Total Posts:27|Showing Posts:1-27
Jump to topic:

Libertarian-democrat????

comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2011 6:08:57 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Is there a such title as Libertarian-democrat or a Libertarian wing of the Democratic Party?

If so, I think I fall into it.
I dislike the Republicans, Democrats, and Libertarians!

I am more in line with the Classic Liberal label, but what party does that fall in line with... no one know! So, if siding with a party is a necessity, I think I would lean more Democrat then Republican.

I have never liked a republican president!
Ever President I have liked have been Democrat (or whig)
Thomas Jefferson
John Tyler
Grover Cleveland (The first time)

So, what do you think?
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2011 6:12:19 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/19/2011 6:08:57 PM, comoncents wrote:
Is there a such title as Libertarian-democrat or a Libertarian wing of the Democratic Party?

If so, I think I fall into it.
I dislike the Republicans, Democrats, and Libertarians!

I am more in line with the Classic Liberal label, but what party does that fall in line with... no one know! So, if siding with a party is a necessity, I think I would lean more Democrat then Republican.

I have never liked a republican president!
Ever President I have liked have been Democrat (or whig)
Thomas Jefferson
John Tyler
Grover Cleveland (The first time)

So, what do you think?

Well, of course.

The democrat party is a collection of ideas and ideals. It has members that spread a verity of beliefs, and in there, there will be individuals that lean towards libertains, and there will be some that lean even further, and futher, until they are more like libertarians that are in that party (probably liberal lean libertarians, that just don't see the point of the actual libertarian party at getting anything done).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2011 6:13:09 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
http://en.wikipedia.org...
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2011 6:23:16 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/19/2011 6:12:19 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 1/19/2011 6:08:57 PM, comoncents wrote:
Is there a such title as Libertarian-democrat or a Libertarian wing of the Democratic Party?

If so, I think I fall into it.
I dislike the Republicans, Democrats, and Libertarians!

I am more in line with the Classic Liberal label, but what party does that fall in line with... no one know! So, if siding with a party is a necessity, I think I would lean more Democrat then Republican.

I have never liked a republican president!
Ever President I have liked have been Democrat (or whig)
Thomas Jefferson
John Tyler
Grover Cleveland (The first time)

Those were all prior to the New Deal, when classical liberal ideas were purged from the Democrats.. Neoclassical liberals are Republican since Goldwater, unless they are REALLY worried about social issues.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Charles0103
Posts: 523
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2011 6:33:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Yep. The democrats did use to be the conservative party. I'd say Woodrow Wilson would be our first really liberal democratic president. Harding and Cooler were our first real right wingers.

Really, just be a Libertarian or don't associate with either party.
"And so I tell you, keep on asking, and you will receive what you ask for. Keep on seeking, and you will find. Keep on knocking, and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks, receives. Everyone who seeks, finds. And to everyone who knocks, the door will be opened." Jesus in Luke 11:9-10
HatedeatH
Posts: 386
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2011 6:35:07 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/19/2011 6:33:08 PM, Charles0103 wrote:
Yep. The democrats did use to be the conservative party. I'd say Woodrow Wilson would be our first really liberal democratic president. Harding and Cooler were our first real right wingers.

Really, just be a Libertarian or don't associate with either party.

It's funny because I remember that during the US civil war the Democrats were actually pro-slavery.
vardas0antras: If Muhammad is great then why didn't he stop 911 ?
gavin.ogden: He was too busy starting it.
Charles0103
Posts: 523
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2011 6:55:23 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/19/2011 6:35:07 PM, HatedeatH wrote:
At 1/19/2011 6:33:08 PM, Charles0103 wrote:
Yep. The democrats did use to be the conservative party. I'd say Woodrow Wilson would be our first really liberal democratic president. Harding and Cooler were our first real right wingers.

Really, just be a Libertarian or don't associate with either party.

It's funny because I remember that during the US civil war the Democrats were actually pro-slavery.

Yeah. Freeing the slaves was a very progressive/liberal idea. Lincoln talked about how the government should be involved more and all that stuff. Wilson was our first liberal democratic president.
"And so I tell you, keep on asking, and you will receive what you ask for. Keep on seeking, and you will find. Keep on knocking, and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks, receives. Everyone who seeks, finds. And to everyone who knocks, the door will be opened." Jesus in Luke 11:9-10
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2011 7:00:13 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/19/2011 6:33:08 PM, Charles0103 wrote:
Yep. The democrats did use to be the conservative party.

No, they were the liberal party.

I'd say Woodrow Wilson would be our first really liberal democratic president.

Assuming we are starting with the adoption of the Constitution, that honor belongs to Thomas Jefferson.

Harding and Cooler were our first real right wingers.

Cooler? Frieza's brother from Dragonball Z?
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
Veridas
Posts: 733
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2011 7:12:11 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I think such a thing exists, Comoncents, but I don't think you're smart enough to be one considering that you apparantely deem it necessary to use four question marks.

In other words, this is the smart people group. The group that favours liberal economic policies and libertarian personal policies. Let people do as they please, support them financially if they need it (but ONLY if they need it) and generally don't be a massive douche.

Massive douches use four question marks.

Can you see where I'm going with this, Comoncents?

Can you?

Now be a good boy and go play, the grownups are talking.
What fresh dickery is the internet up to today?
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2011 9:34:56 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/19/2011 6:12:19 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 1/19/2011 6:08:57 PM, comoncents wrote:
Is there a such title as Libertarian-democrat or a Libertarian wing of the Democratic Party?

If so, I think I fall into it.
I dislike the Republicans, Democrats, and Libertarians!

I am more in line with the Classic Liberal label, but what party does that fall in line with... no one know! So, if siding with a party is a necessity, I think I would lean more Democrat then Republican.

I have never liked a republican president!
Ever President I have liked have been Democrat (or whig)
Thomas Jefferson
John Tyler
Grover Cleveland (The first time)

So, what do you think?

Well, of course.

The democrat party is a collection of ideas and ideals. It has members that spread a verity of beliefs, and in there, there will be individuals that lean towards libertains, and there will be some that lean even further, and futher, until they are more like libertarians that are in that party (probably liberal lean libertarians, that just don't see the point of the actual libertarian party at getting anything done).

I like that analyzes of it.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2011 9:45:17 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/19/2011 7:05:45 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Democrats are more Libertarian than Republicans.

If being allowed to have buttsecks but not being allowed to make money and therefore buy lube is more libertarian than a rule saying, in effect "Buy all the lube you want, it's your money, just hide what you do with it from the police."

(It is almost always easier to hide one's sexual activities from the police than one's economic activities. Hence, an attempt to restrict the former is a lot less effective at violating liberty).
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Veridas
Posts: 733
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2011 7:18:01 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/20/2011 9:45:17 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 1/19/2011 7:05:45 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Democrats are more Libertarian than Republicans.

If being allowed to have buttsecks but not being allowed to make money and therefore buy lube is more libertarian than a rule saying, in effect "Buy all the lube you want, it's your money, just hide what you do with it from the police."

(It is almost always easier to hide one's sexual activities from the police than one's economic activities. Hence, an attempt to restrict the former is a lot less effective at violating liberty).

Yet they do it anyway. Besides which, don't Democrats also go for the "buy all the lube you want" stance but sans the "hide it from the cops" line?

Liberty is not complying with the law. Liberty not having to worry about complying with the law.
What fresh dickery is the internet up to today?
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 9:36:16 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/21/2011 7:18:01 PM, Veridas wrote:
At 1/20/2011 9:45:17 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 1/19/2011 7:05:45 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Democrats are more Libertarian than Republicans.

If being allowed to have buttsecks but not being allowed to make money and therefore buy lube is more libertarian than a rule saying, in effect "Buy all the lube you want, it's your money, just hide what you do with it from the police."

(It is almost always easier to hide one's sexual activities from the police than one's economic activities. Hence, an attempt to restrict the former is a lot less effective at violating liberty).


Yet they do it anyway. Besides which, don't Democrats also go for the "buy all the lube you want" stance
Nuh uh. That would be selfish of you. You have to wait till they've taxed the hell out of you, and then buy significantly less lube than you want. Which incidentally is much more detrimental to the buttsecks than hiding the buttsecks from the police.

Liberty is not complying with the law. Liberty not having to worry about complying with the law.
That's offered by neither party and hence irrelevant to the discussion.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2011 3:49:52 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/20/2011 9:45:17 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 1/19/2011 7:05:45 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Democrats are more Libertarian than Republicans.

If being allowed to have buttsecks but not being allowed to make money and therefore buy lube is more libertarian than a rule saying, in effect "Buy all the lube you want, it's your money, just hide what you do with it from the police."

(It is almost always easier to hide one's sexual activities from the police than one's economic activities. Hence, an attempt to restrict the former is a lot less effective at violating liberty).

As if Republicans are really any different than Democrats on economic policy?
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2011 6:36:28 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/19/2011 6:09:43 PM, Sieben wrote:
Why can't you just side with no one

Exactly. Why do you need a party and label. You always have to give up something, make more of a compromise when you join a party, or put a label on you. Stay independent and they will vie for your vote even more, you will have more power than those who are consigned to a particular status. Once you're in a party they have you, it's the people in the middle without any sort of commitment that they romance, and need and will work toward. I dream of the day when half the people of this country go to town hall and declare themselves independent as they should.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2011 7:34:40 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/19/2011 7:00:13 PM, Reasoning wrote:
At 1/19/2011 6:33:08 PM, Charles0103 wrote:

Harding and Cooler were our first real right wingers.

Cooler? Frieza's brother from Dragonball Z?

Sig'd.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2011 8:49:31 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/23/2011 3:49:52 AM, FREEDO wrote:
As if Republicans are really any different than Democrats on economic policy?

Zing.
President of DDO
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2011 10:25:28 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/23/2011 6:36:28 AM, innomen wrote:
At 1/19/2011 6:09:43 PM, Sieben wrote:
Why can't you just side with no one

Exactly. Why do you need a party and label.

In this political day, you do.

You always have to give up something,

I do not see it this way. Your ideology refuses the "give up something" part.

make more of a compromise when you join a party,

No. You try to change it.

or put a label on you. Stay independent

That, to me, is a cop out. I know you feel different, but we just disagree.

and they will vie for your vote even more, you will have more power

True, but as a Democrat, ideology forces them to still fight for my vote. If they cannot even get their own parties vote, what is left? By placing myself in a party, I can get in and challenge the thought of that party. Even if I can not change the thought, at least I am being heard; and can challenge them anyway.

than those who are consigned to a particular status. Once you're in a party they have you,

That is not true.

it's the people in the middle without any sort of commitment that they romance,

I don't want to be romanced. I want to be challenged! I want to challenge! I want to know what these people really think.

and need and will work toward. I dream of the day when half the people of this country go to town hall and declare themselves independent as they should.

You will dream forever my friend.
I am tired of that dream. I am changing the game plan. We will see what comes about.
Veridas
Posts: 733
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2011 3:06:41 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl said:
Nuh uh. That would be selfish of you. You have to wait till they've taxed the hell out of you, and then buy significantly less lube than you want. Which incidentally is much more detrimental to the buttsecks than hiding the buttsecks from the police.

Do I detect some bitterness?

First, the tax point, really? I mean...really?

Lets try to be fair about this, shall we? Lets compare the tax policies of the most recent Democratic administration (Obama) with...lets say his closest competitor for that position (McCain)
http://abovethelaw.com...

Hmm, that doesn't seem quite consistent with your point.

Next, about buying less...yeah...I really don't think a political party that successfully managed to impliment national health care can really be considered stingy.

Ranar_Rahl said:
That's offered by neither party and hence irrelevant to the discussion.

Since the discussion is on the implimentation of liberarian beliefs, and personal philosophy in libertarianism is the absolute right of the people, then it's not only relevant, it's painfully relevant.
What fresh dickery is the internet up to today?
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2011 8:42:35 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/23/2011 10:25:28 AM, comoncents wrote:
At 1/23/2011 6:36:28 AM, innomen wrote:
At 1/19/2011 6:09:43 PM, Sieben wrote:
Why can't you just side with no one

Exactly. Why do you need a party and label.

In this political day, you do.

You always have to give up something,

I do not see it this way. Your ideology refuses the "give up something" part.

make more of a compromise when you join a party,

No. You try to change it.

or put a label on you. Stay independent

That, to me, is a cop out. I know you feel different, but we just disagree.

and they will vie for your vote even more, you will have more power

True, but as a Democrat, ideology forces them to still fight for my vote. If they cannot even get their own parties vote, what is left? By placing myself in a party, I can get in and challenge the thought of that party. Even if I can not change the thought, at least I am being heard; and can challenge them anyway.

than those who are consigned to a particular status. Once you're in a party they have you,

That is not true.

it's the people in the middle without any sort of commitment that they romance,

I don't want to be romanced. I want to be challenged! I want to challenge! I want to know what these people really think.

and need and will work toward. I dream of the day when half the people of this country go to town hall and declare themselves independent as they should.

You will dream forever my friend.
I am tired of that dream. I am changing the game plan. We will see what comes about.

Wait....wut?
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2011 2:54:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/23/2011 3:06:41 PM, Veridas wrote:
Ragnar_Rahl said:
Nuh uh. That would be selfish of you. You have to wait till they've taxed the hell out of you, and then buy significantly less lube than you want. Which incidentally is much more detrimental to the buttsecks than hiding the buttsecks from the police.

Do I detect some bitterness?

First, the tax point, really? I mean...really?
If you wanna debate liberty as a whole, yes, really.


Lets try to be fair about this, shall we? Lets compare the tax policies of the most recent Democratic administration (Obama) with...lets say his closest competitor for that position (McCain)
First, presidential candidates have to make about 9000 compromises.

Second, the average cut for Mccain under your source is 10 times that for Obama.

Next, about buying less...yeah...I really don't think a political party that successfully managed to impliment national health care can really be considered stingy.
It hasn't implemented. It's legislated. Most of it is yet to be implemented. In any case, that's irrelevant, we aren't talking about "stinginess," as though lube is supposed to be a gift, we're talking about liberty. Even if the national health care plan covered lube (it doesn't), taxing money and "picking the winner" by choosing which lube manufacturers get how much of a cut, which is probable among legislators, is not consistent with liberty-- let alone the actual policy of diverting money that some people may spend on lube to people other than its owners, essentially forcing you to use it charitably toward the ill.


Ranar_Rahl said:
That's offered by neither party and hence irrelevant to the discussion.

Since the discussion is on the implimentation of liberarian beliefs, and personal philosophy in libertarianism is the absolute right of the people, then it's not only relevant, it's painfully relevant.
The discussion is on which party is closer to the implementation of libertarian beliefs. Since both parties have a "no" on that issue, it becomes irrelevant to a COMPARISON, which is what we are doing.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.