If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Guardian)   Thanks to Gary Johnson and the potheads, Colorado could get all nadered-up next Tuesday   (guardian.co.uk) divider line 230
    More: Spiffy, Colorado, potheads  
•       •       •

3756 clicks; posted to Politics » on 03 Nov 2012 at 10:59 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



230 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-03 08:53:16 AM  
i1121.photobucket.com

"Third Party? Nonsense. You already have a choice."
 
2012-11-03 09:05:15 AM  
I don't think that it's going to matter. Romney's chances of taking enough states to get to 270 are very, very low.
 
2012-11-03 09:39:12 AM  
Inb4 Libertarian bashers muck up this thread with their confusion of Libertarianism and Conservatism
 
2012-11-03 10:22:42 AM  
You can't have Libertarianism without the 'Lib'. Obama's support in this state is about to be flipped upside down and I'd like to take a minute to tell you why. In Hawaii where he spent many a day, he could often be found advocating for the hip and cool. Then he gets in a heated argument one day and his Mom sends him overseas to a radical ISLAMISIST school in Indonesia. Drinking fresh-squeezed durian out of a wooden cup he starting having grandiose notions about whether the common people lived like this and whether it would be alright for all manner of social strata to live this way. Now Gary comes up with some fresh ideas and its no dice for Obama. All libs have to do is look in the mirror...

Now on election night around 7 or 8 Obama and Johnson will look around Colorado to see what finally happened there - and Romney will be sitting in the oval office as the prince of bel air!
 
2012-11-03 10:34:40 AM  
"You know you're a libertarian when you hate speed limits," he said, earning cheers.


The essence of the libertarian argument: I don't give a crap if it might endanger other people, you can't stop me doing what I want.
 
2012-11-03 10:39:53 AM  

Amos Quito: [i1121.photobucket.com image 631x615]

"Third Party? Nonsense. You already have a choice."


i1121.photobucket.com

Twas brillig.
 
2012-11-03 10:41:40 AM  

DammitIForgotMyLogin: The essence of the libertarian argument: I don't give a crap if it might endanger other people, you can't stop me doing what I want.


And governments would never keep speed limits artificially low as a revenue generator.
 
2012-11-03 10:46:23 AM  

DammitIForgotMyLogin: The essence of the libertarian argument: I don't give a crap if it might endanger other people, you can't stop me doing what I want.


You know how I know that you know jack farking shiat about Libertarianism?
 
2012-11-03 10:50:00 AM  

DammitIForgotMyLogin: The essence of the libertarian argument: I don't give a crap if it might endanger other people, you can't stop me doing what I want.


There's a bit more than that. A freedom to oppress, as long as you can frame it in the name of business. Openly choosing not to help people because they should help themselves, something that applies to natural disasters as well. No real Libertarian would have an agency like FEMA, or would have government for a second help coordinate personal relief efforts. Infrastructure sure, but feeding people? Not a Libertarian's job.
 
2012-11-03 11:05:38 AM  
The best example that was explained to me about libitarians and their ideas is an airport.

You have an airport with all your rights flying around (planes) and the air traffic control (government) gets to decide where those planes can go to and when. This is to avoid planes from running into each other or some planes getting special treatment.

Libitarians would want to remove the air traffic controller for ultimate freedom, but fail to realize in by doing do, all the planes would eventually start running in to each other.
 
2012-11-03 11:06:04 AM  
If it weren't for the serious damage it would cause, it'd almost be worth giving them a Libertarian president, just to demonstrate how bad things can get without a central government. Well, assuming that a Libertarian president could actually get anything done, which would be insanely unlikely.
 
2012-11-03 11:06:12 AM  

Dancin_In_Anson: DammitIForgotMyLogin: The essence of the libertarian argument: I don't give a crap if it might endanger other people, you can't stop me doing what I want.

You know how I know that you know jack farking shiat about Libertarianism?


What's to know? A candidate runs in the primary as a Republican, loses said primary, claims he's now a Libertarian, mentions something about wanting to legalize weed, the Paultards eat it up, and suddenly he's bypassed his way onto the general ballot.

It's like how a lot of 2-time Bush voters I know suddenly started referring to themselves as Libertarians back in 2006.
 
2012-11-03 11:06:32 AM  

Gulper Eel: DammitIForgotMyLogin: The essence of the libertarian argument: I don't give a crap if it might endanger other people, you can't stop me doing what I want.

And governments would never keep speed limits artificially low as a revenue generator.


I think it is more about insurance for the state. If I get into an accident at 80 mph in a section where the limit is 85 mph, I might be able to sue the state. Accidents under 65 on straighter roads are probably less fatal.

/I do 80 mph
 
2012-11-03 11:08:42 AM  

GAT_00: DammitIForgotMyLogin: The essence of the libertarian argument: I don't give a crap if it might endanger other people, you can't stop me doing what I want.

There's a bit more than that. A freedom to oppress, as long as you can frame it in the name of business. Openly choosing not to help people because they should help themselves, something that applies to natural disasters as well. No real Libertarian would have an agency like FEMA, or would have government for a second help coordinate personal relief efforts. Infrastructure sure, but feeding people? Not a Libertarian's job.


Of course, they swear up and down that they would personally help others if need be, because they're such nice guys. So long as you never test them. Or ask them to do so when it's personally inconvenient. Or ask them without promising to be forever in their debt.
 
2012-11-03 11:10:05 AM  
Imagine what a great country we could be, if only we were more like the great Libertarian paradise of Somalia.

/Seriously though, has this crazy shiat ever worked? Anywhere?
 
2012-11-03 11:10:32 AM  

AnonAmbientLight: The best example that was explained to me about libitarians and their ideas is an airport.

You have an airport with all your rights flying around (planes) and the air traffic control (government) gets to decide where those planes can go to and when. This is to avoid planes from running into each other or some planes getting special treatment.

Libitarians would want to remove the air traffic controller for ultimate freedom, but fail to realize in by doing do, all the planes would eventually start running in to each other.


The ultimate Libertarian response to every argument - "that's fine in practice, but in theory it just won't work."
 
2012-11-03 11:10:56 AM  
I'm excited for this prospect, especially in VA where I believe Johnson and Goode are on the ballot.
 
2012-11-03 11:13:54 AM  

AnonAmbientLight: The best example that was explained to me about libitarians and their ideas is an airport.

You have an airport with all your rights flying around (planes) and the air traffic control (government) gets to decide where those planes can go to and when. This is to avoid planes from running into each other or some planes getting special treatment.

Libitarians would want to remove the air traffic controller for ultimate freedom, but fail to realize in by doing do, all the planes would eventually start running in to each other.


After a bunch of crashes, the pilots who were really good at avoiding other planes would still be in business, and be able to reap the profits because demand for seats on those planes would go way up! Supply and demand, man! Best skilled pilots would reap the most gain.

Also, Darwinism! Watching evolution in action in our skies! It would be spectacular!

If your pilots weren't so good, and might crash, you could at least sell tickets to people who wanted to watch the spectacular crashes, and make money that way!
 
2012-11-03 11:13:59 AM  
So, it's still a horse race?
 
2012-11-03 11:15:37 AM  

Bhruic: If it weren't for the serious damage it would cause, it'd almost be worth giving them a Libertarian president, just to demonstrate how bad things can get without a central government. Well, assuming that a Libertarian president could actually get anything done, which would be insanely unlikely.


They'll just bury their heads in the sand, again, and claim the failure of a liberterian president rest on not putting jesus in their platform
 
2012-11-03 11:15:40 AM  
Oh, and another thing. It makes no sense whatsoever to vote for someone who literally has no chance of actually winning the election - that's just throwing your vote away. Think about that before you pull that lever for Romney!
 
2012-11-03 11:19:44 AM  

stoli n coke: What's to know? A candidate runs in the primary as a Republican, loses said primary, claims he's now a Libertarian, mentions something about wanting to legalize weed, the Paultards eat it up, and suddenly he's bypassed his way onto the general ballot.

It's like how a lot of 2-time Bush voters I know suddenly started referring to themselves as Libertarians back in 2006.


THIS

There are two explanations for being a libertarian: stupid or lying. If you want to be generous, you can rebrand the "stupid" category as "naive."
 
2012-11-03 11:19:46 AM  
Years ago, some farker said that Michael Z. Williamson's Freehold was the best example of why Libertarianism is the shiat.

You can read it here, for free.

Actually, don't, it was the dumbest book I have ever read.
 
2012-11-03 11:20:47 AM  
Did you hear that? HUNDREDS packed the auditorium. DOZENS couldn't find seats and filled the rows. Obama must have seen that and gone to respond to Johnsons impending upheaval!
 
2012-11-03 11:20:55 AM  

BMulligan: Oh, and another thing. It makes no sense whatsoever to vote for someone who literally has no chance of actually winning the election - that's just throwing your vote away. Think about that before you pull that lever for Romney!


You sir, just made my morning.
 
2012-11-03 11:21:52 AM  

CokeBear: Imagine what a great country we could be, if only we were more like the great Libertarian paradise of Somalia.

/Seriously though, has this crazy shiat ever worked? Anywhere?


It works in very small tribal communities where the pressure of social norms are great enough that formal government isn't really needed because if you act in a manner the rest of the tribe doesn't like, you're cast out... something physically but often only socially, which is enough to keep most from becoming a problem. Once the community grows to over about fifty people, formal governance is needed.
 
2012-11-03 11:22:11 AM  

BMulligan: Oh, and another thing. It makes no sense whatsoever to vote for someone who literally has no chance of actually winning the election - that's just throwing your vote away. Think about that before you pull that lever for Romney!


Well, it makes sense if you literally think neither Obama nor Romney is better than the other AT ALL. If you are 100%, truly and completely indifferent between Obama and Romney, then it makes sense to vote for a third party.
 
2012-11-03 11:25:49 AM  
fta Some Democrats, haunted by Ralph Nader's torpedoing of Al Gore in 2000,

That's arguable. Two or three times more Florida Democrats voted for Bush than for Nader. Also, Gore lost his home state. That said, I think the public would be well served by having at least two third-party candidates in the presidential debates. I think having at least a Green and a Libertarian would turn what is now essentially a mutual press conference into an actual debate, with interesting and exciting ideas being discussed and argued. Seems simple enough. You'd only need a few extra microphones.
 
2012-11-03 11:26:43 AM  

theteacher: Gulper Eel: DammitIForgotMyLogin: The essence of the libertarian argument: I don't give a crap if it might endanger other people, you can't stop me doing what I want.

And governments would never keep speed limits artificially low as a revenue generator.

I think it is more about insurance for the state. If I get into an accident at 80 mph in a section where the limit is 85 mph, I might be able to sue the state. Accidents under 65 on straighter roads are probably less fatal.

/I do 80 mph


In this Libertarian Universe, you would contract with a company to provide road services, As part of that contract you would absolve them from liability and any disputes would be taken of in arbitration.
 
2012-11-03 11:28:03 AM  

cman: Inb4 Libertarian bashers muck up this thread with their confusion of Libertarianism and Conservatism


How about their deliberate confusion of libertarianism and Ayn Rand's cult? Am really tired of that shiat.
 
2012-11-03 11:29:15 AM  
I was just out in Colorado Springs. I saw only one Obama sign the whole time I was there; it was like a forest of Romney/Ryan signs. One house had a Romney sign and a hand scrawled "Who is John Galt?" sign. In the NORTHCOM parking lot, there was a truck with a bumper sticker that said, "END OPPRESSION. DEFEAT OBAMA." Yeah, I thought to myself, I feel really oppressed by these huge stacks of money I have sitting around what with the stock market doubling over the past four years, and taxes being about the lowest they've ever been, I can see how terrible that must be for most folks.
 
2012-11-03 11:30:17 AM  
hey this guy that likes weed is running! Let's vote for him even though he has no chance of winning, so the guy who expressly says that he is against weed can win! Brilliant!!
 
2012-11-03 11:32:02 AM  

DamnYankees: BMulligan: Oh, and another thing. It makes no sense whatsoever to vote for someone who literally has no chance of actually winning the election - that's just throwing your vote away. Think about that before you pull that lever for Romney!

Well, it makes sense if you literally think neither Obama nor Romney is better than the other AT ALL. If you are 100%, truly and completely indifferent between Obama and Romney, then it makes sense to vote for a third party.


I'm not sure you read my entire post - that, or your snark detector is on the fritz.
 
2012-11-03 11:32:35 AM  

Notabunny: That said, I think the public would be well served by having at least two third-party candidates in the presidential debates. I think having at least a Green and a Libertarian would turn what is now essentially a mutual press conference into an actual debate, with interesting and exciting ideas being discussed and argued. Seems simple enough. You'd only need a few extra microphones.


A few extra microphones, along with a few cowboys to rope the democratic and republican candidates and drag them onto stage with the hoi palloi. Maybe a few cattleprods too to actually get them to respond to their lessers.
 
2012-11-03 11:33:44 AM  
Obama faces stiff task to blunt Gary Johnson's challenge in Colorado 

You know who else faced a stiff johnson. Aiken knows.
 
2012-11-03 11:33:51 AM  
More wishful thinking. If he drains off any significant number of votes, they won't be from Obama.
Wouldn't make any difference if he did.
Neeeeeext!
 
2012-11-03 11:34:38 AM  

Dancin_In_Anson: You know how I know that you know jack farking shiat about Libertarianism?


Libertarianism is fundamentally unworkable and incoherent. But true believers will tell you that you are just not familiar with the true libertarian philosophy that can be found in a particular sub-sect/cult.

Do you know that there are Catholic Libertarians who believe in the submission of the individual to the authority of the Church because it is done willingly? Their main short term goals seem to be to get government funding for Catholic schools and abolish birth control and abortion (on libertarian grounds), though many would ultimately be ok with no publicly funded education or health care plus government restrictions on things that go against Catholic teaching.
 
2012-11-03 11:35:41 AM  

BMulligan: DamnYankees: BMulligan: Oh, and another thing. It makes no sense whatsoever to vote for someone who literally has no chance of actually winning the election - that's just throwing your vote away. Think about that before you pull that lever for Romney!

Well, it makes sense if you literally think neither Obama nor Romney is better than the other AT ALL. If you are 100%, truly and completely indifferent between Obama and Romney, then it makes sense to vote for a third party.

I'm not sure you read my entire post - that, or your snark detector is on the fritz.


I are a sad dumb dumb.
 
2012-11-03 11:36:19 AM  

Jarhead_h: cman: Inb4 Libertarian bashers muck up this thread with their confusion of Libertarianism and Conservatism

How about their deliberate confusion of libertarianism and Ayn Rand's cult? Am really tired of that shiat.


The distinction is that while Objectivism is autism expressed as an existential philosophy, Libertarianism is autism expressed as a political philosophy.
 
2012-11-03 11:39:08 AM  

cman: Inb4 Libertarian bashers muck up this thread with their confusion of Libertarianism and Conservatism


I meant to say this in another thread. The reason why that confusion happens is because, at least in my experience, there are a whole slew of Libertarian sorts who, when push comes to shove, will side with their fiscal conservativism over their social liberalism.

People who say "yeah, I'd like to see drugs legalized / gays allowed to marry / religion out of politics, but I'm voting based on fiscal issues."
 
2012-11-03 11:39:35 AM  
Libertarianism: Because everything will be sweet once everybody operates on the Honor System. Particularly businesses. They always do what's right.
 
2012-11-03 11:40:03 AM  
Obama could solve this problem with three words: "Let's legalize pot".
 
2012-11-03 11:40:32 AM  
Anybody who's not an under 25 white middle-class (Or higher) male and still a Libertarian is just an idiot. It's a phase that some white guys who've never known poverty go through. Most grow out of it, some don't.
 
2012-11-03 11:40:53 AM  
"You know you're a libertarian when you hate speed limits," he said, earning cheers.

So ... Libertarians are basically people with an overdeveloped suite of pet peeves, then??

I often drive faster than the speed limit, especially on divided highways when conditions are good, but I don't get all red-faced and ragey because there's a sign on the side of the road with a number on it.

Going through life perpetually annoyed at the universe doesn't sound like much fun.
 
2012-11-03 11:42:09 AM  
The one thing Florida in 2000 taught me, was that if the voting was very close, re-counts would be stopped and the Supreme Court step in and award a winner.
 
2012-11-03 11:42:26 AM  

phaseolus: So ... Libertarians are basically people with an overdeveloped suite of pet peeves, then??


Yeah. Nerds.
 
2012-11-03 11:42:31 AM  
I'm voting Libertarian because I don't want anyone telling me not to stare directly at the Sun.
 
2012-11-03 11:44:10 AM  

Jarhead_h: How about their deliberate confusion of libertarianism and Ayn Rand's cult? Am really tired of that shiat.


When the overlap in membership between the two groups falls below 95%, people might start to notice the slight differences.
 
2012-11-03 11:44:23 AM  
Abolish the IRS, the income tax and the corporate tax. Fund the entire federal government off of a consumption tax.

Gee, how could anyone conclude libertarians fall in to one of two categories, naive or selfish. Or perhaps we should say retarded or regressive.

STFU and stay home sucking bong water, the grownups are trying to have an election here.
 
2012-11-03 11:46:27 AM  

LectertheChef: Anybody who's not an under 25 white middle-class (Or higher) male and still a Libertarian is just an idiot. It's a phase that some white guys who've never known poverty go through. Most grow out of it, some don't.


QFT
By far the best medicine to cure anyone of Libertarianism is, ironically, medical bills.
 
Displayed 50 of 230 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report