I'm tempted to say, "No Libertarians need comment here." After all, this is my private blog, and that is my basic right. Just ask the moron Rand Paul. But, you see, I welcome disagreement. I want a spirited discussion.
So that would be a bit of a problem.
The other thing I want is for people to open their eyes to the ignorance and hatred of teabaggers and their glibertarian enablers.
I'm delighted that Rand Paul won the Repugnicant primary in Kentucky, and then went on to display his absurd notions of freedom on national TV, in front of god and all those people. Now, it's up to the good citizens of that great State to make a decision about his particular brand of idiocy. I hope that their decision will be informed by the realization that glibertarianism - and, in fact, virtually all of modern American right-wingery, from William F. Buckley on - is based on an ideal that places the freedoms and rights of corporations over those of actual living, breathing human beings.
The distressing thing is that's it's actually necessary to point this out to anybody.
At least the Jr. Dr. Paul, who believes that "A free society will abide unofficial, private discrimination – even when that means allowing hate-filled groups to exclude people based on the color of their skin."*, promises not to support any attempt to overturn the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Not that any such attempt could ever exist outside of his delusion.
We are so screwed.
* Honest to god, I am not making this up.
H/T to P6
For a more measured and deeply thought through, but no less negative, response, see A.L.
Update: It just keeps getting better. Rand, now like a foul orc from Mordor, apparently afraid of Sunlight, but still hiding behind the "media is out to get me" canard, has cancelled his upcoming appearance on Press the Meet. Follow the link and read the comments. They made my day. Yet another H/T to P6.
.
![[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]](http://www.kitconet.com/charts/metals/gold/tny_au_xx_usoz_4.gif)
Sunday December 22, 2024 Alan Massengill
14 hours ago
4 comments:
My problem with the Glibertarians is that they generally aren't willing to make an honest argument. Instead, every time you introduce a counterexample to one of their cherished notions like "socialism is tyranny" ("But what about Norway?" I ask, Norway measuring at the top in pretty much every kind of freedoms), they engage in much Handwavium to purport that Norway doesn't exist and that what you were really talking about was Stalin's Soviet Union. As if a socialist democracy was the same thing as a Communist tyranny!
So anyhow, how can you conduct spirited intellectual discussion with people who are congenitally dishonest? You can't, really. You can just point out that they're being dishonest when they handwave the existence of entire nations and indeed the entirety of Western Europe away, and that's pretty much it.
As for Rand Paul, props to him for at least being uncomfortable about being honest about his true beliefs. That, alas, cannot be said of many Libertarian types, who either outright lie about their beliefs or proudly flaunt them as being somehow not morally and ethically abhorrent.
- Badtux the Honesty Penguin
Tux -
My only disagreement with you is that in my view Paul was uncomfortable about being asked tough questions and being made to squirm. I think he's trying to look politically correct while maintaining his own personal comfort with his deluded beliefs. That's why he and dad are playing blame the messenger.
At any rate, he's a twerp.
To your earlier point, when I take on Glibs, their usual response is an attempt to derail the conversation, either by obfuscating, bogging down in irrelevant minutia, or changing the subject. They are really good at those things. Getting a substantive discussion with them is like trying to pin jello to the wall.
Part of why WASF,
JzB
Hey Jzb
Libertarians and Randians do suck, but do they suck more than the average corporate Dinkocrat or Repug does? That's the issue--contextualize, JzB. I'm for trad. Demo values--JFKism. Not sure the BO team, supported by G-sachs executives and Clintonites is--.
Ron P. however economically f-ed up did protest the Bushco war...more than say Hillaryites could say (or BO for that matter--who has actually expanded the DoD budget beyond that of Bush) For that matter, Paul (as in Rand, not Ron) was voted in by a majority (tho its just a primary--he'll probably lose to the Demo good ol boy). So the problem's at least partially systemic, as they say.
Alex C. of Counterpunch wrote a somewhat interesting essay on Rand (as in Ayn) recent victory which I linked to on my blog.
J. "what is Truth anyway?"
J -
Hay, man - welcome back. Thanks for dropping in.
As to who's the suckiest - wow, that's tough. They suck in so many different ways, so that makes head to head comparisons rather difficult.
As for Paul the greater and the misbegotten wars - I think of that along the lines of blind pigs and acorns. Hillary and B Hoover Obama are corporate tit-suckers, fer sure (Democrat is the new Republican) but they're smart and connected to reality in some sort of way. The Pauls are delusional idiots.
But yes, indeedie, there are systemic problems.
I hope Paul the lesser loses the general election. Just thinking about him makes me shudder.
Truth - I think that is a statement of something that has a close correspondence to objective reality.
Cheers!
JzB
Post a Comment