Good now you Libertarian can live under socialist rule in Kentucky. Now let's see how that taste in your month. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
STATES Libertarians Brag About Throwing Kentucky Governor Election to Democrat: 'Your Tears are Delicious'
"In an ideal world, we elect Libertarian candidates and advance liberty. Failing that, we push mainstream candidates towards liberty to advance the cause," the LPK wrote in a Facebook post on Tuesday night.
"But if we can't do those things, we are always happy to split the vote in a way that causes delicious tears. Tonight there are plenty of delicious tears from Bevin supporters," they added.
READ MORE HERE....
https://bigleaguepolitics.com/libertarians-brag-about-throwing-kentucky-governor-election-to-democrat-your-tears-are-delicious/
Probably because they are Republicans that are sick of the GOP being destroyed by neoconservatives. They should be supporting Trump in almost every area except for spending. Even with the war on drugs, Trump has fought the battle against the importer instead of the user and focused on helping the user.
Let's face it, Bush, Romney and McCain did more to make Republicans want to leave the party and make us hold our noses when we voted. Trump saved me as a Republican.
But almost twice as many voters in KY voted third party for Governor of KY in 2015 so the Libertarians should be taking less credit and the Republicans should be placing less blame today.
Libs that bailed on the Marxists Dim party. You can take the Stupid lib out of the city slums, but you can't Stupid out of the lib.
I have become increasingly libertarian over the years but I can't and won't jump onboard for few reasons. First they have an arrogance as seen here. Get off your soapbox and stop lecturing us you dickheads. If I want to be lectured to I will watch a Barrack Obama or a John Kasich speech. Secondly they seem to have missed the fact the democrats have blown past establishment junction and are about to stop at Moscow City Station. Even weak kneed republicans are better than a bunch of out of the closet Soviets trying to remove the president for being a Russian. And, did they really have that big of an influence on the Kentucky election? Because there are many articles painting Bevin as being a pretty awful candidate. They undermine themselves by acting like arrogant democrats.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on November 06, 2019, 11:44:57 PM
I have become increasingly libertarian over the years but I can't and won't jump onboard for few reasons. First they have an arrogance as seen here. Get off your soapbox and stop lecturing us you dickheads. If I want to be lectured to I will watch a Barrack Obama or a John Kasich speech. Secondly they seem to have missed the fact the democrats have blown past establishment junction and are about to stop at Moscow City Station. Even weak kneed republicans are better than a bunch of out of the closet Soviets trying to remove the president for being a Russian. And, did they really have that big of an influence on the Kentucky election? Because there are many articles painting Bevin as being a pretty awful candidate. They undermine themselves by acting like arrogant democrats.
Most of these supposed Libertarians are kids that have absolutely know core values, just talking points they think sets them above others.
I got into a debate on one of their forums over the Wall. Not a one of them had ever really thought it through. This became apparent when not a one of them could give me a good reason not to build a barrier.
"Nice house you have there, I want to camp in your yard all summer long, may even stay forever"
When hit with this, they said we have laws against that, I said we also have laws about crossing the border. These idiots live on talking points, they never came back.......Crickets....
Not one of them knew a single thing about our history, immigration, Bracero program, green card system. That was the last post I made, they all ran away to lick their wounds.
"Mommy, that big bad Conservative was mean to us, he made us think"...
Quote from: Solar on November 07, 2019, 06:21:35 AM
Most of these supposed Libertarians are kids that have absolutely know core values, just talking points they think sets them above others.
The problem with the Libertarian Party is that they approach anarchy as a platform in an attempt to look consistent. They may actually have a party that someone would vote for, if they would stop the nonsense about open borders and policies and using a platform that puts their heads in the sand. They do share some values with the Tea Party on government size and influence and I would rather have a Libertarian in office than a Democrat.
But too many kids see the Libertarianiss as permission to get high and do whatever they want.
Quote from: carolina73 on November 07, 2019, 06:55:50 AM
The problem with the Libertarian Party is that they approach anarchy as a platform in an attempt to look consistent. They may actually have a party that someone would vote for, if they would stop the nonsense about open borders and policies and using a platform that puts their heads in the sand. They do share some values with the Tea Party on government size and influence and I would rather have a Libertarian in office than a Democrat.
But too many kids see the Libertarianiss as permission to get high and do whatever they want.
I think most of the libertarians I have know call themselves libertarian because they do not like the sound of the word socialist.
Quote from: s3779m on November 07, 2019, 06:58:39 AM
I think most of the libertarians I have know call themselves libertarian because they do not like the sound of the word socialist.
Libertarians are for minimal government and Socialists are for total government control. They are not the modern use of the word Liberal. Libertarians are for small government, pro 2nd amendment rights, against centralized banking and controls on business. Where they go too far for most Republicans is being too Isolationist, they are for open borders and against religion or morality in our laws.
Quote from: carolina73 on November 07, 2019, 08:03:43 AM
Libertarians are for minimal government and Socialists are for total government control. They are not the modern use of the word Liberal. Libertarians are for small government, pro 2nd amendment rights, against centralized banking and controls on business. Where they go too far for most Republicans is being too Isolationist, they are for open borders and against religion or morality in our laws.
I understand the definitions, what I was stating was most of the libertarians that I have met have sounded more like socialist than libertarians. The highlighted areas above seem to control most of their agenda rather than small government. Why are they celebrating putting a dim in office?
Quote from: carolina73 on November 07, 2019, 06:55:50 AM
The problem with the Libertarian Party is that they approach anarchy as a platform in an attempt to look consistent. They may actually have a party that someone would vote for, if they would stop the nonsense about open borders and policies and using a platform that puts their heads in the sand. They do share some values with the Tea Party on government size and influence and I would rather have a Libertarian in office than a Democrat.
But too many kids see the Libertarianiss as permission to get high and do whatever they want.
Therein lies the problem, they are for less govt control, but many within the movement don't know how to draw line, as in a base set of core values.
Most agree we need border controls, problem is, they don't know what that means, they don't know where to set the baseline at. When confronted about keeping drug smuggling under control, an argument brakes out between them. Because they still think drugs should be legal, while others see what happens to societal culture and the cancer it creates.
Until they can define these basic principals, they'll remain irrelevant.
Truth is, a small Federal govt would cede power to the States to deal with the issues far better.
Quote from: s3779m on November 07, 2019, 06:58:39 AM
I think most of the libertarians I have know call themselves libertarian because they do not like the sound of the word socialist.
That is EXACTLY CORRECT!!!
Quote from: s3779m on November 07, 2019, 06:58:39 AM
I think most of the libertarians I have know call themselves libertarian because they do not like the sound of the word socialist.
I recall what Neil Boortz once said about his having once attended a national Libertarian conference. He was shocked to find that he did not agree with most of the Liberal-Libertarians who dominated the convention. The ran the gamut from anarchists to people who wanted no restrictions on the use of any type of drugs. He thought he had walked into the star wars bar. Bortz didn't allow this experience to deter him from his being a Libertarian, but he learned that many who call themselves "Libertarians" have more in common with the Far Left than Libertarians like himself who are far more conservative. https://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/libertarians-burn-boortz-or-is-it-the-other-way-around
Quote from: wally on November 07, 2019, 09:45:40 AM
I recall what Neil Boortz once said about his having once attended a national Libertarian conference. He was shocked to find that he did not agree with most of the Liberal-Libertarians who dominated the convention. The ran the gamut from anarchists to people who wanted no restrictions on the use of any type of drugs. He thought he had walked into the star wars bar. Bortz didn't allow this experience to deter him from his being a Libertarian, but he learned that many who call themselves "Libertarians" have more in common with the Far Left than Libertarians like himself who are far more conservative. https://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/libertarians-burn-boortz-or-is-it-the-other-way-around
I agree with Boortz. Libertarian has become a cover for people who want no rules of behavior.
Quote from: supsalemgr on November 07, 2019, 12:16:48 PM
I agree with Boortz. Libertarian has become a cover for people who want no rules of behavior.
Like the Tea Party, the Libertarian Movement is a grass roots ideology. As soon as someone attempts to define it and make it into a party, it then represents only that individual
s (or small group of individual's) interpretation of what they believe the term means. I am reminded of Groucho's famous line, " I'd never belong to any organization that would have me for a member ". It's far better to be a Conservative with libertarian views than to call oneself a Libertarian, I think.
I miss the Talkmaster...