The GOP's growing Libertarian problem

The GOP's growing Libertarian problem

There are 228 comments on the The Washington Post story from Nov 20, 2012, titled The GOP's growing Libertarian problem. In it, The Washington Post reports that:

Libertarian presidential nominee Gary Johnson took about 1 percent of the vote, winning more raw votes than any Libertarian candidate ever .

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Washington Post.

“Open your eyes”

Since: Sep 09

Central Florida

#61 Nov 20, 2012
lifes a beach wrote:
<quoted text>
Just because I only quoted one sentence out of your original post does not mean I did not read the entire thing the first time. I repeat if your statement that "if a woman who took personal responsibility in the first place then she wouldn't have gotten pregnant in the first place" is not only a fallacy but makes you look like the idiot, not I. Furthermore, abortion is a form of taking personal responsibility, whether you like it or not. Furthermore, the "father" is the one doing the impregnating, yet I noted absence of mention of his responsibility in your post.
Wow, OK. are you a woman?

You are completely missing the point there. IMO, if a woman does not want to get pregnant and does not go through with ensure she does not get pregnant, then personal responsibility then its ok. No need for personal responsibility, no biggie, go get an abortion if she ends up pregnant.

And the father here should not matter. The woman can say "NO" and take responsibility for herself to not get pregnant. No matter what, it is in the hands of the woman. Not the guy.

Here is a novel idea, if a woman does not want a child, cannot afford to have a child, then why would the woman even put themselves into that position and roll the dice? Why take the chance? To me, that shows a complete lack of personal responsibility. So who is the idiot then?

Ok, now mention rape. I know you will. Even though you said you read the conversation, I know you will mention it. And again I say go back and read the actual conversation. Since you wanted to interject your warped Planned Parenthood endorsed abortion birth control.

“Happiness comes through giving”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#62 Nov 20, 2012
pogue mahone wrote:
The GOP has more of a liberal problem. Liberalism is a growing mental disorder made manifest by the last election.
And thanks to clueless sadists like you, Liberalism will continue to grow, until the "mental disorder" becomes the norm.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#63 Nov 20, 2012
Kahoki wrote:
<quoted text>
As with any party and ideal, there are variations.
Some Libertarians like myself do not support abortion, unless under the situation of rape. Any other reason of abortion then violates the constitutional protect rights of the baby. This could be argued for the same as those under rape. But, a line has to be drawn somewhere.
As a Libertarian, why should gays not be able to get married? Who are we as individuals to tell tell other individuals who they can get married to and who they can't? We have no right to interfere with that. And who are we to make to where gay individuals cannot endure the same martial headaches like the rest of us? Who are we to take away their misery?
Also, Libertarians believe in a non interventionist foreign policy. Unlike the type of foreign policy we have had for years. And what has that gotten us? More wars, more American deaths, more debt, less liberty.
Many Libertarians, like myself, want a very reduced Federal government. A reduced federal Government to the size of its founding. If an issue is not under the power alotted to the Federal Government in the constitution, then it should be left to the states and the people as per Amendment 10 of the constitution.
But, like any party, there will be variations. But, it is the core belief that is important. For the Libertarian Party, that core belief is the constitution and the restrictive government powers in the constitution. Liberty over Security. freedom over Government influence.
That would mean no social security or medicare.

Gee, I wonder why libertarians never win......
lifes a beach

Lebanon, PA

#64 Nov 20, 2012
Kahoki wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow, OK. are you a woman?
You are completely missing the point there. IMO, if a woman does not want to get pregnant and does not go through with ensure she does not get pregnant, then personal responsibility then its ok. No need for personal responsibility, no biggie, go get an abortion if she ends up pregnant.
And the father here should not matter. The woman can say "NO" and take responsibility for herself to not get pregnant. No matter what, it is in the hands of the woman. Not the guy.
Here is a novel idea, if a woman does not want a child, cannot afford to have a child, then why would the woman even put themselves into that position and roll the dice? Why take the chance? To me, that shows a complete lack of personal responsibility. So who is the idiot then?
Ok, now mention rape. I know you will. Even though you said you read the conversation, I know you will mention it. And again I say go back and read the actual conversation. Since you wanted to interject your warped Planned Parenthood endorsed abortion birth control.
The father does matter- he is a party to pregnancy as well. If he doesn't want to risk impregnating a woman then he has equal responsibility in using contraception. I am not arguing actively taking a risk, I am arguing birth control CAN and DOES fail- despite the proper precautions. Risking something also is not the same to consenting to it. Are you then advocating celibacy in adult relationships? Why drive a car if it means you are risking an accident?

Abortion is expensive, painful and time consuming (and can be emotionally/physically draining as well). Obviously you have no real reference of how abortion can be a big deal or in the very least is not simply "no big deal".

Btw, I never mentioned Planned Parenthood- stupid assumption actually because many licensed private physicians also perform abortions within their private practice offices.
lifes a beach

Lebanon, PA

#65 Nov 20, 2012
Kahoki wrote:
<quoted text>

Here is a novel idea, if a woman does not want a child, cannot afford to have a child, then why would the woman even put themselves into that position and roll the dice? Why take the chance? To me, that shows a complete lack of personal responsibility. So who is the idiot then?
Btw, the courts disagree with you in the form of ordered child support. Furthermore, why drive and risk an accident? Same reason people engage in daily actions that may lead to consequences. The benefits usually outweigh the risks or possibility of consequences. Basic cost- benefit analysis, same as with many other human actions.

“Happiness comes through giving”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#66 Nov 20, 2012
Marchin wrote:
Those Libertarians will also begin to peel off votes from democrats, especially when Ron Paul begins his 'college speaking tours'.
It's interesting to note that the popular vote in this 2012 presidential election was
Obama 161+ million
Romney 158+ million
Electoral votes
Obama 303
Romney 206
compared to
2008 presidential election popular vote
Obama 166+ million
McCain 158+ million
Electoral votes
Obama 365
McCain 173
It's also interesting to note how the media and democrats, along with SOME republicans, continue to 'shame' past republican presidential candidates and their running mates and past republican presidents; compared to how the democrats laud their past candidates and presidents.
Wasserman Schultz (who is truly a gift to republicans-along with Nancy Pelosi) blasts republican minority candidates-females, blacks, latinos and then screams about republicans not being diverse.
One needs to take a look at the INDIVIDUAL STATES and the composition of each state's legislature and governorships
29 republican governors
20 democrat governors
1 independent governor
27 republican controlled state legislatures
19 democrat controlled state legislatures
3 split
1 non partisan
The 'big' media doesn't have the impact in individual states as it does in the national presidential election. Media can shape the opinions of americans with their constant blasting of negativity or just total refusal to cover stories.
2016 will not be a shoo-in for another democrat president.(Hillary will be 'too old' to garner enough votes -even with Obama campaigning for her and attempting jive up 'his' ground game)
and latinos will easily be peeled away from democrats as they have more in common with republican ideals.
Republicans have dug DOWN DEEP into states and that will bear fruit compared to democrat dominated(but admittedly big electoral) states.
There are warnings in FL and TX (big electoral votes!)-so republicans need to dig deep in those areas and find republican latino candidates to run for local political office, state political office-cuz there are mucho latinos whose ideals are in line with republicans rather than democrats.
Begin the work, prepare for 2016!
First of all, Obama's electoral vote was 332, not 303.
Second, see if you can get a refund on your crystal ball.

“Happiness comes through giving”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#67 Nov 20, 2012
ToManyLaws wrote:
<quoted text>
If the GOP would dump there racist bigoted uber religous BS and stop the warmongering ideals they would never lose an election.
If the GOP could do that, they would be Democrats.

“Happiness comes through giving”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#68 Nov 20, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
What if id not want to serve any black or Jewish people in my business establishment?
Then you would be allied with Ron Paul and his dull-witted progeny, Rand. They both admittedly would have voted against the Civil Rights Act, because they believe that businesses such as restaurants should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

“Happiness comes through giving”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#69 Nov 20, 2012
Tony wrote:
Wisconsin governor said divide and conquer and that is exactly what the Republican Party is doing to its self. How hilarious it is. hahahahahehehehe
We must do all we can to help them.

“Happiness comes through giving”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#70 Nov 20, 2012
pogue mahone wrote:
<quoted text>I know liberals stand for BIG government. Libertarians are not liberals. I think you may be a liberal bit confused.
It's interesting that in relatively recent history, Republican administrations have been consistently bigger spenders than Democratic ones. Not only are Republicans the true big spenders, they want to spend even more on tracking you into your bedroom.
Gary

Bellingham, WA

#71 Nov 20, 2012
They got a problem, alright. The American
people will not elect a radical libertarian
to the presidency (kill Social Security,
Medicare, Medicaid, the EPA, Planned Parent-
hood, all regulations on business, the Post
Office, the FDA, etc., etc., etc).

But, they do take votes away from their
blood brothers, the Republimorons and the
Democrats will just keep rolling along.

Long live the Libertarian Party!

'Course, they can always surrender their
citizenship and go where there are no rules,
no taxes, no responsibilities of citizenship
except dog eat dog. If there is such place.

Since: Jul 12

Columbia, MD

#72 Nov 20, 2012
lifes a beach wrote:
<quoted text>
Why should we, as the people, have to make up for wasteful spending of our government through further taxation? I'm calling BS...
I have no problem with that provided you have no problem with the government keeping excess funds saved through efficiencies or just not spent. Let the government workers keep it and use it as a bonus. We can undo the bush tax cuts. After all, the reason for that was to return the money to the taxpayers. Bad idea returning it to the taxpayer wasn't it?

Since: Jul 12

Columbia, MD

#73 Nov 20, 2012
Kahoki wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, they are in the classic sense of the word. Not to today's warped meanings of words.
Liberalism (from the Latin liberalis)is a political philosophy or worldview founded on the ideas of liberty and equality.[2] Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas such as free and fair elections, civil rights, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free trade, and a right to life, liberty, and property.
However, the progressive movement from the early 20th century skewed the meaning of the word.
Classical liberalism could also be considered constitutional conservatism. Meaning the founding documents put freedom, liberty, self governence ahead.
During the time of the founding, conservatism was with the people who wanted to stay under the thumb of England.
Another perfect example of this is the commerce clause of the constitution where it states to regulate. Under the 18th century meaning of the word, it is to keep the system regular. Under the founding it was there to ensure individual state protectionism did not take place.
Meaning the state of New York could not tell the state of Vermont, "well, we don't like you people so we will not trade with you.".
Of course over the years and thanks to this progressive global ideal, the meaning of the word was basically changed from keeping the system regular (like fiber to the body) to tax and control.
I think you shape your view of things to support your distorted thoughts.

First, self-governance meant that the people of the United States would govern themselves, not as individuals but withing the governmental systems (federal, state, county, city, etc...) set up for them.

Second, taxation under the commerce clause taxation under the form of tariff's was right there from the start. Further, they were targeted at the well off who could afford "fine" imported goods while leaving those less well-off untaxed using inferior products at the time.

Since: Jul 12

Columbia, MD

#74 Nov 20, 2012
Kahoki wrote:
<quoted text>
The US Constitution is not applied for the world. Well, should not be. Citizenry of other nations need to adopt their own ideals and not have the US force theirs on them. But it should matter. An immigrant comes here and gets pregnant. If that immigrant is not a legal citizen, how could that child be considered an American with the rights of the constitution? I do not see how it could. Especially if the mother comes here illegally.
<quoted text>
Yes. Like many American's, I first got laid when I was 14. My G/F at the time and I knew that if we were going to do anything, we would be safe about it and responsible about it to ensure that no accidents were done. Personal responsibility.
Now this could be argued that it is the parents that need to instill this morality into their children and awareness into their children. This is usually where the break downs happen.
<quoted text>
I can only mention what I have seen and experienced. I have not tried to adopt a child, so into the nitty gritty details, someone else would have to introduce their views. I do know of at least 2 different people that went to China to adopt their little ones due to the long waiting lists here in the US. And I see that as an issue that needs to be addressed.
If she gives birth here then the child is considered a citizen of the US. You are conferring personhood on the child so that is when citizenship would be established.
lifes a beach

Lebanon, PA

#75 Nov 20, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no problem with that provided you have no problem with the government keeping excess funds saved through efficiencies or just not spent. Let the government workers keep it and use it as a bonus. We can undo the bush tax cuts. After all, the reason for that was to return the money to the taxpayers. Bad idea returning it to the taxpayer wasn't it?
No thanks- many of the government workers get paid enough and have much better benefits than most (especially the desk jockeys and bureaucrats- who really don't provide much of a valuable service or product but simply add layering of red tape). I'd rather it stay with the individuals who made their money through the private sector and it wasn't necessarily a bad idea- if you think individuals and families making $200,000/$250,00 a year are the majority of whom are to blame for this economic crisis than you simply have not been paying close enough attention.
WTF

Yacolt, WA

#76 Nov 20, 2012
Cary L Nickel wrote:
The only reason the Republican Party has a "libertarian" problem is because establishment Republicans have for too long strayed from libertarian ideals.
Rather tha grudgingly accepting libertarian ideals, Republicans need to fully and wholeheartedly embrace them.
Problem solved.
Uh, Cary, exactly when was it that this country have a
libertarian President? Republicans aren't libertarians.
Get it? Swallow it and get a grip, Cary. There is a
Libertarian Party, Cary. Join it. Support it. Work for
it. Give your money and your life to it. But don't harbor
some goofy belief that Republicans were really Libertarians.
If you hold on to such pseudo intellectual crap people will
only wonder where you scored your last stash of ......
Yeah, I've never talked to a Libertarian who, after all is
said and done, did not believe and yearn for marijuana to be legal.
I'm OK with that, but stay off the heavy stuff. It only makes you
look and sound stupid.
Ex-GOP Con

San Jose, CA

#77 Nov 20, 2012
Both major parties are liberal. The Dems fight for the poor and the middle class. And the GOP TEA RINOs fight for the rich wealthy one percent.

The only true conservative party left is the Libertarian Party.
Marchin

United States

#78 Nov 20, 2012
get rid of the abortion issue and gay rights issue.

Tired of that crap being tossed out and sucked up by republicans and libertarians as 'discussion' and voting issues
Gary

Bellingham, WA

#79 Nov 20, 2012
Ex-GOP Con wrote:
Both major parties are liberal. The Dems fight for the poor and the middle class. And the GOP TEA RINOs fight for the rich wealthy one percent.
The only true conservative party left is the Libertarian Party.
Who do the libertarians fight for?
Ex-GOP Con

San Jose, CA

#80 Nov 20, 2012
Gary wrote:
<quoted text>
Who do the libertarians fight for?
Smaller government.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

US Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Bernie Sanders says he'll vote for Hillary Clinton 2 min Tom Clancey 57
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 3 min RoxLo 1,420,768
News Trump calls on GOP to improve African-American ... 3 min Ronald 411
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 3 min Blitzking 205,481
News Trump backer tweets cartoon of Clinton in black... 4 min gwww 53
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 4 min Crow 240,120
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 4 min Dr Guru 222,820
News Who is the real 'racist,' Clinton or Trump? Thi... 27 min El Camino 164
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 1 hr Right Wing Wacko 393,425
More from around the web