libertarian in Libertarian Party?

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Do you think the word 'libertarian' is something that hurts the Libertarian Party? People associate the LP with the philosophy of libertarianism. Just a thought. Maybe one reason why it has remained fringy?

[freedom-maniac]

The word libertarian has a very negative connotation. People associate it with pot-heads who refuse to pay taxes whatsoever, and drive around in pick-up trucks without license plates, but half a dozen 2nd Amendment bumper stickers.

[Truth Warrior]

Statement of Purpose: Voluntaryists are advocates of non-political, non-violent strategies to achieve a free society. We reject electoral politics, in theory and in practice, as incompatible with libertarian principles. Governments must cloak their actions in an aura of moral legitimacy in order to sustain their power, and political methods invariably strengthen that legitimacy. Voluntaryists seek instead to delegitimize the State through education, and we advocate withdrawal of the cooperation and tacit consent on which State power ultimately depends.
http://www.voluntaryist.com/

http://www.voluntaryist.com/links.php

[amy31416]

I had no opinion on Libertarians when I got into the Ron Paul thing, I just knew that I agreed with a lot of their platform. It's honestly been the people and their unwillingness to work with other people who are different and their "I'm right, everyone else is wrong" attitude (not all, but many) that has turned me off.

[yongrel]

The extremism and inability to compromise hurts the Libertarian Party. Their derogation of gradualists hurts the LP. Their obsession with the Presidency to the exclusion of the other 535 federal elected offices hurts the Libertarian Party.

The word libertarian is the least of their troubles.

[JS4Pat]

Do you think the word 'libertarian' is something that hurts the Libertarian Party?
Unfortunately, YES.

[Truth Warrior]

"Any compromise between good and evil only works to the detriment of the good and to the benefit of the evil."

Compromise = Repeatedly over time, how we all got into this current Leviathan mess.

I think that Ron would surely agree with that one. :)

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Statement of Purpose: Voluntaryists are advocates of non-political, non-violent strategies to achieve a free society. We reject electoral politics, in theory and in practice, as incompatible with libertarian principles. Governments must cloak their actions in an aura of moral legitimacy in order to sustain their power, and political methods invariably strengthen that legitimacy. Voluntaryists seek instead to delegitimize the State through education, and we advocate withdrawal of the cooperation and tacit consent on which State power ultimately depends.
http://www.voluntaryist.com/

http://www.voluntaryist.com/links.php

I am a voluntaryist. It is ideal. I'm not an anarcho-capitalist, despite what people might believe. You're obviously participating in this election, so I don't know what you're trying to tell me here.

[Truth Warrior]

I am a voluntaryist. It is ideal. I'm not an anarcho-capitalist, despite what people might believe. You're obviously participating in this election, so I don't know what you're trying to tell me here.
Ron Paul's world is a positive step in the correct direction ( at last ) to my world.
However, Ron's world seems to be pretty much of moot point, for the time being. :( If you vote, you are NOT a voluntaryist.<IMHO>

Read the posted statement of purpose once again ........ this time for comprehension. :D

[amy31416]

"Any compromise between good and evil only works to the detriment of the good and to the benefit of the evil."

Compromise = Repeatedly over time, how we all got into this current Leviathan mess.

I think that Ron would surely agree with that one. :)

I'm not talking about a person compromising their perception of what is good and what is evil, I'm talking about working with people who just might believe in god or even simply having some respect for that person and their beliefs and leaving them alone. Some people I'm working with are supporters of the war on drugs, which I personally think is inane, but I'm not going to bash them over the head constantly until they believe exactly as I do (that won't work anyways.)

They're one of the subsets of Paul supporters that I would be hesitant to invite to join a work group to get actual things accomplished because they seem unwilling to focus on a goal and let go of their proselytizing on fringe issues.

Like I said, there are exceptions among the Libertarians, but they certainly aren't all that vocal.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Ron Paul's world is a positive step in the correct direction ( at last ) to my world.
However, Ron's world seems to be pretty much of moot point, for the time being. :( If you vote, you are NOT a voluntaryist.<IMHO>

Why not? I can't be a "democratic voluntaryist"? lol. Hey, I'm voluntarily voting! :D Really, why not vote? Why let the sheep choose our leaders? THAT'S why I believe that voting good. It doesn't matter in America how many people voted, the popular vote in most election processes wins. I think of it as looking out for my best interests.

So you were never a libertarian? I thought you were. Conservative-Republican?

[Truth Warrior]

I'm not talking about a person compromising their perception of what is good and what is evil, I'm talking about working with people who just might believe in god or even simply having some respect for that person and their beliefs and leaving them alone. Some people I'm working with are supporters of the war on drugs, which I personally think is inane, but I'm not going to bash them over the head constantly until they believe exactly as I do (that won't work anyways.)

They're one of the subsets of Paul supporters that I would be hesitant to invite to join a work group to get actual things accomplished because they seem unwilling to focus on a goal and let go of their proselytizing on fringe issues.

Like I said, there are exceptions among the Libertarians, but they certainly aren't all that vocal.

Keep on "compromising" away your ( AND my ) freedoms and just see where you end up. FEMA camp. :p See ya there. :)

[Truth Warrior]

Why not? I can't be a "democratic voluntaryist"? lol. Hey, I'm voluntarily voting! :D Really, why not vote? Why let the sheep choose our leaders? THAT'S why I believe that voting good. It doesn't matter in America how many people voted, the popular vote in most election processes wins. I think of it as looking out for my best interests.

So you were never a libertarian? I thought you were. Conservative-Republican?

Read it again .......... until it clicks. < YAWN! > :p

[Kludge]

Keep on "compromising" away your ( AND my ) freedoms and just see where you end up. FEMA camp. :p See ya there. :)

I think the subject is GRADUALLY moving towards liberty, not away.

We need to come to terms with the incompetence of government, and the gradual removal of liberty for ehhh.... around 232 years! It may very well take that long before our rights are given back, and then another 200 years before we abolish the Constitution and move to anarcho-capitalism with competing gov't.

Every year the LP DOESN'T spend pushing local/state candidates is another year we'll have to try and reverse later. They should know there's NO CHANCE an LP will get to ANY presidential debates, especially after the near-devastating election year with Perot.

I mean, HELL - Republican Ron Paul was shut out of debates!

[amy31416]

Keep on "compromising" away your ( AND my ) freedoms and just see where you end up. FEMA camp. :p See ya there. :)

You don't seem to understand. I'm trying to work with people who, although they have different beliefs, want the same end result: more conservative candidates in the House--which will get you more freedom, son.

It's amazing to me that Libertarians seem to refuse to understand a "live and let live" philosophy. If I'm respectful about differences, perhaps I'll even be able to have a little bit of influence by emphasizing similarities over differences.

They know I believe differently on some issues, but I'm not in their face about it and they aren't in mine.

My background/career, whatever, requires that I work in teams with people. My philosophy is to not get into a spitting match with a person who disagrees with me, I listen to them, maybe learn a thing or two and explain my position and demonstrate why I believe what I do. If that convinces them, great! If not, then I either reevaluate and explain it differently or agree to disagree and move on.

That is not compromising my or your freedoms, it's called "picking your battles" and not simply trying to go nuclear on people. Do you think a person who yaps away about how right they are and how wrong you are will accomplish a damned thing aside from being self-righteous?

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Keep in mind, libertarians are not conservative. They share a mixture of left/right views, the best of both worlds, in my opinion. There might be some self-identified "left/right-libertarians" but they are the exception.

[Kludge]

Keep in mind, libertarians are not conservative. They share a mixture of left/right views, the best of both worlds, in my opinion. There might be some self-identified "left/right-libertarians" but they are the exception.

There are only the "soft" and "hard" libertarians IMO. Anyone else is classifying themselves incorrectly.

Edit: Like Mike Gravel.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

There are only the "soft" and "hard" libertarians IMO. Anyone else is classifying themselves incorrectly.

ok. I have hard beliefs but I'm willing to compromise in order to make things happen. Being uncomprimising has been tried and we don't have any power.

[amy31416]

ok. I have hard beliefs but I'm willing to compromise in order to make things happen. Being uncomprimising has been tried and we don't have any power.

+100^nth

[JosephTheLibertarian]

We have already compromised some. uhh do you agree 100% with everythin RP says? I don't, but I still support him.

[Truth Warrior]

I think the subject is GRADUALLY moving towards liberty, not away.

We need to come to terms with the incompetence of government, and the gradual removal of liberty for ehhh.... around 232 years! It may very well take that long before our rights are given back, and then another 200 years before we abolish the Constitution and move to anarcho-capitalism with competing gov't.

Every year the LP DOESN'T spend pushing local/state candidates is another year we'll have to try and reverse later. They should know there's NO CHANCE an LP will get to ANY presidential debates, especially after the near-devastating election year with Perot.

I mean, HELL - Republican Ron Paul was shut out of debates!

The LP too is inside the Matrix called politics.<IMHO> Their game, their rules.

[Truth Warrior]

You don't seem to understand. I'm trying to work with people who, although they have different beliefs, want the same end result: more conservative candidates in the House--which will get you more freedom, son.

It's amazing to me that Libertarians seem to refuse to understand a "live and let live" philosophy. If I'm respectful about differences, perhaps I'll even be able to have a little bit of influence by emphasizing similarities over differences.

They know I believe differently on some issues, but I'm not in their face about it and they aren't in mine.

My background/career, whatever, requires that I work in teams with people. My philosophy is to not get into a spitting match with a person who disagrees with me, I listen to them, maybe learn a thing or two and explain my position and demonstrate why I believe what I do. If that convinces them, great! If not, then I either reevaluate and explain it differently or agree to disagree and move on.

That is not compromising my or your freedoms, it's called "picking your battles" and not simply trying to go nuclear on people. Do you think a person who yaps away about how right they are and how wrong you are will accomplish a damned thing aside from being self-righteous?

I think I understand. Keep on rationalizing as long and however you choose. Someday reality MAY just slam you between the eyes. It's called an epiphany. Been there, done that. :)

[amy31416]

I think I understand. Keep on rationalizing as long and however you choose. Someday reality MAY just slam you between the eyes. It's called an epiphany. Been there, done that. :)

More of exactly what I said: I'M RIGHT, YOU'RE WRONG. GO SUCK EGGS AND PISS OFF. SOMEDAY WHEN YOU KNOW AS MUCH AS I DO, YOU'LL SEE THE LIGHT.

Good luck with that. It's that self-righteousness that turns so many people off. And for the record, I have compromised zero of my principles.

Let me ask you this--what's your plan to change the government for the better? To keep telling people who are actually trying to work for change that they're a bunch of sell-outs for working with other people who aren't 100% locked in step with me? Perhaps you envision a society of robots all programmed exactly the same?

I'm going to actually paraphrase JosephTheLibertarian: If you support Ron Paul and don't agree with 100% of what he says, you've already compromised yourself. How do you rationalize that?

[yongrel]

I think I understand. Keep on rationalizing as long and however you choose. Someday reality MAY just slam you between the eyes. It's called an epiphany. Been there, done that. :)

Shit like this is why we are called fringe.

The only folks who have the ability to be uncompromising are those who will never get power and those who already have it.

[Truth Warrior]

More of exactly what I said: I'M RIGHT, YOU'RE WRONG. GO SUCK EGGS AND PISS OFF. SOMEDAY WHEN YOU KNOW AS MUCH AS I DO, YOU'LL SEE THE LIGHT.
I've already long forgotten more than you'll EVER know. The first one to get angry loses. < LOL >

Good luck with that. It's that self-righteousness that turns so many people off. And for the record, I have compromised zero of my principles.
Any old available lame excuse will suffice. We'll see a whole lot of those "turned off" folks in FEMA camp too. :D

Let me ask you this--what's your plan to change the government for the better? To keep telling people who are actually trying to work for change that they're a bunch of sell-outs for working with other people who aren't 100% locked in step with me? Perhaps you envision a society of robots all programmed exactly the same?
You're nowhere near ready nor anywhere close to the necessary required mindset.<IMHO> Spend a couple of days perusing the contents of www.voluntaryist.com (http://www.voluntaryist.com) and then we'll talk.

I'm going to actually paraphrase JosephTheLibertarian: If you support Ron Paul and don't agree with 100% of what he says, you've already compromised yourself. How do you rationalize that?
Unloading your question, the top of each page here says "Ron Paul Forums". I am a fan of Ron. Ron's homepage is LewRockwell.com. See if you can figure the rest of it out all by yourself. :D

Have a great day! :)

[Kludge]

Have a great day! :)

I dislike you.

[Truth Warrior]

Shit like this is why we are called fringe.

The only folks who have the ability to be uncompromising are those who will never get power and those who already have it.
You want mainstream, then just vote for McCain, actually this year the mainstream is most probably with Dems.

[Truth Warrior]

I dislike you.

OK, I can live with that. :D

You have a great day too. :)

[amy31416]

Way to miss the point, chief. I'm not angry--that all caps statement was a parody of the mindset you are promoting.

The FEMA camp argument is almost as lame as the old "if you don't believe what I believe, you're like Hitler" notion.

LewRockwell.com is Lew Rockwell's homepage.

Okay, you've convinced me, I won't work with Christians or anyone who disagrees with me on anything and I'll continue to chase butterflies in a sunny field filled with daffodils, unicorns and rainbows. Ignorant and secure in the notion that, while I did nothing, I never compromised on a damn thing. Whoopee!

http://www.unicornlady.net/images/Gallery/11/the_rainbow_valley_of_the_unicorn_copyright_ruth_s anderson.jpg

[Truth Warrior]

Amy --

Your parodies need some work.<IMHO>

Look up Ron's homepage.

Free yourself first!

[yongrel]

You want mainstream, then just vote for McCain, actually this year the mainstream is most probably with Dems.

http://www.forumammo.com/cpg/albums/userpics/10071/picard-no-facepalm.jpg

[Truth Warrior]

Gotta love them ad hominems. :D Is that really the best that you can do? :(

[amy31416]

Your parodies need some work.<IMHO>



IMHO=In My Humble Opinion

Definitions of humble on the Web: marked by meekness or modesty; not arrogant or prideful; "a humble apology"; "essentially humble...and self-effacing, he achieved the highest formal honors and distinctions"- B.K.Malinowski

Your opinions are hardly humble. I know that I can be more educated, have more wisdom, be funnier, be more helpful, be more active, better-looking, richer, more motivated. You don't. As you stated, "you've forgotten more than I've ever known."

Pretty humble opinion there, ace.

[Truth Warrior]

IMHO=In My Humble Opinion

Definitions of humble on the Web: marked by meekness or modesty; not arrogant or prideful; "a humble apology"; "essentially humble...and self-effacing, he achieved the highest formal honors and distinctions"- B.K.Malinowski

Your opinions are hardly humble. I know that I can be more educated, have more wisdom, be funnier, be more helpful, be more active, better-looking, richer, more motivated. You don't. As you stated, "you've forgotten more than I've ever known."

Pretty humble opinion there, ace.

OH NOOO, cut to the quick. :rolleyes: Thanks for the lesson.

Now about that liberty? :D

[amy31416]

Now about that liberty? :D

I'm working on it with a bunch of evil Christians and other people, remember? How about you?

[Truth Warrior]

I'm working on it with a bunch of evil Christians and other people, remember? How about you?
I'm doing fine, thanks for asking. :)

[Kludge]

I'm doing fine, thanks for asking. :)

Is that good enough?

[familydog]

"Any compromise between good and evil only works to the detriment of the good and to the benefit of the evil."

Compromise = Repeatedly over time, how we all got into this current Leviathan mess.

I think that Ron would surely agree with that one. :)

Ron Paul's platform is full of compromises. Our country was founded on compromise. Compromises are necessary to get anything done. You don't have to compromise your beliefs, but you have to compromise on how to achieve them. The LP seems to be unwilling to do that. Tis why I left it.

[Truth Warrior]

Is that good enough?
Beats me. :confused:

[Truth Warrior]

Ron Paul's platform is full of compromises. Our country was founded on compromise. Compromises are necessary to get anything done. You don't have to compromise your beliefs, but you have to compromise on how to achieve them. The LP seems to be unwilling to do that. Tis why I left it.

There ya go.:) I may be seeing you in FEMA camp also.

Thanks!

[familydog]

There ya go.:) I may be seeing you in FEMA camp also.

Thanks!

Way to avoid the issue. Don't want to provide an intelligent thought? Then get out of the way.

[amy31416]

Ron Paul's platform is full of compromises. Our country was founded on compromise. Compromises are necessary to get anything done. You don't have to compromise your beliefs, but you have to compromise on how to achieve them. The LP seems to be unwilling to do that. Tis why I left it.

Hey. If we don't all adopt Truth Warrior's methodology, we're doomed, don't you know?

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y44/stonefruit/camp-fema.jpg

[yongrel]

This thread is asinine. Truth Warrior is having fun assuming the role of "Holier Than Thou Internet Denizen" so I'm all for letting him continue.

Just ignore him until he gets off his high horse.

[Truth Warrior]

Way to avoid the issue. Don't want to provide an intelligent thought? Then get out of the way.

Apologies! I didn't realize that I was in your way. As a Christian, I assume that you forgive me. Thanks! I appreciate that. :)

Now about that liberty!

[Kludge]

This thread is asinine. Truth Warrior is having fun assuming the role of "Holier Than Thou Internet Denizen" so I'm all for letting him continue.

Just ignore him until he gets off his high horse.

It's 4/20. You have no excuse tomorrow, TW.

[amy31416]

This thread is asinine. Truth Warrior is having fun assuming the role of "Holier Than Thou Internet Denizen" so I'm all for letting him continue.

Just ignore him until he gets off his high horse.

Yeah.

He'll need scaffolding to get down off of that clydesdale.

So, anyways, I like the stances of the Libertarian party, and agree with them on most points. Just can't join up due to the issues within, so I'm sticking with the Republican party until further notice.

[Truth Warrior]

This thread is asinine. Truth Warrior is having fun assuming the role of "Holier Than Thou Internet Denizen" so I'm all for letting him continue.

Just ignore him until he gets off his high horse.

Whoa there, easy boy! < dismounts and now on foot > Hmmm, whadayaknow, same truth.

We's all just folks talking here, and in the same awful "manufactured" mess.

Does your mind normally just jump instantly into ad hominem mode?

Just curious? :)

[Truth Warrior]

It's 4/20. You have no excuse tomorrow, TW.
Pardon, excuse for what?

[Truth Warrior]

Yeah.

He'll need scaffolding to get down off of that clydesdale.

So, anyways, I like the stances of the Libertarian party, and agree with them on most points. Just can't join up due to the issues within, so I'm sticking with the Republican party until further notice.
I'm sure John will appreciate your vote. :)

[Truth Warrior]

Way to avoid the issue. Don't want to provide an intelligent thought? Then get out of the way.

Oops sorry, do overs! I guess that you didn't much like or agree with thread post #7.

Can't please everyone. :) Have ya ever noticed?

[Truth Warrior]

Hey. If we don't all adopt Truth Warrior's methodology, we're doomed, don't you know?

And if perchance FEMA camps are real, what well known institution may place you there? All legal and above board of course. :)

[Kludge]

Pardon, excuse for what?

a. Being a dick. Failing to debate, but rather spitting out pathetically juvenile arguments of no depth.

b. Failure to comprehend compromise. You support RP but don't believe in compromise?! To be a truly uncompromising libertarian, you'd need to support full-blown anarchism, where aggression becomes competition.

c. Hijacking a perfectly legit. thread.

d. Bothering me enough to put you on my ignore list (1st of 1) and inspiring to post this image : http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y296/dumbgwailo/loser.jpg
(You're being depicted as the "Loser" in my interpretation)


(Edit: Before you say it, I'm aware of the hypocrisy in the post ;))

[Truth Warrior]

a. Being a dick. Failing to debate, but rather spitting out pathetically juvenile arguments of no depth.

b. Failure to comprehend compromise. You support RP but don't believe in compromise?! To be a truly uncompromising libertarian, you'd need to support full-blown anarchism, where aggression becomes competition.

c. Hijacking a perfectly legit. thread.

d. Bothering me enough to put you on my ignore list (2nd of 2) and inspiring to post this image :
(You're being depicted as the "Loser" in my interpretation)
Ahhh, thanks for the explanation. Now I see. Is that worse than being disliked? :D I see that you've been taking Yongrel lessons too. I'll give you an A. You'll be missed. < sniff, sniff >

Thanks!

Still hoping that you have a real great day! :)

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Do you think it would be better to form a new moderate party that doesn't carry these negative connotations?

[yongrel]

Do you think it would be better to form a new moderate party that doesn't carry these negative cannotations?

No, it would be better to take back the Republican Party. It didn't always belong to the Religious Right and the Neocons, and it doesn't have to in future. We just need to work hard to accomplish a recapturing of the party.

[Kludge]

Without a true revolution, we'll be stuck with the two-party system for a looooong time.... Yongrel's probably right in sticking to the two major parties and influencing them towards actual conservative/libertarian values.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

No, it would be better to take back the Republican Party. It didn't always belong to the Religious Right and the Neocons, and it doesn't have to in future. We just need to work hard to accomplish a recapturing of the party.

It has negative connotations of being of the "right." but ok.

[Kludge]

It has negative connotations of being of the "right." but ok.

What's wrong about being right? :D

[amy31416]

I'm sticking with Republican until I see how this plays out. There's no third party that gets me all giddy.

If it doesn't work out, I'm back to Independent, which isn't a party at all.

[yongrel]

It has negative connotations of being of the "right." but ok.

Right and left are a totally arbitrary terms. If we can take the Republican Party back to its roots as the party of limited government, noninterventionism, free markets, and free people, then I don't give a damn whether it's labeled as "right," "left," or "pudding."

[JosephTheLibertarian]

What's wrong about being right? :D

I don't know what makes me a "ringwinger"

I like Steve Kubby's views on virtually every issue

[Truth Warrior]

"We shall get nowhere until we start by recognizing that political behavior is largely non-rational, that the world is suffering from some kind of mental disease which must be diagnosed before it can be cured. " -- George Orwell

[AutoDas]

I have to compromise on candidates because no one is a copy of me. I don't compromise on the policies. So I agree with half of what Ron Paul says.

[BuddyRey]

I think it's the very opposite. The association with the Libertarian Party is what causes a lot of misunderstanding when one uses the term to mean small-l libertarianism. Especially vexing to libertarians of all parties is when those in the LP are running on just slightly less welfare/warfare statism than the chuckleheaded Republicrats.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

why do anarchists join the LP if the agenda of the LP is not anarchism?

[Kludge]

why do anarchists join the LP if the agenda of the LP is not anarchism?

Is that a real question or are we still bashing TW?

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Is that a real question or are we still bashing TW?

Real question. Why do they join?

[Kludge]

Real question. Why do they join?

Compromise. Power in numbers. 10,000,000 Libertarians are more powerful then 1,000,000 anarchists.

But... 100,000,000 Republicans are more powerful then 10,000,000 Libertarians so....

[Truth Warrior]

Is that a real question or are we still bashing TW?
I have never joined the LP. I was there at the beginning and argued strongly against even forming an LP. The limited government Republican conservative statists present voted to go ahead and do it anyway. They carried the day. Viola! Here we are. :(

[JosephTheLibertarian]

I have never joined the LP. I was there at the beginning and argued strongly against even forming an LP. The limited government Republican conservative statists present voted to go ahead and do it anyway. They carried the day. Viola! Here we are. :(

You were where at the beginning? 1971? Yeah, ok :rolleyes:

[Truth Warrior]

You were where at the beginning? 1971? Yeah, ok :rolleyes:
LP establishment conference, Topeka, KS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_Party_(United_States)

[JosephTheLibertarian]

LP establishment conference, Topeka, KS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_Party_(United_States)

Why would you even care what people wanted to start?

[Truth Warrior]

Why would you even care what people wanted to start?
Because I'm a libertarian. :)

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Because I'm a libertarian. :)

But you said conservative-Republicans started it. Not libertarians! ;)

[Truth Warrior]

But you said conservative-Republicans started it. Not libertarians! ;)
The libertarians present were significantly outnumbered by the Republicans.

[AutoDas]

Compromise. Power in numbers. 10,000,000 Libertarians are more powerful then 1,000,000 anarchists.

But... 100,000,000 Republicans are more powerful then 10,000,000 Libertarians so....

If only they knew the
power that they had
You sell them short
You sell them short

Despot by Pulse Ultra

[familydog]

Oops sorry, do overs! I guess that you didn't much like or agree with thread post #7.

Can't please everyone. :) Have ya ever noticed?

When you're not willing to defend your statement, it doesn't count as intelligent. Sorry to burst your bubble.

[Truth Warrior]

When you're not willing to defend your statement, it doesn't count as intelligent. Sorry to burst your bubble.

I wasn't aware that post #7 was challenged. It seems pretty intuitively obvious to me too apparently. :)

[familydog]

I wasn't aware that post #7 was challenged. It seems pretty intuitively obvious to me too apparently. :)

Since I'm feeling a little spry and bored tonight, and your obviously craving attention, I'll play your game.
Post 38 is quite clearly a challenge to your statement. You quoted it, and you responded with nonsense that had nothing to do with defending your original statement which I challenged. It seems your intellectual prowess needs to be improved.

[Truth Warrior]

Since I'm feeling a little spry and bored tonight, and your obviously craving attention, I'll play your game.
Post 38 is quite clearly a challenge to your statement. You quoted it, and you responded with nonsense that had nothing to do with defending your original statement which I challenged. It seems your intellectual prowess needs to be improved.
OK, let's play. :)

I'll be evil and want slavery, war and poverty.

You can be good and want freedom, peace and prosperity.

Let's compromise.

Who's better off? Who's worse off?

I'll check out post 38 while you decide.

[Truth Warrior]

Ron Paul's platform is full of compromises. Our country was founded on compromise. Compromises are necessary to get anything done. You don't have to compromise your beliefs, but you have to compromise on how to achieve them. The LP seems to be unwilling to do that. Tis why I left it.

I figured that you had to be just kidding or were clueless. That hardly qualifies as a challenge, let alone a refutation.

How often does Ron Paul compromise on the constitution in the Congress? How often should Ron compromise on the constitution?

He's called Dr. No for very good, valid and principled reasons.

[familydog]

I figured that you had to be just kidding or were clueless. That hardly qualifies as a challenge, let alone a refutation.

How often does Ron Paul compromise on the constitution in the Congress? How often should Ron compromise on the constitution?

He's called Dr. No for very good, valid and principled reasons.

Like I said in that post, Ron Paul's platform is full of compromises. For a good example, look at what he says he will do with entitlement programs. The ideal Ron Paul world would not have them, but if he were president, he would have a transition period so the government doesn't throw out on the street anyone who is dependent on them. His plan for Social Security and the fact he wouldn't worry about student loans are two good examples. Look at his stance on abortion. He is personally opposed to it and if it were up to him, there would be no abortions. However, he recognizes that it is up to the states, as designated by the Constitution. His stance on the death pentalty? He is against it, but it is another issue to be left up to the states.

In fact, the Constitution itself is a compromise. The Bill of Rights was a compromise between Federalists and Anti-Federalists. Believing in the Constitution is believing in compromise. The Constitution is not a governing set of beliefs like libertarianism or conservatism, it is simply a procedural mechanism made to maximize liberty, while minimizing government interference in people's personal lives.

[Truth Warrior]

Like I said in that post, Ron Paul's platform is full of compromises. For a good example, look at what he says he will do with entitlement programs. The ideal Ron Paul world would not have them, but if he were president, he would have a transition period so the government doesn't throw out on the street anyone who is dependent on them. His plan for Social Security and the fact he wouldn't worry about student loans are two good examples. Look at his stance on abortion. He is personally opposed to it and if it were up to him, there would be no abortions. However, he recognizes that it is up to the states, as designated by the Constitution. His stance on the death pentalty? He is against it, but it is another issue to be left up to the states.

In fact, the Constitution itself is a compromise. The Bill of Rights was a compromise between Federalists and Anti-Federalists. Believing in the Constitution is believing in compromise. The Constitution is not a governing set of beliefs like libertarianism or conservatism, it is simply a procedural mechanism made to maximize liberty, while minimizing government interference in people's personal lives.
Please answer the two questions that I asked you personally, if you would be so kind.

Thank you. I believe that you are making my case very well. Any set of compromises with evil begets evil ultimately and eventually.

BTW, I'm still patiently waiting for your response on game post # 80.

Have a good one. :)

[familydog]

Please answer the two questions that I asked you personally, if you would be so kind.

Thank you. I believe that you are making my case very well. Any set of compromises with evil begets evil ultimately and eventually.

BTW, I'm still patiently waiting for your response on game post # 80.

Have a good one. :)

Why answer those questions? They are nothing but a distraction from my point. I'm not discussing the merits of compromise. I'm simply saying that Ron Paul does it, and the Constitution is one, and that it is necessary to get anything done. Who benefits from it, whether it's good or evil, etc is not relevent to my point. You're right, Ron Paul is principled, but he is principled at compromising. You see, if one is a Constitutionalist, then one sacrficies her or his own personal opinions for the sake of order and stability (the rule of law). So, it seems Ron Paul does not compromise his consistency to compromise.

[FreeTraveler]

Good luck, TW, you're banging your head against the wall. There are those here who have no interest in following things to their logical conclusion in their quest for liberty. These are the ones who refuse to consider roasting their particular sacred cow.

As far as understanding the difference between compromising your principles and compromising on particular actions to forward your principles, that concept has apparently never entered the minds of most of the posters here.

When I posted a thread asking if taxation was theft, 85% responded in the affirmative, and I had some hope that people here really had opened their eyes.

Then when I asked if ORGANIZED religion should be considered fraud, the ad hominem attacks started in earnest, and not one person defended ORGANIZED religion with facts that differentiated it with fraud. I was instead attacked for even asking the question!

Sorry, liberty and the opportunity for true reasoned discourse is dead, even here at RPF. My guess is that less than 10% here even truly understand the concept of liberty. The rest apparently define liberty as the right to do or say anything, as long as it's something they think you should say or do.

Pick any sacred cow and lead it off to the slaughterhouse, however, and you will be attacked with ad hominem attacks, not logical argument.

[yongrel]

Good luck, TW, you're banging your head against the wall. There are those here who have no interest in following things to their logical conclusion in their quest for liberty. These are the ones who refuse to consider roasting their particular sacred cow.

As far as understanding the difference between compromising your principles and compromising on particular actions to forward your principles, that concept has apparently never entered the minds of most of the posters here.

When I posted a thread asking if taxation was theft, 85% responded in the affirmative, and I had some hope that people here really had opened their eyes.

Then when I asked if ORGANIZED religion should be considered fraud, the ad hominem attacks started in earnest, and not one person defended ORGANIZED religion with facts that differentiated it with fraud. I was instead attacked for even asking the question!

Sorry, liberty and the opportunity for true reasoned discourse is dead, even here at RPF. My guess is that less than 10% here even truly understand the concept of liberty. The rest apparently define liberty as the right to do or say anything, as long as it's something they think you should say or do.

Pick any sacred cow and lead it off to the slaughterhouse, however, and you will be attacked with ad hominem attacks, not logical argument.

You play the martyr very well. You must have a lot of practice.

[FreeTraveler]

You play the martyr very well. You must have a lot of practice.

Thanks. When you roast sacred cows, people keep pushing you into the firepit with them. Being burned alive that often tends to teach martyrdom.

[familydog]

Good luck, TW, you're banging your head against the wall. There are those here who have no interest in following things to their logical conclusion in their quest for liberty. These are the ones who refuse to consider roasting their particular sacred cow.

As far as understanding the difference between compromising your principles and compromising on particular actions to forward your principles, that concept has apparently never entered the minds of most of the posters here.

When I posted a thread asking if taxation was theft, 85% responded in the affirmative, and I had some hope that people here really had opened their eyes.

Then when I asked if ORGANIZED religion should be considered fraud, the ad hominem attacks started in earnest, and not one person defended ORGANIZED religion with facts that differentiated it with fraud. I was instead attacked for even asking the question!

Sorry, liberty and the opportunity for true reasoned discourse is dead, even here at RPF. My guess is that less than 10% here even truly understand the concept of liberty. The rest apparently define liberty as the right to do or say anything, as long as it's something they think you should say or do.

Pick any sacred cow and lead it off to the slaughterhouse, however, and you will be attacked with ad hominem attacks, not logical argument.

If you disagree with my analysis feel free to argue it with intelligent points and examples rather than indirectly attack. True reasoned discourse is not a one way street my friend. Hypoccrisy never shines so brightly as it does here on this forum.

[Truth Warrior]

Good luck, TW, you're banging your head against the wall. There are those here who have no interest in following things to their logical conclusion in their quest for liberty. These are the ones who refuse to consider roasting their particular sacred cow.

As far as understanding the difference between compromising your principles and compromising on particular actions to forward your principles, that concept has apparently never entered the minds of most of the posters here.

When I posted a thread asking if taxation was theft, 85% responded in the affirmative, and I had some hope that people here really had opened their eyes.

Then when I asked if ORGANIZED religion should be considered fraud, the ad hominem attacks started in earnest, and not one person defended ORGANIZED religion with facts that differentiated it with fraud. I was instead attacked for even asking the question!

Sorry, liberty and the opportunity for true reasoned discourse is dead, even here at RPF. My guess is that less than 10% here even truly understand the concept of liberty. The rest apparently define liberty as the right to do or say anything, as long as it's something they think you should say or do.

Pick any sacred cow and lead it off to the slaughterhouse, however, and you will be attacked with ad hominem attacks, not logical argument.

Thanks! I'm much more than inclined to agree with you. :) I find the exercises here stimulating and invigorating, even if not particularly fruitful. It does tend to keep the old neurons firing and the adrenaline pumping.

It's very surprising, good and refreshing to find another occasional sane person here, however infrequently it may be.

Keep up the good works!

Good luck to you too!

[Truth Warrior]

If you disagree with my analysis feel free to argue it with intelligent points and examples rather than indirectly attack. True reasoned discourse is not a one way street my friend. Hypoccrisy never shines so brightly as it does here on this forum.
Post #80? :)

Thanks in advance for your prompt attention.

[Truth Warrior]

bump