What do you think of this young lady, Julie Borowski? She is a Libertarian, but kind of Conservative one. She was inspired to go into politics by Ron Paul. I have to say that I totally agree with Ron, and I believe I totally agree with Julie, too. Me myself being from Eastern Europe (if I may say so, because we are more in the center), I believe Ron Paul and Julie Borowski represent the true spirit of the United States of America. Julie was employed at Freedom Works, but she has decided to go independent and started a new career at her own new web site. She may not be as funny as she desires to be, but she's funny at trying to be funny at least. :wink:
http://julieborowski.com (http://julieborowski.com)
Here is her newest video on her You Tube channel.
Would Hillary Clinton Supporters Still Support Her If She Were a Man? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Y_N-iqop1Q#ws)
And her open letter to Rand Paul from her web site.
http://julieborowski.com/open-letter-to-rand-paul/ (http://julieborowski.com/open-letter-to-rand-paul/)
She'll be a good ally against the Democrats. And especially in helping dissolve the Department of Education, The Department of Energy, HUD, and the IRS. It'll be a tough fight, and I think many young adults will be seeing things the way she does by the year 2020.
I don't see myself voting for Rand Paul in the primaries, but if he's the Republican candidate I certainly will.
Here is one article for people to understand how communist European Union is. Dan, a 27-year-old man in Denmark, committed suicide after government authorities seized and euthanized his dog named Zanto, only because it was a pit bull. I don't believe he committed suicide just because of his dog, but he committed suicide because of the ugly way he was treated by his government, like he was nobody. What was the crime of Dan or Zanto here? There was no crime commited against any individual, but it was a crime against community. Community said pit bulls are outlawed, for the reason just because. And when you buy a dog, it is not your private property, but property of your community. And your community can walk into your house, take your dog away, and kill it.
http://julieborowski.com/man-commits-suicide-after-government-authorities-kill-his-dog-for-stupid-reason/ (http://julieborowski.com/man-commits-suicide-after-government-authorities-kill-his-dog-for-stupid-reason/)
That's tyrannical. We don't know the circumstances of how or why he obtained an illegal dog in-Country. Danish authorities won't release the guy's name, but there's a Facebook-page dedicated to he and Zanto. He overdosed on pain-meds instead of staying and fighting.
I don't know the exact situation in Denmark, but it's surely extremely difficult for an individual to fight against the powerful government. He probably just couldn't see any hope.
Here is a little digression, but the issue is the same, for the people who have never lived in communism to better understand. A scene from a Serbian movie "Three Tickets for Hollywood" ("Tri karte za Holivud", 1993). It's 1962, and a train with Yugoslav communist leader Josip Broz Tito should arrive in a small town. Local authorities are preparing a reception for their leader, and one of the measures is to isolate all people who could make some trouble. Police come to a house to search for a man who is on their isolation list, and he's not at home. But, they hear a goat, and they take it away, because it was forbidden for the people to keep goats. The old lady weeps to the policeman: "Leave me alone, you foe!" And he replies: "I am not your foe, I am the people's government. Your goat will be better with us than with you." A goat or a pit bull, is there any difference?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sSuc1hO8eY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sSuc1hO8eY)
"Tri karte za Holivud" is really a great movie, you can download it with English subtitles from various locations on internet.
HAHAHAHA too funny! Filling quota's too funny. This woman is too flat out with things to ever be on a network though. That's for damned sure.
Sadly it's how most are thinking now days. But it is true, filling the office of the Presidency is more important than that.
Voting for someone because of their skin color, or gender is STUPID. But hey to each their own I guess...
Quote from: daidalos on May 08, 2015, 09:36:43 AMVoting for someone because of their skin color, or gender is STUPID. But hey to each their own I guess...
I believe it's obvious most Americans voted for Obama because of the reason "we want a black president now". And I am affraid Hillary will win because of the reason "we want a woman president now". Why don't Republicans candidate a woman, too? How about Condoleezza Rice, for example? She looks much smarter and prettier than Hillary, she would win her in any debate that's for sure. And she's both black and woman, so she's a twice better candidate than Obama, and a twice better candidate than Hillary. Maybe it would be a stupid reason to vote for, but hey, does it really matters if you vote for a stupid reason to get a smart president?
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2F9%2F97%2FCondi_rice.jpg%2F331px-Condi_rice.jpg&hash=256dbe5b476abb77eb43730e4b5e6355e1ae45cd)
Come on, doesn't this look like a Class?
Quote from: milos on May 14, 2015, 08:20:54 AM
I believe it's obvious most Americans voted for Obama because of the reason "we want a black president now". And I am affraid Hillary will win because of the reason "we want a woman president now". Why don't Republicans candidate a woman, too? How about Condoleezza Rice, for example? She looks much smarter and prettier than Hillary, she would win her in any debate that's for sure. And she's both black and woman, so she's a twice better candidate than Obama, and a twice better candidate than Hillary. Maybe it would be a stupid reason to vote for, but hey, does it really matters if you vote for a stupid reason to get a smart president? Life is a bitch on wheels.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2F9%2F97%2FCondi_rice.jpg%2F331px-Condi_rice.jpg&hash=256dbe5b476abb77eb43730e4b5e6355e1ae45cd)
Come on, doesn't this look like a Class?
One little problem with her running. She doesn't want to. Being a member Of Augusta National completed her accomplishments WITH class.
Quote from: supsalemgr on May 14, 2015, 08:24:07 AM
One little problem with her running. She doesn't want to. Being a member Of Augusta National completed her accomplishments WITH class.
It would really look like a great accomplishment to have a woman for the president of the USA for the first time in history, so Democrats have a good case with Hillary. And just imagine any man Republican candidate against Hillary in presidential debate. If he would be harsh, then he would look like he's oppressing her. And if he would be gentle, then he would look weak. But a woman would know how to deal with another woman.
Quote from: milos on May 14, 2015, 08:49:47 AM
It would really look like a great accomplishment to have a woman for the president of the USA for the first time in history, so Democrats have a good case with Hillary. And just imagine any man Republican candidate against Hillary in presidential debate. If he would be harsh, then he would look like he's oppressing her. And if he would be gentle, then he would look weak. But a woman would know how to deal with another woman.
So forget any qualifications for office and instead vote for a gender. Or a skin color. Okay, I'll play.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.fotki.com%2F1_p%2Crswtbrqsqwbbkftxbqfqsbrwqdbw%2Cvi%2Fbsdqbskwrxbsssdrrfb%2F1%2F1595431%2F9682598%2Fpalinmoose2016-vi.png&hash=72111a99821e1d5c7107f4a08cb6605c81cc1f62)
Quote from: milos on May 14, 2015, 08:49:47 AM
It would really look like a great accomplishment to have a woman for the president of the USA for the first time in history, so Democrats have a good case with Hillary. And just imagine any man Republican candidate against Hillary in presidential debate. If he would be harsh, then he would look like he's oppressing her. And if he would be gentle, then he would look weak. But a woman would know how to deal with another woman.
Speaking as a woman.... I will say this is total insanity!
Does it really take a woman to know how to deal with another woman? Really??
Give me a break!!!!
There is no doubt that Condolezza is a brilliant woman. She has a near photographic memory also!
However, she is PRO ABORTION! Have we forgotten this?
We are following the lemmings off the cliff if we start talking in terms of genitalia and skin tones.
Let's get back to the reality of conservative thinking and actions! That is what will restore this Nation to greatness! Nothing else!!!
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.fotki.com%2F1_p%2Crswtbrqsqwbbkftxbqfqsbrwqdbw%2Cvi%2Fbsdqbskwrxbsssdrrfb%2F1%2F1595431%2F9682598%2Fpalinmoose2016-vi.png&hash=72111a99821e1d5c7107f4a08cb6605c81cc1f62)
Right! I'll vote for a woman....if...she is conservative and a Patriot!!!! I do love no-nonsense Sarah!!!!
Quote from: kroz on May 14, 2015, 09:29:08 AM
Speaking as a woman.... I will say this is total insanity!
Does it really take a woman to know how to deal with another woman? Really??
Give me a break!!!!
There is no doubt that Condolezza is a brilliant woman. She has a near photographic memory also!
However, she is PRO ABORTION! Have we forgotten this?
We are following the lemmings off the cliff if we start talking in terms of genitalia and skin tones.
Let's get back to the reality of conservative thinking and actions! That is what will restore this Nation to greatness! Nothing else!!!
Would you not vote for a candidate if you agreed with them on everything accept abortion?
Just curious.
Quote from: steve folkster on May 14, 2015, 09:54:46 AM
Would you not vote for a candidate if you agreed with them on everything accept abortion?
Just curious.
Abortion is a moot point, the left tries to use it as a wedge issue, but the majority of the nation is pro life, so you can forget that being brought up again in the campaign.
It exposes the leftists for the butchers they are.
Quote from: steve folkster on May 14, 2015, 09:54:46 AM
Would you not vote for a candidate if you agreed with them on everything accept abortion?
Just curious.
Unlikely
Quote from: steve folkster on May 14, 2015, 09:54:46 AM
Would you not vote for a candidate if you agreed with them on everything accept abortion?
Just curious.
Would you vote for a candidate if you agreed with them on everything except there stand on legalizing murder. After all murder wasn't and isn't always a crime in some places. You simply have to reimburse their family for the lost value of their labor - the "blood price".
Just curious.
Quote from: steve folkster on May 14, 2015, 09:54:46 AM
Would you not vote for a candidate if you agreed with them on everything accept abortion?
Just curious.
Why would anyone vote for someone who supports killing babies? That's an odd question.
Quote from: taxed on May 15, 2015, 04:53:17 PM
Why would anyone vote for someone who supports killing babies? That's an odd question.
It's what liberals call entrapment!
Quote from: quiller on May 14, 2015, 08:53:42 AM(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.fotki.com%2F1_p%2Crswtbrqsqwbbkftxbqfqsbrwqdbw%2Cvi%2Fbsdqbskwrxbsssdrrfb%2F1%2F1595431%2F9682598%2Fpalinmoose2016-vi.png&hash=72111a99821e1d5c7107f4a08cb6605c81cc1f62)
I hate to say this, but I saw Sarah Palin in some debates, and I was not convinced she had been able to cope good enough. Just my opinion.
Quote from: kroz on May 14, 2015, 09:29:08 AM
Speaking as a woman.... I will say this is total insanity!
Does it really take a woman to know how to deal with another woman? Really??
Give me a break!!!!
There is no doubt that Condolezza is a brilliant woman. She has a near photographic memory also!
However, she is PRO ABORTION! Have we forgotten this?
We are following the lemmings off the cliff if we start talking in terms of genitalia and skin tones.
Let's get back to the reality of conservative thinking and actions! That is what will restore this Nation to greatness! Nothing else!!!
I was not talking my point of view, but I was talking the case Democrats will make. And it will be: "Let's have a woman president for the first time, that would be so cool and progressive!" And in the presidential debate, they will make a "man against woman" case, where a woman has more chances to win hearts of majority.
I saw Condoleezza's Facebook profile, and she looked like a devoted Christian to me. I didn't know she was pro abortion.
I would really hate to see Hillary wins, but since I am not a US citizen, I can only give you my moral support.
Quote from: milos on May 16, 2015, 01:44:26 AM
I hate to say this, but I saw Sarah Palin in some debates, and I was not convinced she had been able to cope good enough. Just my opinion.
I was not talking my point of view, but I was talking the case Democrats will make. And it will be: "Let's have a woman president for the first time, that would be so cool and progressive!" And in the presidential debate, they will make a "man against woman" case, where a woman has more chances to win hearts of majority.
I saw Condoleezza's Facebook profile, and she looked like a devoted Christian to me. I didn't know she was pro abortion.
I would really hate to see Hillary wins, but since I am not a US citizen, I can only give you my moral support.
Rest easy. Hillary will not win. If the GOP does not screw it up she will self destruct. Humpty Dumpty is a good analogy of Hillary.
Quote from: supsalemgr on May 16, 2015, 04:17:53 AM
Rest easy. Hillary will not win. If the GOP does not screw it up she will self destruct. Humpty Dumpty is a good analogy of Hillary.
Therein lies the age-old problem. Republicans usually do find a way to screw it up. "Read my lips," for example. This cycle, it's still too early to get too excited. Goudy hasn't nailed down more than one diva's-appearance from Shrill over Benghazi, so there's no real mileage to be had --- yet --- from that quarter. Expect a stray sex scandal or two but probably nothing as grotesque as John Edwards (or Wilbur Mills). If Snowden leaks Huma Habedin's e-mails to Hillary, that whole dynamic could change. :blink:
Quote from: quiller on May 16, 2015, 04:35:07 AM
Therein lies the age-old problem. Republicans usually do find a way to screw it up. "Read my lips," for example. This cycle, it's still too early to get too excited. Goudy hasn't nailed down more than one diva's-appearance from Shrill over Benghazi, so there's no real mileage to be had --- yet --- from that quarter. Expect a stray sex scandal or two but probably nothing as grotesque as John Edwards (or Wilbur Mills). If Snowden leaks Huma Habedin's e-mails to Hillary, that whole dynamic could change. :blink:
True, but Team Carpetbag tried to rush hc's committee-appearance down Gowdy's throat a few months ago, before the server-scandal broke (not that
they knew it would break).
as for Wilbur;
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwac.450f.edgecastcdn.net%2F80450F%2Fguyspeed.com%2Ffiles%2F2012%2F10%2FMISTRESS7.jpg&hash=0afb9b4ebde1b94159bc38f7771298f2bf3a3b78)
What guy wouldn't want
her in their Tidal Basin ??!
Quote from: quiller on May 16, 2015, 04:35:07 AM
Therein lies the age-old problem. Republicans usually do find a way to screw it up. "Read my lips," for example. This cycle, it's still too early to get too excited. Goudy hasn't nailed down more than one diva's-appearance from Shrill over Benghazi, so there's no real mileage to be had --- yet --- from that quarter. Expect a stray sex scandal or two but probably nothing as grotesque as John Edwards (or Wilbur Mills). If Snowden leaks Huma Habedin's e-mails to Hillary, that whole dynamic could change. :blink:
What?? You're not excited?? :ohmy:We've gotta do something about that!!Maybe we need to play you some Elvis music and see what happens!! :laugh:
Quote from: kroz on May 16, 2015, 05:14:46 AM
What?? You're not excited?? :ohmy:
We've gotta do something about that!!
Maybe we need to play you some Elvis music and see what happens!! :laugh:
I am so sanguine I even forgot my thesaurus to answer this. The usual early-birds and Young Turks are milling about and the brokered convention is still a ways away. I expect the full-fledged bloodletting and primal screaming to take place in mid to late summer.
Quote from: kit saginaw on May 16, 2015, 05:04:25 AM
True, but Team Carpetbag tried to rush hc's committee-appearance down Gowdy's throat a few months ago, before the server-scandal broke (not that they knew it would break).
as for Wilbur;
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwac.450f.edgecastcdn.net%2F80450F%2Fguyspeed.com%2Ffiles%2F2012%2F10%2FMISTRESS7.jpg&hash=0afb9b4ebde1b94159bc38f7771298f2bf3a3b78)
What guy wouldn't want her in their Tidal Basin ??!
Gart Hart's yacht and that babe as first mate, who needs Captain Stubing and the Love Barge?
Don't care much for Libertarians in general, always stating they are pro abortion like it gives them moral superiority, makes me want to puke
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.jillstanek.com%2Fwp%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F01%2FBaby-Boy-A-e1295539313716.png&hash=ea10b93b689752f69598961c1dbb257efaaab1c4)
They are just one small step away from being libertines.
I still vote for a party that is pro abortion, but not because they are pro abortion but because they are the last chance to avoid civil war. It is a tragic consequence of Europe losing it's faith and Christian Union with each other and God. I believe we will all pay for it and ultimately voting for or against abortion or parties in general doesn't matter as long as the culture doesn't embrace God.
Quote from: Mountainshield on May 16, 2015, 06:04:50 AM
Don't care much for Libertarians in general, always stating they are pro abortion like it gives them moral superiority, makes me want to puke
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.jillstanek.com%2Fwp%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F01%2FBaby-Boy-A-e1295539313716.png&hash=ea10b93b689752f69598961c1dbb257efaaab1c4)
They are just one small step away from being libertines.
I still vote for a party that is pro abortion, but not because they are pro abortion but because they are the last chance to avoid civil war. It is a tragic consequence of Europe losing it's faith and Christian Union with each other and God. I believe we will all pay for it and ultimately voting for or against abortion or parties in general doesn't matter as long as the culture doesn't embrace God.
This is where the U.S. is headed if we keep compromising at the polls!
Mountainshield...... when did your Country slip away from it's moral compass? Were the voters asleep at the wheel or just desirous of moral decadence?
It is not only liberal/progressivism that leads us away from God..... it is also the RINOs. We would be wise to cling to what fragment of moral excellence still exists in our Nation. This is a matter of life and death in more ways than just abortion.
Any society permitting the willful premeditated murder of innocent children would have no compunction whatsoever against authorizing assisted suicide for the elderly, infirm, and, as is now the case in Europe, those simply wanting their own deaths.
Europe forgot in 70 years what they should have learned from the Third Reich policies which also cleared out habitual criminals, gypsies, the insane and others. Jews of course were their own special category.
We are headed for a society in which many now say will be overwhelmingly robotic in nature at the job market, Social Security payouts the federales steal for other uses, and the single largest increase in American history for the babies born after a war, now trying to retire on funds they're likely to never see if liberals keep moving the goalposts.
We abandoned our elderly to nursing homes good, bad or indifferent. We let teachers be our babysitters and the kids deserve the propaganda they get if the parent isn't following what the kids are actually learning. Good. We need uneducated manual labor for carrying stuff when the robots go down for maintenance. Start by programming them to carry school administrators out of their buildings for a close chat with a bucket of roofing tar and some pillow feathers.
Quote from: quiller on May 16, 2015, 07:07:08 AM
Any society permitting the willful premeditated murder of innocent children would have no compunction whatsoever against authorizing assisted suicide for the elderly, infirm, and, as is now the case in Europe, those simply wanting their own deaths.
Europe forgot in 70 years what they should have learned from the Third Reich policies which also cleared out habitual criminals, gypsies, the insane and others. Jews of course were their own special category.
We are headed for a society in which many now say will be overwhelmingly robotic in nature at the job market, Social Security payouts the federales steal for other uses, and the single largest increase in American history for the babies born after a war, now trying to retire on funds they're likely to never see if liberals keep moving the goalposts.
We abandoned our elderly to nursing homes good, bad or indifferent. We let teachers be our babysitters and the kids deserve the propaganda they get if the parent isn't following what the kids are actually learning. Good. We need uneducated manual labor for carrying stuff when the robots go down for maintenance. Start by programming them to carry school administrators out of their buildings for a close chat with a bucket of roofing tar and some pillow feathers.
That is exactly the case I made to an international group of high schoolers 25 years ago in a "Worldviews" class.
It is a slippery slope!
I was privileged to have their undivided attention on this subject and they could not believe what I was saying would happen. ........ wa...laa...... here we are!
I often wonder if they reflect upon that class today as they are now in mid-life.
I capped off the class with a book by Ravi Zacharius entitled "Can Man Live Without God?"
Some of those kids went on to attend Harvard and other Ivy League schools. I hope they used that book as a resource when they were hit with the barrage of ungodly profs.
Quote from: supsalemgr on May 16, 2015, 04:17:53 AM
Rest easy. Hillary will not win. If the GOP does not screw it up she will self destruct. Humpty Dumpty is a good analogy of Hillary.
I am actually being concerned for what might fell into a conspiracy theory. Because, before Obama was elected, some conspiracy theorists claimed United States will have a black president and a woman president. They were right about the black president, so... :confused: Don't know what to think. If it shall be a woman president, then better to be a Conservative one. But this is probably just a crazy way of thinking.
Of course, you just follow your Conservative ideas, that is the right way.
Quote from: Mountainshield on May 16, 2015, 06:04:50 AM
Don't care much for Libertarians in general, always stating they are pro abortion like it gives them moral superiority, makes me want to puke
They are just one small step away from being libertines.
Some Libertarians are pro-life. Julie Borowski is pro-life. Ron Paul is pro-life. They believe human life begins with conception, and I agree with them. It is an obvious fact of nature that human life begins with conception. And so if we want to protect human life, liberty, and property, we should start with conception. All civilized countries have laws against murder already, they should just apply them to abortion as one of the many ways to kill a human being.
Being a Libertine is far far away from being a Libertarian. Libertines are devoid of moral restraints, which they find unnecessary. Libertarians believe in a strict rule of law which protects human life, liberty, and property. In a Libertarian society, Libertines would probably all be jailed for crimes against human life, liberty, and property.
Quote from: milos on May 16, 2015, 11:41:44 PM
I am actually being concerned for what might fell into a conspiracy theory. Because, before Obama was elected, some conspiracy theorists claimed United States will have a black president and a woman president. They were right about the black president, so... :confused: Don't know what to think. If it shall be a woman president, then better to be a Conservative one. But this is probably just a crazy way of thinking.
Of course, you just follow your Conservative ideas, that is the right way.
Some Libertarians are pro-life. Julie Borowski is pro-life. Ron Paul is pro-life. They believe human life begins with conception, and I agree with them. It is an obvious fact of nature that human life begins with conception. And so if we want to protect human life, liberty, and property, we should start with conception. All civilized countries have laws against murder already, they should just apply them to abortion as one of the many ways to kill a human being.
Being a Libertine is far far away from being a Libertarian. Libertines are devoid of moral restraints, which they find unnecessary. Libertarians believe in a strict rule of law which protects human life, liberty, and property. In a Libertarian society, Libertines would probably all be jailed for crimes against human life, liberty, and property.
You would be correct about Libertarians and what it has been historically.
But what has happened since the collapse of the Dim party under the Marxists has driven the idealistic and immoral base away and towards the Libertarian movement, and in the process is morphing it's true meanings based in Conservative ideals and Statesmanship, into one of anarchy, where drug use is considered a liberty, a Right not to be infringed upon.
Yes, they are becoming Libertines due to an influx of kids, clueless of our history with no thought for the future, only themselves.
They think Libertarianism means no govt.
Quote from: Solar on May 17, 2015, 06:30:04 AM
You would be correct about Libertarians and what it has been historically.
But what has happened since the collapse of the Dim party under the Marxists has driven the idealistic and immoral base away and towards the Libertarian movement, and in the process is morphing it's true meanings based in Conservative ideals and Statesmanship, into one of anarchy, where drug use is considered a liberty, a Right not to be infringed upon.
Yes, they are becoming Libertines due to an influx of kids, clueless of our history with no thought for the future, only themselves.
They think Libertarianism means no govt.
Someone needs to enlighten them on "anarchy." ....... not exactly paradise!
Quote from: milos on May 16, 2015, 11:41:44 PM
I am actually being concerned for what might fell into a conspiracy theory. Because, before Obama was elected, some conspiracy theorists claimed United States will have a black president and a woman president. They were right about the black president, so... :confused: Don't know what to think. If it shall be a woman president, then better to be a Conservative one. But this is probably just a crazy way of thinking.
Of course, you just follow your Conservative ideas, that is the right way.
Some Libertarians are pro-life. Julie Borowski is pro-life. Ron Paul is pro-life. They believe human life begins with conception, and I agree with them. It is an obvious fact of nature that human life begins with conception. And so if we want to protect human life, liberty, and property, we should start with conception. All civilized countries have laws against murder already, they should just apply them to abortion as one of the many ways to kill a human being.
Being a Libertine is far far away from being a Libertarian. Libertines are devoid of moral restraints, which they find unnecessary. Libertarians believe in a strict rule of law which protects human life, liberty, and property. In a Libertarian society, Libertines would probably all be jailed for crimes against human life, liberty, and property.
I'm not sold on that one yet. I think he's Asian.
Quote from: Solar on May 17, 2015, 06:30:04 AM
You would be correct about Libertarians and what it has been historically.
But what has happened since the collapse of the Dim party under the Marxists has driven the idealistic and immoral base away and towards the Libertarian movement, and in the process is morphing it's true meanings based in Conservative ideals and Statesmanship, into one of anarchy, where drug use is considered a liberty, a Right not to be infringed upon.
Yes, they are becoming Libertines due to an influx of kids, clueless of our history with no thought for the future, only themselves.
They think Libertarianism means no govt.
That is why I am constantly being confused there is actually any difference at all between American Conservatives and Libertarians. Because, America was originally meant to enable personal liberty, free trade, minarchist government.
I suppose you are right about the current state of things in Libertarian movement, because you live there and you know better. But, if someone thinks there is no moral law, then he certainly is not a Libertarian. Because, Libertarians believe in a certain and strict moral law, which says: "A crime is when you infringe other people's life, liberty, or property." It is so simple, but yet powerful moral code. I can't imagine anyone who believes in this Libertarian moral code could ever become a Libertine. About a drug use, this moral code also applies to it: if you use drugs, then it is your private business; but if you force someone else on using drugs, then you have committed a crime. And why should government punish me if I use drugs? Or alcohol? Or if I smoke tobacco? If I didn't force anyone else to use it, then there is no crime committed. It looks like a common sense to me.
Quote from: kroz on May 17, 2015, 12:19:39 PM
Someone needs to enlighten them on "anarchy." ....... not exactly paradise!
There are different types of Anarchy. Left Anarchists are always some kind of hooligans, assassinators, or terrorists, they are close to Libertines. But Anarcho-Capitalists believe in protection of human life, liberty, and property, and would never be hooligans, assassinators, or terrorists. Although Anarchy is impossible in real life, because people always form some kind of state when they join together.
Quote from: taxed on May 17, 2015, 09:10:19 PM
I'm not sold on that one yet. I think he's Asian.
Come on, Nigeria is in Africa? :wink:
Quote from: milos on May 18, 2015, 06:31:16 AM
About a drug use, this moral code also applies to it: if you use drugs, then it is your private business; but if you force someone else on using drugs, then you have committed a crime. And why should government punish me if I use drugs? Or alcohol? Or if I smoke tobacco? If I didn't force anyone else to use it, then there is no crime committed. It looks like a common sense to me.
You touched on the issue libs can't grasp, wherein lies the problem.
Libs gravitate to a system that appears to give freedoms that slap in the face of culture under the illusion of Liberty, all the while neglecting the moral code of Libertarianism.
In other words, "Laws for thee, not for me", you live by the code that I can do whatever I please, from bestiality to cooking crank as long as I'm on my own property.
Libs completely misrepresent Libertarianism.
Here is the newest video made by Julie, and she is spot on. This one describes the difference between Libertarian and Liberal understanding of freedom of speech.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYfywjmJdg0