#47 JS

Dave Kreuger “As far as I’m concerned, Republicans and Democrats are the biggest impediment to democracy in this country. What we need more of in the U.S. is a strong grass-roots aversion to political parties. Nothing leads to self-examination like the threat of extinction.”

Spot on as usual Dave!

Wow. Thanks for the vote of confidence. Last time I looked at my comment about the parties, it had a bunch of negative karma. Thanks to you, now it’s positive. :)

Probably as good as the 27 year old Bush put in charge of restarting the stock exchange in Iraq. The great business trained experts of GM & the financial idustry put us in this situation. Is your answer to rely on them to get us out?

Not looking for candidates seems to be the most radical and most sensible thing we can do.

Spot on as usual Dave!

Les: If the Democrats score a 20% on “The Liberty Test” and Republicans score a 40%, they both fail and they should both be disqualified from running the government.

I says Hallelujah, brother! I wouldn’t trust Bob Barr or Ron Paul to run the government, even though they would be less awful than the alternatives.

I’m sure we can agree that, as long as there are party loyalists, we’ll be looking for qualified candidates for a long time.

I don’t look for any candidates. I’m just objecting to people who purport to support individual rights favoring the most socialist Democrats over wimpy, wishy-washy Republicans.

Sam: So you’re saying everyone is terrible…except for…

Look here. The word “terrible” is your word. I’m not going to try to parse what you wrote, when you start off by trying to cram words in my mouth.

What I said should be clear. And, it certainly doesn’t justify your lies:

If you prefer your boys’ flavor … your beloved Republicans … a republican or quasi-republican or a closet republican or an ex-republican that still yearns for the good old days or whatever the hell it is you are. … Your people …

None of the rest of your comment has any bearing on reality, being so infused with outright fabrications. I said nothing about torture, so if you intended to imply that I supported US agents torturing prisoners, that’s yet another lie. I don’t. I’m opposed to government agents having any legal power to torture or execute. It’s not that I’m a bleeding heart, but I know that government is inherently flawed and innocent people (or people who don’t deserve such harsh punishment) will eventually fall victim to the state machinery.

Note that before you try to make torture a one-party issue, you need to get Nancy to get her story straight.

In summary: anyone who wants to defend individual rights should not support any political party. Moreover, it is insane to favor the most socialist Democrats over the lame, wishy-washy Republicans on the grounds that the Democrats will be better for individual rights. Clearly, they will not. Stating that fact is not, in any way, a defense of the GOP. All of them should be rode out of town on a rail.

If the Democrats score a 20% on “The Liberty Test” and Republicans score a 40%, they both fail and they should both be disqualified from running the government.

Both parties are happy to go to war, to arrest drug users, to empower cops and decrease due process, and, yes, to take personal property. Both parties want to empower the government and control our bodies and our properties. The degree to which they do it depends on the circumstance, but the bottom line is that both parties fail “The Liberty Test” miserably. If two job candidates pathetically fail the test I give them, I wouldn’t bother to wonder which one failed more, I would just keep looking for candidates who might possibly pass.

I’m sure we can agree that, as long as there are party loyalists, we’ll be looking for qualified candidates for a long time.

Listen man, fascism and evil shit is bad. If you prefer your boys’ flavor to the other boys’ gang go for it, but don’t expect me to agree with you that brown poop’s better for me than dark brown poop.

Oh, and your beloved Republicans (you know, the ones you don’t actually like you just side with to bitch about democrats?) are the torture daddys. Socialism may piss you off and it may not be healthy but torturing and disappearing da brown ppl is evil. Period. It’s why I hated socialism. If you don’t have a problem with it then you, personally, are the enemy. There’s no semantics or bullshitting around this subject. If you like it: You’re evil. If you don’t like it but find it useful so what they hey: You’re evil. If you don’t like it but turn your head so you can pretend you’re not a part of it but still support it: You’re empowering evil and are on the brink of it yourself.

Argue about your taxes with democrats all you like. The republicans have made killing, torturing, and kidnapping people part of my america and they can eat shit, every one.

Gah…this is why I can’t stand arguing about this with a republican or quasi-republican or a closet republican or an ex-republican that still yearns for the good old days or whatever the hell it is you are.

Your people are torturing. Get over them. There is nothing they can do to make up for that.

Unlike me, he still trusts “the system” to work, and that only the guilty will be executed.

As for the Playboy item, I think the magazine does a wonderful job of illustrating why “libertarian” and “libertine” are not synonymous. While libertarians champion anyone’s right to be libertine (or not), Playboy’s editorial stance has always seemed to favor, “All the licentiousness you want, and a government big enough to make sure you can get it.”

Or if you support abortion rights, or separation of church and state, or if you oppose the national security measure de jure, or however many other issues you want to list. I don’t seem to remember the government being particularly limited from 2002 onward.

Sam #35/36: Republicans respect property rights?

Read what I wrote, again. I said “some Republicans” not all. Your anecdotes are not instructive, because they don’t highlight the underlying structural differences between the philosophies. While Republicans tend to be more law-and-order hard asses on vice crimes and immigration, Democrats tend to be similarly law-and-order hard asses on zoning, permits, environmental rules, unions, etc.. You can have your car confiscated for frequenting prostitutes, or you can have your house auctioned off to pay the school taxes (which go up despite increasing failures).

The crucial differences between parties is that the underlying philosophy of nearly all Democrats is that “wealth” is a wellspring that comes from nowhere and needs to be redistributed fairly, i.e., that your wisdom, intellect, and effort which produced the wealth in the first place don’t matter. What matters to them is need. The old lady next door needs medicine, so your paycheck is fair game to them. Plenty of Republicans gave up fighting Democrats on this and seek compromise for the sake of winning elections (not that that works very well). But a non-trivial fraction of Republican politicians and a sizable majority of Republican voters oppose (imperfectly) such Democrat notions. I don’t trust either party, but if you put a gun to my head and make me choose, I’d take my chances with the Pubs.

…stop acting as if party affiliation matters man, it’s a lot like soviet russia back in the day…

That’s crap. Democrats are worse, because they are more socialist. They affect more people. If you’re gay, an immigrant, or a drug user, Republicans will probably infringe on your freedoms more. But under Democrats, everyone “shares the burden” and gets screwed over en masse. You need to pay closer attention and make the crucial distinctions, instead of throwing up your hands and saying it’s all bad. Yes, it’s all bad, but when I look down the road at my future and the futures of my descendants, the Democrat path is the fast road to economic collapse, civil war, and perhaps even the Gulags. The Republican path might get there some day, but it won’t be as fast.

As an addendum let me say I understand your need to believe in something. Please for your own good stop pretending the ideals *you* stand for are a part of a party platform.

You’re not paying attention to what I write. I said, “I don’t vote, on the principle that moral questions should never be subject to the whim of popular opinion. I oppose much of what the typical Republicans stand for.” I’ve said it for years, too. This isn’t about advocating Republicans. It’s about dismay at any liberty-minded individualist even thinking about taking sides with Democrats.

Relax, the Republicans will get the corpse in time for the sequel.

As far as I’m concerned, Republicans and Democrats are the biggest impediment to democracy in this country. What we need more of in the U.S. is a strong grass-roots aversion to political parties. Nothing leads to self-examination like the threat of extinction.

Having said all that, I don’t think he’s as phony as some have accused him of. He’s definitely undergone a distinct, gradual evolution that does in some ways stretch back to some things he tried to do in Congress (i.e., sunsetting the Patriot Act, for which he deserved a lot more credit than he got, and trying to get his own DC medical marijuana amendment repealed). Barr would hardly be the first Ayn Rand fan to be disillusioned by conservative political activism and migrate in a more liberty-friendly direction. As Greg Gutfeld put it his reason.tv interview, “Being around liberals made me a conservative. Being around conservatives made me a libertarian”- a lot of libertarians can claim as much (or vice versa). And on a wide range of issues, Barr has certainly become a lot *more* libertarian than he used to be, sometimes as he was pulled along to satisfy his new recalcitrant constituency. He shouldn’t have been the LP’s nominee, and no doubt he is still very much a right-libertarian, but I think he does still deserve some credit for how far he’s come. He’s still better than 99.999% of ex-Congressmen.

Anecdotally, it was a republican cop that took my sig .45, it was a democrat prosecutor that told em they had to give it back to me. Please for the love of god stop acting as if party affiliation matters man, it’s a lot like soviet russia back in the day…everyone that wants to play has to spout the right crap and be a party member. Here in America we just give em a choice of color to wear.

#30
When you have to go begging to the government to see a doctor, to air condition your house, to drive a safe and useful vehicle…

Hmm.
See a doctor – The government decides who can and can’t be a doctor, intentionally restricts the supply of doctors, driving up the price, and will cage any unauthorized persons who attempt to sell medical services. Or any persons at all who sell treatment they wake up and decide they don’t like. I suppose we’re not quite to the point of begging, but we’re pretty damn close.

A/C my house – I have little knowledge here, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the government decides who can and can’t install the things. And California (or some parts, if I’m not mistaken) require the installation of a neat little gadget that allows them to turn off your A/C remotely.

Drive a safe & useful vehicle – What do you mean “when” we beg for this? We already beg for the privilege of driving on roads we pay for whether we want to or not, then we beg for the privilege of owning an approved vehicle, and we pay periodically for both privileges. Just because they say “yes” to almost everybody who begs doesn’t mean it’s not begging.

1984 has come and gone, and nobody noticed…

EFF YOU CEE, KAY EE DEE,

AY GEE AY EYE ENN!