Originally Posted by
libertariantexas
By "rational libertarian" I mean someone like myself or Ron Paul. Someone who doesn't trust the government to do the right thing or a competent job, and sees too much government as dangerous, as well as a major detriment to the economy.
The "irrational" "libertarians" are those like AJ who seem to be one bad hair day away from climbing a tower. Those paranoiacs who think the government is "out to get them" 24-7. Who believe everything is a massive government conspiracy (part of the reason they are irrational is that the same people who don't think the government is competent enough to deliver the mail think that same government is competent enough to flawlessly execute massive and elaborate conspiracies- that just ain't rational, folks- how can the government be completely inept on one hand, and execute flawlessly on the other?).
Frankly, I'm not sure AJ is irrational. I sometimes think he really doesn't believe half the stuff he says and may well be just demagogue the issues for financial gain. But whether he is a true believer or just an opportunist, he reflects badly on those of us who are rational libertarians.
Are you serious? Do you really think the ability to earn money as an entertainer demonstrates rationality? I'll give you a chance to think about that, and if you really believe it, I'll give you a list of really bat $#@! crazy people who are multi millionaires and you can try again.
Am I missing something here? Last I checked, AJ had a radio show. How are you "viewing" that?
Because they never have nutty people on "The View" or Fox News? Right...
Glenn Beck (not one of my favorite people, despite the fact that he also claims to be a libertarian) was right. The reason AJ is often brought on these shows is to discredit libertarians. Put AJ on "Piers Morgan" or "The View," get him riled up (which usually takes about 15-seconds), red in the face, yelling and ranting, and they win. Because he is being presented as a representative libertarian, but comes off as a blow hard, a bully, and a nut, not a person capable of rational debate.
The sad thing is, he DOES make some good points that I, or any other libertarian, would agree with- whether discussing gun control or anything else. But the good parts of his message are obscured by his abrasive personality and his nutty conspiracy rantings.
Sit back and think about it. Take the infamous "Piers Morgan" appearance. What do you think sticks out most in the mind of the average viewer watching that act:
A) That AJ points correctly points out that the right to bear arms is about protecting ourselves from aggressors or the state.
B) That AJ went off on a bunch of crazy conspiracy rants.
C) That AJ got riled up, started yelling and ranting, challenged Morgan to a fight, etc.
My guess is that no more than 20% focused on A) (and most of those were probably already libertarians). The other 80% probably saw him as a loud mouthed bully and a nut (or both). I doubt that "performance" by AJ convinced a single person who wasn't already a 2nd amendment supporter to become a supporter.
The exact opposite of Ron Paul. Ron, despite being extremely charismatically challenged, was able to convince millions to become libertarians. He didn't do it by throwing out crazy and volatile statements, he didn't do it by yelling and ranting and bullying. He was calm, rational, and reasonable- he got people carefully consider what he was saying, and many realized that what he said made sense.
Connect With Us