Ann Coulter on Stossel battles room full of libertarian students (updated w full show vid)

[jmdrake]

Wait a minute. This moron says the Iraq war was good and the Afghanistan war was bad? WTF? So don't take out Osama Bin Laden, but take out Saddam because, even though the Bush administration admitted that wasn't true, Saddam was trying to fund Al Qaeda? She is too stupid to be taken seriously.

Edit: And I hate the fact that these kiddies didn't seize on that and instead honed in on gay marriage and pot.

 

[Cleaner44]

I like how she ignores that we have such a socialist nation very much because of Republicans working with Democrats in a bipartisan fashion. Who gave us No Child Left Behind? Who legislates for subsides for farmers? Who expanded Medicare?

I wish some student would have asked Ann why she supports BIG GOVT Republicans over small government libertarians.

 

[Brett85]

I agree with her on marriage but disagree with her on Iraq and marijuana. But regardless of what your stance is on marijuana or marriage, these aren't major issues. It's ridiculous for libertarians to pretend that these are huge issues to deal with.

 

[otherone]

It's ridiculous for libertarians to pretend that these are huge issues to deal with.

It's ridiculous for establishment statists to characterize these issues as being huge issues to Libertarians.

 

[Brett85]

It's ridiculous for establishment statists to characterize these issues as being huge issues to Libertarians.

They are huge issues to some of the younger libertarians.

 

[VBRonPaulFan]

I agree with her on marriage but disagree with her on Iraq and marijuana. But regardless of what your stance is on marijuana or marriage, these aren't major issues. It's ridiculous for libertarians to pretend that these are huge issues to deal with.

To be fair, the war on drugs IS a big issue. it is what causes so many domestic problems and so much violence here in our country. To marginalize it like you just did, is morally wrong, IMO.

how can you feel like an overseas war is totally unjustified, but a slightly more silent and nefarious war here at home is less important?

 

[jmdrake]

I agree with her on marriage but disagree with her on Iraq and marijuana. But regardless of what your stance is on marijuana or marriage, these aren't major issues. It's ridiculous for libertarians to pretend that these are huge issues to deal with.

She's wrong on saying marriage is a contract. It's not. It's a license. That's the problem.

 

[CaptUSA]

Wait a minute. This moron says the Iraq war was good and the Afghanistan war was bad? WTF? So don't take out Osama Bin Laden, but take out Saddam because, even though the Bush administration admitted that wasn't true, Saddam was trying to fund Al Qaeda? She is too stupid to be taken seriously.

Edit: And I hate the fact that these kiddies didn't seize on that and instead honed in on gay marriage and pot.

This is how this mindset goes: War in Iraq was good because we removed an enemy of America and, if we followed through properly, we could create a beacon for the entire middle east. They believe that terrorism is driven by the repressive regimes and the people are bound to act out of frustration. By removing repressive regimes and replacing them with freedom, the people would see economic benefit and would not want to bomb us. In Afghanistan, there was no regime. It's just a mess of mountains where you waste a lot of money for no return.

It's total hogwash, but this is what neocons believe. They think we are naive because we don't understand that bad leaders cause their subjects to aim their desperation our way. We tend to think they're pretty naive to think our bad leaders are going to be any better than theirs of deflecting this frustration.

 

[BAllen]

You need to understand what we're up against. Socialists offer government benefits. So legalizing drugs is a way to get some of their supporters away from them. It also is a liberty issue as a person has an individual right to consume what they wish. And, despite billions of dollars, has this 'war on drugs' actually done any good? I wonder how much more good it would do to secure the border and check IDs and expel illegals. Of course some would say that is against freedoms, so what else is there?

 

[Emerick]

Let me see if I understand her points.

1) She's against libertarians proposals because it's a fact that the government is meddling in such and such issues.

2) She's against the Welfare State.

3) Isn't a fact that government is meddling with welfare?

That reasoning is just nonsensical. All she's saying is this: all that can be changed is what I favor; everything else is just impossible.

 

[noneedtoaggress]

I agree with her on marriage but disagree with her on Iraq and marijuana. But regardless of what your stance is on marijuana or marriage, these aren't major issues. It's ridiculous for libertarians to pretend that these are huge issues to deal with.

Do you know how many human beings are made victims for committing victimless non-crimes and being thrown in a cage?

Do you know how much money is spent on the DEA every year? How much money is spent caging non-violent people every year? How much is spent on local police departments every year? How many resources are tied up in this "non-issue"?

Do you know how many people die, not because marijuana is harmful, but due to gang violence and police violence every year due to prohibition? In the US and abroad?

Do you know the precedents that are set when they get away with unconstitutionally deciding they own your body enough to decide what can and can't go in it? When they can claim to search you or your property on weak grounds because you may be holding onto a prohibited substance.

Do you know how many utterly sick people can't get relief from pain and debilitating conditions because their medicine is illegal for political reasons?

Yeah totally not a huge issue at all. The drug war is a massive failure that results in widespread suffering and massive systematic loss of rights and directly contributing to increase in government power but who cares about all that. It's an issue that only affects some dirty hippies and teenage stoners, not morally upstanding people who can ignore that silly druggie nonsense.

 

[jmdrake]

This is how this mindset goes: War in Iraq was good because we removed an enemy of America and, if we followed through properly, we could create a beacon for the entire middle east. They believe that terrorism is driven by the repressive regimes and the people are bound to act out of frustration. By removing repressive regimes and replacing them with freedom, the people would see economic benefit and would not want to bomb us. In Afghanistan, there was no regime. It's just a mess of mountains where you waste a lot of money for no return.

It's total hogwash, but this is what neocons believe. They think we are naive because we don't understand that bad leaders cause their subjects to aim their desperation our way. We tend to think they're pretty naive to think our bad leaders are going to be any better than theirs of deflecting this frustration.

So Coulter supports the Arab spring and the overthrow of Mubarrack? Or was that bad because it happened on a democrat's watch?

 

[Acala]

You can make half your neighbors your enemy by focusing on their socialism. And you can make the other half of your neighbors your enemy by focusing on their authoritarianism. Or you can make all your neighbors your allies by showing them how freedom supports their interests. Some guy once said that freedom brings people together. It is, in my opinion, a sign of maturity in libertarians when they learn to find common ground with others, no matter what their politics, and then use that common ground to make the case for liberty in all spheres.

Coulter makes a living by creating enemies and lambasting them. That helps ratings but does not advance the cause of liberty.

 

[CaptUSA]

So Coulter supports the Arab spring and the overthrow of Mubarrack? Or was that bad because it happened on a democrat's watch?

Lol, don't even get them started on Mubarrak. Lol... they don't know what to think. They wanted the leader overthrown, but not by the people doing it. They wanted the US to get involved earlier so that we could set up our own favorable regime, but they didn't want a Democrat taking credit for it because he would have done it wrong. Lol, their whole worldview gets completely blown apart when a democrat is in office!

 

[BAllen]

You can make half your neighbors your enemy by focusing on their socialism. And you can make the other half of your neighbors your enemy by focusing on their authoritarianism. Or you can make all your neighbors your allies by showing them how freedom supports their interests. Some guy once said that freedom brings people together. It is, in my opinion, a sign of maturity in libertarians when they learn to find common ground with others, no matter what their politics, and then use that common ground to make the case for liberty in all spheres.

Coulter makes a living by creating enemies and lambasting them. That helps ratings but does not advance the cause of liberty.

That won't work with socialists. As long as they get their govenment check, why should they support freedoms? No guarantee there. They'll take the check in the box every time. I would be interested to know how you'd change their mind, though.

 

[noneedtoaggress]

That won't work with socialists. As long as they get their govenment check, why should they support freedoms? No guarantee there. They'll take the check in the box every time. I would be interested to know how you'd change their mind, though.

I don't know about your average socialist leaning neighbors, some of them don't get checks and just think the government is a tool to help people worse off than them, but we can be sure that's at least true when it comes to our socialist police, they clearly care more about getting their government checks than protecting our freedoms.

 

[presence]

Stossel played her well.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

I agree with her on marriage but disagree with her on Iraq and marijuana. But regardless of what your stance is on marijuana or marriage, these aren't major issues. It's ridiculous for libertarians to pretend that these are huge issues to deal with.

If ending the war on drugs is not an issue to you, you are not a fiscal conservative, and you welcome the police state and the end of the Constitution.

 

[Acala]

That won't work with socialists. As long as they get their govenment check, why should they support freedoms? No guarantee there. They'll take the check in the box every time. I would be interested to know how you'd change their mind, though.

It depends on the issue.

If we are talking about government as provider, I can use any of the following:

1. The fact that the war on poverty has utterly failed by any measure.
2. The brute force behind government "charity". The average democrat doesn't like to think about the gun-in-the-face behind the programs
3. The truth that you cannot delegate your own responsibility to love and care for your fellow man without it being corrupted. The implication that their socialism is just a form of laziness appeals to their sense of guilt.
4. The logical conclusion that whatever deficiency they think there is in the character of private sector man, it will also exist in government man.

You can also talk about foreign policy, the bedroom police, crony-capitalism, the banking cartel, etc. And those are EASY.

 

[ctiger2]

Regulate interstate commerce and protect us. Good god is she dumb. Ignore.