Ron Paul and the Alabama straw poll

[Cypress]

-Originally Posted by Cypress

Unless you want to claim "libertarian" is an amorphous, ill-defined term that can apply to anyone who believes in civil liberties and the constitution.

No more than "Liberal". If they advocate for those civil liberties and maintaining that Constitution then they are certainly a kind of libertarian (or liberal), even if their economic views would contradict "LibertarianISM". That's why we have the phrase "civil libertarian". We got that phrase because "liberal" wasn't cutting it anymore to explain a message of individual freedom.


Which, contrary to how somebody wrongly opined earlier in this discussion, the word "Liberal" at its genesis was about individual rights, not collective rights.

You may think that Libertarian (and liberal) are amorphous terms, with a huge amout of overlap, and very broad scopes of ideology.

I don't. I have zero problem determining on a message board who is a liberal poster, and who is a libertarian poster. Usually after only reading one or two posts.

 

[Adam Weinberg]

-Originally Posted by Cypress

You may think that Libertarian (and liberal) are amorphous terms, with a huge amout of overlap, and very broad scopes of ideology.

I don't. I have zero problem determining on a message board who is a liberal poster, and who is a libertarian poster. Usually after only reading one or two posts.

No, I don't consider libertarian and liberal to be "ideologies", I consider them to be adjectives!

I have no problem either seeing who is motivated by Libertarianism or Liberalism. And I have no problem determining who has views that are either liberal or libertarian.

To me, these are different things.

 

[Timshel]

Darla is right, it would be better to call her mostly liberal on social and civil rights issues. Problem is she is not liberal on economics and when there is any seeming conflict she sides with her illiberal views.

The left stole the liberal label and now it is they (e.g., the ACLU) that have tried to move to the civil libertarian one. Problem is they fail that on many issues (e.g., the right to bear arms) when it conflicts with their economic views (e.g., cfr).

 

[Cancel7]

Darla is right, it would be better to call her mostly liberal on social and civil rights issues. Problem is she is not liberal on economics and when there is any seeming conflict she sides with her illiberal views.

The left stole the liberal label and now it is they (e.g., the ACLU) that have tried to move to the civil libertarian one. Problem is they fail that on many issues (e.g., the right to bear arms) when it conflicts with their economic views (e.g., cfr).

In the classic sense of the phrase as it is viewed via Adam Smith, no, I'm not. Though most would not understand it to mean that today, I don't think.

However, there is no conflict or problem, because it's just label and one that has come to be more embraced by the conservative ideology, the same people who might call me a marxist economically.

It's why I normally refer to myself as a leftist.

 

[Timshel]

Oh we are so lonely and in need of claiming Feingold. What a disservice we do him.

I wonder if Russ rejected his award as Civil Libertarian of the Year from the Wisconsin CLU?

This thread makes the lefties around here look really stupid.

bac, ::chirp, chirp::, still no response on your contradiction?

 

[uscitizen]

And if you repeat it often enough you may believe it however ridiulous it is when compared to reality.

Hmm you are sounding like I was after the 2000 election

So perhaps you will be proven to be right

 

[uscitizen]

Go ahead an lable me as you want, I am still not voting for ron Paul

 

[Cypress]

No, I don't consider libertarian and liberal to be "ideologies", I consider them to be adjectives!

I have no problem either seeing who is motivated by Libertarianism or Liberalism. And I have no problem determining who has views that are either liberal or libertarian.

To me, these are different things.

Good, I agree. People are to hung up on labels - labels as adjectives.

Adjectives are virtually meaningless. Everyone claims they are in favor of protecting civil liberties, or the environment. There is almost universal agreement on "values". Libertarians, Democrats, and Republicans will all claim they want to protect the environment or civil liberties. And its true: I don't even think republicans want to drink polluted water.

So, when someone claims to be in favor of civil liberties or environmental protection, it doesn't mean crap to me. Its what their policies (not their values) are that distinguishes ideology.

Libertarians think there should be little in the way of envoronmental regulation. It should be a free market thing, and suspposedly the opportunity of citizens to sue polluter in court, is sufficient to protect public health

Republicans broadly think environmental regulation should be strongly tempered against the need of business interests, profits, and economic growth.

Democrats place more emphasis on public health and the public welfare.

 

[DigitalDave]

Shit guys, sorry I'm late. Was busy dealing with the Sarbanes-Oxley auditers here at work....

*Takes off clothes and pounds on chest*

So, Darla, BAC, Cyp, ib1.... you know you are really just embarassed libertarians. C'mon, admit it. That last Libertarian meeting you went to has you completely wigged out by the guy who refused to take his pregnant wife to the hospital because they would assign his child a Social Security number. C'mon.... admit it!!!!!

 

[Cancel7]

Shit guys, sorry I'm late. Was busy dealing with the Sarbanes-Oxley auditers here at work....

*Takes off clothes and pounds on chest*

So, Darla, BAC, Cyp, ib1.... you know you are really just embarassed libertarians. C'mon, admit it. That last Libertarian meeting you went to has you completely wigged out by the guy who refused to take his pregnant wife to the hospital because they would assign his child a Social Security number. C'mon.... admit it!!!!!

LOL...well, if I was a libertarian, I would be embarrassed about it, that much is true anyway.

 

[Socrtease]

I still support RP but I would like him to tell me specifically about his view of the 2d amendment and the 9th amendment. I have a feeling that he like a lot of more socially conservative people don't really BELIEVE what the 9th amendment says. That we have rights NOT ENUMERATED in the bill of rights but that are nontheless reserved to us, we the people, not voted on by states or agreed to by legislators.

 

[Socrtease]

Darla is right, it would be better to call her mostly liberal on social and civil rights issues. Problem is she is not liberal on economics and when there is any seeming conflict she sides with her illiberal views.

The left stole the liberal label and now it is they (e.g., the ACLU) that have tried to move to the civil libertarian one. Problem is they fail that on many issues (e.g., the right to bear arms) when it conflicts with their economic views (e.g., cfr).

And the conservatives tend to fail on many issues when they conflict with their social views of marriage, procreation, and drug use.

 

[DigitalDave]

LOL...well, if I was a libertarian, I would be embarrassed about it, that much is true anyway.

Yeah, I know the feeling, I was a Democrat once....

 

[Battleborne]

Well after reading all these diatribes............

I searched for Ron Paul's Biography...I am really not all that familiar with him as he never represented my area...however he does have a diverse background and seems well educated...

www.citizensforaconstitutionalrepublic.com/paulBio.html

...akin to the Bull Moose Party of the turn of the century!

 

[Cypress]

Shit guys, sorry I'm late. Was busy dealing with the Sarbanes-Oxley auditers here at work....

*Takes off clothes and pounds on chest*

So, Darla, BAC, Cyp, ib1.... you know you are really just embarassed libertarians. C'mon, admit it. That last Libertarian meeting you went to has you completely wigged out by the guy who refused to take his pregnant wife to the hospital because they would assign his child a Social Security number. C'mon.... admit it!!!!!

Nah, its the "property rights" Nazi libertarians, who stick shotguns in my face when I inadvertantly stray onto their property, that wigs me out.

 

[uscitizen]

Nah, its the "property rights" Nazi libertarians, who stick shotguns in my face when I inadvertantly stray onto their property, that wigs me out.

Yeah it is their liberty to protect their property
Or is it your liberty to go on their property ?

 

[Cypress]

Yeah it is their liberty to protect their property
Or is it your liberty to go on their property ?

In the Sierra back country, or up in the Klamaths, there's not exactly a lot of fences and other indicators of private property. I've wandered by accident more than once, onto some kooky, whacked out libertarian survivalist's property

 

[uscitizen]

ahh well you would know my property line if you ran into it. Predator grade Low impedance electric.

 

[blackascoal]

Oh we are so lonely and in need of claiming Feingold. What a disservice we do him.

I wonder if Russ rejected his award as Civil Libertarian of the Year from the Wisconsin CLU?

This thread makes the lefties around here look really stupid.

bac, ::chirp, chirp::, still no response on your contradiction?

I'm real comfortable with who this thread makes look stupid.

An award as a "civil libertarian" doesn't make him remotely a libertarian nor is it even defined as libertarianism.

I posted a long line of Feingold's position that are decidely non-libertarian which you chose to ignore. That's cool.

The inescapable reality is that 00000.05%.

And I'm still waiting for you to direct me to your supposed contradictions.

 

[uscitizen]

Check out the other ron paul thread BAC. Ron paul supporters cannot even do basic math.