Repealing and Vetoing Our Way Forward (Politics Thread)

by **TenuredVulture** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 11:56:52

There's been this odd habit among some populist conservatives to get wildly excited about someone with little or no political experience who says things they like. Palin, Cain, even, most bizarrely, Trump, etc. I think what might be happening is some kind of projection, which lasts until the vetting process exposes their skeletons. It's sort of like someone who gets infatuated over and over again with deeply flawed individuals, because there's some desperate need or even pathology.

But I also think there's a deep sense in which mainstream candidates are inherently corrupt.

The left of course is not immune from this kind of thing, though for whatever reasons the objects of infatuation are just a bit more realistic (Warren, Dean). Some of the rhetoric coming out of the Hillary camp seems to be taking this phenomenon on--her people seem to be saying something like, "grow up--you went idealistic with Obama, and look how that turned out. You need someone who is cynical and manipulative, someone who believes in little more than her own ambition to fight those guys on the right"

Frankly, I think Hillary may be one of the most dishonest and disingenuous politicians out there. She gladly serves the power structure. It's sort of like the opposite of the "What's the matter with Kansas" phenomenon. You get to have abortions, at the cost of ever more power and wealth in the hands of the titans of Wall Street.

by **TomatoPie** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 13:09:53

It's taken me a long time to get here, but I've just about reached that dismal place of having no candidate nor party to "believe in."

I keep looking for that honest and compassionate small-government conservative who is socially liberal who can Change The World. I knew for sure it wasn't McCain or Mitt, but every new hope - Jindal, for example - eventually gets crushed. I wish there was a prominent libber terrier who wasn't a nutbag like Rand and Ron and Les.

by **pacino** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 13:13:19

when every prominent libertarian is a nutbag, that might say something about the political philosophy

by **The Crimson Cyclone** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 13:20:26

TenuredVulture wrote:Frankly, I think Hillary may be one of the most dishonest and disingenuous politicians out there. She gladly serves the power structure. It's sort of like the opposite of the "What's the matter with Kansas" phenomenon. You get to have abortions, at the cost of ever more power and wealth in the hands of the titans of Wall Street.

I have been getting more and more depressed that this will likely wind up being Bush v Clinton

I guess people just like to know whose dick it is that's fucking them in the ass

by **SK790** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 13:20:52

pacino wrote:when every prominent libertarian is a nutbag, that might say something about the political philosophy

Who needs taxes amirite???

by **TomatoPie** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 13:32:16

pacino wrote:when every prominent libertarian is a nutbag, that might say something about the political philosophy

lol

For sure Rand and Ron are wackos, I was mostly kidding about Les - he may not even have been a libber.

OTOH, all these non-nutbags are libbers:

Dave Barry
Jeff Bezos
Drew Carey
Milton Friedman
Penn Jillette
Gary Johnson
Rufus Wainwright

by **Werthless** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 13:38:22

pacino wrote:when every prominent libertarian is a nutbag, that might say something about the political philosophy

Gary Johnson is the man.

Prominant small-l libertarians don't have institutional support of the GOP party. This is why you get these internally inconsistent GOP'ers like Rand Paul who are trying succeed among a party littered with people who support the status quo.

by **Soren** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 13:38:25

TomatoPie wrote:
pacino wrote:when every prominent libertarian is a nutbag, that might say something about the political philosophy

lol

For sure Rand and Ron are wackos, I was mostly kidding about Les - he may not even have been a libber.

OTOH, all these non-nutbags are libbers:

Dave Barry
Jeff Bezos
Drew Carey
Milton Friedman
Penn Jillette
Gary Johnson
Rufus Wainwright

Drew Carey and Rufus Wainwright. You are a really weird person.

by **jerseyhoya** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 13:38:43

I think if your philosophy about government is in almost all cases there should be less of it, you're gonna be inclined to avoid working for the government in a way that people who hold pretty much any other political philosophy won't be. The pragmatic, rational libertarian goes and gets a job and bitches about politics on a Phillies message board.

by **Werthless** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 13:39:39

jerseyhoya wrote:I think if your philosophy about government is in almost all cases there should be less of it, you're gonna be inclined to avoid working for the government in a way that people who hold pretty much any other political philosophy won't be. The pragmatic, rational libertarian goes and gets a job and bitches about politics on a Phillies message board.

lol

by **pacino** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 13:39:39

Dave's World was based off Dave Barry's life!

by **The Crimson Cyclone** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 13:40:46

jerseyhoya wrote:I think if your philosophy about government is in almost all cases there should be less of it, you're gonna be inclined to avoid working for the government

by **Bucky** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 13:47:30

Mary Moon. She's a Libertarian.

by **Soren** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 14:03:58

Bucky wrote:Mary Moon. She's a Libertarian.

She don't like government, but she sure loves constitutional protections for personal liberties

by **Bucky** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 15:11:24

McConnell seems to be tripling down on his douchiness

http://www.kentucky.com/2015/03/03/3725 ... .html?rh=1

by **drsmooth** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 15:11:39

TomatoPie wrote:OTOH, all these non-nutbags are libbers:

Dave Barry
Jeff Bezos
Drew Carey
Milton Friedman
Penn Jillette
Gary Johnson
Rufus Wainwright

And your point is...?

Love that you've bracketed a Nobel-honored economist with two large comics

oh, and gary johnson

by **TomatoPie** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 15:18:27

drsmooth wrote:
TomatoPie wrote:OTOH, all these non-nutbags are libbers:

Dave Barry
Jeff Bezos
Drew Carey
Milton Friedman
Penn Jillette
Gary Johnson
Rufus Wainwright

And your point is...?

Responding to Pacino who, based on Ron-Rand, concluded that all prominent libbers are nutbags.

I'm not voting for Drew Carey for President -- but he ain't a nutbag

by **RichmondPhilsFan** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 16:04:15

jerseyhoya wrote:I think if your philosophy about government is in almost all cases there should be less of it, you're gonna be inclined to avoid working for the government in a way that people who hold pretty much any other political philosophy won't be. The pragmatic, rational libertarian goes and gets a job and bitches about politics on a Phillies message board.

You'd think so, but I work with several of them. At least one of them justified it by drawing a distinction between the federal government and state government.

by **drsmooth** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 16:10:03

TomatoPie wrote:Responding to Pacino who, based on Ron-Rand, concluded that all prominent libbers are nutbags.

I'm not voting for Drew Carey for President -- but he ain't a nutbag

As a funnyman, I'm not sure he'd reject the label out of hand

by **TenuredVulture** » Mon Mar 23, 2015 16:44:15

There are all kinds of bizarre people who claim to be libertarians, but probably really aren't. The neo-confederate states right gang I think would be in that camp. The whole Lew Rockwell/von Mises institute (not to be confused with von Mises himself) would be among them. Ron and Rand Paul would also count as not really libertarians, given their views on immigration. My reading of immigration and libertarianism is that libertarians, to the extent possible, want all relationships to be voluntary, including that between the individual and the government. The only way to have a voluntary relationship with government is if you are free to move anywhere you want. In essence, you apply market principles to citizenship--those places that are more attractive for people will be places where people want to live, those places that are less so will lose population.

Archived

Repealing and Vetoing Our Way Forward (Politics Thread)

Re: Repealing and Vetoing Our Way Forward (Politics Thread)

Re: Repealing and Vetoing Our Way Forward (Politics Thread)

Re: Repealing and Vetoing Our Way Forward (Politics Thread)

Re: Repealing and Vetoing Our Way Forward (Politics Thread)

Re: Repealing and Vetoing Our Way Forward (Politics Thread)

Re: Repealing and Vetoing Our Way Forward (Politics Thread)

Re: Repealing and Vetoing Our Way Forward (Politics Thread)

Re: Repealing and Vetoing Our Way Forward (Politics Thread)

Re: Repealing and Vetoing Our Way Forward (Politics Thread)

Re: Repealing and Vetoing Our Way Forward (Politics Thread)

Re: Repealing and Vetoing Our Way Forward (Politics Thread)

Re: Repealing and Vetoing Our Way Forward (Politics Thread)

Re: Repealing and Vetoing Our Way Forward (Politics Thread)

Re: Repealing and Vetoing Our Way Forward (Politics Thread)

Re: Repealing and Vetoing Our Way Forward (Politics Thread)

Re: Repealing and Vetoing Our Way Forward (Politics Thread)

Re: Repealing and Vetoing Our Way Forward (Politics Thread)

Re: Repealing and Vetoing Our Way Forward (Politics Thread)

Re: Repealing and Vetoing Our Way Forward (Politics Thread)

Re: Repealing and Vetoing Our Way Forward (Politics Thread)