Any libertarians here?

[dratsab]

I'm a leftist libertarian. I say we need to do legalize prostitution and every drug. I think seat belt laws are horse-shit; just a way to save the reputation of a town over caring about the individual. Speaking of, any Penn Jillette fans?

[Guest123018-4]

Damn a "leftist" libertarian. So does that mean you are only for restoring some of the rights back to the people?

[i'va biggen]

He and dull knife can chat it up now.

[JohnnyCap]

Originally Posted by dratsab

I'm a leftist libertarian. I say we need to do legalize prostitution and every drug. I think seat belt laws are horse-shit; just a way to save the reputation of a town over caring about the individual. Speaking of, any Penn Jillette fans?

I tried to be a Penn Jillette fan but I just can't. He's smart, talented and has a lot of good ideas but that does not justify his overwhelming arrogance and complete certainty he is right about things he can not know for sure. I'm pretty sure his physical size and loud and aggressive demeanor have kept him from being knocked down when necessary.

In addition, he laughs at his own jokes with a hideous cackle. I 'd rather hear a cat die slowly.

[JD Barleycorn]

I'm wondering about the difference between a "rightist" and a "leftist" libertarian? I don't think you understand the term libertarian. Don't ask EVA. He thinks he is a moderate and not a liberal.

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

I'm wondering about the difference between a "rightist" and a "leftist" libertarian? I don't think you understand the term libertarian. Don't ask EVA. He thinks he is a moderate and not a liberal.

LMAO like you have a clue.

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by dratsab

I'm a leftist libertarian. I say we need to do legalize prostitution and every drug. I think seat belt laws are horse-shit; just a way to save the reputation of a town over caring about the individual. Speaking of, any Penn Jillette fans?

A "leftist" libertarian?

That means you want to legalize drugs and prostitution, but still want the government to redistribute money and property, right?

[Mr MojoRisin]

America is a two party political system. You are either a Democrat or Republican. There is some variations of both, far left and far right with everything in between. I would say two thirds of the American populous is strictly Liberal the other one third are a combination of Dem and Republican.

Jim

[JohnnyCap]

Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

America is a two party political system. You are either a Democrat or Republican. There is some variations of both, far left and far right with everything in between. I would say two thirds of the American populous is strictly Liberal the other one third are a combination of Dem and Republican.

Jim

There's two parties, democrat & republican, and everyone is that or liberal?

[Mr MojoRisin]

Originally Posted by JohnnyCap

There's two parties, democrat & republican, and everyone is that or liberal?

Yep, sort of.

Jim

[JD Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

America is a two party political system. You are either a Democrat or Republican. There is some variations of both, far left and far right with everything in between. I would say two thirds of the American populous is strictly Liberal the other one third are a combination of Dem and Republican.

Jim

Recent polling shows that a plurality of the American people are conservative (about 40%) despite the results of the election. Then are we going to use classic terms or modern terms. The classic liberal is more like a libertarian or conservative than a modern liberal who are more like socialist or statists.

[Cpalmson]

Liberals are really socialists. They believe in wealth redistribution and heavy state involvement in the lives of all citizens. Very few Americans are truly liberal.

Conservatives come in several flavors. There are the fiscal conservatives who believe in low taxes, balanced budgets and low deficits They also tend to believe government should stay the fuck out of the economic lives of Americans and generally oppose any government regulation when it comes to business practices. Then there are the social conservatives who basically believe in the same economic beliefs as do the fiscal conservatives but believe the government should play an activist role in the way people behave from a morality stand point. They are opposed to abortion, gay marriage, prostitution, drugs, alcohol, etc. Most Americans are probably fiscal conservatives and don't know it. Additionally, those who are fiscally conservative and not really socially conservatives are what you call libertarians.

Libertarians believe in small/limited government which makes them fiscally conservative and more socially accepting of prostitution, drugs, etc. Simply put, Libertarians question the role of government in the lives of citizens. If there is no practical or useful role for the government, it should stay the fuck out of people's lives.

There was a recent study that said the country is moving in a more libertarian direction-- especially the younger generation. They are more accepting changes to social mores, but also want a more conservative fiscal approach by the government.

Rand Paul is tapping into this movement. 20 years ago, Rand Paul would already be the Libertarian candidate for President in 2016, but he would stand little chance of winning. However, if he becomes a force in the GOP, Paul could be a serious contender to get the GOP nod and a damn good shot at being the next President. He can woe the youth vote. All he has to do is convince some of these repressed Baptists in the South to accept he's not going to fly the Rainbow flag from the White House. If Paul can hold onto the social conservatives during the primaries, they will vote for him regardless come November, In November, he should be able to sway enough youth to win in the key states like Ohio and Florida to beat the Democrat.

[JD Barleycorn]

I would go so far as to say fascist-socialist. They want to control how business (and by extension the people) go about their lives. The EPA, the IRS, the NLB, are all telling us how it is without our consent. Implied consent of the governed is the foundation of our government. When you loose that consent then you have a tyranny.

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

America is a two party political system. You are either a Democrat or Republican. There is some variations of both, far left and far right with everything in between. I would say two thirds of the American populous is strictly Liberal the other one third are a combination of Dem and Republican.

Jim

Sorry, Jim. That's bullshit. The two-party system is the problem.

Oh, OP. Left Libertarian AND huge Penn Jillette fan here!

[dratsab]

Originally Posted by The2Dogs

Damn a "leftist" libertarian. So does that mean you are only for restoring some of the rights back to the people?

Ehh, I'm definitely against people taking away acts of will, just because that individual could act badly on his own behalf. I don't find anything immoral with an action unless it causes the infringement of someone's rights, and if you are the victim of yourself, then to arrest you would be to blame the victim. Makes no sense. However, I'm kind of unsure of myself regarding the economy. I agree with Ayn Rand when she says, "Where a gun begins, morality ends," but then I think it comes down to utilitarian ethics vs deontological ethics (Sorry, philosophy nerd here). While it is immoral to take someone's money by force, I also wonder if it is a huge benefit to society to have a safety net there to catch those that fail or just fall via horrendous luck. Of course, a voluntary safety net would be ideal, but impractical. So, again, I haven't made up my mind. Is it realistic to run a country without any form of safety net? Maybe it is. However, I do think pollution should be prevented by government at least to some extent, because that does infringe on the rights of others. I'm not a hippy about it, but I do think it needs some consideration.

Originally Posted by JohnnyCap

I tried to be a Penn Jillette fan but I just can't. He's smart, talented and has a lot of good ideas but that does not justify his overwhelming arrogance and complete certainty he is right about things he can not know for sure. I'm pretty sure his physical size and loud and aggressive demeanor have kept him from being knocked down when necessary.

In addition, he laughs at his own jokes with a hideous cackle. I 'd rather hear a cat die slowly.

I find this statement totally ironic. I'm inspired by the humility of Penn. He constantly downplays how smart he is, and constantly says that he doesn't have the answer for everything. He seems like a super nice guy. I'm curious, where are you getting your info? Is it strictly from Bullshit or do you dislike his atheism? If it's just Bullshit, then I can see why you might think that, because he came off a bit ruder than he seems on his podcasts and books, but if it's atheism, well I can't help you there... because there is no God, and you have to accept that brotha <3

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Sorry, Jim. That's bullshit. The two-party system is the problem.

Oh, OP. Left Libertarian AND huge Penn Jillette fan here!

Fuck yeah, +1.

Also, what do you guys think of Stefan Molyneux? I like some of the shit he says, but he seems to be against sexual promiscuity, even talking down to pornstars a bit, kinda irks me. I think slutty girls should be encouraged, and not be made to feel ashamed. Other than that, he seems like a swell dude. I like that he talks about racism against whites, that seems like a bold move these days. God damn white guilt...