The KGB Oracle Forums General Public Discussion (SPECIAL ACCESS) KGB Political Debate Central For The Tea Party the Bell Tolls

No, he deflects this to the state level, knowing well that for places that are his natural base it is "the right way". It is not unlike if a liberal from New York stated that gun regulation should be decided at the municipal level.



Personally, I think that any candidate left of "legitimate rape" is fine, problem is that there are a lot of these rapists in the GOP. Any candidate that willing to uphold Roe vs. Wade is palatable to me.



I actually agree. Free abortions on each corner while living in a police oligarchy is less desirable than otherwise free society that does not allow abortions.

If these issues were the only thing, I'd be voting libertarians. At the same time I am nowhere near as liberal as Jet.

My personal reason for holding the nose and sticking with Democrats through ugly and Ugly and UGLY is following:

They are the party that is not hell-bent on dismantling social nets and programs that I see as crucial to functioning society. Free society is impossible when people are allowed to starve on the streets. Free is only possible when the basic needs are addressed - food, shelter, healthcare. I am willing to be pragmatic about it and realize that resources to help are limited, but I absolutely could not get behind someone that sees people in need as lazy parasites living off the dole.

Yes the State-level argument is something of a dodge. But it is at least a philosophically consistent dodge. I highly respect it, because the purpose is to focus on the important issues without getting mired in the wedge issues.

The thing is, none of the leading libertarian leaners like Rand Paul are intent on dismantling social nets. Hayekian-sphere full blown libertarians like myself dont even believe in such a thing. There are plenty of fringe elements of most political groupings. But among the politically "serious" libertarian leaners, most of the emphasis is on ending corporate welfare, not dismantling safety nets for individuals.

I have seen a lot more left leaning bloggers and pundits talk about the dangers of ring wingers - which to them includes libertarians - dismantling social safety nets than I have seen influential libertarian minded pols arguing or pushing for the elimination of social safety nets.

What bothers me is when it gets extreme, like that guy who was arguing for liberals to not join with libertarians to protest the NSA. Fearing, that if the coalition was successful.. somehow that would translate into the most fringe extremest Rothbardian libertarians gaining such popularity that they could and would actually dismantle said safety nets. Which is absolutely ludicrous from pretty much any angle. If anything, the longer the current string of abuses and scandals continue to grow.. I would think that would present a much greater threat of an explosion of extreme libertarianism, where more and more people come to see govt as nothing but an enemy. Reigning in govt abuses and corruption with any coalition should seem like a good idea to the serious liberal, because people who trust govt are far more likely to entrust it with more of their money.

Even among those who philosophically reject the concept of activist govt, most are willing to accept a reasonable level of govt provided it operates in an open, accountable and even-handed manner.

I happen to agree with "that guy", but mostly because I don't feel that libertarians sufficiently differentiate from the Tea Party. Government shutdown was missed opportunity, instead Libertarians chose to ride the short bus.

Not sure I understand what that has to do with protesting the NSA. I also admit to not understanding what the big deal was. The "shut down" was a non-event. Like 15% of the govt actually shut down... some people got a 2 week paid vacation. Sound and fury.

The shut down, and threats of default, was a clear sign of unwillingness or inability to govern. I'd actually take it step further and state that libertarians and the tea party are showed willing to sabotage the government. This is not how you govern.

Here is another recent example where libertarians are happy to wreck.

How do you figure?

Here is my issue Hele. Paul and Cruz are so far right on subjects like this, that I cant even hear anything else they say.

I am telling you, if a true centrist independent, dem, or repub , came along that all of us could tolerate, they would win the day.

I cant stand things like the overreaching NSA and most importantly the Citizens United corruption. I don't worship Obama, but I just cant palate the right wing christian borderline racist agenda you get from many. I am no saying that any of you are these things, but just like me, you have to look past the issues that concern you and choose between a douche and a turd sandwich (plagiarized from South Park).

Compromise and tolerance are how we have gotten this far, and the people in power are feeding off the radical left and right parts of this country, and in my opinion, leaving the majority of us behind.

Think of it this way. We have all been bitching at each other for years in this forum. If we had the power and all say in a room together, we could agree on a great many things and resolve some of the most challenging issues of our day with compromise and tolerance.

But that;s no fun, so back to bitching

Jet's appeals to reason assume that there is reason to be had anywhere on the right. I pointed out that Cruz 16 is a very real possibility, and except for Derid nobody even cringed. They are all death panels/birth certificate/shut the government down/agenda 21 kind of people. This is what passes for conservatism these days.

In other words, conservatism is dead. Derid, please turn the lights off on your way out.

What I still dont get is how not liking the way X would hypothetically govern if they somehow had full Congressional majorities / Presidency has anything to do with protesting NSA. (and other related issues)

Also Jet, Rand Paul isnt what your thinking apparently. His work with Pat Leahy (D-VT) on sentencing reform is anything but racist. As an eye surgeon by trade, I doubt he disbelieves in science.

It might also benefit some people to recall that just a few short years ago, the political world was convinced that Red America was the future. We all know how that ended up. Dont think for a second that after all the massive abuses, wealth transfer, and yes Obamacare.. that there isnt a big blowback coming down the pike.

The only blow-back is that US going to be 1-party system, completely unaccountable to anyone. Why? Because the opposition insists on staying irrelevant and non-viable by excursively appealing to crazy. I hope GOP will go through its "No Homers Club" moment sometime soon, but if '12 humiliation didn't do it, I don't know what will.