page 4

10/12/2012 9:26:11 AM

how did it become so chic to be a libertarian? selling off your country should not be seen as a good thing.

10/12/2012 11:13:32 AM

Who is the Whig Party candidate?

He/she gets my vote.



The line in the sand is here. I am the first to claim allegiance to the Whig Party in the 21st century. Future hangers-on aren't as cool as me.

[Edited on October 12, 2012 at 11:20 AM. Reason : hipsteriffic. ]

10/12/2012 11:18:44 AM

^^ the NDAA?

10/12/2012 11:19:17 AM

^^^you say that because the only thing you see as being good is an enormous government tit.



[Edited on October 12, 2012 at 11:21 AM. Reason : pathetic imo]

10/12/2012 11:19:21 AM

let's not even pretend like a GOP government will be smaller. Did you really not pay attention to what the GOP did between 2000-2008?

10/12/2012 11:21:39 AM

^clearly, you are not familiar with simonn's political views.

[Edited on October 12, 2012 at 11:25 AM. Reason : says he wants govt way larger]

10/12/2012 11:25:04 AM

Who was it that had the comment in one of the threads about big government for things that kill people, just not things that help people? that was spot on but now i cant find it.

10/12/2012 11:29:11 AM

^^ ok, that's true, i dont.

^yeah that was me.

FWIW, i'm not a fan of big government, but also not a believer in a barebones government either. We are, as a whole paying some of the lowest taxes in US history while owning a likely insurmountable debt that, in my opinion, both parties are pretty much equally to blame.

and since we're apparently choosing between a candidate that wants to grow the "help the people" side of the government vs a candidate that wants to increase military spending, while simultaneously cutting taxes for the rich, I'm picking the former.

[Edited on October 12, 2012 at 11:38 AM. Reason : . ]

10/12/2012 11:30:55 AM

Quote :

"says he wants govt way larger"

i want a government that cares about it's people. and the planet.

oh and here's a dirty little secret, we could do that on a smaller government, just reel in defense spending to a reasonable number.

10/12/2012 11:46:17 AM

Gary Johnson because I want the freedom to do what I want without intruding on what everyone else wants to do. Also, I would like our government to get out of the business of policing the world and killing thousands of people in foreign lands.

10/12/2012 12:01:02 PM

Quote :

"how did it become so chic to be a libertarian? selling off your country should not be seen as a good thing."

What does it even mean to "sell off" one's country, what does that have to do with being libertarian? Do you realize that the opposite of a libertarian is an authoritarian? Which would you rather be associated with?

"libertarian" is not strictly right or left. OWS could probably be called left libertarian. Ron Paul-inspired liberty movement is roughly right libertarian.

[Edited on October 12, 2012 at 12:23 PM. Reason : ]

10/12/2012 12:21:31 PM

Quote :

"oh and here's a dirty little secret, we could do that on a smaller government, just reel in defense spending to a reasonable number."

The further-left party, the Democrats, have failed to deliver on this. They increased defense spending. Your argument is irrelevant.

10/12/2012 12:24:46 PM

^ nothing i say is irrelevant when discussing my personal beliefs on how government should work.

Quote :

"What does it even mean to "sell off" one's country, what does that have to do with being libertarian?"

is this a joke? are you wholly unfamiliar w/ the concept of "privatization"?

Quote :

"Do you realize that the opposite of a libertarian is an authoritarian? Which would you rather be associated with?"

i'm pretty sure there's room in the middle.

10/12/2012 12:29:51 PM

Here is an illustrative lttle chart:



Vote libertarian and vote to end the completely ineffectual and destructive War on Drugs.

10/12/2012 12:58:58 PM

Quote :

"Vote libertarian and vote to end the completely ineffectual and destructive War on Drugs."

those are not synonymous!

[Edited on October 12, 2012 at 1:03 PM. Reason : one is stupid and one is a super fucking good idea.]

10/12/2012 1:03:27 PM

Ron Paul because he is the most qualified and most informed statesmen that has volunteered to run the country in this election.

10/12/2012 1:05:01 PM

Obama because he's black

10/12/2012 1:06:31 PM

The democrat and republican parties are locked into supporting this ridiculous policy. The libertarians are the only party opennly opposed to the WoD. Notice how the Obama administration has done exactly nothing to slow down the WoD and the insanely high number of drug arrests and incarcerations.

10/12/2012 1:07:55 PM

^It's okay to talk shit about the president and vice president, but once talk shit about the people running the government behind the president, you've crossed the line.

When you've identified the people you're not supposed to talk about, you've found the people who are really running the country.

(hint: the federal reserve)

10/12/2012 1:13:18 PM

i always find it odd when people like simon, who often comes across as a negative asshole on this board, and is always quick to criticize and insult other people, is so gung-ho about a caring and loving government. what a dichotomy

10/12/2012 1:20:11 PM

pointing out to you the difference between a retired and honored jersey and caring about poor people are about as incomparable as it gets.

10/12/2012 1:32:08 PM

i'm referring to you be an asshole, for years and years. and i'm kinda kidding. i agree with most of what you're saying in here, to a degree.

10/12/2012 1:34:04 PM

if it helps you think of me as a fun guy, i found this well put and hilarious:

Quote :

"i'm referring to you be [sic] an asshole, for years and years."

and just to be an asshole, i pointed out your typo.

10/12/2012 1:37:12 PM

you wanna be all nice to the planet and poor people you don't even know, but be an asshole to me and other anonymous twwers for no good reason. i just don't get it.

10/12/2012 1:39:35 PM

first, i like that we're derailing two threads w/ this conversation.

second... i can't explain that.

[Edited on October 12, 2012 at 1:42 PM. Reason : i mean, if i thought i was actually hurting your feelings i wouldn't do it.]

10/12/2012 1:41:31 PM

i'm just playing. carry on!

10/12/2012 1:43:55 PM

Anybody who cares that much about the money we spend on drug control and uses that to decide on who they are voting for is a legitimate pothead. You can accept or deny it, but that is so stupid to base your vote on that when we are currently paying a fourth of all the money we have spent on drug control since the 70s every year in the form of interest on our debt, and have a ton of other issues that need to be dealt with first. And don't even tell me that cutting back drug control is the answer to decreasing our debt either, because cutting it back would eliminate jobs, and that 20 billion isn't going to put a dent in the national debt.

Also, someone could easily look at that chart and say that we are having to spend more funds now than ever just to keep the addiction rate down because of its growth and increased accessibility of drugs in our culture.

I like a lot of the views of libertarians, but this issue is not a major problem in America. Except to potheads I guess.

10/12/2012 1:45:37 PM

^that's pretty narrow-minded.

how about the millions of people we keep locked up in over-crowded prisons for minor drug offenses?

10/12/2012 1:48:03 PM

I have no sympathy for people that break drug laws. They have a choice, and they know the risks. I don't see how that is being narrow minded, it's not my fault they chose to break the law. And where I'm from, plenty of my friends have been caught with marijuana several (as in 3-4 times) all minor offenses, and have not faced jail time yet. One most recently received a 500 dollar fine. If you are dumb enough to try something the fifth or sixth time, then yeah I'm not going to care if you are going to jail for that. I would be in favor of keeping some of out jail, and fining them for large sums of money if you feel sorry for sending them to prison however. Increased revenue.

10/12/2012 1:59:56 PM

^ THIS is one of the more closed minded things posted in this thread. let me guess, your friends are all white and don't live in bumfuck middle of the country?

Quote :

"how about the millions of people we keep locked up in over-crowded prisons for minor drug offenses?"

also a product of privatizing the prison system... kind of like what (ron paul) libertarians would do. which i realize you specifically are not arguing for, just pointing out.

10/12/2012 2:03:39 PM

Quote :

"how about the millions of people we keep locked up in over-crowded prisons for minor drug offenses"

sounds like millions of people that aren't looking for jobs thus not included in the unemployment numbers.

10/12/2012 2:10:17 PM

Actually, my area is about 50-50 blacks and whites, one of the poorest counties in NC (with an overcrowded, rundown prison), and the high school I attended had more black people than white people. So no, you're wrong.

But someone please tell me how not having sympathy for someone who continuously breaks the law and THEN goes to jail on their 5th offense for a minor infraction is being closed minded. I guess we should just legalize weed and all of our problems would be solved. Oops, looks like that's not really the reality we're looking at right now, so why talk about it? I'm just saying, call it closed minded if you want but if you don't know how to not get caught after the fourth or fifth time, then you deserve to be punished. I can't stand idiots.

Privatized prisons would be a pretty awesome thing IMO.

[Edited on October 12, 2012 at 2:18 PM. Reason : .]

10/12/2012 2:17:28 PM

Quote :

"is this a joke? are you wholly unfamiliar w/ the concept of "privatization"?"

I don't equate privatization with "selling off the country". That phrase implies that people and property of the United States is owned by its government and that by allowing people to take ownership of themselves and their property, something is being sold. No, the people own themselves, their property, and their labor. The people don't need to "buy" anything back from the government, they just need to have the boot removed from their throats.

Quote :

"i'm pretty sure there's room in the middle."

Sure. And, on a scale running from "peaceful behavior" to "mass murder", there's plenty of room in between, you just don't want to be there.

Not even going to respond to the drug nonsense. I don't do any drugs. If you don't understand the costs and the long-term consequences of drug prohibition, you have quite a bit of homework ahead of you. If you can't be bothered to do your homework, then there's not much to say.

Quote :

"also a product of privatizing the prison system... kind of like what (ron paul) libertarians would do. which i realize you specifically are not arguing for, just pointing out."

You have no idea what you're talking about. Libertarians have been some of the most vocal opponents of privatizing prisons, precisely because it adds even more incentive to lock people up for victimless crimes.

[Edited on October 12, 2012 at 2:19 PM. Reason : ]

10/12/2012 2:17:32 PM

I get the feeling that everyone in this thread thinks everyone else is wrong. I'm out.

10/12/2012 2:22:35 PM

^ I agree with him. No one makes people do drugs. Why do drugs? What is so fun about it?

10/12/2012 2:24:16 PM

Quote :

"And don't even tell me that cutting back drug control is the answer to decreasing our debt either, because cutting it back would eliminate jobs, and that 20 billion isn't going to put a dent in the national debt."

or perhaps folks could find jobs in the marijuana industry

10/12/2012 2:24:49 PM

Quote :

"Anybody who cares that much about the money we spend on drug control and uses that to decide on who they are voting for is a legitimate pothead. You can accept or deny it, but that is so stupid to base your vote on that when we are currently paying a fourth of all the money we have spent on drug control since the 70s every year in the form of interest on our debt, and have a ton of other issues that need to be dealt with first. And don't even tell me that cutting back drug control is the answer to decreasing our debt either, because cutting it back would eliminate jobs, and that 20 billion isn't going to put a dent in the national debt."

First off, I haven't smoked pot in almost 15 years. I oppose the WoD because it curtails freedom and dumps large ammounts of government resources in enforcing someone elses morals on me. If someone wants to smoke a joint or drop a tab, what business is it of yours or the government to tell me that's wrong. If gays want to get married, good for them. It's a free country, right?

The government is essential for certain things like infrastructure, inspection, national defense, etc. However, dictating morality with threats of fines and/or incarceration should be cut right out.

10/12/2012 2:36:10 PM

our terrible drug policies have a lot more bad things than just how much we spend

10/12/2012 2:37:03 PM

I think some people forget that Marijuana is still our #1 cash crop.

The war on drugs is a failure. 20 billion may not put a dent in the national debt, but the continued revenue of the government taxing said products would be a step in the right direction.

With the exception of bootleg liquor, the government gets their piece of the pie for every alcoholic beverage consumed. Marijuana is a plant that they could not regulate in its entirety, so they have created the stigma in society that many people still cling to today.

I personally don't think legalization will ever happen because the man can't get his grubby fingers on every last penny. Even if they were only able to tax 50% of it, that would still be in excess of $15 billion (low estimate based on estimates from 25-45 billion annual industry) in new taxable revenue for the federal government

[Edited on October 12, 2012 at 2:45 PM. Reason : ..]

[Edited on October 12, 2012 at 2:46 PM. Reason : ..]

10/12/2012 2:41:21 PM

O'Bama didn't thank anyone. Fuck that guy. He also told that future college graduate he can work in a factory.

10/16/2012 9:07:30 PM

great job preaching manufacturing jobs to a college sophomore. the future is bright kid!

10/16/2012 9:08:29 PM