Gov. Mark Sanford Fires Back At Lindsey Graham in Defense Of Libertarians!

[Morerockin]

YouTube - Mark Sanford Fires Back At Lindsey Graham In Defense Of Libertarians (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikqJ_KB66WQ)

[angelatc]

Thank you, Gov. Sanford.

[idiom]

Well. That passes as nailing your colours to the flag for me.

Unless of course he takes it back.

[MRoCkEd]

Good guy.

[Elwar]

Don't mess with libertarians or I'll hit you with an EMP bomb bitch...

[max]

DON'T BUY IT!!!!

Marc Sanford is a Bildeberger attendee. If the Ron Paul movement gets out of hand, this is the type of pawn that the Establishment will move in to co-opt the libertarian movement.

Sanford is quite cozy with the Newt Gingrich/Rush Limbaugh wing.

You will know a true Libertarian by his open disdain for the FED and foreign wars.....neither of which Sanford has ever oppossed.

[Elwar]

Gingrich: Attack North Korea with electromagnetic pulse (http://www.prisonplanet.com/gingrich-attack-north-korea-with-electromagnetic-pulse.html)

South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford (R) agreed with Gingrich’s preemptive policy, saying that “in the countryside of South Carolina, at some point you’ve got to back up words with action.”

[torchbearer]

Liberty is freedom from government tyranny. Let's see how he stacks up.

[iddo]

South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford (R) agreed with Gingrich’s preemptive policy, saying that “in the countryside of South Carolina, at some point you’ve got to back up words with action.”

Right, but Sanford also said (http://www.amconmag.com/article/2009/mar/09/00006/): "I don’t believe in preemptive war. For us to hold the moral high ground in the world, our default position must be defensive".
So he might have libertarian tendencies with regard to foreign policy, the future will tell...

[Elwar]

Right, but Sanford also said (http://www.amconmag.com/article/2009/mar/09/00006/): "I don’t believe in preemptive war. For us to hold the moral high ground in the world, our default position must be defensive".
So he might have libertarian tendencies with regard to foreign policy, the future will tell...

So...some days he's for pre-emptive attacks and other days he doesn't believe in pre-emptive war.

Sounds like a principled libertarian to me.

[torchbearer]

So...some days he's for pre-emptive attacks and other days he doesn't believe in pre-emptive war.

Sounds like a principled libertarian to me.

When I read his Korean statement, it almost read- you don't make a threat unless you are willing to back it up.
Which is true.

The idea is not to make the threat to begin with...

[sailor]

The idea is not to make the threat to begin with...

You`re right. A surprise attack is much better.


j/k :D

[V-rod]

DON'T BUY IT!!!!

Marc Sanford is a Bildeberger attendee. If the Ron Paul movement gets out of hand, this is the type of pawn that the Establishment will move in to co-opt the libertarian movement.

Sanford is quite cozy with the Newt Gingrich/Rush Limbaugh wing.

You will know a true Libertarian by his open disdain for the FED and foreign wars.....neither of which Sanford has ever oppossed.


You left out evil follower of the Protocols of Zion. :rolleyes:

[NYgs23]

He's seemingly the best (least bad?) person with any chance of getting in the White House. Of course, you can't forget how every time a freedom movement became too powerful, the Establishment subverted it (Buckley in the 50s, Reagan in the 80s). If Sanford were to get into office and pull a Reagan, I think that's the last presidential candidate I'd bother to even root for from the sidelines.

[BuddyRey]

He's seemingly the best (least bad?) person with any chance of getting in the White House.

Aren't you forgetting Gary Johnson? :eek:

[0zzy]

DON'T BUY IT!!!!

Marc Sanford is a Bildeberger attendee. If the Ron Paul movement gets out of hand, this is the type of pawn that the Establishment will move in to co-opt the libertarian movement.

Sanford is quite cozy with the Newt Gingrich/Rush Limbaugh wing.

You will know a true Libertarian by his open disdain for the FED and foreign wars.....neither of which Sanford has ever oppossed.

HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAGHAHAHA
h
sdhsdhsdahasd


please calm the hell down. "OMG OMG OMG BILDEBERGER! OMG OMG! AHH!"

I think he is pretty good to me, I'll have to see him in debates at the national level, but if I were to vote for a "mainstream" today, It'd be him.

[0zzy]

Aren't you forgetting Gary Johnson? :eek:

Everyone has forgot about Gary Johnson. As far as anyone else is concerned, he's a fringe person and no one knows him. He has a much tougher road if he decides to run.

[crhoades]

Regarding Graham's comments...

Here is an interview Reagan did with Reason Magazine in 1975 where he brings up libertarianism. After reading this, who would you group Reagan with - Paul or Graham?

http://www.reason.com/news/show/29318.html

REAGAN: If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.

Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are travelling the same path.

[ClayTrainor]

Very well said Mr. Sanford :cool:

[torchbearer]

Regarding Graham's comments...

Here is an interview Reagan did with Reason Magazine in 1975 where he brings up libertarianism. After reading this, who would you group Reagan with - Paul or Graham?

http://www.reason.com/news/show/29318.html

REAGAN: If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.

Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are travelling the same path.

Within the libertarian party there are three factions- anarchist - minarchist - and GOP-lite.
The varying shades of libertarianism. The differences are, as you say, how much government is still too much.
Believe it or not, the anarchist have ran the national conventions for years, the minarchist are the swing votes.

In 2004, Michael Badnarik, won as a dark horse choice of the anarchist who controlled the votes. He beat out Aaron Russo and Gary Nolan- who were the favorites going in.
Badnarik bombed in the election, more so than usual.

In 2008, the minarchist swung their votes over to GOP lite because the more anarchist supported candidates were a bit too much for the public to handle. (at least that was the perception). So you ended up with Bob Barr. GOP-lite.

Mary Ruwart would have been a better bet. I see her more of a minarchist, but her writing on child porn would be misconstrued and is a by-product of her belief of where the government should be.

[NYgs23]

Aren't you forgetting Gary Johnson? :eek:

I don't think he'd have much of a shot, but if he throws his hat in, who knows?

[american.swan]

The speaker in the youtube video in the first post is another Reagen. He is no friend of mine. He will be used by the powers to make sure a Ron Paul clone doesn't win. I would never vote for him.

[Carole]

My comment at You Tube.

Quiltskate (9 seconds ago)
I hope Gov. Sanford renounces any ties to the CFR whose meeting he attended at least one time.
This is not a group with which a Libertarian should be connected. I hope he means it when he says he loves Liberty. It was meant for all, not just the elite.

[Carole]

And this:


REASON: These days, most private universities are the recipients of Federal funds. Do you think that it’s proper to use tax revenue to finance higher education?

REAGAN: Well, if I answer that question then I’m answering that we should do away with our state universities and frankly I haven’t given enough thought to what could be a counter-system.
At first, there was a great opposition to most of the Federal revenues that are going to education on the part of many educators. Once the money was there, however, it was like the farmer who went into the woods and came back with the wagon loads of wild pigs. When they asked him how he had done it–they’d been wild for a hundred years–he said, "I built a fence and I put corn down and fed them, and they got used to eating the corn there, so l extended the fences’s sides and finally I had an enclosure and I corralled them." He said, "If I can get them to take food from me, I’ll own them." And this is what really happened with Federal aid to education. You know, the Federal Government could have done it differently if the Federal Government did not at the same time want control.

And this:


REASON: Now that you’re in the minority party, how do you feel about other prospects for minor parties or third party activities?

REAGAN: Well, third parties have been notoriously unsuccessful; they usually wind up dividing the very people that should be united. And then we elect the wrong kind–the side we’re out to defeat wins. I have been doing my best to try to revitalize the Republican Party groups that I’ve spoken to, on the basis that the time has come to repudiate those in our midst who would blur the Republican image by saying we should be all things to all people in order to triumph. Lately, we find that of the 26 percent of the people who didn’t vote, more than half of them now say they didn’t vote because they don’t see any difference between the parties. I’ve been urging Republicans to raise a banner and put the things we stand for on that banner and don’t compromise, but don’t try to enlarge the party by being all things to everyone when you can’t keep all the promises. Put up a banner and then count on the fact that if you’ve got the proper things on that banner the people will rally round.

Sadly, once in office, the shadow government took control. They put Reagan in his place for the most part and he went the way of so many other leaders.

[Brian4Liberty]

Aren't you forgetting Gary Johnson? :eek:

Sanford has been on the mainstream political shows several times now. He needs to ramp that up. I have never seen Johnson on them. Starting today would almost be too late.

McCain (and his twin Bill Kristol) spent about a decade (almost every weekend) on the MSM political shows before McCain ran for POTUS the first time...