If elected, should Rand try to ban speech critical of him?

[Cutlerzzz]

Here me out: Socialists love welfare and will use propaganda to to try and defend the welfare state. Should Rand shut down anyone critical of him until the welfare state is abolished? IMO, you can't have open discussion and a welfare state. The emotional rhetoric and vote buying schemes of the socialists are too powerful. Exile to a foreign country would be a suitable punishment, until the welfare state is abolished of course.

I support free speech, its just that free speech and a welfare state are not compatible.

[RM918]

Sure, he should also execute dissidents and make it a law to have an inspiring portrait of himself in every home.

[Seraphim]

Not. Sure. If. Serious.

[Cutlerzzz]

Sure, he should also execute dissidents and make it a law to have an inspiring portrait of himself in every home.

Way to go off the deep end. All I'm saying is that Rand should have ICE exile people who speak out in favor of taking our money, have no respect for this countries history or constitution, and take away or money and freedom. Only do this until to welfare state is abolished. We can have open discussion when the welfare state is gone.

[Kotin]

what? no.

[Seraphim]

Yes, yes HE went off the deep end.

His response was sarcasm to your OP which is the truely concerning idea.

Way to go off the deep end. All I'm saying is that Rand should have ICE exile people who speak out in favor of taking our money, have no respect for this countries history or constitution, and take away or money and freedom. Only do this until to welfare state is abolished. We can have open discussion when the welfare state is gone.

[Christian Liberty]

Not. Sure. If. Serious.

what? no.

He's mocking immigration law supporters. Took me about three seconds to figure that out.

[brandon]

No i actually think he is serious.

[Cutlerzzz]

So will people actually try to refute me instead of defending this giant deficit?

[William Tell]

Of course not.

[Christian Liberty]

So will people actually try to refute me instead of defending this giant deficit?

He's mocking immigration law supporters. Took me about three seconds to figure that out.

Before I bother.... am I incorrect here?

If your point is that utilitarianism is awful, good point.

If you actually expect me to defend free speech, I'll simply say "NAP" and then go away.

[acptulsa]

'Truth is great and will prevail if left to herself; [..] she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons, free argument and debate; errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them.'--Thomas Jefferson

[Cutlerzzz]

Did Jefferson live in a time with 200 trillion in unfunded liabilities?

[cajuncocoa]

only in the Rand subforum

[Christian Liberty]

only in the Rand subforum

Which is privately owned

[acptulsa]

Did Jefferson live in a time with 200 trillion in unfunded liabilities?

No, but he did live in a time when a whole bunch of warmongers wanted a major amount of adventurism in France. And owned a bunch of newspapers which roasted him alive. And stood by his principles anyway. To our great benefit; to some degree the precedent still stands, and we of this forum take advantage of that fact daily.

[cajuncocoa]

Which is privately owned

it's a joke

[Christian Liberty]

it's a joke

I know, I was joking too.,..

[kcchiefs6465]

Way to go off the deep end. All I'm saying is that Rand should have ICE exile people who speak out in favor of taking our money, have no respect for this countries history or constitution, and take away or money and freedom. Only do this until to welfare state is abolished. We can have open discussion when the welfare state is gone.

Must spread some rep around.

[kcchiefs6465]

So will people actually try to refute me instead of defending this giant deficit?

We need emboldened text, underlines, and pictures. Lots of pictures.

Then flood this forum with news articles of rabble rousers causing trouble.

Bring the troops home. Have them defend it. Just until we are free, of course. I'm not an authoritarian. I'm just not an utopian.

[Cutlerzzz]

We need emboldened text, underlines, and pictures. Lots of pictures.

Then flood this forum with news articles of rabble rousers causing trouble.

Bring the troops home. Have them defend it. Just until we are free, of course. I'm not an authoritarian. I'm just not an utopian.

Good idea about the troops. It would be much easier than expanding ICE to the point it could pull it off. Killing two birds with one stone if you end the wars and use the troops to do it.

[Cutlerzzz]

No, but he did live in a time when a whole bunch of warmongers wanted a major amount of adventurism in France. And owned a bunch of newspapers which roasted him alive. And stood by his principles anyway. To our great benefit; to some degree the precedent still stands, and we of this forum take advantage of that fact daily.

So no, Jefferson didn't live in an era with 200 trillion in unfunded liabilities where millions of socialists spread lies about it, bankrupting us.

[idiom]

Here me out: Socialists love welfare and will use propaganda to to try and defend the welfare state. Should Rand shut down anyone critical of him until the welfare state is abolished? IMO, you can't have open discussion and a welfare state. The emotional rhetoric and vote buying schemes of the socialists are too powerful. Exile to a foreign country would be a suitable punishment, until the welfare state is abolished of course.

I support free speech, its just that free speech and a welfare state are not compatible.

Sad straw-manning satire is sad and straw-manning.

FTR I am a firm believer in the more the merrier.

[kcchiefs6465]

Sad straw-manning satire is sad and straw-manning.

FTR I am a firm believer in the more the merrier.

I think it's quite analogous of how many people think.

I hear the OP's argument weekly, at least.

And what do I get for pointing out how inconsistent it is? I get labeled an utopian. Or otherwise dismissed as someone not living in the real world.

Well, for those who think bringing war hardened troops from here or there to be placed onto the border to guard against whatever misguided threat they dream up and use sophist arguments to further pimp, while thinking it will not result in a loss of freedom (as well as ensuring freedom is never attained) I'd simply say they are drinking something nationalistically Strong.

[osan]

Sure, he should also execute dissidents and make it a law to have an inspiring portrait of himself in every home.

And butt sex.

Gotta have lots of butt sex.

[amy31416]

Jesus...of course not. I think that one of the (supposedly) great things about this country is that a bunch of hippies can form a commune, a bunch of libertarians can have very limited government, a bunch of socialists can have their little welfare town (that'll work well.)

No more of this top-down bull$#@! where some "supreme" leader thinks he or she knows what's best and crushes anyone who says otherwise.

Come on.

[Root]

Wtf!! Can we just stop trying to ban stuff already? Wow, just wow.

[RonZeplin]

The infidels should be waterboarded, to detect impure thoughts of Hillary. /s

[fr33]

So much sarcasm in RPF today...

[Liberty's Last Hero]

Damn, first Ron Paul's supporting Putin, and now this?

What is it with faux libertarians and enjoying fascism?