Neo-Confederate libertarians are not conservatives.

[Kevin_Kennedy]

You're grasping at straws. You don't even know WTF you're talking about. Best to stick to topics you actually understand. Clearly this one is above your caliber range.

I understand that you're tap-dancing around an issue that you would be better off to acknowledge, and do something about.

After all, things couldn't get any worse, considering there are 0 libertarians in the Congress.

Btw, you gave the reasons of the founding "in part."

I think we know what the other part was!

Justin Amash? Thomas Massie? They're not libertarians?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The Libertarian Party,founded 1971

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_Party_(United_States)

Right, and the term libertarian doesn't go back to long before that at all, does it?

I believe H.L. Mencken coined the term in the 1920s

I don't know that he coined it, but he certainly used it.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The Libertarian Party,founded 1971

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_Party_(United_States)

Right, and the term libertarian doesn't go back to long before that at all, does it?

You can track the name back to Jesus, if you want, but that doesn't change the date of the founding, or the reasons for it.

The founding of the Libertarian Party is not the founding of libertarianism. And I doubt you could trace the word back to Jesus.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

You're grasping at straws. You don't even know WTF you're talking about. Best to stick to topics you actually understand. Clearly this one is above your caliber range.

I understand that you're tap-dancing around an issue that you would be better off to acknowledge, and do something about.

After all, things couldn't get any worse, considering there are 0 libertarians in the Congress.

Btw, you gave the reasons of the founding "in part."

I think we know what the other part was!

As the old saying goes, Dullard, it is best to remain silent and let others wnder if you're ignorant, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

 

[Impenitent]

You're grasping at straws. You don't even know WTF you're talking about. Best to stick to topics you actually understand. Clearly this one is above your caliber range.

I understand that you're tap-dancing around an issue that you would be better off to acknowledge, and do something about.

After all, things couldn't get any worse, considering there are 0 libertarians in the Congress.

Btw, you gave the reasons of the founding "in part."

I think we know what the other part was!

As the old saying goes, Dullard, it is best to remain silent and let others wnder if you're ignorant, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

I have no doubt that bright, articulate Libertarians do exist, yet they seem to be conspicuously absent from both houses of Congress, and this thread.

 

[paulitician]

I still haven't seen any proof from the OP or others that Neocons/Progressives are more Conservative. I mean, Boehner and McConnel? Conservatives? Really?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I understand that you're tap-dancing around an issue that you would be better off to acknowledge, and do something about.

After all, things couldn't get any worse, considering there are 0 libertarians in the Congress.

Btw, you gave the reasons of the founding "in part."

I think we know what the other part was!

As the old saying goes, Dullard, it is best to remain silent and let others wnder if you're ignorant, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

I have no doubt that bright, articulate Libertarians do exist, yet they seem to be conspicuously absent from both houses of Congress, and this thread.

Wrong again. You're batting a thousand. You dont even know what a libertarian is, Berk (Im giving you the name Berk because Dullard and Corky are taken already by other board members).

There are libertarians in congress. They have been named already and there are others too.

Regardless of that fact, you are now trying to move the goal posts because your initial assertion was shown to be as ridiculous and stupid as you. It's a classic Authoritarian Progressive Loser tactic.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I have no doubt that bright, articulate Libertarians do exist, yet they seem to be conspicuously absent from both houses of Congress, and this thread.

Obviously George Soros has sent the ThinkProgress legion out with orders to try and smear Libertarians with the acts of the Antebellum South. On the face of this, it is so absurd that most of us just ignore it. But given that several of you are engaging in the same attack, this is clearly an organized effort, carried out by all of Soros's little Goebbels.

 

[Impenitent]

As the old saying goes, Dullard, it is best to remain silent and let others wnder if you're ignorant, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

I have no doubt that bright, articulate Libertarians do exist, yet they seem to be conspicuously absent from both houses of Congress, and this thread.

Wrong again. You're batting a thousand. You dont even know what a libertarian is, Berk (Im giving you the name Berk because Dullard and Corky are taken already by other board members).

There are libertarians in congress. They have been named already and there are others too.

Regardless of that fact, you are now trying to move the goal posts because your initial assertion was shown to be as ridiculous and stupid as you. It's a classic Authoritarian Progressive Loser tactic.

There are no Libertarians in Congress. Amash and Massie are Republicans! Apparently, although they lack the courage of their convictions, such as you have, they make up for it by having more political sense.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I have no doubt that bright, articulate Libertarians do exist, yet they seem to be conspicuously absent from both houses of Congress, and this thread.

Wrong again. You're batting a thousand. You dont even know what a libertarian is, Berk (Im giving you the name Berk because Dullard and Corky are taken already by other board members).

There are libertarians in congress. They have been named already and there are others too.

Regardless of that fact, you are now trying to move the goal posts because your initial assertion was shown to be as ridiculous and stupid as you. It's a classic Authoritarian Progressive Loser tactic.

There are no Libertarians in Congress. Amash and Massie are Republicans! Apparantly, although they lack the courage of their convictions, such as you have, they make up for it by having more political sense.

Berk, party affiliation doesn't mean anything when it comes to ideology. Ron Paul was a republican too. The reason? Simple. There is a two party paradigm in the US. Only the two parties receive any media atttention and therefore, outside of this paradigm one is left with very little hope of gripping the national audience.

Furthering your lack of understanding, you accused Pauul of hijacking the libertairan party. Meanwhile, he was a republican party affiliate. Though, known for his libertarian views.

C'mon, Berk. Find a narrative and stick to it. You're all over the place. Furthering the argument that someone who is ignorant should remain quiet and make people wonder, rather than remove all doubt.

 

[JWBooth]

I have no doubt that bright, articulate Libertarians do exist, yet they seem to be conspicuously absent from both houses of Congress, and this thread.

Wrong again. You're batting a thousand. You dont even know what a libertarian is, Berk (Im giving you the name Berk because Dullard and Corky are taken already by other board members).

There are libertarians in congress. They have been named already and there are others too.

Regardless of that fact, you are now trying to move the goal posts because your initial assertion was shown to be as ridiculous and stupid as you. It's a classic Authoritarian Progressive Loser tactic.

There are no Libertarians in Congress. Amash and Massie are Republicans! Apparently, although they lack the courage of their convictions, such as you have, they make up for it by having more political sense.

Gracious, you are as clueless on this as the clerk down at the Circle K, bless your heart.

 

[PrometheusBound]

lol...are Cons still defending their racism in this thread?

Let me guess, you oppose the 1964 CRA because it infringed on "liberty".

Civil Rights for the Uncivilized. Integration caused disintegration. It was passed against the will of the majority, so it is invalid. The ruling class sought to humiliate the majority, so it forced upon us a fake "social conscience" mandate to cover up its design to put down one race while pretending that it was all about lifting up another race.

 

[bendog]

I coulda sworn civil rights legislation passed on a bipartisan majority in congress. Goldwater didn't go along, but I respect(ed) his position. Actually, I agree(d) with it, but when you lose, you move on.

 

[PrometheusBound]

While we talk about it seeing as the CSA held men and women in bondage and treated them as property and slaughtered them like cattle I would say Jefferson Davis was the true Tyrant...So to all you Lincoln hating assholes truth is without him NONE of you would have the freedoms you have now.

Lincoln was really dishonest in his Gettysburg Address when he claimed that the war was about preserving Government of the People. If the South would have won or been allowed to secede, the result would have been two representative republics, each no different from the united republic before the war. Lincoln was a sharp lawyer twisting and spinning words and concept so skillfully that his bloated, bloviating nonsense has been designated a classic in oratory. It only would have been relevant to the battlefield if given by Washington at Yorktown.

Significant in our Chickenhawk ascendancy, his speech excusing the policy of the letting the rich buy their way out of the draft also made no sense. He blithely dismissed it all by saying that's the way things have always been done. He could have made the same excuse about slavery, but the Republicans needed Abolitionism as a break from the past in order to get the South to secede, which gave the plutocrats free rein on tariffs. After victory, the Replutocans raped the prostrate South economically and confirmed the reign of the Robber Barons and sweatshops up North.

 

[PrometheusBound]

Right, and the term libertarian doesn't go back to long before that at all, does it?

You can track the name back to Jesus, if you want, but that doesn't change the date of the founding, or the reasons for it.

The founding of the Libertarian Party is not the founding of libertarianism. And I doubt you could trace the word back to Jesus.

But you can trace it back to the birth of Judas Iscariot, who was delivered by the Roman obstetrician Ronus Paulus.

 

[bripat9643]

Right, and the term libertarian doesn't go back to long before that at all, does it?

I believe H.L. Mencken coined the term in the 1920s

I don't know that he coined it, but he certainly used it.

He is widely credited for coining the term. I think I've even read the editorial where he first used it.

 

[PrometheusBound]

Andrew Jackson was far worse. IMHO.
But that's just me. I take a dim view of genocide.

Some genos need to be cided. They are unfit species dragging down or obstructing the rest of us.

 

[PrometheusBound]

Andrew Jackson was far worse. IMHO.
But that's just me. I take a dim view of genocide.

Sherman and the others went on to commit genocide for the benefit of the railroads that Lincoln championed his entire career.

The obsolete feral occupants were no different from the buffalo, whose million-strong herds would have flattened any kind of infrastructure and wiped out whole villages with their Rolling Thunder.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I believe H.L. Mencken coined the term in the 1920s

I don't know that he coined it, but he certainly used it.

He is widely credited for coining the term. I think I've even read the editorial where he first used it.

Well, i do not know about that. European Anarchists (esp. the french variety) were using the term libertaire as early as the 1850s (in a publication by one Joseph Déjacque, an anarchist of the communist variety) . Now, there is a constrasting difference between the ideas espoused by such anarchists, vs. the western worlds adoption of and use of libertarian.

In the western world, the term was adopted to denote a difference between the classical liberal and the authoritarian progressive who use the term "liberal" today.

 

[PrometheusBound]

A hero should be judged not by what side he fought for, but whether you would want him on your side. Anyone who wants to win instead of being a gutless Fairness Fairy would want Sherman to lead. The air-conditioned ethics of the Geneva Convention showed contempt for all warriors. There is no such thing as a non-combatant in a combat zone.