Neo-Confederate libertarians are not conservatives.

[RKMBrown]

Well there are some issues that make it obvious. Anybody who claims to be a libertarian but says they support the Iraq War is lying about being a libertarian, for example.

Most would say they support the troops but not the decision.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I don't blame you for trying to disassociate yourself from Paul.

But he's your poster boy.

Like it or not.

Disassociate?

ROFL

Rand Paul strikes fear in you leftists. You loathe him due to that fear. The sleazy fucks of the American left make Josef Goebbels look honest and even handed - demagoguery is your weapon, and the corrupt media is your delivery system.

Paul is a front runner for the 2016 nomination, and the best chance for the GOP to win the office against Biden (I don't think Hillary will run.)

((CNN) – Sen. Rand Paul was the favorite in a presidential straw poll at a Republican leadership conference in Michigan that concluded Sunday.

Of the 526 votes, the Kentucky Republican took 35%, while New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie received 16% at the three-day event on Mackinac Island.)

Rand Paul wins another straw poll ? CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

You're right to fear him.

 

[kaz]

I am tired of the neo-confederate libertarians acting like they are conservatives. They are not

I'm a libertarian who lives in North Carolina and I never heard the term until you used it here. I haven't seen anyone argue that on the board. How did this become an issue exactly?

 

[kaz]

What the heck is a Neo-Confederate libertarian?

lol I dono... I don't even know how you have a libertarian that supports slavery but whatever hahah.

That would have to be impossible, but as I understand a little now that I've read a little bit anyway since thanos introduced me to the term, I don't think that wanting slavery is the issue, it's State rights, which certainly is a concept that libertarians would support. Not that it makes them libertarians, I don't know enough. I'm just referring to that one dimension.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Do you think it merely coincidental that a new political movement pops up shortly after the CR Act of 1964 , supporting the rights of the oppressors?

What "new" political movement is that?

The Libertarian Party,founded 1971

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

You mean the one founded in response to actions by by NIXON?!

Time to dig out the Windex, dude, you're a window licker!

 

[Jarlaxle]

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.

Dude, you REALLY need to dial back the hard drugs.

 

[Jarlaxle]

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.

We can start with you!

 

[Jarlaxle]

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.

Sorry, but I generally don't want psychopaths on my side. I'll take Robert Edward Lee (who had looters & rapists hanged) over Sherman every time.

 

[Jarlaxle]

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.

So a good Libertarian is one who swallows his pride, and puts the (R) after his name, thus assuring himself of that RNC money (as opposed to the non-existent L money) and the guarantee of not having a pesky R opponent. I'm learning!

I believe Lindsey Graham's Democratic opponent in 2008 was running as a "Ron Paul Democrat." In other words, a libertarian running as a Democrat. It really wouldn't matter which party a libertarian chose to run as.

I know of one libertarian who describes himself as a "pre-Roosevelt Democrat", which he describes as, "a Democrat without the socialism".

 

[Jarlaxle]

I am tired of the neo-confederate libertarians acting like they are conservatives. They are not

I'm a libertarian who lives in North Carolina and I never heard the term until you used it here. I haven't seen anyone argue that on the board. How did this become an issue exactly?

A voice in the OP's head!

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

So a good Libertarian is one who swallows his pride, and puts the (R) after his name, thus assuring himself of that RNC money (as opposed to the non-existent L money) and the guarantee of not having a pesky R opponent. I'm learning!

I believe Lindsey Graham's Democratic opponent in 2008 was running as a "Ron Paul Democrat." In other words, a libertarian running as a Democrat. It really wouldn't matter which party a libertarian chose to run as.

I know of one libertarian who describes himself as a "pre-Roosevelt Democrat", which he describes as, "a Democrat without the socialism".

The problem with that description is most people will then think of Woodrow Wilson, who was every bit as bad as Roosevelt.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Libertarian is more than a political party, it's also a political ideology like liberalism or conservatism. In that respect, Amash and Massie are libertarians, rather than conservatives, who happen to be members of the Republican Party. Anybody who doesn't understand that simple concept should not be discussing libertarianism at all.

Does that make everyone a libertarian that has just one viewpoint that intersects with the libertarian party plank?

I wouldn't think so. That'd be like saying that I'm a conservative or a progressive because there is some overlap on this or that issue. Obviously I'm neither. Murray Rothbard had a rule that you're allowed three deviations from the libertarian position before you're not considered a libertarian anymore. Of course that merely begs the question of what the libertarian position is in the first place. Not every issue is cut and dry.

At any rate, I think there has to be some kind of baseline, I just couldn't say where it is.

I'll do it. It's the firm, principled belief in the NAP (Non-Aggression Principle). What separates Rand, is that hes an interventionist. Which puts him in direct odds with libertarian principle.

 

[RKMBrown]

Does that make everyone a libertarian that has just one viewpoint that intersects with the libertarian party plank?

I wouldn't think so. That'd be like saying that I'm a conservative or a progressive because there is some overlap on this or that issue. Obviously I'm neither. Murray Rothbard had a rule that you're allowed three deviations from the libertarian position before you're not considered a libertarian anymore. Of course that merely begs the question of what the libertarian position is in the first place. Not every issue is cut and dry.

At any rate, I think there has to be some kind of baseline, I just couldn't say where it is.

I'll do it. It's the firm, principled belief in the NAP (Non-Aggression Principle). What separates Rand, is that hes an interventionist. Which puts him in direct odds with libertarian principle.

Libertarian wrt domestic issues and authoritarian wrt foreign issues... yeah I would not have absolute trust in someone that thinks he's a member of a superior race, domestic or foreign.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Does that make everyone a libertarian that has just one viewpoint that intersects with the libertarian party plank?

I wouldn't think so. That'd be like saying that I'm a conservative or a progressive because there is some overlap on this or that issue. Obviously I'm neither. Murray Rothbard had a rule that you're allowed three deviations from the libertarian position before you're not considered a libertarian anymore. Of course that merely begs the question of what the libertarian position is in the first place. Not every issue is cut and dry.

At any rate, I think there has to be some kind of baseline, I just couldn't say where it is.

I'll do it. It's the firm, principled belief in the NAP (Non-Aggression Principle). What separates Rand, is that hes an interventionist. Which puts him in direct odds with libertarian principle.

Well yes, but are minarchists libertarians? After all, they believe in "limited" government, or limited aggression. To say that they're not disqualifies a lot of otherwise excellent libertarians.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I wouldn't think so. That'd be like saying that I'm a conservative or a progressive because there is some overlap on this or that issue. Obviously I'm neither. Murray Rothbard had a rule that you're allowed three deviations from the libertarian position before you're not considered a libertarian anymore. Of course that merely begs the question of what the libertarian position is in the first place. Not every issue is cut and dry.

At any rate, I think there has to be some kind of baseline, I just couldn't say where it is.

I'll do it. It's the firm, principled belief in the NAP (Non-Aggression Principle). What separates Rand, is that hes an interventionist. Which puts him in direct odds with libertarian principle.

Well yes, but are minarchists libertarians? After all, they believe in "limited" government, or limited aggression. To say that they're not disqualifies a lot of otherwise excellent libertarians.

As long as they respect voluntary transactions/actions, then, yes. We don't harshly control our ranks. Rand is, however, not really classical in the liberal sense. I do agre with him in many ways.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

in fact, we dont do control. the more the merrier on as many issues as possible. Authoritarians have to struggle when that happens.

 

[thanatos144]

See sonny, there you go again, using those complicated words that sound important without your having any concept of their meaning.

Are you getting nervous now that everyone can see you as the racist Democrat you are?

Say sparky, this stream of consciousness stupidity that you engage in, did it take time to develop or is it common to everybody from the Detroit suburbs?

LOL Is that your way of trying to insult me? yea I am from the state and city that shaped the modern USA in to a financial power house where as you confederates gave us nothing but shame that we have ignorant democrats like you. ....

 

[thanatos144]

From your own link, Dullard:

The founding of the party was prompted in part due to concerns about the Vietnam War, conscription, and the end of the Gold Standard.[8] Although there is not an explicitly-labeled "left" or "right" designation of the party, many members, such as 2012 presidential nominee Gary Johnson, say they are more socially liberal than the Democrats, but more fiscally conservative than the Republicans. The party has generally promoted a classical liberal platform, in contrast to the modern liberal and progressive platform of the Democrats and the more conservative platform of the Republicans

The libertarian party was founded because LOLberal progressive authoritarians, hijacked the term liberal. Which is exactly what libertarians are - classical liberal. You LOLberals today aren't liberals at all. You are authoritarian progressives.

What! No mention of the CR of 64? So that wasn't historically important!

That can mean only this: That Ron Paul and other Southern Conservatives, have hijacked the Libertarian Party!

Ron Paul would be a southern Democrat not a conservative.

 

[thanatos144]

Far more Conservative than the Neocons/Progressives and Communists/Progressives who currently control both Parties.

Who spoon fed you those talking points? LOL

 

[thanatos144]

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?

I am sorry but what would a person like you who seem to stupid to know confederates were democrats know about being conservative?