It's the Talk Like a Republican thread!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(larkinmj @ Apr 3 2007, 01:45 PM) [snapback]417108[/snapback]</div>

that's true - I am a registered democrat :lol:

 

Those damn democrats accomplished more in their first 100 hours than we great GOP leaders have managed in 6 years. It's just plain luck, I tell you. Now they are following us on a fact finding mission to the Middle East even though we were just there. Those COPYCATS. They seem to want to lynch good 'ole boy junior for what?? Spending the national treasury into the next century? Bringing the nation to our knees in the name of National Security? They barely have a majority and they think they have a MANDATE?? We'll show those gay abortionists how to run a country, just give us a little more time and troops and an open checkbook. They can't prove junior is not a flesh-eating bacteria yet they think they can lead! Sheesh!!!

 

[attachmentid=7243]

[attachmentid=7244]

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ Apr 3 2007, 01:40 PM) [snapback]417136[/snapback]</div>

I'm not a Republican either.

 

Libertarians for torture?
Libertarians for detention without trial?
Libertarians for unchecked executive power?

Surely not? Or do I misunderstand the US meaning of Libertarian?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(KMO @ Apr 3 2007, 07:18 PM) [snapback]417306[/snapback]</div>

Perhaps it is better even in your world to be a libertarian than a democrat who are for:

1. terrorists rights
2. the defeat of US forces
3. Increased pork spending
4. withholding funds for US armed forces for body armor, bullets, etc
5. talking to and advising terrorists (syria, Hama, hezbollah - jimmycarter)
6. handicapping executive power - which will be interesting if the defeatocrats win the oval office next year.

 

If you are christian you are a winner
If you ain't straight you are a sinner
If you are black best sit in the back
War is our trade oil is our crack
If you are women your wombs are our domains
Bush, Cheney, Rice, Romney, Ashcroft are our names
We are never this articulate, we are typically simplistic
If you think a republican wrote this rhyme, you're certainly not realistic!

 

dude, you gotta be kidding. you talk in extremes ALL THE TIME. it makes you sound ridiculous.

republicans are guilty of not wanting to fund the troops they sent over there. a cousin of mine made national headlines for commandeering broken down trucks in iraq to fix their own equipment, because they could not get proper new equipment. this was in 2004. there were documented armor deficiencies before that.

dems don't want to send anyone else there. fundamental difference.

what's with the merging of firstnamelastname among you folks? i don't get it. funny that three republicans were in damascus before pelosi... don't hear you whining about them now do we? nahhhhhh.

i thought republicans were the ones for limiting government? or with the neocons around are they now for dictatorship all of a sudden? if the dems are the ones cutting back executive power, that says a hell of a lot about neocons.

 

You gotta admit, he's got the talk like a Republican thing down to a "T."

Don't think I've seen better in this thread!

He even manages to keep it in character when attempting a riposte!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Apr 4 2007, 02:29 PM) [snapback]417725[/snapback]</div>

Another possibility is that withholding funds will precipitate withdrawal; but I do recognize the fondness of drawing one, absolute, can't-possibly-be-wrong conclusion from limited data by some people.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(KMO @ Apr 3 2007, 07:18 PM) [snapback]417306[/snapback]</div>

US libertarianism is a carcass of an ideology. The only strong political urge I see is an ongoing desire to exploit illegal immigrants and manipulate the tax code to their benefit.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(EricGo @ Apr 6 2007, 12:16 PM) [snapback]418807[/snapback]</div>

"Carcass of an ideology"--I like that terminology!

I've heard of a couple of other points that seem to be universal, too, but I shan't mention them here. Yes, I'm afraid of getting shot by a legalized meth addict with a rocket launcher.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ Apr 3 2007, 05:27 PM) [snapback]417283[/snapback]</div>

Yep. Registered Libertarian.

Not sure what's up with the negative stigma attached to Libertarians. Seems like we're the only real Conservatives left. Fiscally conservative yet socially liberal.. sounds good to me.

How someone can call themselves a Democrat and not be ashamed is beyond me. It seems like everything I read from a liberal Democrat is bashing America or passively supporting terrorism.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(desynch @ Apr 6 2007, 03:15 PM) [snapback]419058[/snapback]</div>

Maybe we need a talk like a Libertarian thread, just to round things out in FHOP.

You can go first, Desynch. =)

 

There's the old joke that a Libertarian is just a Republican that wants to smoke dope and have sex.
At one point, a long time ago, I got a bit interested in the philosophy of libertarianism. I had a girlfriend in college who, because of my interest in architecture, gave me a copy of "The Fountainhead", and then I read some of the other works of Ayn Rand. From there I was intrigued by the notion of libertarianism (while libertarianism was supposedly the political manifestation of the philosophy espoused by Ayn Rand, she had nothing but scorn for the movement and dismissed the Libertarian Party as "publicity seekers". As much as she hated the Communists, she despised the libertarians more.)
I suppose what initially attracted me to the philosophy was the "live and let live" attitude, which is seemingly espoused on the official Libertarian Party website:
"Libertarians strongly oppose any government interfering in their personal, family and business decisions. Essentially, we believe all Americans should be free to live their lives and pursue their interests as they see fit as long as they do no harm to another."
And that attitude does sound appealing- do what you want, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. But as my thinking matured I realized that you cannot have a country of 300 million people, or a world of 6 billion people, where everyone's action is guided merely by their own self-interest. That doesn't mean that we have to resort to socialism. But we do need laws and regulations to protect individuals from the irresponsible actions of others, and from corporations who would otherwise act only to promote their own interests.
It seems like the Libertarian Party today exists for one main purpose (and, what I get from listening to people who call themselves libertarians, their other talking points such as civil liberties are far secondary)- to promote lower taxes and less corporate regulation. They don't believe that there should be any environmental regulations (even Nixon was more progressive than that), and somehow they claim that the US government is the biggest threat to the environment. One some issues- freedom of speech, the Patriot Act, our draconian drug laws- my beliefs coincide with the philosophy of the Libertarian Party. But on others I think they are dead wrong. For instance, they oppose all gun laws whasoever. I have no problem with law-abiding citizens owning guns. I also believe that every responsible person should be allowed to drive a car. But I accept the inconvenience of having to register and insure my car and getting a driver's license in order to exercise that privilege. I cannot, for the life of me, understand why law-abiding citizens should not undergo a background check before buying a gun.
It also seems to me that the "Libertarian" label is conveniently used by politicians who aren't totally consistent with libertarian principles, so it might be a bit hard to know what to say in a "Talk like a Libertarian" thread.

 

Back to the OP, here's a direct quote from another thread. I just had to cut and paste!

The bottom line is this:

If you want to rely on the government for your welfare and well being - be a democrat/liberal

If you have the confidence to make it on your own - be a republican/conservative.
get rid of pork = line item veto

Bush is a good man doing a good job.

Haliburton is a great company.

end of story

I'm not making this stuff up.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(larkinmj @ Apr 7 2007, 04:44 PM) [snapback]419546[/snapback]</div>

Okay, another joke. It's said that the libertarian party only picked up a critical mass for ballot status, etc by defecting republicans appalled by Nixon! After all, they're first presidential candidate was a philosophy professor. I am a registered libertarian but haven't been a dues paying, bumper sticker wearing one for some time. I'm probably still registered because I enjoy the look the little old ladies in the polls give me when they see I'm one of those. I distinctly remember blowing them off when the local party lost their senses and endorsed a republican assembly candidate who held the curiously unlibertarian viewpoint that the Air Force was guilty of harboring witches.

You are right that the party does seem to have been captured by survivalists, probably a problem for any small party. The California green party seems to have attracted a good number of marxists.

Although I admit I've lost touch with the party, per se, I find it hard to believe that a libertarian would advocate exploiting immigrant labor.

 

Back on topic.

There is no such thing as global warming!

And if there were, it wouldn't be important, or due to fossil fuel use!