violentsalvation: Wow, they actually have a heartfelt interest in the game and it wasn't a ridiculous corporate production.

"They all agreed, so they totally aren't sheep."

cman: It went green!

As they say, all press is good press for smaller groups

I will let NAMBLA know.

dugitman: He's not one of those overbearing Libs that argue for the sake of arguing.

They're called debates. And I'd be afraid of a party that doesn't have any.

Gee, I can't imagine why RONPAUL doesn't switch his party affiliation from republican to libertarian.

Isn't it about time these cranks should just go back to writing mean spirited letters to the local newspaper about issues they have no understanding of?

People focused on maximizing their personal liberty above all other considerations can't get along?

--Would you prefer staged media events?

Great_Milenko: Gee, I can't imagine why RONPAUL doesn't switch his party affiliation from republican to libertarian.

Isn't it about time these cranks should just go back to writing mean spirited letters to the local newspaper about issues they have no understanding of?

Because he's a dyed in the wool Republican who only votes against his party in situations where his vote won't matter, keeping his "lone voice of opposition cred." Oh, and he also spews enough bullshiat about wanting to legalize weed to fleece book sales out of the Alex Jones crowd and the people who, unlike the rest of the world, still take Atlas Shrugged seriously.

meehaw: Trying to have a cohesive Libertarian Party seems like trying to get Atheists to start their own religion...it's an empty set. The Libertarian friends that I talk with frequently detest government, and therefore getting them together to agree on bureaucracy seems designed to elicit screams of "Get off my lawn!" and just make them generally ornery, and not much else.

I used to respect the libertarian philosophy as being cohesive and consistent, but now I find it terribly unnuanced and prone to severely reductionist thinking, that tends to cut off the nose despite the face. Again, those friends of mine who are Libertarian cannot but get angry when politics is the subject, and that's the only subject that they want to broach. So that leads me to believe that they just like being angry.

//Atheist.
///Liberal



Reminds me of Penn Jillette's "Big Think" videos on YouTube. In one of them he implicitly suggests he'd rather be objectively correct than cooperate on common goals with people who are not -- this attitude is rampant among libertarians. And they some how see this as a virtue, rather than a glaring weakness.

heinrich66: --Would you prefer staged media events?

These sound to be infinitely more entertaining.

Libertarians - flakier than Kellogg.

DarnoKonrad: Reminds me of Penn Jillette's "Big Think" videos on YouTube. In one of them he implicitly suggests he'd rather be objectively correct than cooperate on common goals with people who are not -- this attitude is rampant among libertarians. And they some how see this as a virtue, rather than a glaring weakness.

Is "objectively" the correct adverb you intended to use? Subjectively would make more sense. Otherwise it seems you are putting forward the notion of standing by one's principles is a weakness.

meehaw: cut off the nose despite the face.

fyi: it's "to spite the face" not "despite the face." I offer you this because I remember learning some time ago (when I was about 18) that "all intensive purposes" is wrong and it's supposed to be "all intents and purposes." i wish someone had told me I was wrong, so there you go, friend.

Was Ron Paul there?

starsrift: DarnoKonrad: Reminds me of Penn Jillette's "Big Think" videos on YouTube. In one of them he implicitly suggests he'd rather be objectively correct than cooperate on common goals with people who are not -- this attitude is rampant among libertarians. And they some how see this as a virtue, rather than a glaring weakness.

Is "objectively" the correct adverb you intended to use? Subjectively would make more sense. Otherwise it seems you are putting forward the notion of standing by one's principles is a weakness.

every strength is a weakness, dude. Also, rather than "objectively" here, I think you might substitute "internally valid" or "of sound internal logic" -- as in, a = b, b = c, there fore a = c sort of thing.

starsrift: DarnoKonrad: Reminds me of Penn Jillette's "Big Think" videos on YouTube. In one of them he implicitly suggests he'd rather be objectively correct than cooperate on common goals with people who are not -- this attitude is rampant among libertarians. And they some how see this as a virtue, rather than a glaring weakness.

Is "objectively" the correct adverb you intended to use? Subjectively would make more sense. Otherwise it seems you are putting forward the notion of standing by one's principles is a weakness.


"Common goals" is the operative context here. Whether you believe in evolution or not is not going to get in the way of me agreeing on unemployment insurance. It would for Mr. Jillette. Because you're wrong. See what I'm saying?

DarnoKonrad: "Common goals" is the operative context here. Whether you believe in evolution or not is not going to get in the way of me agreeing on unemployment insurance. It would for Mr. Jillette. Because you're wrong. See what I'm saying?

Ah, okay. Thanks.

Rann Xerox: Was Ron Paul there?

If only, and I'm just thinking out loud here, but if there was some sort of...I don't know...let's say an "article" that you could take a look at to discern the whos and whats and wheres and whens of an event. Some sort of historical record of what had occurred that you could glean before posting about said event. If only...

meehaw: CapnBlues: meehaw: cut off the nose despite the face.

fyi: it's "to spite the face" not "despite the face." I offer you this because I remember learning some time ago (when I was about 18) that "all intensive purposes" is wrong and it's supposed to be "all intents and purposes." i wish someone had told me I was wrong, so there you go, friend.

Oh gawd. I'm super embarrassed. I know this, and I'm appalled I didn't catch it. I blame it on last night's shenanigans. Thank you, though, for so graciously pointing out my error.

/serious, not sarchastic.

no worries, buckaroo. :) i'm just glad you took it well. and alcohol is and always will be a valid excuse for difficulties in verbal communication.

I recommended the Libertarians to my brother, who is too sensible to vote for Romney and too racist to vote for Obama. I originally suggested Mike the Headless Chicken, but this guy is much better since my brother has a deep and abiding love of marijuana (he's 58). The way I see the current race is like this:

Libertarians: want to let the country fall apart and the world go to hell, on principle
repubs: want to screw over women, minorities and the poor and make the world safe for billionaires, on principle
Democrats: willing to sacrifice their principles to get things done, and then don't accomplish anything

If Ron Paul somehow wins the election, better melt down all your wife's jewelry because we'll be back on the gold standard in no time. If you've invested heavily in buggy whip manufacturers, you're about to make it big.

Boxcutta: Rann Xerox: Was Ron Paul there?

If only, and I'm just thinking out loud here, but if there was some sort of...I don't know...let's say an "article" that you could take a look at to discern the whos and whats and wheres and whens of an event. Some sort of historical record of what had occurred that you could glean before posting about said event. If only...

Yeah, but that would require giving that hypothetical "article" website hits. If it's located on a website with a name like "Breitbart" or "WND" or "Reason", that might not be something you want to support.

DarnoKonrad: People focused on maximizing their personal liberty above all other considerations can't get along?

Some of these are basically the same thing, but, relevant:

cman: FreetardoRivera: cman: It went green!

As they say, all press is good press for smaller groups

I will let NAMBLA know.

...and there goes my statement right down the shiatter. D:

A very small shiatter.

Good.

Libertarian=Republican hiding under another name.

A conservative is a liberal who's been mugged.
A liberal is a conservative who's been arrested.
A libertarian is either who's been drafted.

Wyalt Derp: Libertarians apparently know exactly what they don't want, but have no clue what they do want.

cash. lots and lots of it. and you'd better not require them to follow any rules of the game.

Ron Paul supporter Daniel Williams has launched a Kickstarter campaign to fund a video game called Ron Paul: Road to REVOLution. What do you think?



"What better libertarian tribute could there be than forcing players into a world of rules they didn't create to achieve a goal they never chose?"
Colleen Abrams
Gas Inspector

This is the kind of thing that makes me love and despair for the LP.

The fact they have NOTA on the ballot is great. It gives them a way to reject everyone and puts a check on the establishment candidates.

At the same time, they are so full of people that are so disassociated from human reality they think everyone thinks like a computer and they go into a rage when the world fails to meet their standards.

THey nominated two realistic, rational candidates, each of them having real-world political accomplishments. This is a huge change over most nominations.

Then immediately they devolve into wrangling over silliness.

I have not been to an LP convention since..., I think Badnarik was nominated. Was that Indianapolis?

I was thinking of trying to go this year, but I figured Johnson had enough support, and if he failed to get to nomination the LP would be too far gone for my efforts as one of over a thousand delegates to help.

Granted, being such a small party is part of the problem. There are just as many nuts, if not more, in the R and D parties, but being small allows the nuts more impact in the LP than they get in the R and D parties. The nuts tend to fade into the background noise in the R and D parties.

This is one of the main things every small party faces, when trying to grow. It is true for the LP, the Green Party, and was also true for the Reform Party. The laws that reserve special privileges for the R and D parties are the biggest hurdle, but the self-injury the flakes cause is also keeping them all back.


Still planning on voting Johnson/Gray this year, and will sign the ballot petition to get them on. Which is a good thing. Last time around, evn though I still voted LP, I also changed my reg to Republican just so I could vote Ron Paul in the R primary, and changed to LP after that.

This time I have real rational candidates in the LP. And I hope they put some hurt on both Romney and Obama. It will be interesting to see how badly the media treat the LP, GP and others this time around.

Lackofname: A conservative is a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is a conservative who's been arrested.

I've been mugged several times, I've never been arrested, and I'm definitely a liberal.

cman: Linux_Yes: Good.

Libertarian=Republican hiding under another name.

Thats like someone saying Democrat=Communist hiding under another name

Whenever I talk to LP members I get the feeling that they're saying that the LP is the other Republican Party. You'd have to go to the alliance for the libertarian left to hear about old dems who got sick of their party line.

Fluorescent Testicle: Lackofname: A conservative is a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is a conservative who's been arrested.

I've been mugged several times, I've never been arrested, and I'm definitely a liberal.

Maybe if both testicles fluoresced you could see the light.