+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 35

Thread: Boortz the Libertarian on Ron Paul

  1. #11
    Unchained Fat Tone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Nofuck, Vagina
    Posts
    12,916

    Default Re: Boortz the Libertarian on Ron Paul

    Quote Originally Posted by Bman View Post
    Agreed

    Boortz is a Bush shill

    no question.
    I disagree.....he lambasts Bush on just about everything, EXCEPT the war in Iraq.
    "wait a minute now, I didn't authorize ATTACKS on the Pirates,
    I authorized A TAX on the pirates"

  2. #12
    I'm not banned Mallard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    29,387

    Default Re: Boortz the Libertarian on Ron Paul

    Quote Originally Posted by Fat Tone View Post
    I disagree.....he lambasts Bush on just about everything, EXCEPT the war in Iraq.
    yeah, they havent read much of what he has to say if they think hes a shill. ONE issue alone doesnt make one a shill

    by that token the left should LOVE savage because hes constantly going on about how he thinks the Bush administration is the worst in history and has done more damage to the future of our country than any other prez

  3. #13
    They should pay me to post here Vast's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,755

    Default Re: Boortz the Libertarian on Ron Paul

    Quote Originally Posted by Bitch View Post
    Agreed. I find very little 'true' libertarian philosophies in his articles.

    Not a fan at all. I think he's another ignorant Bushie.
    Listen to his radio program when you can Bitch. He's far from a Bushie...one thing that makes his show better than Rush's or Sean's.
    Separation of Press and State now.

  4. #14
    Back to Basics Voice of Reason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    8,752

    Default Re: Boortz the Libertarian on Ron Paul

    So you can't be a Libertarian if you take the Jihadist threat at face value. Very interesting.

  5. #15
    Planet Slayer BleedingHeadKen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,658

    Default Re: Boortz the Libertarian on Ron Paul

    Quote Originally Posted by Voice of Reason View Post
    So you can't be a Libertarian if you take the Jihadist threat at face value. Very interesting.
    It's not whether you take the threat at face value, it's how you believe the threat should be answered. It's whether you force others to pay for the invasion of other countries, the destruction of their infrastructure and the killing of innocent people. Proponents of intervention tell us that taxing us for the purpose of invading other countries is for the common good - a collectivist notion. Foreign intervention also tends to lead to loss of domestic liberty at home and expansion of central authority.

    It's no different than if you believe that homosexuality is immoral. A few llibertarians that I know do believe homosexulaity is immoral, but they don't advocate for laws to prevent homosexual activities. What they demand is their right to associate freely.
    "Men desire authority for its own sake that they may bear a rule, command and control other men, and live uncommanded and uncontrolled themselves." - St. Thomas More

  6. #16
    registered Logicrat Oth-er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,780

    Default Re: Boortz the Libertarian on Ron Paul

    Boortz is an American Libertarian... meaning here that he believes in establishing a Libertarian way of life here in America. The rest of the world can and will do whatever it wants. He sees the War in Iraq as protecting American Libertarianism as a way of life. This is a vew held by thousands of Libertarians as well, so to say his credentials are null and void because he disagrees with the national party on this one issue is silly.

    Personally, I disagree with Boortz on Iraq. However I disagree with the Libertarians and Anarchos as well that there can [I]never[I] be a case for interventionism. Another of the reasons that I've recently abandoned both philosophies is their self-destructive demands for a all-or-nothing instantly. Human change is never accomplished without process, and thus both movements are at their base profoundly illogical, and thus moot.

  7. #17
    Planet Slayer BleedingHeadKen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,658

    Default Re: Boortz the Libertarian on Ron Paul

    Quote Originally Posted by Oth-er View Post
    Personally, I disagree with Boortz on Iraq. However I disagree with the Libertarians and Anarchos as well that there can [I]never[I] be a case for interventionism. Another of the reasons that I've recently abandoned both philosophies is their self-destructive demands for a all-or-nothing instantly. Human change is never accomplished without process, and thus both movements are at their base profoundly illogical, and thus moot.
    That's ridiculous. We libertarians argue all the time without giving up our principles. Now, if you are abandoning the parties, that's understable, but I'm not sure that there is anywhere else to go where you even have a chance of making yourself heard.

    It's the nature of politics to struggle for all-or-nothing especially in what is essentially an all-or-nothing electoral system. Those who have the least power must band together in order to obtain it quickly and decidedly. Those who are pushed out of power will then work with others who are out of power to band together in order to obtain it quickly and decidedly.

    Boortz can call himself a libertarian all he wants, he can join the party and advocate for something things which are in line with libertarian thinking. When he advocates for collectivist policies, then those of us who are against collectivism entirely will call him out on it. That's what politics are all about and I'm sorry if you don't have the stomach for it.

    There is nothing illogical about the principles we hold, or wanting them implemented as rapidly as possible. Our Founding Fathers did it, fighting and dying for them, and didn't abandon the principles even though they fought bitterly over the implementation of them.
    Last edited by BleedingHeadKen; 08-23-2007 at 02:40 PM.
    "Men desire authority for its own sake that they may bear a rule, command and control other men, and live uncommanded and uncontrolled themselves." - St. Thomas More

  8. #18
    registered Logicrat Oth-er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,780

    Default Re: Boortz the Libertarian on Ron Paul

    Quote Originally Posted by BleedingHeadKen View Post
    There is nothing illogical about the principles we hold, or wanting them implemented as rapidly as possible. Our Founding Fathers did it, fighting and dying for them, and didn't abandon the principles even though they fought bitterly over the implementation of them.
    Hardly. They abandoned them right from the get-go. They didn't apply them to slaves, obviously, but also not to women, to Native Americans, to Mexicans, to many other immigrants depending upon their origin. Does this make them villains? No. They sought the most practical way to implement as many ideas of theirs as they could within the constraints of their society and their times.

    You are a bit of an exception Ken-- you actually sought political office and therefore I assume sought to effect practical change. But I also see a lot who complain loudly but even for the sake or argument cannot accept anything short of absolutism. I don't even have a problem with the concept of absolutism... I just believe that goals are reached sometimes in leaps and bounds, sometimes in tiny increments, but never all at once.

    I think Boortz sees Libertarianism as a goal that, though remote, is viably possible for Americans in the not-too-distant future. I think he correctly believes that there are many places on Earth that could not hope to reach that epiphany until much much further down the line. In this he is correct. Many Libertarians, and an even higher percentage of Anarchists, seek immediate American laws that deal evenly with the entire world, despite the fact that such laws cannot be implemented elsewhere despite our desires.

    Boortz, and to some extent myself, say deal with what you can here at home, then hope the rest will follow your lead.

  9. #19
    I have ALOT of Frigging posts
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    15,477

    Default Re: Boortz the Libertarian on Ron Paul

    Boortz is a republican that opposes the drug war and supports choice in marriage and abortion. Given the growing number of Republicans (I purposefully used a small "r" with Boortz) that support the last two, he's not that far from mainstream except on the issue of drugs.

  10. #20
    Planet Slayer BleedingHeadKen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,658

    Default Re: Boortz the Libertarian on Ron Paul

    Quote Originally Posted by Rip View Post
    Boortz is a republican that opposes the drug war and supports choice in marriage and abortion. Given the growing number of Republicans (I purposefully used a small "r" with Boortz) that support the last two, he's not that far from mainstream except on the issue of drugs.
    I don't listen to him much, so it's hard to say where he stands. Few, if any, republicans would go so far as to say abolish the FDA and government funded public education. Boortz might - pushing him into the libertarian category.
    "Men desire authority for its own sake that they may bear a rule, command and control other men, and live uncommanded and uncontrolled themselves." - St. Thomas More

+ Reply to Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts