The Libertarian Party Is Losing It

[Mac1958]

Nope. I do not support every plank of the LP platform. I definitely do not support their feelings about national defense at all.
As for drugs, I am starting to come around on that issue. Our War On Drugs has been a catastrophic failure. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different result.
We have more people in prison than any other nation on Earth, including communist China which is four times more populated than we are.
It is time to do something different. I believe we need to shift our focus toward harm reduction.

I guess another thought on this guy's comment is that he's competing for attention in a fuckin' sea of flamethrowers.

Obviously it shouldn't be this way, and stuff like this doesn't reflect well on the party. But then again, taken in context...

That's just where we are right now, sadly.

 

[EMH]

Oh, wow. I just realized you are a sock puppet of LA RAM FAN, who is a sock puppet of Mister Beale, or vice versa.

Who is talking to Zbigniew in those three photos???

Why are there NO PHOTOS of "Osama" in Saudi?

Did 600F burning jet fuel produce a river of 2200F molten steel to pour out of the South Tower?

 

[jackflash]

Oh no! The Libertarian party is losing it?

Who will we now elect to office?

I'd say Killary C. or Hunt-her Bee? Who knows? I mean with possible eLeCtRoNiC election rigging & suicides(?) galore around Killery & Teflon Bill anyone in favor with the RepubliCratic Duopoly Party(RCDP) Honchos can take the Woke House in the next general deflection. Either way it's gonna be a hard fought game between the Statist Left Jackals & the Neocon Wolverines!

 

[Lesh]

In the endless quest of the Zionist to maintain a "two party" system where they own both parties, they always toss fraud and nonsense at Libertarians.

This post is 100% fraud.

EVERY registered Libertarian in American knows 911 was a fraud.... because every registered Libertarian has an IQ over 5

9/11 was a fraud huh?

Fucking dope

 

[g5000]

Being against insider trading is like being against sin or being for apple pie. No decent, God-fearing person wants to see insiders take advantage of honest investors. Unfortunately, apple isn't one of my favorite pies, and I'm not even sure I'm against sin. So I'm having trouble getting myself worked up about insider trading. - Harry E. Browne, 2000 LP candidate for president.

 

[EMH]

9/11 was a fraud huh?

Fucking dope

We were warned about you...

Einstein Letter Warning Of Zionist Facism In Israel

 

[TNHarley]

Only the most naive and stupid and ignorant idiots on the planet believes industry would police itself.

You completely ignored what I said. Or maybe you just dont understand libertarianism. Infringing on individual rights is a big no no

We tried that in the beginning, and look what happened.

This isnt 1856. Try to consider why people had their kids working. Plus, they still support laws against neglect of children.

And they most certainly do believe insider trading should be legal.

I know. Re-read what I actually said.
Under a Lib govt, the banks would have actually gotten in trouble.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

The Libertarian party never had it to begin with.

We had a taste of it under Liz Truss. She lasted 44 days before they kicked her out.

In that time she saw the pound crash, mortgage rates go up,pension funds on the verge of bankruotcy andthe economy performing worse than Russia.

I believe she is trawling her ideas around the US on the comeback trail.
Be scared,

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Whenever the small l moves to the large L, it fails.

 

[BackAgain]

Weird how that does not translate to this forum...you are as dishonest as Biden

You are not remotely in a position to address my honesty. You lie like a rug.

You aren’t even able (or willing) to recognize truth.

Gfy.

 

[g5000]

Fourth, regulations against insider trading are another area where libertarian paternalists should be able to get government to liberalize its approach if their principle is in harmony with political incentives. The purpose of insider-trading prohibitions is to prevent outsider investors in corporate stock from being harmed by the trading of those with inside information.The objective is a good one, but prohibiting insider trading may not be the best way to achieve it in all cases. For example, regulation against half the perceived problem is unenforceable, since prohibitions against using insider information to decide not to trade cannot be enforced. Also, the price information created by insider trading can be useful to outsiders and can increase the general efficiency of financial markets. Instead of an outright prohibition, no trading on insider information could be the default policy for corporations, but they could opt out in favor of a policy allowing insider trading by making that policy clearly and widely known. This libertarianpaternalism approach would allow corporations and investors greater choice in how they operate and invest.

https://fee.org/media/5208/0707leelibertarianpaternalism.pdf

 

[g5000]

It's Time To Legalize Insider Trading

In prosecuting ''insider trading,'' the government elevates economy-sapping ignorance.

www.forbes.com

The author of the article is a Senior Fellow at the Libertarian think tank Cato Institute.

 

[g5000]

So, yeah. Libertarians believe insider trading should be legal.

Everything I said about them is true.

 

[g5000]

Under a Lib govt, the banks would have actually gotten in trouble.

Under a Libertarian government, the bank fraud would have been even worse. There would be no regulations against it. No SEC. No regulations. No oversight.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You are not remotely in a position to address my honesty. You lie like a rug.

You aren’t even able (or willing) to recognize truth.

Gfy.

Never understood people like you that are too frightened to type out the word fuck.

It won't hurt you

 

[MarcATL]

G-d Himself calls it an abomination.

Do you adhere to everything else He calls abominations?

 

[BackAgain]

Because as mentioned before, it all but guarantees the Communist Democrat wins every time. Sorry no, but winner take all is the best way.

I agree. Maybe I’d hedge it a bit. But in general, I say ranked choice voting is both needlessly complicated and designed by and for the ones who endorse it.

They cry for “democracy” but then undermine it with these shenanigans.

For the benefit of Couchpotato who did initially ask in a civil fashion, here is the article I referenced earlier: The flaw in ranked-choice voting: rewarding extremists

 

[Rigby5]

I used to admire the Libertarian Party in some respects. In fact, in 2020 I voted for the Libertarian candidate because they have been more closely aligned with my beliefs than the two major parties.

There are some things with which I disagree strongly with the LP, but now they have really gone batshit insane.

To wit, this tweet:

Wrong.

Lincoln did not start the Civil War to end slavery.
He was as racist as anyone, and participated in the illegal Blackhawk wars to commit genocide against plains Natives, and violate treaties.
No other country had to resort to a civil war to end slavery.
They all did it slowly, by financial incentives.
Only the US deliberately started an unnecessary war, where Sherman's March to the sea was deliberate war crimes against civilians.

The Libertarians are wrong about some things, but not this.

 

[GMCGeneral]

He calls eating pork an abomination, too.

And masturbation.

He put adultery in the Top Ten sins! And stealing! And bearing false witness!

Have any of you condemned Trump to hell?

Context, context, context. Remember that Christ Himself came to fulfill, not abolish the Law.

 

[g5000]

Trump is/was certainly no angel and violated many facets of Christianity.

And yet you never seem to work up ANY vitriol for Trump that you aim at homosexuals.