HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Politics 2014 (Forum) » Do libertarians ever piss...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:42 PM

Do libertarians ever piss you off more than conservatives?

Last edited Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:15 PM - Edit history (1)

I just hate how they tend to think of themselves as ultra-rational or as being above the left-right partisan fray. They seem to mistake consistency, simplicity, or parsimony for true logic. Einstein said, "Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler". Libertarians make things too simple. They also don't seem to be aware of the "is aught" problem of moral philosophy. They think they can derive the appropriate role of government by appealing to a small set of axiomatic "natural rights", most involving only negative liberty (i.e. the right to be left alone and not have any responsibility towards the greater good of society).

Here a number of things that make me want to slap libertarians silly...

1.) Calling anyone who supports regulation and limited economic redistribution for the sake of fairness and protection from harm a "statist".

2.) The "taxation is theft" meme. God, this just makes me want to strangle them.

3.) Completely naive and un-nuanced understanding of the "coercion" and "liberty".

4.) Resort to victim-blaming and just-world-fallacy arguments (the whole "personal responsibility" cliche) when morally cornered, then completely don't get why people get pissed off and bash libertarians.

5.) Claims that private charity will work just as well or even better than state-funded social safety nets, despite the overwhelming real world evidence to the contrary. When cornered on this obnoxiously revert to the tired "but that still doesn't justify paying with other people's money taken by force" argument, effectively proving that they really just don't give a fuck what would happen as long as they got theirs.

6.) Paranoid slippery slope arguments. "If government can make me pay for healthcare, what's stopping them from making me <insert ridiculous item>".

7.) Continual denial ("but that isn't real libertarianism") when you point out gross injustice, extreme poverty, and suffering brought on by temporary implementation of "free market" extremist policies in places like Chile and some former communist states. Leaders of these states basically had to give in and restore some small semblance of a welfare state or they would have faced a violent popular uprising.

8.) More moderate libertarians who are against eliminating worker rights and social safety nets get bent out of shape over my "unfair generalizations". This pisses me off more than anything as most libertarians, including those who support the policies advocated by the American Libertarian party itself, are anything but moderate. The "moderates" provide convenient cover for the majority of the nutcases and thus have no right to cry "persecution" whenever anyone criticizes their cherished ideology. Their ideology also has an undue influence on the new breed of "Tea Party" Republicans who have been interfering with Congress's ability to do its job for nearly two years.

103 replies, 15153 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 103 replies Author Time Post
Reply Do libertarians ever piss you off more than conservatives? (Original post)
frostfern Dec 2012 OP
onehandle Dec 2012 #1
dlwickham Dec 2012 #11
Vincardog Dec 2012 #23
dlwickham Dec 2012 #42
Walk away Dec 2012 #53
dlwickham Dec 2012 #55
pnwmom Dec 2012 #60
Vincardog Dec 2012 #78
PoliticalBiker Dec 2012 #94
pnwmom Dec 2012 #59
get the red out Dec 2012 #2
KarenS Dec 2012 #10
HankyDub Dec 2012 #22
budkin Dec 2012 #3
Efilroft Sul Dec 2012 #4
Jackpine Radical Dec 2012 #26
RomneyLies Dec 2012 #5
taught_me_patience Dec 2012 #6
TexasBushwhacker Dec 2012 #96
davidn3600 Dec 2012 #97
rablrouzer Dec 2012 #7
coalition_unwilling Dec 2012 #48
Jennicut Dec 2012 #64
dlwickham Dec 2012 #8
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #9
sadbear Dec 2012 #12
trublu992 Dec 2012 #14
LeftInTX Dec 2012 #18
Gidney N Cloyd Dec 2012 #13
coalition_unwilling Dec 2012 #49
CTyankee Dec 2012 #15
Wise Child Dec 2012 #87
CTyankee Dec 2012 #88
frostfern Dec 2012 #16
sadbear Dec 2012 #17
busterbrown Dec 2012 #44
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #19
coalition_unwilling Dec 2012 #50
Skittles Dec 2012 #20
forestpath Dec 2012 #21
Lordquinton Dec 2012 #24
muktiman Dec 2012 #46
liberalmuse Dec 2012 #28
athenasatanjesus Dec 2012 #25
liberalmuse Dec 2012 #27
Liberalagogo Dec 2012 #29
Wait Wut Dec 2012 #30
Still Sensible Dec 2012 #31
Phillyindy Dec 2012 #32
Walk away Dec 2012 #54
tclambert Dec 2012 #33
Hydra Dec 2012 #34
abelenkpe Dec 2012 #35
Thinkingabout Dec 2012 #36
Paladin Dec 2012 #37
Ratty Dec 2012 #38
frostfern Dec 2012 #56
Mr.Turnip Dec 2012 #39
DonCoquixote Dec 2012 #40
Third Doctor Dec 2012 #41
SouthernDonkey Dec 2012 #65
Zoeisright Dec 2012 #43
pnwmom Dec 2012 #61
Wounded Bear Dec 2012 #45
Generic Brad Dec 2012 #47
BadGimp Dec 2012 #51
patrice Dec 2012 #52
allan01 Dec 2012 #57
Turbineguy Dec 2012 #58
Prophet 451 Dec 2012 #62
frostfern Dec 2012 #63
frostfern Dec 2012 #66
Norrin Radd Dec 2012 #67
lunatica Dec 2012 #68
MurrayDelph Dec 2012 #74
Proud Liberal Dem Dec 2012 #69
lunatica Dec 2012 #70
Codeine Dec 2012 #71
Tom Ripley Dec 2012 #72
Blasphemer Dec 2012 #73
Kennah Dec 2012 #75
napoleon_in_rags Dec 2012 #76
madrchsod Dec 2012 #77
LeftishBrit Dec 2012 #79
WhoWoodaKnew Dec 2012 #80
hrmjustin Dec 2012 #81
WhoWoodaKnew Dec 2012 #83
JLII Dec 2012 #82
NYC Liberal Dec 2012 #84
Jamaal510 Dec 2012 #85
DebJ Dec 2012 #86
Jamaal510 Dec 2012 #92
Springslips Dec 2012 #89
Arkana Dec 2012 #90
Jamaal510 Dec 2012 #91
dbackjon Dec 2012 #93
Third Doctor Dec 2012 #95
Name removed Apr 2013 #98
Name removed Sep 11 #99
uppityperson Sep 11 #100
Al Carroll Sep 11 #101
Half-Century Man Sep 11 #102
clg311 Sep 11 #103

Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:48 PM

1. They are right-wing fanatics who pretend to be open-minded as some sort of con.

Nothing more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Reply #1)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:16 PM

11. not all of them are

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dlwickham (Reply #11)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:58 PM

23. Right not all of them are bothering to pretend

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vincardog (Reply #23)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 07:55 PM

42. you have some libertarians who are actually libertarians

and not closet republicans



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dlwickham (Reply #42)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 10:09 PM

53. Their ideology is cruel and anti social.

I call Libertarians "Republicans without hearts". They advocate people dying rather than living with government help. Nasty!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Walk away (Reply #53)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 10:23 PM

55. it's selfish

and anti-social to a point

but I wouldn't necessarily call it cruel-cruelty is in the eye of the beholder

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dlwickham (Reply #55)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 10:50 PM

60. Their economic policies are more cruel and more right wing

than many "traditional" Republicans -- like Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, and GHW Bush.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dlwickham (Reply #55)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 04:16 PM

78. Exactly which of their selfish destructive policies are you trying to defend?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dlwickham (Reply #42)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 05:07 PM

94. I disagree...

Libertarians are ultra-conservative republicans. Not not butt-nugget crazy like the TeaBaggers, but close.
Some of thier ideas have merit, but not in the context in which they place them.
Their position on taxation has appeal, but is not practical.
Their position on foreign intervention has some good points, but can be shot full of holes on specifics
As a governing philosophy, it is totally unworkable for a country of 300 million +

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dlwickham (Reply #11)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 10:48 PM

59. They all are ultra-right wing in their economic views.

Some of them just want to smoke their dope, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:48 PM

2. They are generally hypocrites

Generally, they don't want anyone to receive any "entitlements" unless you start listing those they might qualify for now or in the future; then you enter "sacred entitlement" territory (for THEM not those lazy people who aren't them).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to get the red out (Reply #2)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:16 PM

10. Most definately hypocrites, at least the ones I know are.

Not only on the "entitlements" but also on the not wanting to pay taxes thing while loving to travel on the open road and visiting State & National Parks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to get the red out (Reply #2)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:56 PM

22. I had a hilarious conversation with one of these d-bags once.

 

So he's yapping about dehr guberment and how it ruins everything, then I notice that he's going to school at the University of Minnesota.

Hilarity ensued.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:57 PM

3. Yes because they are completely ignorant about how everything works

Their basic motto is "everyone for themselves." Totally absurd.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:58 PM

4. Libertarianism dresses selfishness with a political philosophy.

Conservatism accessorizes that dressing with flag pins made in China.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Efilroft Sul (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:30 PM

26. I forgive you your backwards-spelled user name

because of this great aphorism, and because of the Yeats quote in your sig line.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:00 PM

5. Libertarians in sheep's clothing piss me off the most.

 

Glenn Greenwald comes to mind here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:00 PM

6. Simple minded solutions to complex problems

and nearly always wrong in real-world application.

Great post... big kick and recommend.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to taught_me_patience (Reply #6)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 01:34 AM

96. Yeah, go back on the gold standard, audit the Fed, free market everything

I have a young friend that believes in all this stuff and I just say "Great, except that's never going to happen." Audit the Fed? Okay, 10 years later it's audited, what are you going to do? Who's going to decide what's okay and what isn't? Is the Fed going to have to go through bankruptcy? Are you going to put someone in prison? If anyone did anything illegal, my money would be on Alan Greenspan and he's 86 years old! Go back on the gold standard? No one on the planet is on the gold standard anymore. Unless all countries went back on a gold standard, no countries could. Free market everything? No regulations? No EPA, no OSHA, no FDA. People like the Koch brothers would feed you a hot dish of fecal matter and tell you it's health food because it's "organic".

Ron Paul and his libertarian followers are like broken clocks. Just because they're right occasionally doesn't mean their system has any chance of working.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TexasBushwhacker (Reply #96)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 03:43 AM

97. Their issue is with the Feds, not government in general

They believe in government on the local and state level...but they hate a centralized federal government because they feel it breeds corruption, can't police itself, and can't limit itself. They feel it continues to grow in perpetuity until it either becomes a monster or it collapses on its own weight.

That's their mindset. Libertarians are not anarchists. They support strong state governments.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:09 PM

7. Not really, a "poopological" response

If you want to take apart a Libertarian, and they'll give you the time, and you have the patience, get a copy of their own "platform," and go through it with them.

The LP, for example, doesn't have the courage to take a position on abortion.

All their high flying rhetoric about individual rights, "We hold that all individuals have the right to exercise sole dominion over their own lives . . . "

and property

"The owners of property have the full right to control, use, dispose of, or in any manner enjoy, their property without interference"

DOES NOT EXTEND TO A WOMAN'S CONTROLLING HER OWN WOMB.


I like to poke at them about sewage.

They just haven't thought out what economists call externalities, and I call poop.

Most of us live downstream, and therefore drink the urine and poop (and toxic chemicals) flushed downriver.

The Libertarian Manifesto guts what rights we downstream drinkers have to go to court or Congress and "force" those flushing human excrement into our rivers to stop.

"Do you want to drink poop," I ask.

"Of course not!"

Libertarianism is mind-poop. It is only credible because its adherents have never known an "uncivilized," meaning unregulated, life.

http://www.lp.org/platform

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rablrouzer (Reply #7)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 09:46 PM

48. +1,000,000,000 x 1,000,000,000 - Well put and definitely

 

needed saying.

Ask them how they feel about 'slavery' and see what they say. Underneath their anti-government patina lies a pronounced pro-states' rights (racist) bias.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rablrouzer (Reply #7)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 11:46 PM

64. Perfect response to libertarians.

"Do you want to drink poop?"



I need to use that on one when I get in an argument.

Libertarians are extremely ignorant about what a country would be with little to no rules and regulations. They have had it too easy and take it all for granted. I do have some libertarian leaning ideas such as legalizing most drugs and prostitution. But then libertarians tell me that regulating markets and what we can do to the environment and ensuring workers' rights and gay rights and women's rights is wrong. And then I just get disgusted with them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:15 PM

8. some progressive piss me off more than some conservatives

because I think they should know better but then they go and surprise me by being total assholes

this does NOT refer to the OP or anyone in this thread

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:15 PM

9. Not really.

If they're anti-war and pro-civil liberties, they don't bother me too much. I'll never agree with them on economics, but i definitely have more in common with them than with mainstream Repubs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:19 PM

12. YES!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadbear (Reply #12)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:25 PM

14. Future Republiican Party

I think this what republicans will morph into in the future when being republican is no longer viable. Some are anti war and pro civil liberties but they all seem to share the "me and me only" attitude and are completely oblivious as to how they have benefited from the social contract.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trublu992 (Reply #14)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:55 PM

18. Republicans seem to be picking and choosing from the libertarians

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:23 PM

13. For people who want to be left alone they sure like to steal my time telling me about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gidney N Cloyd (Reply #13)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 09:48 PM

49. Hah! We should develop a 'Libertarian Meter' that we can start running when

 

one of those asswipes starts in with their bullshit and then bill them for our time

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:27 PM

15. People who call themselves Libertarians but then turn around and say they are pro-life just

floor me. Do they realize that they support the idea that the STATE should control whether or when a woman chooses to have a child?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #15)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 09:08 AM

87. The Libertarian label

is useful for college aged (and young adult) children of Fundie parents who want to rebel, but not in any good, retrospective way. The parents probably assume that their dear, sweet yet opinionated child would never deviate from the two red button issues of abortion and gay rights. Doing so would be considered an existential threat to their soul. And maybe they don't deviate from those two issues, after all they like the attention with the label.

They hope to pass off their new found Libertarian label as some kind of a super - conservative. It also makes them feel special.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Wise Child (Reply #87)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 09:34 AM

88. "it makes them feel special."

That's a good point! I hadn't thought of that before, but now that you mention it I can see how that could be the case...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:29 PM

16. Another thing....

Last edited Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:09 PM - Edit history (1)

I've noticed that a lot of 20 somethings go for the libertarian label because it seemingly represents a "third path". They want to see themselves as independent thinkers so they can say they are above partisan politics. The problem is when you argue with them they only present abstract principles. I find that when I get down to really specific instances a lot of them start to back-pedal and find themselves in at least partial agreement. I'm overwhelmingly progressive, but there are specific instances when I've sided with the libertarian position, against state intervention. When I decide on the necessity of regulations or safety-net provisions, I do it by looking at the pro's and con's on a case-by-case basis. Libertarians generally don't do this unless you force them to. They would rather use this abstract default position that regulation is always bad.

Younger libertarians generally give me hope because I can see that they are just naive and might hopefully grow out of it. On specifics the more intelligent ones concede certain points but it seems like they just don't want to let go of their cherished label. It's not cool to be a boring liberal or progressive. They want to be a special snowflake but aren't left wing enough to go for the Green Party or become Socialists, so they go for libertarianism.

Unfortunately it's been my experience that most libertarians over 30 are of the "I got mine, fuck you" mindset who when push comes to shove will vote for a Republican over a Democrat. In other words they're conservatives who don't want to own up to the label because they don't want to be seen anywhere near the religious right who they see as intellectual inferiors, bigots, and racists.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Reply #16)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:40 PM

17. Most libertarians I know are atheist republicans.

They're pretty well educated (usually techies) and feel they have sufficient job skills to make themselves indispensable, and that they have "earned" everything they have. A harsh dose of reality will makes them either progressives or hard-core republicans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Reply #16)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 08:07 PM

44. They think Ron Paul is cool! For Pot, Hookers and against war. ôSimplification" you say, Correct!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:17 PM

19. Just another flavor of deranged utopianism.

They're either the stupidest people on earth, or the absolutely most useless smart people on earth. I can't decide which, but there's little practical difference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #19)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 09:51 PM

50. Good point. I'd like to put in a pitch for utopianism that isn't deranged. (The word

 

'Utopia' comes from Greek for 'No place,' if I remember Thomas More correctly.)

Marxism is about as close as you can get to utopianism that isn't deranged, imho.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:18 PM

20. I've never met a self-professed Libertarian who wasn't an idiot

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:31 PM

21. Yes, because they don't call themselves what they are - REPUBLICANS.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forestpath (Reply #21)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:21 PM

24. What he said

Only replace republican with anarchist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lordquinton (Reply #24)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 09:08 PM

46. that gives anarchists a bad name.

no they are half wits.
everybody agrees with freedom but freedom without responsibility is impossible. so they only have half the picture.

they are extremely irritating b/c they talk in platitudes and are impervious to REASON. boorish selfish fundamentalists that think they are superior. i don't bother with them any more, they are a waste of time.

most of the young Libertarians out grow it, the older ones, forget it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forestpath (Reply #21)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:33 PM

28. EXACTLY.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:24 PM

25. I'm pissed off that the media has turned the word Libertarian into only RW Libertarian.

Libertarian isn't supposed to have anything to do with the economy one way or another.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:32 PM

27. Yes.

The selfishness and disconnect from reality is stunning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:34 PM

29. Libertarians

are just republicans that want to smoke pot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:35 PM

30. Frequently.

For the most part, I've met two types of 'Libertarians'. Those that are so far right that they want to do away with any and all government and think we've all been microchipped and the pot smokers that only pay attention to politics enough to hear "Ron Paul wants to legalize pot" and nothing else. The rest are uninformed Independents that get their political views from bumper stickers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:42 PM

31. Generally, I find it hard to respect today's "libertarians"

because they aren't consistent. They are "selectively" libertarian more often than not, tying themselves in knots trying to reconcile their positions with fundamentalists and other right wing viewpoints.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:48 PM

32. Wanna know how to stump a libertarian?

 

...ask a follow up question. These people have the critical thinking skills of a small child. Taking any of their ideas to their logical conclusion always spells disaster and chaos. Frustrating thing is you can explain this on a case by case basis, in indisputable fashion, and it just goes in one ear and out the other.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Phillyindy (Reply #32)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 10:15 PM

54. Or if you meet a Jewish Libertarian (I know one)

tell him you agree with his view on cutting off all aid, weapons and military support to Israel because you know Libertarians are isolationists and would rather pay taxes that fight a war for another country.
I thought this poor man would actually have a cow!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:56 PM

33. Libertarian is simply a modern rebranding of Anarchist.

Bad government can be a terrible thing. One of the worst forms of government is no government at all, exactly what anarchists and libertarians want. And then "no government" quickly degenerates into the very worst form of government--tyrannical dictatorship--when somebody sees the vacuum of power and decides to seize control by force.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:57 PM

34. Both groups annoy me about equally

And btw, #6 is valid and will be a problem in the future.

Libertarians trust people with money simply because they HAVE money. That's just stupid.

Conservatives think things are better when we all think/act/believe the same thing(that they approve of). Authoritarians are only as right as the people leading them.

They're both coming from the same place to worship the same things, so they're basically the same with a little different window dressing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:57 PM

35. All the time

In america libertarians are just mean bullies looking for justification for their assholery.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 07:02 PM

36. Libertians want to throw the 2nd Amendment into play but want less government

When it works for themselves but do not feel everyone else has the same rights. Besides all this, it makes some crazy like Rand Paul.

I find it interesting Ron Paul wants to stop the spending but still adds earmarks to bills he knows are going to pass and then votes against them. Now this is a good example of someone stopping the spending.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 07:07 PM

37. Regularly. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 07:36 PM

38. Absolutely!

They are smug in a way that conservatives often are not. They revel in their own supposed intelligence while the typical conservative takes pride in his ignorance. They are overwhelmingly male - don't know what that means but it's irritating as well. And the blindness and hypocrisy, geez even conservatives don't have that level of hypocrisy. They call themselves Libertarians because they are antiwar and/or pro pot and smugly, stupidly believe that's all there is too it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ratty (Reply #38)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 10:23 PM

56. I notice the smugness too...

That's why I call them "glibertarians". It's hard to argue with them because they have these cute little canned arguments, anecdotes, and talking points to counter anything you bring up. They love to argue and must spend an inordinate amount of time learning all the ways to rhetorically counter whatever you throw at them, but no time considering whether any of it really makes sense.

They like to flout their supposedly superior understanding of economics. They have a real fetish for Austrian economics and like to thump people over the head with quotes from Fredrick Hayek or Milton Friedman. They may have a little bit more knowledge than the average joe but immediately run into problems with anyone who has actually studied macro-economics. Their understanding is about as deep as a puddle. They only study as far as they can use it for rhetorical advantage.

I've also noticed a lot of idiocy in the way they respond with "but you don't understand economics" whenever you express an opinion against their free-market dogmatism. They don't seem to understand the "is aught" problem in that they positively advocate for a specific economic setup while pretending they are somehow value neutral. They cannot be truly value-neutral when they decide to positively advocate for a certain economic setup because they are ultimately appealing to how the world "aught" to be in their utopian vision with has almost nothing to do with any objective study of economics in the real world. In the real world the study of economics really boils down to the study of inordinately complex systems of human behavior, with varying degrees of competition and cooperation. Economics has absolutely nothing to do with "freedom". When they talk about economics all they're doing is dressing up their ideology in a bunch of jargon to sound more intelligent and sophisticated than they actually are and hopefully intimidate whoever they are arguing with into giving up. It's so ridiculously futile.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 07:49 PM

39. Yes, its one of the most fantastical utopian bullshit ideologies out there.

The Tea Party guys are also super nonsense but at least they generally don't act like they have some sort of professorial superiority to you while believing in some of the most simplistic ideas there are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 07:54 PM

41. They sure do.

I debated one that viewed taxes as stolen money and the the federal government could not afford "entitlements" even thought he was in the military and living off of the publc dole. He also said that the government has put too many regulations in the way of corporations. Umm.. You can imagine how I reacted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Third Doctor (Reply #41)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 12:14 AM

65. Same here!

A guy I worked with. We got into it on Facebook right before the elections. He was in the military for years, and retired from a high paying federal job. He never joined our union nor paid dues, but he benefited by everything we did for him, including a huge pay negotiation that he took gladly. I called him a leach and a hypocrite. His wife became a citizen when he married her in Korea while in the service. Yet he bitched about entitlements, and Obama's birth certificate and non citizenship status, and how he used a stolen SS number. That kind of crap! What a total hypocrite. He said he didn't mind if rich people paid no taxes at all, as they were the job creators!
I couldn't help myself. I just came right out and called him an f'n idiot. Of course then I get the tired old line "when you liberals can no longer intelligently discuss an issue you resort to name calling! wahhh wahhh wahhhh" I responded "only because capital murder carries the death penalty! .....Stupid!" These guys just grate on my nerves they are so ignorant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 08:00 PM

43. They're usually just lazy repukes.

And they're really immature.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zoeisright (Reply #43)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 10:51 PM

61. Or pot-smoking repukes. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 09:02 PM

45. Yeah, they do....

I consider them Republicans on steroids. It pisses them off when I call them that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 09:24 PM

47. I've encountered quite a few self proclaimed libertarians

The ones I have met are typically well spoken and passionate about their positions. Their inability to comprehend cause and effect or logic is staggering. Their arguments are heavy on form and extremely light in substance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 10:01 PM

51. not really

I find died in the wool Libertarians (as a group) to be Intellectually Lazy, Morally Selfish and Socially Irresponsible. Much more so than mainline Conservatives imo.

When someone demonstrates they have no interest in coming to terms with the outcome that would occur if they get their way, and they can't or won't even see the trajectory that we would be on, and the consequences we would have to deal with if we did things their way, I just walk away. These folks can not be reasoned with.

No sense in getting upset at them.

Hey Libertarians...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 10:08 PM

52. I have known a lot of "Libertarians". I think they are mis-named. They are Contrarians.

Adolescent minds that have not and may never progress beyond the mistaken ideology that freedom = no consequences, which mistaken assumption puts them always and forever ENSLAVED to reactionary knee-jerk responses to ANY and every power and authority, actual or simply mis-perceived as such. They can't see the forest for the trees. They don't know how to pick their battles. All locus of control is external. They get USED, usually by other "Libertarians". They're doing waaaaaaaaaaaay too many drugs and I DON'T mean just cannabis.

Freedom is the ability and potential to manage and mitigate consequences as much as necessary and then to CHOOSE to act purposefully anyway at the best possible strategic moment even with whatever consequences that remain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 10:33 PM

57. re:Do libertarians ever piss you off more than conservatives?

these folk are pusedo republicans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 10:42 PM

58. The libertarians will never succeed

there is simply too large a shortage of psychopaths in the country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 11:02 PM

62. Constantly

Libertarianism is the philosophy of sociopaths and dumbfucks who like to think they have political sophistication. It's the philosophy that others should starve so I don't have to pay taxes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 11:07 PM

63. Oh, another thing that pisses me off...

Whenever you explain how tax cutting and deregulation has only created greater and greater inequality and more and more extreme concentrations of wealth and power in the hands of what are effectively a bunch of global quasi-monopolies they always run their mouth off with "but that isn't capitalism, that's corporatism"

Everything I bring up that's fucked up and unjust with the current situation they claim to agree with me, but then they always go through the same tiresome mental gymnastics where they turn it around and blame government. They want to claim that things like massive monopolies, financial fraud, "too big to fail" banks, worker exploitation, etc... would never exist if we had "True Capitalism (TM)" instead of "Government Crony Capitalism (TM)". They seem to have no idea that none of these things require government/business collusion or even central banks. Capitalism rife with overt fraud, greed, exploitation, panics, crashes, and brutal economic depressions with massive unemployment where commonplace all throughout the entire 19th century when government was hardly involved.

The worst part is even when they admit how fucked up things have gotten, that the government is corrupt in in the pockets of big business, etc... they still think the solution is not to actually hold the culprits accountable. Noooo... the solution is to get rid of government subsidies and deregulate and everything will be hunky dory.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 12:46 AM

66. Actually you know what...

The thing that gets my dander the most...

9.) If you don't agree with me you just don't understand economics...

wherein they presume to "educate" me, until they find out I actually have a much deeper understanding (have read graduate level texts, etc...) than they do.

There's nothing that irritates me more than an idiot that presumes to be some kind of intellectual elite. No, being a soulless free-market wanker who doesn't care if people starve on the street doesn't make you smarter than me.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 04:55 AM

67. The Big L libertarians should more accurately refer to themselves as "minarchists."

Since they hypocritically think our taxes should pay for the police and military to protect their stuff. They would gladly drag us back to feudalism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 11:03 AM

68. They're always very impressed with themselves

I agree with every word you said. I just never saw it all laid out so well before. But yeah, whenever I see Rand Paul I really do want to slap him hard. Even when I don't hear what he says.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lunatica (Reply #68)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 12:22 AM

74. This is akin to what I have said here (and elsewhere) before

Libertarians operate on two presumptions:

an artificially high (and false) view of their own value

and an equally artificially low (and equally false) view of everyone else's.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 11:22 AM

69. Libertarians don't usually bother me THAT much

Their economic policies/messaging suck but at least they aren't crazy/fanatical about social issues and mostly progressive (or at least "hands-off") about things like abortion rights, gay rights, etc. Unfortunately, where they go wrong for me is their belief that they can pare government back to next to nothing and still maintain a functioning society (maybe at one point in history but definitely NOT now), as well as their general Randian disregard for "others". I could just not be capable of being that cold and heartless so as to ignore the needs and suffering of others but it wouldn't be a bad idea to try to find common ground with them when we can. These are "Republicans" that I think that we have a better chance of dealing with IMHO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 11:41 AM

70. I really enjoyed reading this thread

Welcome to DU!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 12:11 PM

71. Libertarians are just extreme righties who like to smoke weed. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 03:53 PM

72. Only when they go and on about their limited edition action figures

as if I really give a damn about that stuff

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 04:34 PM

73. Absolutely!

And according to the political compass, I am left-libertarian so it's not as if I don't have any points of agreement with them. But yes, they are generally extremely self-satisfied and not at all open to criticism of their ideas. There's a certain "cool kids club" element to the whole movement. I've known lefties who've become part of the movement for short periods of time and when it happens, they become hyper-focused on issues like drug laws and completely ignore the rest of the platform. It is no coincidence that it is very attractive to the more privileged amongst us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 01:46 AM

75. I find them to be pretentious liars

I once called one on the 14th Amendment, and he defiantly proclaimed, "I've read the Constitution, and I know what it says."

I immediately turned to my computer, googled the 14th Amendment, pulled it up, then watched as his argument collapsed.

I then poked a figurative stick in him by saying, "I thought you'd read the Constitution."

He then said, "Well, it's kinda long, so I haven't read the whole thing."

"Really fuckstick? Take an hour away from movies and Fox News." OK, I really didn't say that, but I thought it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 01:59 AM

76. No.

Why? Because I find conservative advocates of "small government"who want forced vaginal insertions for women contemplating abortion more offensive than advocates of small government who do not. I find advocates of "small government" who are against man-man love in the bedroom more offensive than those who are not. I find advocates of "small government" willing to spend trillions a year locking up people for smoking weed more offensive than those who are not willing to do that.

The Republican party is conservative, not libertarian. And I find anybody willing to talk about how "Okay" these forced vaginal insertions, these totalitarian pot laws, these anti-gay laws, in contrast to a the marginalized LP, as frankly quite cowardly. Thank God we have a brave and bold leadership in the Dem party who isn't afraid to stand up against those standing up against them, otherwise there never could have been a win in the last election.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:13 AM

77. yes....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 05:57 PM

79. Yes

At least the people who call themselves libertarians nowadays.
In the UK, libertarian used to mean 'civil libertarian', and what is now called libertarianism was called 'laissez faire economics'. But more recently the British seem to have adopted the American terminology.

I get quite frustrated by the so-called libertarians, as they tend to be more arrogant about their beliefs than many Conservatives, and as they try to group things together that don't really go together at all. The argument is that free-market economics goes along with social liberalism and civil liberties. But it doesn't. As I've said several times on the board, if you are economically right-wing you can only be socially liberal and pro-civil liberties for those above a certain income. The threat of severe poverty, of losing your job and then freezing or starving in the street or dying from lack of healthcare, is just as oppressive as the threat of social ostracism or police action or imprisonment.

I once came across an Australian playground rhyme, which sums up the basics of libertarianism:

Australia is a free land,
Free without a doubt.
If you haven't any dinner,
Then you're free to go without!

Actually the rhyme is a bit unfair to Australia, which so far as I'm aware from the other end of the world, has a reasonably good social safety net. But it just about sums up the way libertarianism operates!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:23 PM

80. I know a whole lotta hardcore republicans that hate libertarians.

i think, on some issues, they remind them of what some republicans use to be like. it's more an embarrassment thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WhoWoodaKnew (Reply #80)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:30 PM

81. Welcome to DU, and I hope you enjoy the site.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #81)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:41 PM

83. Thanks!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:44 PM

82. Not really, because...

 

... like "conservative" and "liberal", "libertarian" has been redefined to mean whatever anyone wants it to mean. For example, no person who would interfere in reproductive rights is in fact a libertarian. That the Pauls claim to be libertarians without challenge tells us we live in a degenerate culture as much as it informs us about other substantive points.

Conservatives used to favor strong central government and understand the need for regulation of commerce because proper regulation ensured competition. Then REACTIONARIES redefined their nutty beliefs as conservatism without objection from the press, and the word 'conservative' meant whatever they wanted it to mean. Similarly, liberals of my youth believed the individual was the thing and government, while necessary, needed close watching. Then radicals redefined the liberal position as advancing government rights over individual rights for the so-called greater good, again without media challenge, and another word lost closely defined meaning.


Probably the most hilarious word-game media cop out of my life is over economics terminology. In the 1980s FriedmaNUTs wanted to give a Keynesian bump to the economy through corporations instead of federal programs or even state programs, but FriedmaNUTs loathed the word "Keynesian" because it has 'big government' implications, and so pulled "supply side" out of their butts. And it stuck to the point where halfwits refuse to see supply side as anything except public welfare to private corporations.

More recently Obama criticized "trickle-down" and "supply side" economics in his campaign yet the bulk of his stimulus was pushed into the supply side through state and local governments, clearly a trickle-down (supply side) effort, and in a hilarious tribute to Swift, described as "demand side". Predictably every form of media dutifully ignored that state and local governments are forms of corporations and reported the fantasy instead of the reality.

So, to your original point, what passes for libertarians today are mostly a gaggle of delusional idiots, but are not in the original sense of the word anything close to libertarians. Like all unconstrained delusional indiots, they bear watching, but they don't anger me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 12:36 AM

84. Many "libertarians" don't really want less government. They want less federal government.

Most are all for intrusive STATE governments banning things like abortion, same-sex marriage, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 01:27 AM

85. One thing that you didn't mention is how

many libertarians affectionately give false equivalence to both sides of the aisle. They love to say things like "Obama=Bush" or "left-wing, right-wing, same corporate bird". That really pisses me off because they're neglecting the fact that RW and Republican politics are responsible for our inequality and much of our issues nationwide and worldwide. For starters, Democratic presidents have created more jobs than Republicans have since the mid-20th century.

Also another thing that annoys me about libertarians (in addition to how they love to spam "RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT" on any YouTube political video) is how they prioritize the "freedom" of corporations and the wealthy elite over everyone else. This is definitely the case when you take into consideration their opposition to the safety net, taxation, environmental standards, food standards, funding of public schools, socialized health care, and anti-discrimination laws. Apparently the freedoms of the non-rich, women, and minorities don't count to them. And neither does the freedom to live. It's okay for corporations to step in and monopolize the free market and for the 1% to hoard cash, but it's not okay for Mr. Average Joe to have enough spending cash to buy all his necessities.

I just think their vision of freedom and liberty sounds vague.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 03:04 AM

86. I've told a few they should go to Somalia, which reflects their desires for

a perfect country: nearly no government, lots of guns........enjoy the freedom, buddy!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DebJ (Reply #86)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 03:55 PM

92. That question was asked on YA about why Libertarians and Republicans

don't want to move to Somalia, and one person actually said "because I don't want to get randomly shot". You cannot make this stuff up!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 02:24 PM

89. They have no answer to corporate power.

If government is so scaled back corporations can gut work laws. We would go back to the days of the 80-hour work week, no vacations, child labor, dangerous work environments, ect. We wouldn't have the freedom we experience today, as we would be living in corporate tyranny. Too me, their is no difference between corporate and government tyranny, so their points are moot until they describe how an individual frees themselves from corporate without government or union power. I know what they say, that "no one forces you to work for a corporation." But when you think about it that goes against their free -market philosophy in many ways.

That's why when they call me "statists" I call them "Corporatist".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 02:38 PM

90. More, because they like to pretend they're not conservatives.

My personal favorites are Ron Paul's acolytes--the ones who like to think they're better than your average teabagging moron because they're for legalizing weed and against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. When called on it, they will invariably answer with something like "You should read some of the things Dr. Paul (they always call him this, it's like Jewish folks always typing G-d instead of God) has written. Maybe then you'd see the truth."

What they fail to realize about Lord Paul is that he's not against the War on Drugs--he's against a FEDERAL War on Drugs. He'd be just fine if all 50 states set up task forces to round up anyone caught with a joint in their pocket.

And he's not against killing Muslims--he's against it because it's federal money that's being spent. If the entirety of the American contingent in the Middle East was made up of private contractors and weekend warriors, "Dr. Paul" would be just fine.

Libertarians piss me off because they live in a fantasy world--where every man and woman is so generous that there's no need for a social safety net, where anti-discrimination laws are unnecessary because minorities and gays can just go elsewhere when told their business isn't wanted, and where horrible working conditions, slave wages, and godawful schedules are just hunky-dory because you can just quit and get another job! It's the political mindset of a 13-year-old and to see it in grown men and women pisses me off to no end.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Arkana (Reply #90)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 03:53 PM

91. That's an interesting way of looking at his drug and war stances.

"What they fail to realize about Lord Paul is that he's not against the War on Drugs--he's against a FEDERAL War on Drugs. He'd be just fine if all 50 states set up task forces to round up anyone caught with a joint in their pocket.

And he's not against killing Muslims--he's against it because it's federal money that's being spent. If the entirety of the American contingent in the Middle East was made up of private contractors and weekend warriors, "Dr. Paul" would be just fine."

Judging by his position on things like the CR Act and those newsletters that were revealed, you're probably correct. I think he could care less about all the people of color that the Drug War has disproportionately affected; he probably only cares about not having federal money go into it, like you said. Both libertarians and liberals oppose it, but for different reasons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 04:34 PM

93. Yes, because they are mostly clueless about reality

I constantly hear "Government shouldn't be in the business of regulating marriage - so I am opposing Gay Marriage because I don't want to expand it".

They beleive that is the path to equality - taking away the thousands of rights straight married couples have to bring them down to the ZERO rights gay married couples have.


When I ask if they file separate returns, don't use any of the federal marriage benefits, etc, I get blank stares.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 12:01 AM

95. This guy sums it up nicely.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)


Response to frostfern (Original post)


Response to Name removed (Reply #99)

Thu Sep 11, 2014, 09:38 PM

100. Welcome to DU. Who are you supporting for the next election, even undeclared, and tell us about

you more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Thu Sep 11, 2014, 09:45 PM

101. You left out Libertarian racists and secessionists

Being for small govt they inevitably attract secessionists, which means mostly white supremacist neo Confederates.

All the ludicrous denials of Ron Paul being racist are annoying. You show them the evidence, they ignore it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Thu Sep 11, 2014, 09:55 PM

102. Yes, just yes(nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frostfern (Original post)

Thu Sep 11, 2014, 10:04 PM

103. They're antiwar

And oppose the drug war. On both issues they are much better than democrats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread