RON PAUL

BOB BARR!

JOHN RATZENBERGER!

PETER BAGGE

Is this an attempt at humor?

JOHN PAUL

CAPS LOCK

WAYNE ALLYN ROOT

STEVE BEUERLEIN

BOB SAGET

Lionel Mandrake: Is this an attempt at humor?

I'm hoping it's a protest against all the lame Reason articles that keep getting posted.

I wonder if Boortz is a mod.

Klingon Penis: Lionel Mandrake: Is this an attempt at humor?

I'm hoping it's a protest against all the lame Reason articles that keep getting posted.

I wonder if Boortz is a mod.

I was actually directing the comment at the article, not the comments here, which are shaping up to be pretty funny.

Reason has some good shiat...then they have this shiat...

* Every December 25, the illegal immigrant known as Santa Claus crosses the border into the United States without a passport. He carries concealed contraband, which he sneaks into the country in order to avoid inspection by the U.S. Customs Service. And just what's in all those brightly colored packages tied up with ribbons, anyway? The Drug Czar and Homeland Security want to know.

He obviously has clearance, if NORAD is tracking him and not scrambling fighters. Obviously, Santa Claus is a United States operative.

* Look at how this international fugitive gets around: Santa flies in a custom-built sleigh that hasn't been approved by the FAA. He never files a flight plan. He has no pilot's license. In the dark of night, he rides the skies with just a tiny bioluminescent red light to guide him -- a clear violation of traffic safety regulations.

Okay - watch that "fugitive" shiat, asshat. He's an operative. His sleigh is an experimental craft making great strides every year in deer-fart propulsion. Let's see your insignificant party come up with THAT kind of green technology. The fact that he follows FAA regs by having a flashing red signal light does not mean he doesn't have other running lights on the sleigh. Speaking of which, they're not necessarily required on experimental craft anyway.

* Pulling Santa's sleigh: Eight tiny reindeer, a federally protected species being put to hard labor. None of these reindeer have their required shots, and Santa's never bothered to get these genetically- engineered animals registered and licensed. It's no wonder: He keeps them penned outside his workplace in a clear violation of zoning laws.

How the fark do you know what shots and inspections they've had, or what licensing has been done? And I'm pretty sure that, as the ruling authority over "Santa's Workshop" (an independent and sovereign state, like the Vatican), he can keep them wherever he likes. And even so - everyone knows from the many documentaries (Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer, The Santa Clause, etc.), we know they have a fine stable with many elf attendants.

* But Crooked Claus the Conniving Capitalist harms more than just animals -- he's hurting hard-working American laborers, too. Isn't Santa's Workshop really Santa's Sweatshop, where his non-union employees don't make minimum wage and get no holiday pay? Add the fact that OSHA has never inspected the place, and you have a Third-World elf-exploitation operation that only Kathy Lee Gifford could love.

Again - I'd like to see proof of this. As far as I know, since Regan fired the elves and then they were re-hired, things have been peaceful on the labor front. The North Pole is a right-to-work state anyway.

* No wonder Santa is able to maintain his monopoly over the toy distribution industry: He's cornered the Christmas gift market. Santa dares to give away his products for free in a sinister attempt to crush all competition -- just like Microsoft's Internet Explorer. Antitrust Lawsuit Memo to the feds: Is Santa Claus the Bill Gates of Christmas?

Ummmm... have you been to a farking wal-mart lately? Santa has no monopoly, you stupid git. The fact that is, his is a phlanthropic organization, not a business.

Kreist. I don't celebrate this holiday, but come on - let the kids believe there's someone out there, even if fictional, who gives without expectation of recompense, as a reward for good behavior. It's farking harmless, you tightasses.

Benevolent Misanthrope

The idea of Santa breaking laws does have some comic potential, but the article failed miserably. I wouldn't have thought it possible, but you were even less entertaining than the article.

Way to go, Libertarian Party. This sort of thing is just what you need to change the perception that you're a bunch of wackos.

Benevolent Misanthrope: Again - I'd like to see proof of this. As far as I know, since Regan fired the elves and then they were re-hired, things have been peaceful on the labor front. The North Pole is a right-to-work state anyway.

The girl from the Exorcist?? That biatch!

shivashakti: Benevolent Misanthrope: Again - I'd like to see proof of this. As far as I know, since Regan fired the elves and then they were re-hired, things have been peaceful on the labor front. The North Pole is a right-to-work state anyway.

The girl from the Exorcist?? That biatch!

Yep, that's her.

You know what's the scariest part? I can imagine someone writing this up and being serious about it.

GAT_00: You know what's the scariest part? I can imagine someone writing this up and being serious about it.

They're libertarians, for them, everything is serious business. EVERYTHING.

Get over it, you lost so suck it!

Santa Clause is a capitalist?

Dear Libertarians,

You are retarded.

Sincerely,
thefais

So the Libertarian Party still believes in Santa Claus? Can't say I'm surprised.

WE NEED PICTURES OF SERIOUS CAT, STAT!!

/CAPS!

EdgeRunner: So the Libertarian Party still believes in Santa Claus? Can't say I'm surprised.

They believe a lot of crazy things.

I don't get this attempt at humor at all as everything they cite is not what Libertarians believe. That Santa is doing all that he does without first getting government approval should be a Libertarian wet dream. Libertarians believe that every capitalist will become Santa if only the big bad government would get out of the way.

Santa Claus is a lie, just like the 9/11 report.
The Libertarian Party should know that.

liberalish: They believe a lot of crazy things.

No kidding! Everyone knows Obama Claus is the one who'll be handing out gifts and money with no concern of how to pay for it all!

/we've pretty much covered the "Libertarians be teh crazee!" angle. Time to dynamite the tracks and derail the thread!

Befuddled: I don't get this attempt at humor at all as everything they cite is not what Libertarians believe. That Santa is doing all that he does without first getting government approval should be a Libertarian wet dream. Libertarians believe that every capitalist will become Santa if only the big bad government would get out of the way.

The article is taking potshots at the government, not Santa Claus.

TSE: Befuddled: I don't get this attempt at humor at all as everything they cite is not what Libertarians believe. That Santa is doing all that he does without first getting government approval should be a Libertarian wet dream. Libertarians believe that every capitalist will become Santa if only the big bad government would get out of the way.

The article is taking potshots at the government, not Santa Claus.

Jokes get better when you explain them.

So, as far as I understand it, the whole basic guiding principle of libertarianism is "You have the right to do anything you want, provided it does not infringe upon the rights of others". With regards to government, they generally want less government control over businesses and people, greater civil and social liberties, less taxes, and less war.

What is so crazy about this? I really don't understand why everyone calls them insane. Even if you believe that there is a legitimate need for government maintentence in social rights, war, and the economy, I think their calls for caution,oversight and consistency with respect to all government programs should be at least heeded, if not lauded.

Seriously, whats the complaint? Without one, I just hear people calling them "NUTBALLS" and, frankly, it just makes those people look insecure to me if I don't hear any justifications for the name-calling.

tallguywithglasseson: Way to go, Libertarian Party. This sort of thing is just what you need to change the perception that you're a bunch of wackos.

Captain Obvious is going to go out on a limb and say the Libertarian Party is just poking fun here.

Lighten up.

I dare say: even NeoCons are funnier. "The Half Hour News Hour" is The Aristocrats by comparison.

Deftoons: Captain Obvious is going to go out on a limb and say the Libertarian Party is just poking fun here.

Lighten up.

Stupid libertarians... they're all civil liberties this and stop stealing from me that... what a bunch of buffoons.

At least they have a sense of humor

And to think, I used to think the Libertarian party was batshiat crazy.

Boy did they show me

ron paul

Steve132: Seriously, whats the complaint?

The way I see it, the Libertarians are saying that everything in life should be 'Caveat Emptor', that it is up to me to figure out when and where to spend my money. That's fine for some things but fails miserably on many very important things, like food, medicine, energy, and investments (Madoff), things that I can't individually do the enough to ensure that I am not being ripped off or harmed. It makes more sense to do the proper oversight collectively so that everyone has some assurance that what is being offered is what it claims.

If government isn't able to have the power of oversight, watching to make sure that people or corporations aren't harming others, then how is government supposed to punish those who do harm others? Without evidence, there can't be any criminal case.

Sym_pathetic: Jokes get better when you explain them.

LMAO

Deftoons: tallguywithglasseson: Way to go, Libertarian Party. This sort of thing is just what you need to change the perception that you're a bunch of wackos.

Captain Obvious is going to go out on a limb and say the Libertarian Party is just poking fun here.

I know what they're trying to do. My point stands.

Sym_pathetic:

Jokes get better when you explain them.

if he's held to the same standards as a typical American. was the giveaway for me.

Steve132: So, as far as I understand it, the whole basic guiding principle of libertarianism is "You have the right to do anything you want, provided it does not infringe upon the rights of others". With regards to government, they generally want less government control over businesses and people, greater civil and social liberties, less taxes, and less war.

What is so crazy about this? I really don't understand why everyone calls them insane. Even if you believe that there is a legitimate need for government maintentence in social rights, war, and the economy, I think their calls for caution,oversight and consistency with respect to all government programs should be at least heeded, if not lauded.

Seriously, whats the complaint? Without one, I just hear people calling them "NUTBALLS" and, frankly, it just makes those people look insecure to me if I don't hear any justifications for the name-calling.

Steve132: So, as far as I understand it, the whole basic guiding principle of libertarianism is "You have the right to do anything you want, provided it does not infringe upon the rights of others". With regards to government, they generally want less government control over businesses and people, greater civil and social liberties, less taxes, and less war.

What is so crazy about this? I really don't understand why everyone calls them insane. Even if you believe that there is a legitimate need for government maintentence in social rights, war, and the economy, I think their calls for caution,oversight and consistency with respect to all government programs should be at least heeded, if not lauded.

Seriously, whats the complaint? Without one, I just hear people calling them "NUTBALLS" and, frankly, it just makes those people look insecure to me if I don't hear any justifications for the name-calling.

Have you ever had a discussion with the average self-labeled "Libertarian?" While most people have a libertarian streak in them, the people who join the party are almost impossible to have a conversation with on any subject. They have their doctrine and they stick to it no matter what.

Do you like the FDA? Public Education? Public Roads? Hospitals? Fire Departments? Police? Most Libertarians don't. And those that do are shouted down by the others.

You can't have a nuanced decision with a lot of these guys.

You: "I think maybe we should regulate the banks/mortgage industry so this doesn't happen again."
Them: "No No regulation at all! Every problem is the government's fault!"
You: "Surely some regulation to set the ground rules is worth considering."
Them: "NO NO NO THE FEDERAL BANKS NOT ON GOLD STANDARD RON PAUL WHARRRGARBL!!!111"

There's a reason why the Libertarians are called the "Marxists of the right." The party is filled with blind one-answer-to-every-question fanatics, and frankly it's kinda creepy -- scaring plenty of folks away, even if they agree with some libertarian principles.

Throw in the fact that a whole bunch of them are huge hypocrites on the abortion issue (Ron Paul, Bob Barr come to mind,) coming down on the side of government regulation, AND the movement's de facto leader is a racist nutjob and even bigger hypocrite for not opposing Bush with any meaningful legislation during his time in congress, and you start to see why they are laughed at.

Yes, the core ideas are good. It's the people (who when not spamming Digg are writing shiatty articles like this on "Reason" Magazine) that get them labeled "nutjobs."

Because they are.

Jensaarai: Because they are.

All Democrats are dumb.

Steve132: So, as far as I understand it, the whole basic guiding principle of libertarianism is "You have the right to do anything you want, provided it does not infringe upon the rights of others". With regards to government, they generally want less government control over businesses and people, greater civil and social liberties, less taxes, and less war.

What is so crazy about this? I really don't understand why everyone calls them insane. Even if you believe that there is a legitimate need for government maintentence in social rights, war, and the economy, I think their calls for caution,oversight and consistency with respect to all government programs should be at least heeded, if not lauded.

Seriously, whats the complaint? Without one, I just hear people calling them "NUTBALLS" and, frankly, it just makes those people look insecure to me if I don't hear any justifications for the name-calling.

So the basic problem is thus. Libertarians have some principles that conservatives can appreciate, they have some principles that liberals can appreciate, but the one principle that both liberals and conservatives can appreciate is that libertarians are assholes.

More specifically, the problem is that the whole "provided it does not infringe upon the rights of others" thing is ridiculously fuzzy. Should we have civil rights laws? All libertarians favor equality at the level of government, but what about private property. Why should the government infringe my right to use my property as I see fit by forcing me to rent my apartment to some nig---? His rights aren't realistically infringed because he is legally entitled to rent from someone else. Or how about abortion? The libertarian argument could cut either way. From one perspective, I'm not infringing anyone's rights but my own when I have an abortion, but from another perspective I'm critically infringing the rights of a fetus. What about environmentalism? One libertarian argument is that if you own land with a river running through it, you have the right to dump whatever you feel like into it - it's your land after all. Another libertarian argument is that you're infringing all the rights of the downstream users of that river. But that's a slippery slope; if the government can force you to be accountable for what some downstream users want to do, there's no real reason why you shouldn't be accountable for what all downstream users want.

That's just it. Anything and everything can be libertarian. Anything and everything can be anti-libertarian. Libertarians don't even agree on what is and is not libertarian. The case isn't helped by the fact that assholes of every color have co-opted the libertarian voice to justify objectively bad things. Bigamists and bigots, pedophiles and corporate raiders. All of them share the common political belief of keeping the government out of their business. I don't claim that all libertarians believe that, but I can safely say that these people are drawn to libertarianism as a means of supporting their beliefs.

Benevolent Misanthrope: shivashakti: Benevolent Misanthrope: Again - I'd like to see proof of this. As far as I know, since Regan fired the elves and then they were re-hired, things have been peaceful on the labor front. The North Pole is a right-to-work state anyway.

The girl from the Exorcist?? That biatch!

Yep, that's her.


Not a biatch. Feisty and hardworking, but not a biatch.

sarcastrophe: Jensaarai: Because they are.

All Democrats are dumb.

0/10

sarcastrophe: Jensaarai: Because they are.

All Democrats are dumb.

Isn't that a side issue?

sarcastrophe: Stupid libertarians...

The problem doesn't appear to be with libertarians, but rather with Libertarians.

Nuuu: Libertarians don't even agree on what is and is not libertarian.

No. It's a matter of degrees... just like any other political party. The ultra-liberals are not indicative of the Democrat's platform. Unfortunately, the Libertarian Party kicked out all of the moderates. It's no different than Democrats arguing about what is "liberal" enough or Republicans arguing about what is "conservative" enough. For some reason, the anarchists won the internal debate and the LP has been relegated to pointlessness ever since.

That is a fair criticism to make, sure. But don't think that such debates don't occur in other mainstream political parties as well.