|
hmmn


Registered: 01/09/13
Posts: 372
|
Re: Do you think U.S. would be safe with a strict libertarian President in office? [Re: r00tuuu123]
#19371488 - 01/05/14 06:07 AM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I believe the US would be safer with a strict libertarian President in office. This is because I have yet to any convincing evidence that our excessive use of military force and surveillance both overseas and within the country make us any safer; indeed, there seems to be good evidence that these actions endanger us.
...
I notice that in this thread, those who dislike the idea of libertarianism seem to equate it with some kind of personality cult surrounding Ron Paul. Fuck that! Ron Paul is one person who has expressed many libertarian and some non-libertarian views and who self-identifies as a libertarian. There are many people who have expressed and acted on libertarian views who are not Ron Paul. If you want to offer meaningful commentary on libertarianism or on libertarian politics in the United States today, you must take the time to educate yourselves on what these things actually are.
Don't equate your beliefs about Ron Paul with the reality of libertarianism; they are distinct.

p.s. this comment is not directed at Confucion (duh).
Edited by hmmn (01/05/14 06:10 AM)
|
shivas.wisdom
בּ



Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,465
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 10 minutes, 59 seconds
|
Re: Do you think U.S. would be safe with a strict libertarian President in office? [Re: hmmn] 1
#19371750 - 01/05/14 08:17 AM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
hmmn said: If you want to offer meaningful commentary on libertarianism or on libertarian politics in the United States today, you must take the time to educate yourselves on what these things actually are.
Libertarian is just a euphemism for selfish-anarchist.
--------------------
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: Do you think U.S. would be safe with a strict libertarian President in office? [Re: Crystal G]
#19372239 - 01/05/14 10:37 AM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Crystal G said: I am not talking about what a President is in the power to do. I am talking about as far as BELIEF SYSTEM goes. Which Ron Paul is NOT a libertarian, like so many people claim he is. His social policies and economics policies actually are more reminiscent of the typical neoconservative Republican.
who cares what his beliefs are, who cares what Obama's beliefs are, who cares what any president believes, it has no bearing on what they'll do in office which is vacation and pose and sign some papers
Quote:
What are you talking about? If you save money by cutting spending in one avenue, it creates a surplus.
incorrect, you only create a surplus if you: a. if revenues are higher than expenditures (as was the case with social security under clinton) b. cut expenditures to below the amount of revenue
both mean you're taking in more money than you're paying out
clinton cut military spending and raised taxes but those revenues went to other projects, the surpluses were in social security, money paid into a 'trust' for people that will be retiring, not tax revenues.
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: Do you think U.S. would be safe with a strict libertarian President in office? [Re: r00tuuu123]
#19372261 - 01/05/14 10:43 AM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
r00tuuu123 said:
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
Repertoire89 said: I think we would be much better off, the only thing I disagree with RP about is currency. No libertarian will ever be elected though
it's a matter of winning over the electoral college, it's made up of voters, just a much smaller number than vote in the general elections, we dont need a libertarian president because the president really isnt much more than a figurehead, someone that signs bills into laws. if you want to make a change, start with the people that we actually elect to office. start with congress
You're wrong Pris executive orders circumvent the system of checks an balances that was put into place for just this reason.
which executive orders?
you do understand how little power an executive order holds over the american people, that it dictates what government can/cannot do and the only bearing it will have on the private sector will be on government contractors. there is no EO that prevents us from voting, or from ousting someone in congress and replacing them with someone that the public feels to be a better fit. it happens every 2 years
|
|