Libertarians beginning to be a thorn in the side of the Republicans

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,235
6,338
126
I fear change? Heh, funny.

In many ways, Moonbeam, the haves already pay a bigger part of the tab. So, I don't understand what you mean there. You two can fight over who pays what on the tab. I'd like to get rid of the tab altogether.

It's just a damn shame that a McDonald's burger flipper receives his paycheck only to see the government took some before he even got his. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

But regardless of why you bring that up, Moonbeam, where we really need change is in foreign policy. And that is not what we'd get with Obama. Obama is an interventionist and a world's policeman, just like all the rest. It's a myth you all have been led to believe, that the two parties have a different foreign policy. And while you two bicker about wedge issues, you fail to see the truth, that the two parties argue only on the details of the same foreign policy.

For want of a nail the shoe was lost, for want of a shoe, the horse and so on.........

You don't know what you're going to get with Obama as you already reminded me I don't know.

What you are willing to do is vote based on a fantasy that because Obama is not the perfect vessel for your ideological belief you will cut your nose off to spite your face. It just smacks of irrational, elitist, ideological purism to me.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,235
6,338
126
You have entered a passage way with two doors in front of you. The tiger is not far behind. One of the doors is open and you can see it leads to hell. What do you do?

Click on the other door please. Jesus Christ!
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
61
Originally posted by: Moonbeam

You don't know what you're going to get with Obama as you already reminded me I don't know.

I know what we won't get. We won't get smaller government, we won't get less spending, we won't get a better respect for our freedoms, we won't get a different foreign policy.

On top of that, I don't know what other harms we will get. But what I stated above is enough, by far.

You have entered a passage way with two doors in front of you. The tiger is not far behind. One of the doors is open and you can see it leads to hell. What do you do?

Click on the other door please. Jesus Christ!

I'll take the door less opened. Thanks.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
61
It is rather odd that you Democrats would like to think you can pick up the votes from those disgruntled with the Republican party.

You cannot see that we are disgruntled because they are acting like you?
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,235
6,338
126
Originally posted by: bamacre
It is rather odd that you Democrats would like to think you can pick up the votes from those disgruntled with the Republican party.

You cannot see that we are disgruntled because they are acting like you?

Act like me? You know something about how I act. The need to demonize others, I should think, is an act of self hate. Voting for a party that will never win must make you feel effete.
 

Tab

Lifer
Sep 15, 2002
12,145
0
71
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: Moonbeam

You don't know what you're going to get with Obama as you already reminded me I don't know.

I know what we won't get. We won't get smaller government, we won't get less spending, we won't get a better respect for our freedoms, we won't get a different foreign policy.

On top of that, I don't know what other harms we will get. But what I stated above is enough, by far.

How the hell did you get to that conclusion?

P.S

-I'd love to have whatever you're smoking. ;)
 

marincounty

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2005
3,227
5
76
The last time a third party got a significant number of votes (Nader), it led to the current disaster, GWB.

Ideologically pure Greens couldn't bring themselves to vote for the evil Al Gore and what happened-the opposite of what they wanted. They took enough votes away from Gore that it allowed GWB to win. So much for principles.

As for the decriminalization of marijuana (in California), it was passed by a Democratic majority in the Assembly(Willie Brown) and state Senate, and signed into law by Democrat Jerry Brown. This was a long time ago, but I bet you could count the Republicans who voted for this on one hand. So don't give me any BS about both parties being at fault for marijuana laws.

Willie Brown actually wanted to legalize marijuana, but discussions with the bizarre Jesuit educated Gov Moonbeam revealed he was against legalization, so Willie never brought up legislation.

And a couple of years ago Nevada was poised to decriminalize marijuana, till the right wingers flew in the drug czar and started running all kinds of scare advertising to defeat the bill.
 

shira

Diamond Member
Jan 12, 2005
9,500
6
81
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: Sawyer
I wish the Libertarians would gain ground, we need a viable and real 3rd party other than the two jokes we have now.

Yup, and you will wish forever.

Libertarians are brought to you be the same psychotics that told us that Bush and Gore were indistinguishable, and that voting for Nader would "send a message."
 

Tab

Lifer
Sep 15, 2002
12,145
0
71
Originally posted by: marincounty
The last time a third party got a significant number of votes (Nader), it led to the current disaster, GWB.

Uhh, almost but not quite.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
61
Originally posted by: Tab
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: Moonbeam

You don't know what you're going to get with Obama as you already reminded me I don't know.

I know what we won't get. We won't get smaller government, we won't get less spending, we won't get a better respect for our freedoms, we won't get a different foreign policy.

On top of that, I don't know what other harms we will get. But what I stated above is enough, by far.

How the hell did you get to that conclusion?

P.S

-I'd love to have whatever you're smoking. ;)

The entire statement, or something specifically?
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,329
126
Originally posted by: Tab
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: Moonbeam

You don't know what you're going to get with Obama as you already reminded me I don't know.

I know what we won't get. We won't get smaller government, we won't get less spending, we won't get a better respect for our freedoms, we won't get a different foreign policy.

On top of that, I don't know what other harms we will get. But what I stated above is enough, by far.

How the hell did you get to that conclusion?

P.S

-I'd love to have whatever you're smoking. ;)

We won't get smaller government
BHO intends to drastically increase the size and responsibilities of the government.

we won't get less spending
BHO intends to spend a crapton of money to do the above.

we won't get a better respect for our freedoms
BHO supports FISA.

we won't get a different foreign policy
Although it might be for a different reason BHO will still put a large amount of our resources (money and troops) all across the globe. Same game with a few different players.

 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: bamacre
It is rather odd that you Democrats would like to think you can pick up the votes from those disgruntled with the Republican party.

You cannot see that we are disgruntled because they are acting like you?

Act like me? You know something about how I act. The need to demonize others, I should think, is an act of self hate. Voting for a party that will never win must make you feel effete.

You mean the way you're demonizing libertarians here? You call us the villains then expect us to merrily follow you to the voting booth and pull the lever for Obama.

Sorry pal, you're convincing me NOT to vote for Obama. I was going to vote for him because I think the Republicans need a clear message in this election. But between the way Obama has changed since he got the nomination and how his followers have become insane goons like you, I think I'm going to throw my vote away on a third party.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
61
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: bamacre
It is rather odd that you Democrats would like to think you can pick up the votes from those disgruntled with the Republican party.

You cannot see that we are disgruntled because they are acting like you?

Act like me? You know something about how I act. The need to demonize others, I should think, is an act of self hate. Voting for a party that will never win must make you feel effete.

Not you personally, Moonbeam, your party.
 

Tab

Lifer
Sep 15, 2002
12,145
0
71
Originally posted by: Darwin333
Originally posted by: Tab
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: Moonbeam

You don't know what you're going to get with Obama as you already reminded me I don't know.

I know what we won't get. We won't get smaller government, we won't get less spending, we won't get a better respect for our freedoms, we won't get a different foreign policy.

On top of that, I don't know what other harms we will get. But what I stated above is enough, by far.

How the hell did you get to that conclusion?

P.S

-I'd love to have whatever you're smoking. ;)

We won't get smaller government
BHO intends to drastically increase the size and responsibilities of the government.

With social programs, maybe. Compared to McCain, he looks like a baby.

we won't get less spending
BHO intends to spend a crapton of money to do the above.

Yea, on reducing our debt. McCain intends to barrow, lower taxes and spend even more.

we won't get a better respect for our freedoms
BHO supports FISA.

No, he doesn't and eventually voted against it.

we won't get a different foreign policy
Although it might be for a different reason BHO will still put a large amount of our resources (money and troops) all across the globe. Same game with a few different players.

Obama didn't support the war from the beginning, he wants troops out. There isn't anything inconsistent about this - unless you have something to show me.
 

Chaotic42

Lifer
Jun 15, 2001
33,932
1,113
126
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Is voting for great good and getting the worst of evils an evil worse than voting for a lesser evil?

This is the question which we must ask ourselves.

Everyone makes compromises in their votes and votes in some amount of "evil" except for those who vote for themselves.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,235
6,338
126
Originally posted by: Chaotic42
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Is voting for great good and getting the worst of evils an evil worse than voting for a lesser evil?

This is the question which we must ask ourselves.

Everyone makes compromises in their votes and votes in some amount of "evil" except for those who vote for themselves.

It's the question bamacre avoids by imagining he's opening some fantasy lesser opened door that has no practical material existence.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
61
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: Chaotic42
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Is voting for great good and getting the worst of evils an evil worse than voting for a lesser evil?

This is the question which we must ask ourselves.

Everyone makes compromises in their votes and votes in some amount of "evil" except for those who vote for themselves.

It's the question bamacre avoids by imagining he's opening some fantasy lesser opened door that has no practical material existence.

You fail to see that I am doing only what I think is right, voting for the one who I think will do the best job, regardless of electability.

Hypothetically speaking, what if McCain were leading in the polls, 85% to Obama's 15%. Would you just refuse to vote?

I don't take polls into consideration when I vote. I don't need to be wrong just because so many others are.

And, again, I don't know why your panties are getting in a wad here, Moonbeam. Barr's votes are votes that won't go to McCain. Barr is helping Obama win. If Obama can't beat McCain even with Barr's help, then it says something about your party.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,235
6,338
126
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: bamacre
It is rather odd that you Democrats would like to think you can pick up the votes from those disgruntled with the Republican party.

You cannot see that we are disgruntled because they are acting like you?

Act like me? You know something about how I act. The need to demonize others, I should think, is an act of self hate. Voting for a party that will never win must make you feel effete.

You mean the way you're demonizing libertarians here? You call us the villains then expect us to merrily follow you to the voting booth and pull the lever for Obama.

Sorry pal, you're convincing me NOT to vote for Obama. I was going to vote for him because I think the Republicans need a clear message in this election. But between the way Obama has changed since he got the nomination and how his followers have become insane goons like you, I think I'm going to throw my vote away on a third party.

Be sure and eat some worms when you do and maybe put a bullet through your foot. And I don't see myself as an Obama follower. I am an Obama leader. I sent him a letter telling him why he had to run and he did. I know how to make waves.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,235
6,338
126
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: Chaotic42
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Is voting for great good and getting the worst of evils an evil worse than voting for a lesser evil?

This is the question which we must ask ourselves.

Everyone makes compromises in their votes and votes in some amount of "evil" except for those who vote for themselves.

It's the question bamacre avoids by imagining he's opening some fantasy lesser opened door that has no practical material existence.

You fail to see that I am doing only what I think is right, voting for the one who I think will do the best job, regardless of electability.

Hypothetically speaking, what if McCain were leading in the polls, 85% to Obama's 15%. Would you just refuse to vote?

I don't take polls into consideration when I vote. I don't need to be wrong just because so many others are.

And, again, I don't know why your panties are getting in a wad here, Moonbeam. Barr's votes are votes that won't go to McCain. Barr is helping Obama win. If Obama can't beat McCain even with Barr's help, then it says something about your party.

I wondered when somebody thinking my panties are in a bunch would remember that this thread was about how Barr digs into McCain's vote and helps Obama, and then realize that in fact my panties were never in a bunch and that what they were really experiencing is a projection, the guilt and reactive defensiveness of knowing they are committing the crime of political extremism at a critical time that demands the choice of the lesser of two evils. No, my panties aren't in a bunch. As usual I am just showing people how the universal disease of self hate works in their own individual and personal case.

I know you because I know me. Via my own merciless and pitiless analysis of myself I managed to destroy every illusion I held dear including any illusion there is any hope anywhere much less in the political. I died to all belief, to all hope of anything out there. Only from ashes did my bird fly.

And I was going to vote for Ron Paul but he was too impure. I fear his gold standard wouldn't be 99.999999999% fine.
 

Xavier434

Lifer
Oct 14, 2002
10,373
1
0
Obviously this needs to be reiterated:

That means that they need to learn how to play the game so that once they win they can change the game.

Regardless of how much one may hate how the political game works, myself included, this is necessary to do if one wishes to change anything. If the Libertarians want to ever do more than just sit around whining and hosting a bunch of their stuff over the internet then they need to get with the program. If they do not then they will just have to live with the fact that they are going to be spending the rest of their lives accomplishing nothing until the day they die. One day some of you that support Libertarianism are going to realize (hopefully) that your pride is doing nothing to help this country. You can let go of your pride and still do what you believe is best for this country. You just need to learn how to work the system to your advantage. You will also need to learn to accept that the country cannot and will not change to a Libertarian state of mind over the course of one night or one presidential term for that matter. It will require little bits of change over time. Unfortunately, most Libertarians that I have conversed with are very impatient and refuse to believe that we cannot just dive right into what they want head first without there being any serious negative consequence. Doing so will ultimately lead to failure and the Libertarians will just have to start over again where they started with zero real power.

Take it or leave it folks. This is how it works whether you like it or not. Disagreeing with me or trying to justify to yourselves and the rest of the internet why I am wrong is not increasing the political power of the Libertarians. All it is showing that you will continue to do what has continued to fail when it comes to your cause. You never get past square one now do you? Why is that? How will you change that?
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,235
6,338
126
Originally posted by: Xavier434
Obviously this needs to be reiterated:

That means that they need to learn how to play the game so that once they win they can change the game.

Regardless of how much one may hate how the political game works, myself included, this is necessary to do if one wishes to change anything. If the Libertarians want to ever do more than just sit around whining and hosting a bunch of their stuff over the internet then they need to get with the program. If they do not then they will just have to live with the fact that they are going to be spending the rest of their lives accomplishing nothing until the day they die. One day some of you that support Libertarianism are going to realize (hopefully) that your pride is doing nothing to help this country. You can let go of your pride and still do what you believe is best for this country. You just need to learn how to work the system to your advantage. You will also need to learn to accept that the country cannot and will not change to a Libertarian state of mind over the course of one night or one presidential term for that matter. It will require little bits of change over time. Unfortunately, most Libertarians that I have conversed with are very impatient and refuse to believe that we cannot just dive right into what they want head first without there being any serious negative consequence. Doing so will ultimately lead to failure and the Libertarians will just have to start over again where they started with zero real power.

Take it or leave it folks. This is how it works whether you like it or not. Disagreeing with me or trying to justify to yourselves and the rest of the internet why I am wrong is not increasing the political power of the Libertarians. All it is showing that you will continue to do what has continued to fail when it comes to your cause. You never get past square one now do you? Why is that? How will you change that?

In a nuclear war that destroys civilization it is important to be on the right side, the one God is on. Similarly, libertarians have the elite privilege of going down in flames with clean, pure, and unsullied hands. Wouldn't you trade being right over compromising for the sake of your nation. Oh, that's right both sides are equally evil to the motivationally blind.