What is Digg?Sponsored by newegg
Missed out on the best electronic deals last Black Friday? view!
newegg.com - Newegg.com's Cyber Monday Promotion has you covered. No Lines, No Crowds; Just Click and Save.
118 Comments
- TheEngineer2008, on 11/07/2009, -12/+78I hope Judge Napolitano sits in for Glenn Beck more often. That being said, at least Beck lets Ron Paul on the show, unlike the rest of Fox (one only has to look at Fox's treatment of Ron Paul during the campaign to see the growing rift first hand).
- growvideos, on 11/07/2009, -3/+64I hope one day we have more choices - I am sick of Republicans and Democrats.
- juslen, on 11/07/2009, -18/+54I was listening to Glenn Becks radio program when he apologized to Libertarians for calling himself a Libertarian. But he later admitted that he is getting closer and closer to agreeing with many Libertarians on certain issues. And the way in which he said it, you could tell he was a bit apologetic because we was straying from his Conservative ideology.
But that just goes to show you the impact that Libertarians like Ron Paul and Judge Napolitano have on average Americans. And the great part is, Ron Paul isn't even a true Libertarian.. he like Rand Paul are Constitutional Conservatives. But the difference between Libertarians and Conservatives is key, its all about social issues.
But above all.. what can Unite Americans will be liberty and freedom. Political and Religious ideology aside, the constitution, the founding principles in which this country was created and the prosperous times which allowed the government to intervene in the first place is now in jeopardy. We are losing our freedoms and our rights because hard working Americans built a platform which allowed the government to step in and rob people of their livelihood, their future and soon their health. - PhillAholic, on 11/08/2009, -1/+34Glenn Beck (and his show) is full of *****. The only reason he or the rest of Fox News are giving Libertarians, Constitutional conservatives or those that think similarly any attention or TV time is because they are in contrast with much of what is going on in Liberal controlled Washington. Make no mistake about it, once the Republican party regains the White House they will kick Paul to the curb just like they did during the primaries. There should be a rift between the GOP and Libertarian minded groups, because the GOP only wants to promote the things Libertarians do when they aren't in power and not when there in power. All of these movements are doing nothing but contaminating the Libertarian message with GOP *****.
- rmxz, on 11/08/2009, -3/+33Growing?
Since Reagan tripled the national debt from $700 billion to $3 trillion there hasn't been much in common between republicans and libertarians beyond both thinking abortion's a states-rights issue.
Fiscally, Reagan's shift to "borrow and spend" allowed republicans to be *less* fiscally conservative than Democrats (who's "tax and spend" strategy is constrained by how much they can jack up taxes).
Regarding almost everything else (foreign wars; mid-east policies; giving money to other countries; drugs; etc) libertarians and republicans have almost diametrically opposed viewpoints. Heck, libertarians have more in common with democrats these days:
Relative to libertarians:
Democrats: agree on drug and gay policies
Republicans: agree that abortion should be a sttes rights issue
Both: disagree on foreign policy, fiscal policy, education, corporate welfare, etc.
I thought most thinking libertarians distanced themselves from Republicans quite some time ago. - Floobins, on 11/08/2009, -0/+28Since when were Libertarians ever close to the Republicans?
- Deveak, on 11/08/2009, -5/+30I used to be a republican, got sick of them and the dems, hate political party's like that, i guess I'm a.... conservative libertarian? can you be that? but yeah, the republican party seems to have abandoned the center right people and shoot for the neo cons and abandon all sanity. :(
- govsucks, on 11/08/2009, -6/+30Judge Napolitano is a person that actually understands the constitution and RESPECTS the liberty of others. Someone who would actually make a good president. SOOOO much better than these jerks that say "We won, prepare to have the jack boot of our ideology crush you."
- richirwin, on 11/08/2009, -2/+25This presumes that there is/was an affinity between republicans and libertarians.
This isn't/wasn't. - czernel, on 11/08/2009, -6/+27Dugg for Ron and Rand.
Freedom is popular - Ne007, on 11/08/2009, -11/+31l think it's awful the way people think it's cool to call Ron Paul supporters "paultards".
It's like they don't want to accept the answer to America's problems and want to belittle us for actually DOING SOMETHING!
I am part of something here and I am proud to be a Ron Paul republican. - nirvanix, on 11/08/2009, -2/+16I feel that Glenn Beck's job is to co-opt the grass roots movement in America and steer it off-course. He let's just enough truth on his show to buy credibility for himself, but then he always colors the issues enough to ultimately derail them.
- DrNemo, on 11/08/2009, -2/+15You had a choice within the republican party but you didn't seize it. Ron Paul would have been a great president, alas hated and derided because he wouldn't have gone the way of Obama and bail out everybody. Ending the Fed and its awful policies would have brought pain but also a needed correction to the mess we're in. Unfortunately we'll need to have a total collapse to end the madness.
- xedd, on 11/08/2009, -0/+11I am sick of seeing corporations influencing the governing of this nation to such a huge extent.
Campaign funding should be coming from the PEOPLE, not from the corporations. I wonder if the corporations want to limit the number of parties because it makes things much more simple for them to control: only two viable candidates per office that they need to buy through campaign financing. Otherwise, it gets hella more complicated and *ahem* expensive... - mintedmeadow, on 11/08/2009, -5/+16Most libertarians do _not_ agree with Democrats on gay policies. Democrats don't want to reform the marriage laws or give people any more freedoms, they just want to make it so that gays can get married. Libertarians typically, on the other hand, want the government to stop intervening in marriage completely -- except typically in the cases of minors, et cetera. Democrats just want to put a band-aid on an even larger problem.
- tonyjorb1337, on 11/08/2009, -0/+11I would say if you don't believe in voluntary contracts, you're not a libertarian.
- PhillAholic, on 11/08/2009, -3/+13Loosing an open mind because of the channel that something airs is participating in the same kind of activity that your burying in protest of.
- joculator, on 11/08/2009, -1/+11I don't think all Libertarians agree on fundamental issues.
- Seren2399, on 11/08/2009, -8/+18Thank God for Ron Paul
- gonzap1, on 11/08/2009, -0/+9Sadly, I agree with your statement. One the republicrats get the other side in..they will treat Dr. Paul with disdain.
- TheEngineer2008, on 11/08/2009, -0/+9Big government conservatives like Focus on the Family always push the GOP to embrace big government whenever they take power. Here's how it works:
1. Republicans gain control based on promises of limited government.
2. We get a few years of somewhat limited government, especially if the president is a Democrat.
3. We then watch the biggest statists in America -- social conservatives -- demand that the federal government "do something" about every perceived social ill in America.
4. We then watch the GOP respond to social con threats by becoming 100% statist. Every time the GOP gains ascendancy, it eventually decides it ought to use the power of the federal government to force "conservative" (in quotes because big government is never conservative) goals.
5. We then kick the statists out of power.
6. We then watch the GOP at least pretend to believe in small government (many in the coalition will simply wish to limit power of Dems, thus forming an accidental coalition).
7. Repeat. - Ymeg, on 11/08/2009, -7/+15You sound like the Republicans calling everyone a socialist.
- mdoverkill, on 11/08/2009, -0/+7^^^ No, they don't, there are many politicial philosophies that fall under the blanket term libertarianism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism
Libertarianism is a term adopted by a broad spectrum[1] of political philosophies which advocate the maximization of individual liberty[2] and the minimization or even abolition of the state.[3][4] Libertarians embrace viewpoints across that spectrum, ranging from pro-property to anti-property, from minarchist to openly anarchist.[1][5][6][7] - govsucks, on 11/08/2009, -5/+12That is just false. The very point of the libertarian party is to respect the liberty of others. My respect for your freedom allows you to choose any political viewpoint you wish WITHOUT my interference. Freedom is ANY ideology. Under the libertarian view, if you want to be a communist, you are free to do so. If you want to be a republican or democrat you are free to do so. THey ONLY thing you are NOT allowed to do is force those views on others. SO I whole heartedly reject your statement.
IF a group of people want to get together and form a department of education they are FREE to do so. What they are not free to do is force my participation. WHy can't people like you wrap your mind around that?
If a group of people want to get together and for a single payer system, they are FREE to do so. THey are not free to force my participation under the libertarian view point.
This is VERY simple ***** man. You are FREE to live under any ideology you wish, just not free to force it on others. Once again, why is it so hard for you to wrap your brain around that?
My plea to people like you is to stop trying to equate our belief that you should be able to live as you wish with force because its not. The only thing we force on you is that you don't force your beliefs, whatever they may be, on another human being. Thats it, period. Other than that, do whatever you want. LIve in a commune, drink each others pee, I don't give a flying *****. Just don't force those beliefs on me. - cjsmith87, on 11/08/2009, -1/+8ARE YOU KIDDING? He is the only man with answers that make sense. Are you telling me that Obama has a grand plan? Hell no him and Geithner and good ol Bernanke seem to be playing it by ear day to day. So I guess according to you a balanced budget is delusional, getting out of country building is not very effective, refusing to send free money to dictatorships whose people never see a dime is such a non republican thing to do.
You think were out of the recession? Take my word for it brother we are about to have one of the worst quarters (Q4) that we've seen in a couple years. And when we have to account for the ridiculous deficit, human ***** will literally hit the fan. - govsucks, on 11/08/2009, -1/+8babar,
If a commune forms around my house SO WHAT. AS long as they don't attempt to force me to join then I don't see an issue.
A single payer system is fine, as long as its not run by the government and forced on every citizen. If a group wants to get together and all put into one big pot and pay for all group members healthcare from that single payer then how is any other persons freedom taken. MANY communes exist that DO NOT force anyone to do anything. SOme of them are true pacifists and have existed for thousands of years.
There is a Buddhist commune less than a mile from my house. They don't bother anyone and I have no intention of making them do anything. So there you go, commune and individual living side by side without issues. The difference being that the Buddhists understand they have no right to force their will on others much like libertarians and very much unlike social collectivists.
Law simply prevents any commune from forcing others to join or participate. Unlike our current system that forces people to participate in everything from education to retirement to healthcare.
I still reject your statement. Just because you and others can't understand how to leave people alone, it doesn't mean myself and many other people will do the same. - SouthsideIrish, on 11/08/2009, -0/+7If you believe that government has the right to force you to do something, or even believe in government, you are not a Libertarian.
- fuzzynyanko, on 11/08/2009, -4/+11Napolitano rocks. I would have watched that show if I knew he was sitting in for Beck
- richirwin, on 11/08/2009, -1/+8"there hasn't been much in common between republicans and libertarians beyond both thinking abortion's a states-rights issue."
And ever there, there's a huge difference.
Libertarians believe abortion is a state's rights issue because they believe some states want abortion legalized and some states do not want abortion legalized.
republicans claim that abortion is a state's rights issue only as a first step toward criminalizing abortion.
It's like you and I agreeing that you should divorce your wife.
You want to divorce her because she's a bitch.
I want you to divorce her because I want to pork her. - WhiteHatTrick, on 11/08/2009, -12/+18You should becuase this is as close to anti fascist as you're gonna get on fascist tv news station
- erhanaltay, on 11/08/2009, -1/+7You do have more choices. I voted Libertarian last week (NJ elections) There were a ton of other parties on the ballet as well. If everyone who whined about wanting more choices actually exercised the choice they already had, we would be well on our way towards a multiparty system.
- AuriniDMJ, on 11/08/2009, -1/+7I'm utterly shocked ot see a conversation thread where both sides are presenting reasoned and lucid arguments, and yet one side isn't being buried in vote-downs - red-dots are reserved for the trolls. This is promising.
- sndream, on 11/08/2009, -0/+6The main difference is that Libertarians want to limit govt power, while Republican only want to limit Democrat govt power.
- jasoninoakland, on 11/08/2009, -0/+5@vuke69: That doesn't mean that there aren't plenty of (mostly older) libertarians who somehow reconcile disdain for marriage equality and limited government. Maybe we should stop calling these people libertarians and rather "Constitutional conseratives" as Rand Paul prefers to call himself.
- cswake, on 11/08/2009, -3/+8Reagan in 1975:
If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.
Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are travelling the same path. - babar77, on 11/08/2009, -7/+12Of course they do.
This is not meant to be an ignorant dig on libertarians. I learn far more from debating most libertarians than I would a Palinite. Libertarians are the only part of the Republican party with any sanity left. But there are two things I really wish Libertarians would stop lying to themselves about:
1) They know what the constitution says. If they really knew what the constitution says, they'd realize that the judicial branch has full authority over interpreting it, and that constitutional court law is in effect an extension of the constitution. Its fine if you don't agree with their interpretations. The Founding fathers knew there would be multiple interpretations of the various clauses, and were smart enough to separate interpretation of our laws to a separate branch. If you respect the constitution, then you respect the fact that the Supreme Court, and not libertarians has the legal final say on the interpretation of that document. But stop saying all you have to do is read the constitution, because that's 100% false. You have to read the volumes of court law created by the Supreme Court as well.
2) You are indeed forcing your ideology on others. This doesn't mean your ideology is wrong or ill intentioned. But anyone actively involved in politics is by definition trying to force their ideals on others, or at least a minority of others. Guess what, if someone honestly believes the Department of Education is the best way to provide education - rightly or wrongly - and you gain the power to abolish it, you've just forced your ideology on others. If someone feels that we should have a single payer system because they believe the evidence shows the insurance industry doesn't really make a service or good and market forces would be near impossible to bring to bear because of the nature of that particular sector of the economy, and you completely deregulate the industry and abolish all government programs concerning health care, you've just forced your ideology on others. Now you might be forcing less of your ideology on others then say Palinites would, but that doesn't mean you aren't guilty of it.
So my plea to libertarians is as follows: Stop hiding behind your claim that you're for the constitution and that you aren't trying like every other politician to force an ideology on others, because it isn't quite true, and nor is it really relevant. You should be debating your ideology on it's merits alone, not whether some document written 200 years ago says it should be done.
And be prepared for the backlash if you ever get into power. Because if there's one thing I know is true, it's America's willingness to impose laws on others. So when all these people realize that "personal liberties" and "limited government" means in practice their neighbors get to park 5 non-running rust buckets in their un-mowed front lawns and paint their house power blue with baby ***** orange trim, you're going to lose power really quick when you don't do anything about it. - breadfred, on 11/08/2009, -0/+5Glenn Beck portrays to be whatever makes him the most profit. Politics does not come into it.
- TobiasParker, on 11/08/2009, -0/+5I agree, however classical liberals like Friedman believe in limited government. I read Mises all the time and most(all?) of them are limited government types.
- govsucks, on 11/08/2009, -9/+14Sorry, someone that wants to force their ideology on you is arrogant. Libertarians don't believe in forcing their ideology on others.
- inactive, on 11/08/2009, -3/+7Why do people think that Atlas Shrugged represents libertarianism? Ayn Rand said some very mean things about libertarians in her day.
- scottpigeon, on 11/08/2009, -0/+4Some libertarians I associate with still toe the Republican line on things like gay marriage and abortion, and are critical of libertarians that came from the left. I find myself wondering why they didn't just stay in the Republican party. I wish the rift would grow, so that the LP would be more attractive and friendly to people coming from both sides, as both sides have their strong points that we welcome. It will never be a viable 3rd party if it keeps riding the coattails of another.
I think "Below The Beltway" explains it pretty well in his blog's tagline, "I believe in the free speech that liberals used to believe in, the economic freedom that conservatives used to believe in, and the personal freedom that America used to believe in." - drouix, on 11/08/2009, -0/+4For once I would like to hear a politician just say what they mean. But they can't because at they end of the day like many of us they are tying to keep there job. So imagine for second that your "leader" is trying to get your buy-in/vote so he can keep his job. for example libertarians and republicans should be on the same ticket. Does that help to clear up the message to the public or benefit the candidate? Anyone else get the sense that Ron and Rand might also not be on teh same page.
- iQAviDiQ, on 11/08/2009, -0/+4Glenn Beck, prior to his "fox" days, appeared to be libertarian leaning on many things. I actually used to enjoy his show. Once he hit fox news however, he changed his tone pretty dramatically in order to appeal to fox viewers and rake in the $$. He probably doesn't believe in half of what he says today...
- Waiting2awake, on 11/08/2009, -0/+4What in the world makes you think that?
- Mikelulz, on 11/08/2009, -2/+6Actually, most libertarians don't give a ***** about gay rights. A lot of them seem to have a disdain for the gay rights movement. I've heard libertarians seriously use the term "gay agenda" before, which just reinforces the belief I now hold, which is that libertarians don't really sympathize with gay rights advocates at all and that, no matter how much libertarians may say that they're opposed to both parties, they're really a lot closer to the GOP in the end.
I mean, really, gay marriage is about getting equal rights and the acceptance of society. Libertarians aren't concerned with equality so much as they're concerned with getting as much freedom as possible--the freedom to smoke weed, the freedom to carry guns in public, etc. Equal rights for gay people doesn't really come into the equation.
That's why they're currently allied with Republicans in the protests against healthcare reform. I mean, seriously, the people who are drumming up the support of the crowds of Tea Party protesters are people who are against gay marriage, and there are even "family values" organizations attending these protests. - Asromeburns, on 11/08/2009, -0/+4cant agree with PhillAholic and breadfred more. sorry you've grown cynical hakujin but i think auditing the fed is a good start. now they're trying to introduce a watered down version of that i believe.
- TobiasParker, on 11/08/2009, -1/+5Most libertarians are limited government. People who don't believe in government, like myself, are generally considered Anarcho-Capitalists, but we are close enough that we work together on most issues.
- mkw408, on 11/08/2009, -0/+4I agree. I believe there is a reason for his insanity. People that might be leaning towards that direction, are scared off when they see the nut jobs. The Teabaggers are a perfect example, you don't want to go join in the marches for fear you will be considered a rightwing extremists. The End the Fed marches don't get any publicity or they will show the couple a people who are destroying property.
Beck is putting the icing on the cake. Reeling the sheep back to the middle, towards complacency. - Mikelulz, on 11/08/2009, -0/+4Oh, and to reinforce my point: In the video, Judge Napolitano calls Doug Hoffman a "libertarian slash conservative" or something like that. Doug Hoffman is opposed to gay marriage. Apparently a belief in gay rights isn't a prerequisite for being libertarian.
- rpgmakr, on 11/09/2009, -0/+4This comment is unrelated to yours but HOLY *****! Rand Paul is a younger version of Ron Paul, seriously. The apple didn't fall too far from the tree :)
My hope has been restored. -
Show 51 - 100 of 122 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is