So basically you need to a hardcore libertarian to hang out around here? [admin: no]

[Andrew-Austin]

Yes, because we've established such a clear consensus here among all the different issues.

*cough*

*choke*

I think it might be nice to have a sort of "libertarian hardcore" majority here, with a respectable little l minority. But such is not the case.

 

[brandon]

"libertarian hardcore"

That sounds like a porno genre

 

[acptulsa]

[Libertarian hardcore] sounds like a porno genre

 

[mconder]

Not to mention the fact that most older Americans actually get off their sofas (and their computers) and GO VOTE.

Generally they vote party 100%.

 

[Truth Warrior]

I agree.

We are all a fish out of water, flopping around.

The problem is Truth Warrior is telling everyone that flopping around is the correct path to be going down., but I know we will die eventually if we don't organize our flopping and have an actual plan.

Chaos defeats order every time, because it's better organized.

Uhhhh.... page # 16.

 

[Feenix566]

I agree.

We are all a fish out of water, flopping around.

The problem is Truth Warrior is telling everyone that flopping around is the correct path to be going down., but I know we will die eventually if we don't organize our flopping and have an actual plan.

We're all gonna die eventually, one way or another.

Some people may find this difficult to believe, but there are political disagreements among the members of every political movement. Any time you put two people in a room and tell them to talk politics, they'll find something to disagree about. The fact that not all of Ron Paul's supporters agree on everything should not be viewed as a weakness of the movement. It's just part of human nature.

 

[Kludge]

We're all gonna die eventually, one way or another.

Maybe YOU are. I'm going to be cloned in ~200 years.

 

[SnappleLlama]

We're all gonna die eventually, one way or another.

defeatist.

 

[ARealConservative]

We're all gonna die eventually, one way or another.

Some people may find this difficult to believe, but there are political disagreements among the members of every political movement. Any time you put two people in a room and tell them to talk politics, they'll find something to disagree about. The fact that not all of Ron Paul's supporters agree on everything should not be viewed as a weakness of the movement. It's just part of human nature.

If we didn''t agree that voting for Ron Paul was the way to go, then we aren't in the same movement.

 

[Feenix566]

Maybe YOU are. I'm going to be cloned in ~200 years.

defeatist.

I know it's fun to joke about, but this is something that needs to be repeated to people more often. Everyone expects the gov't to protect them from dangers, like people with guns, unsafe automobiles, terrorist attacks, getting old and not being able to afford the latest heart medication, etc. It's almost like everyone expects to live a risk-free life. Maybe if people realized that life is full of danger, and everybody's gonna die some day, they wouldn't be as afraid of living as they are now, and they'd stop expecting the nanny state to protect them from everything.

 

[ARealConservative]

We're all gonna die eventually, one way or another.

Some people may find this difficult to believe, but there are political disagreements among the members of every political movement. Any time you put two people in a room and tell them to talk politics, they'll find something to disagree about. The fact that not all of Ron Paul's supporters agree on everything should not be viewed as a weakness of the movement. It's just part of human nature.

so we shouldn't fight to survive?

In the context of what I wrote, this is the only way what you said is applicable.

 

[Kludge]

I know it's fun to joke about, but this is something that needs to be repeated to people more often. Everyone expects the gov't to protect them from dangers, like people with guns, unsafe automobiles, terrorist attacks, getting old and not being able to afford the latest heart medication, etc. It's almost like everyone expects to live a risk-free life. Maybe if people realized that life is full of danger, and everybody's gonna die some day, they wouldn't be as afraid of living as they are now, and they'd stop expecting the nanny state to protect them from everything.

Pfff, I guess you don't believe in luck or destiny either, eh?

*sigh* internet....

(On a side note, my horoscope said I was going to meet someone new today! Guess what?!?! IT CAME TRUUUUE - AGAIN!)

 

[Feenix566]

so we shouldn't fight to survive?

In the context of what I wrote, this is the only way what you said is applicable.

We shouldn't think that our petty disagreements are going to rip apart the movement. We still agree on fundamentals, like the need for fiscal responsibility and less foreign entanglements.

 

[Truth Warrior]

Anytime now that the CONSERVATIVES are FINALLY ready.

 

[LawDawg]

Anytime now that the CONSERVATIVES are FINALLY ready.

Hmmmmm, wouldn't it probably in our nature as conservatives to be slow and steady, not prone to quick rash decisions, just by the fact that we are conservative.

 

[Truth Warrior]

Hmmmmm, wouldn't it probably in our nature as conservatives to be slow and steady, not prone to quick rash decisions, just by the fact that we are conservative.

I'm libertarian, BTW.

I sense a significant difference between "slow and stready" and "comatose brain dead" hypocrisy.

The socialists didn't GROW the government all by themselves.

 

[LawDawg]

I'm libertarian, BTW.

Nah, really?

Sorry the slow conservative comment was more than half sarcasm, the rest an observation of the mental inclination of conservatives....not really an attempt at inducing a ideologically discussion of how socialism came about.

 

[ARealConservative]

We shouldn't think that our petty disagreements are going to rip apart the movement. We still agree on fundamentals, like the need for fiscal responsibility and less foreign entanglements.

I don't think this is a petty disagreement.

How about instead of Truth trying to convince us to not vote, he is trying to convince us to vote for McSame? Still a petty difference? And if so, what is a major difference?

 

[The_Orlonater]

I am watching the destruction of the language before my eyes..

Somehow, Economic Liberalism is now socialism... I don't get it.

+1

Liberalism is different from Social Liberalism.(+ Socialism.)

 

[Truth Warrior]

I don't think this is a petty disagreement.

How about instead of Truth trying to convince us to not vote, he is trying to convince us to vote for McSame? Still a petty difference? And if so, what is a major difference?

Statement of Purpose: Voluntaryists are advocates of non-political, non-violent strategies to achieve a free society. We reject electoral politics, in theory and in practice, as incompatible with libertarian principles. Governments must cloak their actions in an aura of moral legitimacy in order to sustain their power, and political methods invariably strengthen that legitimacy. Voluntaryists seek instead to delegitimize the State through education, and we advocate withdrawal of the cooperation and tacit consent on which State power ultimately depends.
http://www.voluntaryist.com/

Page # 16 deja vu, BTW.