot, he is like Cankles, above the law.

I would guess none of this makes sense to you, since your media has not informed you.

What lies? Any that led us to war? Be specific.

Of course to you guys Lying about a bj is worse than lying us to war

 

[gipper]

Thanks, much oblige.


.

Did you hear a lot of Brits still want to put Tony Blair on trial for clearly lying them into the iraq war? Not only was the reason for invading shaky at best, the war was poorly planned out. I say that was on purpose but that's another conversation.

But like hillary and bush, we don't put people like Tony blare or bush on trial. Even if they lied us into a war. History is judging though and bush is as guilty as oj Simpson in retrospect

It would be great to put W on trial and in prison...but then we would also try BO and imprison him too. Imagine how that would prevent pols from lying in the future.

What would we try Obama for?

o,....and of course, the many lies he has told. If W can be tried for lying, why not Big Ears...Oh I forgot, he is like Cankles, above the law.

I would guess none of this makes sense to you, since your media has not informed you.

What lies? Any that led us to war? Be specific.

Of course to you guys Lying about a bj is worse than lying us to war

So...the lie can only lead to war. Is that right?

He lied us into the war in Libya...the war in Syria...the war with ISIS...he lies about the war with radical Islam. He lied about ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanstinstain.

Closing Gitmo...and of course, he lied numerous times about Obamacare, which has directed affected millions of Americans. Lied about lowering HC costs....lied about cutting the deficit in his first term...he lied about NSA spying on Americans, which is clearly unconstitutional and impeachable...lied about shovel ready projects, lied about climate change, lied about alternative energy, lies...lies....and more lies.

 

[JoeNormal]

The problem is that libertarians don't seem to know how the things they possess came to be. They generally don't look any further than their current situation and think it's because of their own self worth. I would guess that you don't care that much of what you own is the product of slave labor. Those people just shouldn't have been born slaves right?

Tell me how you can support laissez faire economics and not acknowledge the engine that drives it.

BTW, if you worked for Boeing, you're a huge beneficiary of our military industrial complex. You at least realize that don't you?

Ah, we're anarchists again! What a stupid ****

I'll bet you wish you could use those emoticons in your business presentations. They lend such an air of authority.

So do you realize you're a huge beneficiary of the military industrial complex just by virtue of working for Boeing? Probably not. Like most libertarians, not much thought has been given to any of the contradictions of your ideology.

You make up my "contradictions." You're ignorant and want to stay that way. I'm not taking you seriously until you start addressing my actual views. I even gave you my OP overview of my views and you proceeded to tell me that I'm pro-war, want government to pick market place winners and support slavery. That as you tell me I'm a totalitarian anarchist.

You're a dumb ass

I read your mini manifesto of what constitutes a libertarian in your view and found it ok as far as it went. But when I pointed out obvious, glaring omissions, you gave me the most complete lines of bullshit I've seen in a while. Maybe you just need some time to formulate something coherent. I don't know. Take your time and update the manifesto when you have something you won't embarrass yourself with.

Ommissions? You made your crap up. Obviously salvery and corporatism aren't possible in a libertarian system.

I wonder what scares you so much you can't address even remotely what I actually said?

Scares the shit out of you that you have to go off the deep end like that.

Fascinating

Corporatism is a thing. So is slavery. The fact that libertarians choose to ignore them doesn't make them go away.

 

[JoeNormal]

Listening to everything the GOP and Libertarians have to say, I have to say I viamently disagree with the direction they want to take America. They are a very selfish group.

Paul Ryan, the father of a Republican budget initiative that seeks to destroy Medicare and Social Security has continually invoked the name of Ayn Rand as his philosophical mentor and guide. Many other Republicans have do so too. They are embracing a philosophy which, according to Ayn Rand herself, is one of selfishness and is against all forms of Spirituality. The question any thoughtful Americans must ask themselves is: “Is this the America we want?”

And how do they get evangelicals to go along with them is beyond me.

Its a very selfish every man for himself mentality.

And Libertarians don't believe in the Commons. What are the Commons?

The Commons are resources that are owned by all of us. That includes the Grand Canyon, oil rights, power companies, roads, public airwaves, schools, etc.

Here is how they think. Libertarians think if we all own the land on which our sheep graze, we will each add one too many sheep until we destroy the land for future generations. That We the People can't manage the commons.

Libertarians think that if one person owns the land and charged everyone else grazing fees, he would be more committed to preserving it for the future than a village of farmers.

I disagree.

Great post! And I agree. I could never be a Republican or Libertarian because I'm not a sociopath.

So you don't thing being a parasite makes you a sociopath?

Except that I'm not a parasite. You don't think being an idiot is a problem?

Very Interrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrresting.


So what set of PRINCIPLES have motivated you to vote for Hillary?


.

None, because I'm not voting for her. Are all the other GOP'ers/Libertoonians on this site as dumb as you are?

I think you'll find the answer is yes. At least for libertarians.

 

[kaz]

Ah, we're anarchists again! What a stupid ****

I'll bet you wish you could use those emoticons in your business presentations. They lend such an air of authority.

So do you realize you're a huge beneficiary of the military industrial complex just by virtue of working for Boeing? Probably not. Like most libertarians, not much thought has been given to any of the contradictions of your ideology.

You make up my "contradictions." You're ignorant and want to stay that way. I'm not taking you seriously until you start addressing my actual views. I even gave you my OP overview of my views and you proceeded to tell me that I'm pro-war, want government to pick market place winners and support slavery. That as you tell me I'm a totalitarian anarchist.

You're a dumb ass

I read your mini manifesto of what constitutes a libertarian in your view and found it ok as far as it went. But when I pointed out obvious, glaring omissions, you gave me the most complete lines of bullshit I've seen in a while. Maybe you just need some time to formulate something coherent. I don't know. Take your time and update the manifesto when you have something you won't embarrass yourself with.

Ommissions? You made your crap up. Obviously salvery and corporatism aren't possible in a libertarian system.

I wonder what scares you so much you can't address even remotely what I actually said?

Scares the shit out of you that you have to go off the deep end like that.

Fascinating

Corporatism is a thing. So is slavery. The fact that libertarians choose to ignore them doesn't make them go away.

Oh yeah, kaz, you oppose government deciding which companies will win? You want conrolling markets to be taken away from government? That's just another way of saying you want government picking marketplace winners and controlling markets! Bam! Suck dirt, kaz, nailed you.

You're a ******* moron.

Hey, remember how you kept calling me a totalitarian while you were calling me an anarchist? Or how I support slavery while I oppose government control over our lives? Then there's how you know more about libertarian than a libertarian because you know three libertarians, though one is a liberal and asked them? Then there was the classic how you think people who post on message boards are idiots with no life when ... hello ... you were posting that on a message board?

You really are a ******* moron, you don't just play one on message boards, do you?

 

[JoeNormal]

I'll bet you wish you could use those emoticons in your business presentations. They lend such an air of authority.

So do you realize you're a huge beneficiary of the military industrial complex just by virtue of working for Boeing? Probably not. Like most libertarians, not much thought has been given to any of the contradictions of your ideology.

You make up my "contradictions." You're ignorant and want to stay that way. I'm not taking you seriously until you start addressing my actual views. I even gave you my OP overview of my views and you proceeded to tell me that I'm pro-war, want government to pick market place winners and support slavery. That as you tell me I'm a totalitarian anarchist.

You're a dumb ass

I read your mini manifesto of what constitutes a libertarian in your view and found it ok as far as it went. But when I pointed out obvious, glaring omissions, you gave me the most complete lines of bullshit I've seen in a while. Maybe you just need some time to formulate something coherent. I don't know. Take your time and update the manifesto when you have something you won't embarrass yourself with.

Ommissions? You made your crap up. Obviously salvery and corporatism aren't possible in a libertarian system.

I wonder what scares you so much you can't address even remotely what I actually said?

Scares the shit out of you that you have to go off the deep end like that.

Fascinating

Corporatism is a thing. So is slavery. The fact that libertarians choose to ignore them doesn't make them go away.

Oh yeah, kaz, you oppose government deciding which companies will win? You want conrolling markets to be taken away from government? That's just another way of saying you want government picking marketplace winners and controlling markets! Bam! Suck dirt, kaz, nailed you.

You're a ******* moron.

Hey, remember how you kept calling me a totalitarian while you were calling me an anarchist? Or how I support slavery while I oppose government control over our lives? Then there's how you know more about libertarian than a libertarian because you know three libertarians, though one is a liberal and asked them? Then there was the classic how you think people who post on message boards are idiots with no life when ... hello ... you were posting that on a message board?

You really are a ******* moron, you don't just play one on message boards, do you?

You apparently think (that's kind of a strong word for you) that government is the only force of oppression. Your ******* free market is 10x worse in oppressing those in the lower ranks of the economic pecking order than government has ever been.

And again I ask, where did you get that I know only three libertarians? I suppose you hope that I've formed a wrong impression because I've only met the dipshits. Is that it? I've already told you that some of the libertarians I know personally, I consider friends. That should tell you that I don't think all of them are worthless pieces of shit like you.

 

[BlueGin]

Did you hear a lot of Brits still want to put Tony Blair on trial for clearly lying them into the iraq war? Not only was the reason for invading shaky at best, the war was poorly planned out. I say that was on purpose but that's another conversation.

But like hillary and bush, we don't put people like Tony blare or bush on trial. Even if they lied us into a war. History is judging though and bush is as guilty as oj Simpson in retrospect

It would be great to put W on trial and in prison...but then we would also try BO and imprison him too. Imagine how that would prevent pols from lying in the future.

What would we try Obama for?

o,....and of course, the many lies he has told. If W can be tried for lying, why not Big Ears...Oh I forgot, he is like Cankles, above the law.

I would guess none of this makes sense to you, since your media has not informed you.

What lies? Any that led us to war? Be specific.

Of course to you guys Lying about a bj is worse than lying us to war

So...the lie can only lead to war. Is that right?

He lied us into the war in Libya...the war in Syria...the war with ISIS...he lies about the war with radical Islam. He lied about ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanstinstain.

Closing Gitmo...and of course, he lied numerous times about Obamacare, which has directed affected millions of Americans. Lied about lowering HC costs....lied about cutting the deficit in his first term...he lied about NSA spying on Americans, which is clearly unconstitutional and impeachable...lied about shovel ready projects, lied about climate change, lied about alternative energy, lies...lies....and more lies.

And lied about a transparent administration.

 

[sealybobo]

Did you hear a lot of Brits still want to put Tony Blair on trial for clearly lying them into the iraq war? Not only was the reason for invading shaky at best, the war was poorly planned out. I say that was on purpose but that's another conversation.

But like hillary and bush, we don't put people like Tony blare or bush on trial. Even if they lied us into a war. History is judging though and bush is as guilty as oj Simpson in retrospect

It would be great to put W on trial and in prison...but then we would also try BO and imprison him too. Imagine how that would prevent pols from lying in the future.

What would we try Obama for?

o,....and of course, the many lies he has told. If W can be tried for lying, why not Big Ears...Oh I forgot, he is like Cankles, above the law.

I would guess none of this makes sense to you, since your media has not informed you.

What lies? Any that led us to war? Be specific.

Of course to you guys Lying about a bj is worse than lying us to war

So...the lie can only lead to war. Is that right?

He lied us into the war in Libya...the war in Syria...the war with ISIS...he lies about the war with radical Islam. He lied about ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanstinstain.

Closing Gitmo...and of course, he lied numerous times about Obamacare, which has directed affected millions of Americans. Lied about lowering HC costs....lied about cutting the deficit in his first term...he lied about NSA spying on Americans, which is clearly unconstitutional and impeachable...lied about shovel ready projects, lied about climate change, lied about alternative energy, lies...lies....and more lies.

I was listening to a story on NPR about how the Brits finally realize Tony Blair and Bush lied us into war.

Chilcot Report Details Britain's Role In The Iraq War

And you stupid Americans still don't realize it.

Funny thing is that the same way they lied us into Iraq is just about identical to how they are trying to lie us to war with Iran. Unfuckingbelievable. Regime change? WMD's? All ******* lies. The Iraq war was a war of choice.

 

[sealybobo]

It would be great to put W on trial and in prison...but then we would also try BO and imprison him too. Imagine how that would prevent pols from lying in the future.

What would we try Obama for?

o,....and of course, the many lies he has told. If W can be tried for lying, why not Big Ears...Oh I forgot, he is like Cankles, above the law.

I would guess none of this makes sense to you, since your media has not informed you.

What lies? Any that led us to war? Be specific.

Of course to you guys Lying about a bj is worse than lying us to war

So...the lie can only lead to war. Is that right?

He lied us into the war in Libya...the war in Syria...the war with ISIS...he lies about the war with radical Islam. He lied about ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanstinstain.

Closing Gitmo...and of course, he lied numerous times about Obamacare, which has directed affected millions of Americans. Lied about lowering HC costs....lied about cutting the deficit in his first term...he lied about NSA spying on Americans, which is clearly unconstitutional and impeachable...lied about shovel ready projects, lied about climate change, lied about alternative energy, lies...lies....and more lies.

And lied about a transparent administration.

In case you are thinking about trusting Republicans again, remember they lied us into a war. And if you don't know that is a fact, ask our buddies over in England.

After seven years, the British have released the findings of a report on the Iraq War. The report found that Britain rushed to war before all peaceful means were exhausted. An investigation has concluded there was 'no imminent threat' by Saddam Hussein when Prime Minister Blair decided to invade, alongside the U.S. It also reveals secret communications nine months before the war in which Blair told President George W. Bush, 'I will be with you whatever.' "Blair decided to invade before all the evidence was in, the report says. "Mr. Blair knew by January 2003 that Washington had decided to go to war to overthrow Mr. Hussein and accepted the American timetable for the military action by mid-March, pushing only for a second Security Council resolution that never came, 'undermining the Security Council's authority,' the report concludes. Mr. Blair was 'Washington's poodle,'.

Blair held a news conference to respond to the report. "The intelligence assessments made at the time of going to war turned out to be wrong," Blair said.


Britain has been doing its own exhaustive examination of why its political leaders decided to join that invasion, the faulty intelligence underlying that decision and military failures in the war that followed.

It is now clear the policy on Iraq was made on the basis of flawed intelligence and assessments. They were not challenged, and they should have been. Military action was not a last resort, Saddam Hussein posed no imminent threat and that Blair rushed into war before all the evidence was in. It also revealed secret conversations between Blair and Bush in which Blair told Bush I will be with you whatever. That revelation that Britain promised to back the U.S. unconditionally whatever the circumstances is what most rattles people in the UK.

 

[BlueGin]

What would we try Obama for?

o,....and of course, the many lies he has told. If W can be tried for lying, why not Big Ears...Oh I forgot, he is like Cankles, above the law.

I would guess none of this makes sense to you, since your media has not informed you.

What lies? Any that led us to war? Be specific.

Of course to you guys Lying about a bj is worse than lying us to war

So...the lie can only lead to war. Is that right?

He lied us into the war in Libya...the war in Syria...the war with ISIS...he lies about the war with radical Islam. He lied about ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanstinstain.

Closing Gitmo...and of course, he lied numerous times about Obamacare, which has directed affected millions of Americans. Lied about lowering HC costs....lied about cutting the deficit in his first term...he lied about NSA spying on Americans, which is clearly unconstitutional and impeachable...lied about shovel ready projects, lied about climate change, lied about alternative energy, lies...lies....and more lies.

And lied about a transparent administration.

In case you are thinking about trusting Republicans again, remember they lied us into a war. And if you don't know that is a fact, ask our buddies over in England.

After seven years, the British have released the findings of a report on the Iraq War. The report found that Britain rushed to war before all peaceful means were exhausted. An investigation has concluded there was 'no imminent threat' by Saddam Hussein when Prime Minister Blair decided to invade, alongside the U.S. It also reveals secret communications nine months before the war in which Blair told President George W. Bush, 'I will be with you whatever.' "Blair decided to invade before all the evidence was in, the report says. "Mr. Blair knew by January 2003 that Washington had decided to go to war to overthrow Mr. Hussein and accepted the American timetable for the military action by mid-March, pushing only for a second Security Council resolution that never came, 'undermining the Security Council's authority,' the report concludes. Mr. Blair was 'Washington's poodle,'.

Blair held a news conference to respond to the report. "The intelligence assessments made at the time of going to war turned out to be wrong," Blair said.


Britain has been doing its own exhaustive examination of why its political leaders decided to join that invasion, the faulty intelligence underlying that decision and military failures in the war that followed.

It is now clear the policy on Iraq was made on the basis of flawed intelligence and assessments. They were not challenged, and they should have been. Military action was not a last resort, Saddam Hussein posed no imminent threat and that Blair rushed into war before all the evidence was in. It also revealed secret conversations between Blair and Bush in which Blair told Bush I will be with you whatever. That revelation that Britain promised to back the U.S. unconditionally whatever the circumstances is what most rattles people in the UK.

Dipshit.

I am an independent. Who thinks many republicans are douchebags. Like Ryan for instance.

But don't think for a minute I am stupid enough to fall for democrats and their mounds of bullshit about how they have integrity and are honest.

 

[sealybobo]

o,....and of course, the many lies he has told. If W can be tried for lying, why not Big Ears...Oh I forgot, he is like Cankles, above the law.

I would guess none of this makes sense to you, since your media has not informed you.

What lies? Any that led us to war? Be specific.

Of course to you guys Lying about a bj is worse than lying us to war

So...the lie can only lead to war. Is that right?

He lied us into the war in Libya...the war in Syria...the war with ISIS...he lies about the war with radical Islam. He lied about ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanstinstain.

Closing Gitmo...and of course, he lied numerous times about Obamacare, which has directed affected millions of Americans. Lied about lowering HC costs....lied about cutting the deficit in his first term...he lied about NSA spying on Americans, which is clearly unconstitutional and impeachable...lied about shovel ready projects, lied about climate change, lied about alternative energy, lies...lies....and more lies.

And lied about a transparent administration.

In case you are thinking about trusting Republicans again, remember they lied us into a war. And if you don't know that is a fact, ask our buddies over in England.

After seven years, the British have released the findings of a report on the Iraq War. The report found that Britain rushed to war before all peaceful means were exhausted. An investigation has concluded there was 'no imminent threat' by Saddam Hussein when Prime Minister Blair decided to invade, alongside the U.S. It also reveals secret communications nine months before the war in which Blair told President George W. Bush, 'I will be with you whatever.' "Blair decided to invade before all the evidence was in, the report says. "Mr. Blair knew by January 2003 that Washington had decided to go to war to overthrow Mr. Hussein and accepted the American timetable for the military action by mid-March, pushing only for a second Security Council resolution that never came, 'undermining the Security Council's authority,' the report concludes. Mr. Blair was 'Washington's poodle,'.

Blair held a news conference to respond to the report. "The intelligence assessments made at the time of going to war turned out to be wrong," Blair said.


Britain has been doing its own exhaustive examination of why its political leaders decided to join that invasion, the faulty intelligence underlying that decision and military failures in the war that followed.

It is now clear the policy on Iraq was made on the basis of flawed intelligence and assessments. They were not challenged, and they should have been. Military action was not a last resort, Saddam Hussein posed no imminent threat and that Blair rushed into war before all the evidence was in. It also revealed secret conversations between Blair and Bush in which Blair told Bush I will be with you whatever. That revelation that Britain promised to back the U.S. unconditionally whatever the circumstances is what most rattles people in the UK.

Dipshit.

I am an independent. Who thinks many republicans are douchebags. Like Ryan for instance.

But don't think for a minute I am stupid enough to fall for democrats and their mounds of bullshit about how they have integrity and are honest.

If you want the country to go in the direction of paul ryan, mitch mcconnell, the conservative supreme court then vote GOP. I will never want that.

 

[gipper]

What lies? Any that led us to war? Be specific.

Of course to you guys Lying about a bj is worse than lying us to war

So...the lie can only lead to war. Is that right?

He lied us into the war in Libya...the war in Syria...the war with ISIS...he lies about the war with radical Islam. He lied about ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanstinstain.

Closing Gitmo...and of course, he lied numerous times about Obamacare, which has directed affected millions of Americans. Lied about lowering HC costs....lied about cutting the deficit in his first term...he lied about NSA spying on Americans, which is clearly unconstitutional and impeachable...lied about shovel ready projects, lied about climate change, lied about alternative energy, lies...lies....and more lies.

And lied about a transparent administration.

In case you are thinking about trusting Republicans again, remember they lied us into a war. And if you don't know that is a fact, ask our buddies over in England.

After seven years, the British have released the findings of a report on the Iraq War. The report found that Britain rushed to war before all peaceful means were exhausted. An investigation has concluded there was 'no imminent threat' by Saddam Hussein when Prime Minister Blair decided to invade, alongside the U.S. It also reveals secret communications nine months before the war in which Blair told President George W. Bush, 'I will be with you whatever.' "Blair decided to invade before all the evidence was in, the report says. "Mr. Blair knew by January 2003 that Washington had decided to go to war to overthrow Mr. Hussein and accepted the American timetable for the military action by mid-March, pushing only for a second Security Council resolution that never came, 'undermining the Security Council's authority,' the report concludes. Mr. Blair was 'Washington's poodle,'.

Blair held a news conference to respond to the report. "The intelligence assessments made at the time of going to war turned out to be wrong," Blair said.


Britain has been doing its own exhaustive examination of why its political leaders decided to join that invasion, the faulty intelligence underlying that decision and military failures in the war that followed.

It is now clear the policy on Iraq was made on the basis of flawed intelligence and assessments. They were not challenged, and they should have been. Military action was not a last resort, Saddam Hussein posed no imminent threat and that Blair rushed into war before all the evidence was in. It also revealed secret conversations between Blair and Bush in which Blair told Bush I will be with you whatever. That revelation that Britain promised to back the U.S. unconditionally whatever the circumstances is what most rattles people in the UK.

Dipshit.

I am an independent. Who thinks many republicans are douchebags. Like Ryan for instance.

But don't think for a minute I am stupid enough to fall for democrats and their mounds of bullshit about how they have integrity and are honest.

If you want the country to go in the direction of paul ryan, mitch mcconnell, the conservative supreme court then vote GOP. I will never want that.

Damn....those Rs you mention are big gov progressives like you. Your fear of them merely proves you have been duped.

 

[kaz]

You make up my "contradictions." You're ignorant and want to stay that way. I'm not taking you seriously until you start addressing my actual views. I even gave you my OP overview of my views and you proceeded to tell me that I'm pro-war, want government to pick market place winners and support slavery. That as you tell me I'm a totalitarian anarchist.

You're a dumb ass

I read your mini manifesto of what constitutes a libertarian in your view and found it ok as far as it went. But when I pointed out obvious, glaring omissions, you gave me the most complete lines of bullshit I've seen in a while. Maybe you just need some time to formulate something coherent. I don't know. Take your time and update the manifesto when you have something you won't embarrass yourself with.

Ommissions? You made your crap up. Obviously salvery and corporatism aren't possible in a libertarian system.

I wonder what scares you so much you can't address even remotely what I actually said?

Scares the shit out of you that you have to go off the deep end like that.

Fascinating

Corporatism is a thing. So is slavery. The fact that libertarians choose to ignore them doesn't make them go away.

Oh yeah, kaz, you oppose government deciding which companies will win? You want conrolling markets to be taken away from government? That's just another way of saying you want government picking marketplace winners and controlling markets! Bam! Suck dirt, kaz, nailed you.

You're a ******* moron.

Hey, remember how you kept calling me a totalitarian while you were calling me an anarchist? Or how I support slavery while I oppose government control over our lives? Then there's how you know more about libertarian than a libertarian because you know three libertarians, though one is a liberal and asked them? Then there was the classic how you think people who post on message boards are idiots with no life when ... hello ... you were posting that on a message board?

You really are a ******* moron, you don't just play one on message boards, do you?

You apparently think (that's kind of a strong word for you) that government is the only force of oppression. Your ******* free market is 10x worse in oppressing those in the lower ranks of the economic pecking order than government has ever been.

And again I ask, where did you get that I know only three libertarians? I suppose you hope that I've formed a wrong impression because I've only met the dipshits. Is that it? I've already told you that some of the libertarians I know personally, I consider friends. That should tell you that I don't think all of them are worthless pieces of shit like you.

Challenge ... accepted. OK, Sport. How can companies oppress you without using the force of government to do it? Walk across the street to their competitor, lazy ass. Here are three bohemoths, use them for example. McDonalds, Wal-Mart and Delta Airlines...

Explain how without governement restricting their competition they could oppress you. You are so full of shit, you can't bend over without it splashing out of your ears

 

[BlueGin]

What lies? Any that led us to war? Be specific.

Of course to you guys Lying about a bj is worse than lying us to war

So...the lie can only lead to war. Is that right?

He lied us into the war in Libya...the war in Syria...the war with ISIS...he lies about the war with radical Islam. He lied about ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanstinstain.

Closing Gitmo...and of course, he lied numerous times about Obamacare, which has directed affected millions of Americans. Lied about lowering HC costs....lied about cutting the deficit in his first term...he lied about NSA spying on Americans, which is clearly unconstitutional and impeachable...lied about shovel ready projects, lied about climate change, lied about alternative energy, lies...lies....and more lies.

And lied about a transparent administration.

In case you are thinking about trusting Republicans again, remember they lied us into a war. And if you don't know that is a fact, ask our buddies over in England.

After seven years, the British have released the findings of a report on the Iraq War. The report found that Britain rushed to war before all peaceful means were exhausted. An investigation has concluded there was 'no imminent threat' by Saddam Hussein when Prime Minister Blair decided to invade, alongside the U.S. It also reveals secret communications nine months before the war in which Blair told President George W. Bush, 'I will be with you whatever.' "Blair decided to invade before all the evidence was in, the report says. "Mr. Blair knew by January 2003 that Washington had decided to go to war to overthrow Mr. Hussein and accepted the American timetable for the military action by mid-March, pushing only for a second Security Council resolution that never came, 'undermining the Security Council's authority,' the report concludes. Mr. Blair was 'Washington's poodle,'.

Blair held a news conference to respond to the report. "The intelligence assessments made at the time of going to war turned out to be wrong," Blair said.


Britain has been doing its own exhaustive examination of why its political leaders decided to join that invasion, the faulty intelligence underlying that decision and military failures in the war that followed.

It is now clear the policy on Iraq was made on the basis of flawed intelligence and assessments. They were not challenged, and they should have been. Military action was not a last resort, Saddam Hussein posed no imminent threat and that Blair rushed into war before all the evidence was in. It also revealed secret conversations between Blair and Bush in which Blair told Bush I will be with you whatever. That revelation that Britain promised to back the U.S. unconditionally whatever the circumstances is what most rattles people in the UK.

Dipshit.

I am an independent. Who thinks many republicans are douchebags. Like Ryan for instance.

But don't think for a minute I am stupid enough to fall for democrats and their mounds of bullshit about how they have integrity and are honest.

If you want the country to go in the direction of paul ryan, mitch mcconnell, the conservative supreme court then vote GOP. I will never want that.

Well ...I sure ain't going to vote for another corrupt democrat that blatantly lies her ass off while smugly mocking americans with her arrogant elitist BS.

 

[Contumacious]

What lies? Any that led us to war? Be specific.

Of course to you guys Lying about a bj is worse than lying us to war

So...the lie can only lead to war. Is that right?

He lied us into the war in Libya...the war in Syria...the war with ISIS...he lies about the war with radical Islam. He lied about ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanstinstain.

Closing Gitmo...and of course, he lied numerous times about Obamacare, which has directed affected millions of Americans. Lied about lowering HC costs....lied about cutting the deficit in his first term...he lied about NSA spying on Americans, which is clearly unconstitutional and impeachable...lied about shovel ready projects, lied about climate change, lied about alternative energy, lies...lies....and more lies.

And lied about a transparent administration.

In case you are thinking about trusting Republicans again, remember they lied us into a war. And if you don't know that is a fact, ask our buddies over in England.

After seven years, the British have released the findings of a report on the Iraq War. The report found that Britain rushed to war before all peaceful means were exhausted. An investigation has concluded there was 'no imminent threat' by Saddam Hussein when Prime Minister Blair decided to invade, alongside the U.S. It also reveals secret communications nine months before the war in which Blair told President George W. Bush, 'I will be with you whatever.' "Blair decided to invade before all the evidence was in, the report says. "Mr. Blair knew by January 2003 that Washington had decided to go to war to overthrow Mr. Hussein and accepted the American timetable for the military action by mid-March, pushing only for a second Security Council resolution that never came, 'undermining the Security Council's authority,' the report concludes. Mr. Blair was 'Washington's poodle,'.

Blair held a news conference to respond to the report. "The intelligence assessments made at the time of going to war turned out to be wrong," Blair said.


Britain has been doing its own exhaustive examination of why its political leaders decided to join that invasion, the faulty intelligence underlying that decision and military failures in the war that followed.

It is now clear the policy on Iraq was made on the basis of flawed intelligence and assessments. They were not challenged, and they should have been. Military action was not a last resort, Saddam Hussein posed no imminent threat and that Blair rushed into war before all the evidence was in. It also revealed secret conversations between Blair and Bush in which Blair told Bush I will be with you whatever. That revelation that Britain promised to back the U.S. unconditionally whatever the circumstances is what most rattles people in the UK.

Dipshit.

I am an independent. Who thinks many republicans are douchebags. Like Ryan for instance.

But don't think for a minute I am stupid enough to fall for democrats and their mounds of bullshit about how they have integrity and are honest.

If you want the country to go in the direction of paul ryan, mitch mcconnell, the conservative supreme court then vote GOP. I will never want that.

If you want WWIII vote for Hillary. Continued intervention in Syria to defend the Zionists will have serious consequences.


.

 

[JoeNormal]

I read your mini manifesto of what constitutes a libertarian in your view and found it ok as far as it went. But when I pointed out obvious, glaring omissions, you gave me the most complete lines of bullshit I've seen in a while. Maybe you just need some time to formulate something coherent. I don't know. Take your time and update the manifesto when you have something you won't embarrass yourself with.

Ommissions? You made your crap up. Obviously salvery and corporatism aren't possible in a libertarian system.

I wonder what scares you so much you can't address even remotely what I actually said?

Scares the shit out of you that you have to go off the deep end like that.

Fascinating

Corporatism is a thing. So is slavery. The fact that libertarians choose to ignore them doesn't make them go away.

Oh yeah, kaz, you oppose government deciding which companies will win? You want conrolling markets to be taken away from government? That's just another way of saying you want government picking marketplace winners and controlling markets! Bam! Suck dirt, kaz, nailed you.

You're a ******* moron.

Hey, remember how you kept calling me a totalitarian while you were calling me an anarchist? Or how I support slavery while I oppose government control over our lives? Then there's how you know more about libertarian than a libertarian because you know three libertarians, though one is a liberal and asked them? Then there was the classic how you think people who post on message boards are idiots with no life when ... hello ... you were posting that on a message board?

You really are a ******* moron, you don't just play one on message boards, do you?

You apparently think (that's kind of a strong word for you) that government is the only force of oppression. Your ******* free market is 10x worse in oppressing those in the lower ranks of the economic pecking order than government has ever been.

And again I ask, where did you get that I know only three libertarians? I suppose you hope that I've formed a wrong impression because I've only met the dipshits. Is that it? I've already told you that some of the libertarians I know personally, I consider friends. That should tell you that I don't think all of them are worthless pieces of shit like you.

Challenge ... accepted. OK, Sport. How can companies oppress you without using the force of government to do it? Walk across the street to their competitor, lazy ass. Here are three bohemoths, use them for example. McDonalds, Wal-Mart and Delta Airlines...

Explain how without governement restricting their competition they could oppress you. You are so full of shit, you can't bend over without it splashing out of your ears

Are you living in some kind of vacuum somewhere? This gets pretty much continuous coverage on this site alone.

Large companies like Walmart come into an area and kill off the competition using tactics they should be ashamed of, then after the competition is gone, raise prices to levels not much lower than the competition they decimated. Meanwhile, the people who were employed by the local companies are left without a livelihood and are forced to accept whatever slave wage the behemoth wants to pay.

I was appalled when the Japanese were subsidizing their own companies in the 80's so that they could undercut our prices and kill off the competition over here. Now our own companies are adopting the same tactics against fellow Americans. Disgraceful.

 

[kaz]

Ommissions? You made your crap up. Obviously salvery and corporatism aren't possible in a libertarian system.

I wonder what scares you so much you can't address even remotely what I actually said?

Scares the shit out of you that you have to go off the deep end like that.

Fascinating

Corporatism is a thing. So is slavery. The fact that libertarians choose to ignore them doesn't make them go away.

Oh yeah, kaz, you oppose government deciding which companies will win? You want conrolling markets to be taken away from government? That's just another way of saying you want government picking marketplace winners and controlling markets! Bam! Suck dirt, kaz, nailed you.

You're a ******* moron.

Hey, remember how you kept calling me a totalitarian while you were calling me an anarchist? Or how I support slavery while I oppose government control over our lives? Then there's how you know more about libertarian than a libertarian because you know three libertarians, though one is a liberal and asked them? Then there was the classic how you think people who post on message boards are idiots with no life when ... hello ... you were posting that on a message board?

You really are a ******* moron, you don't just play one on message boards, do you?

You apparently think (that's kind of a strong word for you) that government is the only force of oppression. Your ******* free market is 10x worse in oppressing those in the lower ranks of the economic pecking order than government has ever been.

And again I ask, where did you get that I know only three libertarians? I suppose you hope that I've formed a wrong impression because I've only met the dipshits. Is that it? I've already told you that some of the libertarians I know personally, I consider friends. That should tell you that I don't think all of them are worthless pieces of shit like you.

Challenge ... accepted. OK, Sport. How can companies oppress you without using the force of government to do it? Walk across the street to their competitor, lazy ass. Here are three bohemoths, use them for example. McDonalds, Wal-Mart and Delta Airlines...

Explain how without governement restricting their competition they could oppress you. You are so full of shit, you can't bend over without it splashing out of your ears

Are you living in some kind of vacuum somewhere? This gets pretty much continuous coverage on this site alone.

Large companies like Walmart come into an area and kill off the competition using tactics they should be ashamed of, then after the competition is gone, raise prices to levels not much lower than the competition they decimated. Meanwhile, the people who were employed by the local companies are left without a livelihood and are forced to accept whatever slave wage the behemoth wants to pay.

I was appalled when the Japanese were subsidizing their own companies in the 80's so that they could undercut our prices and kill off the competition over here. Now our own companies are adopting the same tactics against fellow Americans. Disgraceful.

You're making your shit up. And yes, I know other Democrats do it too. Though the price delusion you have is a new one. Wal Mart is cheap everywhere and they have competition everywhere. All they do is resell products made by someone else. The barriers to entry are low. They have to keep prices low.

Instead of pulling your crap out of your ass and posting it, maybe you could provide some reputable sources. Of course you can't, you're full of shit

 

[westwall]

Listening to everything the GOP and Libertarians have to say, I have to say I viamently disagree with the direction they want to take America. They are a very selfish group.

Paul Ryan, the father of a Republican budget initiative that seeks to destroy Medicare and Social Security has continually invoked the name of Ayn Rand as his philosophical mentor and guide. Many other Republicans have do so too. They are embracing a philosophy which, according to Ayn Rand herself, is one of selfishness and is against all forms of Spirituality. The question any thoughtful Americans must ask themselves is: “Is this the America we want?”

And how do they get evangelicals to go along with them is beyond me.

Its a very selfish every man for himself mentality.

And Libertarians don't believe in the Commons. What are the Commons?

The Commons are resources that are owned by all of us. That includes the Grand Canyon, oil rights, power companies, roads, public airwaves, schools, etc.

Here is how they think. Libertarians think if we all own the land on which our sheep graze, we will each add one too many sheep until we destroy the land for future generations. That We the People can't manage the commons.

Libertarians think that if one person owns the land and charged everyone else grazing fees, he would be more committed to preserving it for the future than a village of farmers.

I disagree.

The Commons. Ahhh yes, the ever popular meme that land is owned by all and just by dint of existing you get to benefit from that land. However, in the real world the critter that does no work, starves. Likewise the human being that does no work likewise starves. Infants, and those who are physically disabled, are exempt from that simple law of existence thanks to social contracts that man has evolved over millenia.

Only modern progressives seem to think that the laws of physics and nature don't apply to them. They frequently find out otherwise to their eternal pain and suffering.

 

[JoeNormal]

Corporatism is a thing. So is slavery. The fact that libertarians choose to ignore them doesn't make them go away.

Oh yeah, kaz, you oppose government deciding which companies will win? You want conrolling markets to be taken away from government? That's just another way of saying you want government picking marketplace winners and controlling markets! Bam! Suck dirt, kaz, nailed you.

You're a ******* moron.

Hey, remember how you kept calling me a totalitarian while you were calling me an anarchist? Or how I support slavery while I oppose government control over our lives? Then there's how you know more about libertarian than a libertarian because you know three libertarians, though one is a liberal and asked them? Then there was the classic how you think people who post on message boards are idiots with no life when ... hello ... you were posting that on a message board?

You really are a ******* moron, you don't just play one on message boards, do you?

You apparently think (that's kind of a strong word for you) that government is the only force of oppression. Your ******* free market is 10x worse in oppressing those in the lower ranks of the economic pecking order than government has ever been.

And again I ask, where did you get that I know only three libertarians? I suppose you hope that I've formed a wrong impression because I've only met the dipshits. Is that it? I've already told you that some of the libertarians I know personally, I consider friends. That should tell you that I don't think all of them are worthless pieces of shit like you.

Challenge ... accepted. OK, Sport. How can companies oppress you without using the force of government to do it? Walk across the street to their competitor, lazy ass. Here are three bohemoths, use them for example. McDonalds, Wal-Mart and Delta Airlines...

Explain how without governement restricting their competition they could oppress you. You are so full of shit, you can't bend over without it splashing out of your ears

Are you living in some kind of vacuum somewhere? This gets pretty much continuous coverage on this site alone.

Large companies like Walmart come into an area and kill off the competition using tactics they should be ashamed of, then after the competition is gone, raise prices to levels not much lower than the competition they decimated. Meanwhile, the people who were employed by the local companies are left without a livelihood and are forced to accept whatever slave wage the behemoth wants to pay.

I was appalled when the Japanese were subsidizing their own companies in the 80's so that they could undercut our prices and kill off the competition over here. Now our own companies are adopting the same tactics against fellow Americans. Disgraceful.

You're making your shit up. And yes, I know other Democrats do it too. Though the price delusion you have is a new one. Wal Mart is cheap everywhere and they have competition everywhere. All they do is resell products made by someone else. The barriers to entry are low. They have to keep prices low.

Instead of pulling your crap out of your ass and posting it, maybe you could provide some reputable sources. Of course you can't, you're full of shit

Listen carefully because this is going to tax your brain. Walmart has a HUGE buying network. They don't have to go through middle men to negotiate prices with the companies that produce their products. They can hammer away directly and in quantities that will either make or break the producers. And the more competition they can eliminate, the stronger their bargaining position becomes.