georg jetson
Regular Member
EXACTLy!
Last edited:
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Assault on independence continues. Obama HQ briefs Romney's press corps
EXACTLy!
Jim675
Founder's Club Member
()pen(arry
Regular Member
Was busy earlier, so I hadn't had a chance to figure out what Hillsdale is. Didn't take much to figure it out: "National Review has described Hillsdale as a 'citadel of American conservatism.'" Well, with that sterling endorsement, I'm just positive we're dealing with objective, fact-based information! Seriously, that's like a Communist arguing with a libertarian, and saying, "Libertarianism is fascism! For proof, just read Mao's Little Red Book!" Well done, sir, well done. Glenn Beck should be calling you with a job offer soon.
EDIT: I'm chuckling, right now, because as I was writing my first response to your silly claim this morning, I thought to myself, "I'll bet this guy reads the NRO and fools like Brent Bozell." Pretty sure I nailed it.
Last edited:
You mean someone like Rush Limbaugh?
marshaul
Campaign Veteran
Yeah, someone like him.
davidmcbeth
Banned
Ron Paul is running in the GOP primary .. unless he wants to splinter off (doubtful) then you may have a choice between paul & obummer .... in november
DrakeZ07
Regular Member
According to that quiz;
Your PERSONAL issues Score is 90%
Your ECONOMIC issues Score is 40%
According to your answers, the political group that agrees with you most is... Liberal.
Never would have guessed, as most of the answers, for me, was just common sense not reflecting party lines.
Jim675
Founder's Club Member
That quiz has been around for some time. Its always interesting when new people take it. We're all so sure we're "normal" that people are often shocked that their answers skew them into an unexpected group.
DangerClose
Regular Member
Obama is for cutting spending, cutting taxes, eliminating the IRS, auditing The Fed, against the Patriot Act and NDAA and undeclared wars? I did not know that.
You're going to keep tabs and pressure on the legislative candidates who support the Patriot Act, NDAA, ridiculous levels of spending based on Baseline Budgeting, and who get all swoony for "fiscally conservative" budget proposals that add trillions to the debt the first 10 years and don't balance the budget for 30 years from big-government fake conservatives like Paul Ryan?
Beretta92FSLady
Regular Member
I am sure there is a Universe where Obama did all of that, in one day; it took God six days.
GhostOfJefferson
Regular Member
georg jetson
Regular Member
He was being facetious. A vote for Ron Paul is the only vote NOT wasted. A vote for any other Repub or Democratic candidate is a wasted vote because it's a vote for the "same ol same ol".
By your "wasted vote logic", the only vote not wasted is to vote for the candidate that wins. May I borrow your crystal ball so that I know who to vote for?
Last edited:
DangerClose
Regular Member
Also, a very good argument can be made that Ron Paul is the ONLY guy who can beat Obama. He'll get the "anyone but Obama" vote plus the independent vote plus disenfranchised Dem votes, etc.
But, establishment Republicans would rather give Obama four more years than have Ron Paul as President and show the world what a real conservative and real constitutionalist and real HONEST President is like.
But, establishment Republicans would rather give Obama four more years than have Ron Paul as President and show the world what a real conservative and real constitutionalist and real HONEST President is like.
H
Herr Heckler Koch
Guest
Riight
No crystal ball necessary. If you want to cast your vote for the eventual winner, vote for the incumbent.
()pen(arry
Regular Member
- Attempting to prove that "the Founding Fathers" weren't libertarians is of no purpose, since no one is claiming that they were.
- I did, implicitly, rebuff your claim that "the Founding Fathers" "rejected libertarianism", exactly zero support for which you have provided, here or elsewhere.
- Federalist #15 expresses an argument that if a government is to have the power to enact law, it must, by definition, have the power to define and enforce consequence for violation of that law; this argument, does not, by itself, have anything to do with arguing whether a government should have the power to enact law, nor whether a government should have the power to enact laws of various kinds.
- While there is a meaning of the phrase "the Founding Fathers" that is functionally useful in limited circumstances, there is no group of historical people to whom the collective label can reasonably be applied for which one can simply, and singularly, claim or deny political philosophy. They were as far from uniform in their principles and opinions as are, say, libertarians today.
- Not only should it be obvious that not all of "the Founding Fathers" agreed with Federalist #15, it should be especially obvious, since that lack of universal agreement with the philosophy behind Federalist #15 is precisely why Federalist #15 was written in the first place.
- Your lecturer makes a specific assertion about what "the libertarian's view" is. Poignantly, this assertion is baseless and, not surprisingly, false.
- Only a minute subset of those who claim for themselves the label "libertarian" are opposed to government, per se. The popular conflation of "libertarian" and "anarchist" is borne of sheer, and often willful, ignorance.
- Even were we to assume that your lecturer is right about what "the Founding Fathers" believed, and what "the libertarian's view" is, nothing that you have quoted demonstrates, by any argument that can be considered to be valid according to reason and logic, that "the Founding Fathers" and libertarians are in philosophical conflict.
- Taking all of the above into account, it is abundantly clear that your lecturer is an ignoramus, at best, and a charlatan, more like.
Jim675
Founder's Club Member
Agreed. I'm always instantly suspicious when someone tries to ascribe a certain viewpoint to a large group of people (say, more than 1).