Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 56

Thread: In a moronic rant, Bill Maher trashes libertarians, dumb enough to include Paul Ryan

  1. #1

    Default In a moronic rant, Bill Maher trashes libertarians, dumb enough to include Paul Ryan

    http://ww w.me dia ite.com/tv/bill-maher-tears-into-libertarians-movement-went-nuts-intellectually-stuck-in-their-teen-years/



    Bill Maher ended his show tonight by railing against a political movement he has aligned himself with in the past: libertarianism. He slammed the current wave of libertarians, among them Paul Ryan and Rand Paul, for having a “creepy obsession” with free markets, Ayn Rand, and government staying out of the way. He made it clear that he has not abandoned the libertarianism altogether, saying, “I didn’t go nuts, this movement did.”

    Maher complained that the current crop of libertarians are “ruining libertarianism,” saying there’s a difference between holding that political philosophy and being a “selfish prick.” Maher admitted that he has expressed support in the past for a lot of what libertarians have to say, but along the way he noticed it evolved into a “creepy obsession with free market capitalism.”

    Maher specifically brought up libertarian worship of Ayn Rand, whom he argued only sounds good when you’re a teenager but actually lacks any real substance. He declared that libertarians like Ryan and Paul who subscribe to this line of thinking are “intellectually stuck in their teenage years.”

    Maher admitted that he still agrees with a lot of what libertarians have to say, but considers the movement to have basically gone “nuts,” always complaining about the nanny state and free market as if the government has no role in setting basic societal restrictions, even in the case of helping out with natural disasters.

    He concluded that libertarians may hate Medicare and Social Security, but “it beats stepping over lepers and watching human skeletons shit in the river and I also like not seeing those things. I’m selfish that way!”



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    I saw this tonight. It's funny how he said that he was a libertarian and now feels the libertarian movement has gotten too hardcore. Apparently, he doesn't remember Harry Browne or Ron Paul back when Ron Paul was the Libertarian nominee in '88.

    It's also ridiculous that he doesn't get that economic freedom and personal freedom make you a libertarian. Someone how stealing money by force and redistributing it is very noble.

  4. #3
    Truth is treason ... Occam's Banana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Empire of Lies
    Posts
    8,202

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by misean View Post
    Apparently, he doesn't remember Harry Browne or Ron Paul back when Ron Paul was the Libertarian nominee in '88.
    I very seriously doubt Maher has any clue who Harry Browne is.

    And if he thinks Rand Paul (let alone Paul Ryan) is a scion of Ayn Rand, then he has a badly-warped to non-existent understanding of any of those people.

    He's just spewing the same spittle that every smug, hateful and self-righteous asshole spouts when he encounters people who have the temerity to reject his self-congratulatory & holier-than-thou pronouncements

    Bill Maher is a raging ignoramus who just made himself look like a demented, babbling fool to anyone who has the even the slightest clue about libertarianism.

    Haters gonna hate ...
    tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito · fiat justitia, ruat caelum · sic semper tyrannis
    The Bastiat Collection - FREE PDF

    Frédéric Bastiat
    • "When law and morality are in contradiction to each other, the citizen finds himself in the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense, or of losing his respect for the law."
      - The Law (p. 54)
    • "Government is that great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
      - Government (p. 99)
    • "[W]ar is always begun in the interest of the few, and at the expense of the many."
      - Economic Sophisms - Second Series (p. 312)
    • "There are two principles that can never be reconciled - Liberty and Constraint."
      - Harmonies of Political Economy - Book One (p. 447)

  5. #4

    Default

    This guy is a complete moron.

  6. #5

    Default

    Maher is basically the poseur socialist version of O'Reily. He's done one or two good monologues, but otherwise I don't care for him. His idea of humor (most of the time) is just stringing together a bunch of expletives and insults delivered in a snide, snarky manner. :P

    I don't know how he got so far. His old standup routines are incredibly unfunny and frankly boring.
    Last edited by heavenlyboy34; 04-05-2013 at 11:40 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Paul
    The government is incapable of doing what it's supposed to do. A job like the provision of security is something best left to private institutions.
    My music/art page is here"government is the enemy of liberty"-RP
    That which doesn't kill me has made a grave tactical error
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    This whole board is a thoughtcrime in progress.
    Quote Originally Posted by danke View Post
    I carry my man purse for fashion, not function.

  7. #6

    Default

    I never realized libertarians have been fierce advocates for abolishing stoplights, Bill Maher sure is insightful.
    Last edited by T.hill; 04-06-2013 at 12:15 AM.

  8. #7

    Default

    It would be interesting to see him invite some libertarian-thinkers like tom woods or even an anarcho-capitalist like Stefan Molyneux onto his show and see how well he fares debating them.

  9. #8

    Default

    Wait wait wait. Ryan is a libertarian?
    "Corruptisima republica plurimae leges."

    ---- Tacitus

    I love von Mises and Emma Watson

  10. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KingRobbStark View Post
    Wait wait wait. Ryan is a libertarian?
    I don't even view Ayn Rand's philosophy consistent with liberty.

  11. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sola_Fide View Post
    I don't even view Ayn Rand's philosophy consistent with liberty.
    Yeah, it's a shame libertarian's are stereotyped as followers of Randian objectivism. Libertarian's might agree with some of her theories and admire her as a philosopher, but i'd say many are not objectivists themselves. At least I'm not anyway.
    Last edited by T.hill; 04-06-2013 at 12:31 AM.

  12. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T.hill View Post
    I never realized libertarians have been fierce advocates for abolishing stoplights, Bill Maher sure is insightful.
    Yeah, the libertarians who deal with roads and highways like myself propose replacing stoplights with roundabouts and other rational solutions. Stoplights are wasteful and time consuming, like every public works program.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Paul
    The government is incapable of doing what it's supposed to do. A job like the provision of security is something best left to private institutions.
    My music/art page is here"government is the enemy of liberty"-RP
    That which doesn't kill me has made a grave tactical error
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    This whole board is a thoughtcrime in progress.
    Quote Originally Posted by danke View Post
    I carry my man purse for fashion, not function.

  13. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T.hill View Post
    Yeah, it's a shame libertarian's are stereotyped as followers of Randian objectivism. Libertarian's might agree with some of her theories and admire her as a philosopher, but i'd say many are not objectivists themselves. At least I'm not anyway.
    Ron critiqued both Ayn Rand and Rothbard in The Revolution. Also, according to Ron Paul, being pro-life is necessary to defend liberty:

    Being Pro Life Is Necessary To Defend Liberty
    "Pro-life libertarians have a vital task to perform: to persuade the many abortion-supporting libertarians of the contradiction between abortion and individual liberty; and, to sever the mistaken connection in many minds between individual freedom and the "right" to extinguish individual life.

    Libertarians have a moral vision of a society that is just, because individuals are free. This vision is the only reason for libertarianism to exist. It offers an alternative to the forms of political thought that uphold the power of the State, or of persons within a society, to violate the freedom of others. If it loses that vision, then libertarianism becomes merely another ideology whose policies are oppressive, rather than liberating.

    We expect most people to be inconsistent, because their beliefs are founded on false principles or on principles that are not clearly stated and understood. They cannot apply their beliefs consistently without contradictions becoming glaringly apparent. Thus, there are both liberals and conservatives who support conscription of young people, the redistribution of wealth, and the power of the majority to impose its will on the individual.

    A libertarian's support for abortion is not merely a minor misapplication of principle, as if one held an incorrect belief about the Austrian theory of the business cycle. The issue of abortion is fundamental, and therefore an incorrect view of the issue strikes at the very foundations of all beliefs.

    Libertarians believe, along with the Founding Fathers, that every individual has inalienable rights, among which are the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Neither the State, nor any other person, can violate those rights without committing an injustice. But, just as important as the power claimed by the State to decide what rights we have, is the power to decide which of us has rights.

    Today, we are seeing a piecemeal destruction of individual freedom. And in abortion, the statists have found a most effective method of obliterating freedom: obliterating the individual. Abortion on demand is the ultimate State tyranny; the State simply declares that certain classes of human beings are not persons, and therefore not entitled to the protection of the law. The State protects the "right" of some people to kill others, just as the courts protected the "property rights" of slave masters in their slaves. Moreover, by this method the State achieves a goal common to all totalitarian regimes: it sets us against each other, so that our energies are spent in the struggle between State-created classes, rather than in freeing all individuals from the State. Unlike Nazi Germany, which forcibly sent millions to the gas chambers (as well as forcing abortion and sterilization upon many more), the new regime has enlisted the assistance of millions of people to act as its agents in carrying out a program of mass murder.

    The more one strives for the consistent application of an incorrect principle, the more horrendous the results. Thus, a wrong-headed libertarian is potentially very dangerous. Libertarians who act on a wrong premise seem to be too often willing to accept the inhuman conclusions of an argument, rather than question their premises.

    A case in point is a young libertarian leader I have heard about. He supports the "right" of a woman to remove an unwanted child from her body (i.e., her property) by killing and then expelling him or her. Therefore, he has consistently concluded, any property owner has the right to kill anyone on his property, for any reason.

    Such conclusions should make libertarians question the premises from which they are drawn.

    We must promote a consistent vision of liberty because freedom is whole and cannot be alienated, although it can be abridged by the unjust action of the State or those who are powerful enough to obtain their own demands. Our lives, also, are a whole from the beginning at fertilization until death. To deny any part of liberty, or to deny liberty to any particular class of individuals, diminishes the freedom of all. For libertarians to support such an abridgement of the right to live free is unconscionable.

    I encourage all pro-life libertarians to become involved in debating the issues and educating the public; whether or not freedom is defended across the board, or is allowed to be further eroded without consistent defenders, may depend on them."

    ================================================== ============================ http://www.l4l.org/library/bepro-rp.html

  14. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by heavenlyboy34 View Post
    Yeah, the libertarians who deal with roads and highways like myself propose replacing stoplights with roundabouts and other rational solutions. Stoplights are wasteful and time consuming, like every public works program.
    Well, if there are practical reasons for replacing them with some alternative, then so be it. Yet, I'm not vehemently opposed to local municipalities and state governments being involved in that.

  15. #14

    Default

    He's not wrong. The Libertarian Party almost nominated a supporter of legalizing child porn in 2008, and many here defend drunk driving "until they crash into someone else." As long as those people have a loud voice, Libertarians will continue to be shunned politically.

    Nobody wants legalized child porn and heroin, drunk drivers and extreme open borders to every peasant from Mexico who wants to come in.
    Last edited by RonPaulFanInGA; 04-06-2013 at 01:14 AM.

  16. #15
    Truth is treason ... Occam's Banana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Empire of Lies
    Posts
    8,202

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RonPaulFanInGA View Post
    He's not wrong.
    Yes, he is - to the extent that such terms as "right" and "wrong" can be applied to his spiteful ranting in any meaningful sense.

    It would be more accurate to say that, like most spittle-spewers, he is simply full of shit.

    Quote Originally Posted by RonPaulFanInGA View Post
    The Libertarian Party almost nominated a supporter of legalizing child porn in 2008, and many here defend drunk driving "until they crash into someone else." As long as those people have a loud voice, Libertarians will continue to be shunned politically.
    Libertarian Party != libertarian.

    How many times need this be said?

    Quote Originally Posted by RonPaulFanInGA View Post
    Nobody wants legalized child porn and heroin, drunk drivers and extreme open borders to every peasant from Mexico who wants to come in.
    Given your previous sentence, either (1) you have a very strange definition of "nobody" or (2) you are engaging in the same sort of careless hyperbole that Maher is spouting.
    Last edited by Occam's Banana; 04-06-2013 at 01:51 AM.
    tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito · fiat justitia, ruat caelum · sic semper tyrannis
    The Bastiat Collection - FREE PDF

    Frédéric Bastiat
    • "When law and morality are in contradiction to each other, the citizen finds himself in the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense, or of losing his respect for the law."
      - The Law (p. 54)
    • "Government is that great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
      - Government (p. 99)
    • "[W]ar is always begun in the interest of the few, and at the expense of the many."
      - Economic Sophisms - Second Series (p. 312)
    • "There are two principles that can never be reconciled - Liberty and Constraint."
      - Harmonies of Political Economy - Book One (p. 447)

  17. #16
    Account Restricted. Admin to review account standing
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    841

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RonPaulFanInGA View Post
    Nobody wants legalized child porn and heroin, drunk drivers and extreme open borders to every peasant from Mexico who wants to come in.
    Someone hasn't been to my place on a Friday night!

  18. #17

    Default

    I suppose a warfare/welfare state is much better.

    Has North Korea blotted the sun yet?

    Child porn should be illegal. A victim is needed to produce such bullshit. Computer generated bullshit, whatever.

    Drunk drivers killing people are by and large statistically non-worthy of discussion. Add in sleepy drivers or any distracted driver and you'll see the ridiculousness. (compare those to the number of drunk driving deaths yearly, which is around 12,000- that doesn't differentiate the accidents caused by someone else or the accidents caused while one is also on the phone, or texting, or etc.- to those who die while being sleepy or distracted) It isn't until 'they crash into someone.' It is until they exhibit reckless driving. I believe we still have a law for that anyways?

    Heroin. What can I say about heroin? Perhaps that clean needles and Narcan (an overdose stopping drug) should be available to active users? It isn't as if there will be a sudden uprising in heroin usage. Quite the opposite. With education the usage will actually go down. Without marijuana sellers selling weed to your child, on heroin and cocaine residued scales, the use will go down. With a designated area where heroin is used and sold, the usage will go down.. over time. People need to take a responsibility to speak to their children. Tell them in no unexplicit terms that it is one hell of an addictive drug and that they'll be sucking dick to acquire it before long. (the truth hurts)

    Open borders to Mexico? The massive police state (example: drones being used) is not needed.
    Last edited by kcchiefs6465; 04-06-2013 at 01:56 AM.
    “I call the bottom bunk at Gitmo,” Snowden joked as he contemplated our prospects.

  19. #18

    Default

    So, in other words, Bill didn't know what a libertarian was when he claimed to be one, and now that he has figured out libertarianism ≠ socialism, he is appalled?
    ROLL TIDE ROLL!!!
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  20. #19

    Default

    Why can't the guy admit he's not a libertarian, but a hedonistic socialist?

    If anything, libertarianism has been corrupted by conservatism, thanks to Ron Paul. Libertarians would have never been pro-life, pro-compromising on retaining social security for massive budget cuts and stuff of the like. The libertarian of today really is where regular non-Rockefeller conservatives were in the 60s, minus the saber rattling. There's absolutely nothing Randian about it.

    I don't think the teenage version of me would have even liked Ron Paul, because it was him who brought me to conservative understandings of social issues later in life.
    Last edited by abacabb; 04-06-2013 at 10:09 AM.

  21. #20

    Default

    Bill Maher is apparently the flip side of the coin from many Republicans. They both say they support freedom but it's only one side of the coin. Some people say they want Liberty in economic dealings but would love to regulate what everyone puts in their bodies and what they do in the bedroom. (I just read a good article today that used the term "theoconservatives.") Other people, like Maher, want the freedom to do whatever they want on a personal level, but are fully in favor of crippling any hint of economic freedom.

    You can't split liberty in half like that.
    "Some supporters of the war use their religion to justify the war. Evidently, I’ve been reading from a different Bible." — Ron Paul
    “I'm supportive of all voluntary associations and people can call it whatever they want.” ― Ron Paul

    My crazy whistling YouTube channel
    My crazy whistling music on iTunes

  22. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T.hill View Post
    It would be interesting to see him invite some libertarian-thinkers like tom woods or even an anarcho-capitalist like Stefan Molyneux onto his show and see how well he fares debating them.
    They would intellectually destroy him.

  23. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T.hill View Post
    I never realized libertarians have been fierce advocates for abolishing stoplights, Bill Maher sure is insightful.
    I've argued with some libertarians here who have said that stop lights should be abolished as well as all speed limits.
    1 Peter 1: 24-25

    For, "All people are like grass, and all their glory is like the flowers of the field; the grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of the Lord endures forever."

  24. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T.hill View Post
    Yeah, it's a shame libertarian's are stereotyped as followers of Randian objectivism. Libertarian's might agree with some of her theories and admire her as a philosopher, but i'd say many are not objectivists themselves. At least I'm not anyway.
    I don't believe there are more Randians today than decades ago. That cult appears to be intellectually bankrupt.

    Ayn Rand hated libertarians. It's not surprising Maher doesn't know anything about all of this, given that he most likely obtains his information from leftwing sources who notoriously have no idea about anything.

  25. #24

    Default

    It's funny, he never has someone like tom woods or peter schiff on his show.
    "I am, therefore I'll think" - Ayn Rand

  26. #25
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Purcellville, Virginia
    Posts
    15,513
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by supermario21 View Post
    http://ww w.me dia ite.com/tv/bill-maher-tears-into-libertarians-movement-went-nuts-intellectually-stuck-in-their-teen-years/
    He was dumb enough to include Paul Ryan AND Rand Paul*. What the crap is happening to our movement when its that easy to get in? What libertarians are we talking about again?

    As I have said, Rand Paul doesn't even agree on legalization of pot and withdrawal from foreign bases. Someone who does not agree with those basic tenants of libertarianism is not a libertarian. Yes, there are different degrees of being libertarian but that the disagreement there has more to do with what kinds of duties local government has to its citizens and what should be done about disaster relief and roads and things more along that nature. Foreign policy and personal liberty issues are not really up for debate, you're talking about a fundamentally different movement at that point. Granted, considering just how powerful Leviathan is right now, supporting Rand is a good idea and happens to want to move in the same direction as a libertarian, but he doesn't want to move NEARLY as far.

    *Comparing Rand Paul to Paul Ryan is actually offensive in itself. Rand Paul is a conservative, Paul Ryan is a neocon.

  27. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Purcellville, Virginia
    Posts
    15,513
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Traditional Conservative View Post
    I've argued with some libertarians here who have said that stop lights should be abolished as well as all speed limits.
    Well, I support privatization of roads but I expect the free market to end up with rules like this on its own. I don't take the position that just because the state illegitimately owns the roads that they necessarily should have no rules reggarding their use. That said, I think speed limits are mostly bullcrap anyway, especially considering how they arbitrarily don't enforce them unless its 10 or more over. And what speed is safe to drive depends on other factors such as how good a driver you are, how the traffic is flowing, exc. At the very least I don't think they should exist on highways. Germany's autobahn does this and has a low accident rate. I can see a place for them on local roads, but I can't imagine them surviving on highways in the free market.

    Traffic lights, on the other hand, are at least actually a concrete rule. As I said, the roads should be privatized, but traffic lights are probably a good idea. And at least actually enforcible, there's no gray area there, either you crossed it or you didn't.

  28. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFanatic View Post
    As I have said, Rand Paul doesn't even agree on legalization of pot and withdrawal from foreign bases. Someone who does not agree with those basic tenants of libertarianism is not a libertarian. Yes, there are different degrees of being libertarian but that the disagreement there has more to do with what kinds of duties local government has to its citizens and what should be done about disaster relief and roads and things more along that nature. Foreign policy and personal liberty issues are not really up for debate, you're talking about a fundamentally different movement at that point. Granted, considering just how powerful Leviathan is right now, supporting Rand is a good idea and happens to want to move in the same direction as a libertarian, but he doesn't want to move NEARLY as far.

    .
    There isn't a specific libertarian foreign policy. Foreign policy is actually very debatable. The main purpose of government is to protect the country. Most libertarians are non-interventionists, but that doesn't mean closing down all foreign military bases.

  29. #28
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Purcellville, Virginia
    Posts
    15,513
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RonPaulFanInGA View Post
    He's not wrong. The Libertarian Party almost nominated a supporter of legalizing child porn in 2008, and many here defend drunk driving "until they crash into someone else." As long as those people have a loud voice, Libertarians will continue to be shunned politically.

    Nobody wants legalized child porn and heroin, drunk drivers and extreme open borders to every peasant from Mexico who wants to come in.
    Did that candidate actually support legalizing child porn, or did that candidate merely support going after producers and not viewers, which IIRC is the exact view Ron Paul has? Granted, I don't agree with either one, I think that deliberately viewing child porn gives incentive to create it, but it is very, very hard to actually prove that viewing something on the internet was done deliberately.

    I've never heard of any libertarian supporting legalizing child porn, except in cases where it was either that or death. I STILL think that's an act of aggression, but I have never heard any libertarian advocate for it under any other situation.

    As for drunk driving, I agree that, absent private roads which would probably have their own rules about that, we should have rules about that, but there are some libertarians who disagree with me.

    Immigration, again, libertarians have different views as to whether immigration should be regulated or not, but I believe that it shouldn't be. I can understand it as a necessary evil considering the welfare state, but I still don't think its a good idea and so I spend my time fighting the welfare state rather than immigration.

    Heroin is perhaps one of the clearest issues from a libertarian perspective. It is the definition of "Victimless crime." No libertarian OPPOSES legalization of this or any other substance. "Libertarians" who don't agree on this are really either libertarian leaning conservatives or libertarian leaning liberals.

  30. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Purcellville, Virginia
    Posts
    15,513
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by misean View Post
    There isn't a specific libertarian foreign policy. Foreign policy is actually very debatable. The main purpose of government is to protect the country. Most libertarians are non-interventionists, but that doesn't mean closing down all foreign military bases.
    Its worth mentioning that there are anarcho-capitalists in the world that don't agree with this. I'm not one of them, but they are part of the libertarian tent and so are worth mentioning.

    I have never heard of anyone supporting foreign military bases without also supporting some foreign policy interventionism. The reason why is because it would be a complete waste. Its also an aggression against the people of that country, and the American taxpayer. It also doesn't even really protect us. And preemptive war is certainly an act of aggression against the country in question.

    I do believe that to be a libertarian, you have to be a non-interventionist. I don't think you have to agree with me on abortion, or immigration, or to agree with me on exactly what kind of public programs should exist (For me there are three, police, courts, and defense, some more moderate libertarians also support public roads, schools, exc.) but war is an absolutely huge issue.

  31. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    I very seriously doubt Maher has any clue who Harry Browne is.

    And if he thinks Rand Paul (let alone Paul Ryan) is a scion of Ayn Rand, then he has a badly-warped to non-existent understanding of any of those people.

    He's just spewing the same spittle that every smug, hateful and self-righteous asshole spouts when he encounters people who have the temerity to reject his self-congratulatory & holier-than-thou pronouncements

    Bill Maher is a raging ignoramus who just made himself look like a demented, babbling fool to anyone who has the even the slightest clue about libertarianism.

    Haters gonna hate ...
    I don't think it can be summed up any better than this. Brilliant.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast




« Previous Thread | Next Thread »


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •