Time For Libertarians To Leave The GOP?

^^^^^^^
Quite clearly there is a concerted effort underway to damage the Libertarian Party, which would be the loudest voices against the upcoming attack on Iran. Sarwark is obviously a CIA plant and working against the party that he somehow was elected to be chairman of.

Within the Libertarian Party and libertarian movement in general, there is a certain split on non-intervention. Quite common. It depends on the intervention. Iran would probably be one of the just and righteous interventions in the eyes of some “libertarians”.
 
^^^^^^^
Quite clearly there is a concerted effort underway to damage the Libertarian Party, which would be the loudest voices against the upcoming attack on Iran. Sarwark is obviously a CIA plant and working against the party that he somehow was elected to be chairman of.

No, the party has been doing it to itself. They have a constituency that continues to tolerate failure to uphold principles.
 
No, the party has been doing it to itself. They have a constituency that continues to tolerate failure to uphold principles.

One person speaks for the entire Libertarian Party now? Really? You honestly believe that?

Within the Libertarian Party and libertarian movement in general, there is a certain split on non-intervention. Quite common. It depends on the intervention. Iran would probably be one of the just and righteous interventions in the eyes of some “libertarians”.

Naaa, he's a plant. His background gives it away. I used to work at American University. It's basically just a CIA/globalist training school. As for the rest of your comment, I have never met a libertarian that supports pre-emptive war. Any one claiming to be libertarian but advocating the pre-emptive killing of innocent people on the other side of the planet is not a libertarian.
 
Last edited:
One person speaks for the entire Libertarian Party now? Really? You honestly believe that?

Naaa, he's a plant. His background gives it away. I used to work at American University. It's basically just a CIA/globalist training school. As for the rest of your comment, I have never met a libertarian that supports pre-emptive war. Any one claiming to be libertarian but advocating the pre-emptive killing of innocent people on the other side of the planet is not a libertarian.

The caveat is usually “as long as it is voluntary”. Privately funded war is OK. Which leads to ho-hum resistance to government war. Mental gymnastics. Kind of like how a pro-abortion “libertarian” would oppose government funded abortion (ie. not very much).

Plant? Possible. Infiltration and takeover requires that.
 
Last edited:
And we should just believe that you left it?
What was it you said about the LP guy?

I have no problem admitting that I previously worked in a lot of swampy places and witnessed a lot of swampy things. Hell, I'm even from a swampy family. You'd probably be jealous of my resume and family lol. It gave me great insight that has served me well later in life for recognizing swampy things when I see them and recognizing people that are full of shit when I see them, also.
 
I have no problem admitting that I previously worked in a lot of swampy places and witnessed a lot of swampy things. Hell, I'm even from a swampy family. You'd probably be jealous of my resume and family lol. It gave me great insight that has served me well later in life for recognizing swampy things when I see them and recognizing people that are full of $#@! when I see them, also.
Your record speaks for itself and now your admitted background adds to it.
 
Your record speaks for itself and now your admitted background adds to it.

Haha yeah my record as a 12 year daily member of this forum and dedicated activist for libertarian causes is just a ruse for my real agenda of infiltrating the liberty movement, working on libertarian candidate campaigns and spreading knowledge of how the world really works. I'm a slick one, for sure.
 
Any book can be incorrectly translated. But with the texts in the original languages still there for anyone to study, I don't see why that's a big deal. It certainly doesn't put the Bible into any special category of being inaccessible or corrupted relative to any other books.

Most of the rest of what you say looks like baseless conspiracy theory. The Nicene Creed had nothing to do with the making of the Bible. I'm not sure what you mean about writings being thrown out or discarded, but we still have all the scriptures that Jesus and the apostles read as scripture in what is today known as the Old Testament, and the ones they passed on to the Church for her permanent use in what is today known as the New Testament, in forms that are in all important respects no different than the forms they took in the first century. If some people choose to discard any or all of those books from their own use, that reflects on them, but not the scriptures.

The Hebrew word used in Exodus 22:17 (verse 18 in English versions) is mecashephah, meaning "one who practices sorcery," from the verb cashaph, which means to practice sorcery. Three centuries before Christ, and 19 centuries before King James, it had already been translated into Greek with the word pharmakos, which also meant one who practices sorcery. It was also translated as "witch" in the English translations that preceded the KJV.

Hmmmmm.....
Constantine, who formed & controlled the Nicene Creed was a pagan.
75 Books were taken out of the original writings- including some of Jesus words (The Book of Thomas.)
And the word that was later translated to witch originally meant herbalist or poisoner.
Here's an interesting article on the probable meanings & translations:

https://www.haaretz.com/archaeology...-to-live-a-murderous-mistranslation-1.5443682

And I'm not going to get into a heated discussion on religion- I am a minister and have studied the histories of the ancient texts etc for a long time. You can believe what you wish.
 
Pathological libertarian resorting to insults and name calling when you present true reality to them, I have to tell you that I did not see that coming. Nothing I said in that post is dumb but the purist libertarians will reject true reality. I don't like Trump but even I can see the many positives that he is solely responsible for. You can't say that about your boy Amash.

I will take Trump while we wait for libertarian utopia that will never come. The state is here to stay, big govt and welfare socialism can be harnessed to benefit liberty. I am done complaining about Trump.

He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother.
 
Do you also agree with this?

Are you asking if I think big govt and welfare socialism can be harnessed to benefit liberty? If that is your question, my answer is no. There certainly are choices we can make under such circumstances and some choices are better than others for liberty.

Small government > BIG GOVT

Low taxes > welfare state

capitalism > socialism

I do however appreciate having a president that publicly declares the media as fake. The more people that learn the truth of fake news the better. When have you ever seen a president say such things?
 
Last edited:
The problem with the Libertarian Party is that its filled with a bunch of beta males who run beta male candidates. If the party spend the past few decades running people with alpha male personalities, the party wouldn't be having a lot of issues right now. They don't even need to be alpha males in the same vain as Trump. They just have to be alpha males in general. I love Ron, Rand, Massie, and Amash. I appreciate everything they have done over the years. But until they start acting like alpha males, nothing is ever doing to get done. Trump is an alpha male whether we want to admit it or not. Trump gave us the blue print on how to win elections. Whether he did that on purpose or not I have no idea. In fact, all the GOP has to do from this point onward is to have every Republican candidate campaign the exact way Trump did, and you'll probably go a couple decades without a Democrat in office.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top