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.

(NPR)   Republican college students spell doom for the GOP: Many are leaning Libertarian because the GOP is medieval on social issues, and even those who parrot Fox News talking points admit the party may have lost voters for the next 50 years   (npr.org) divider line 88
    More: Obvious, Fox News, GOP, Republican, talking points, lecture hall, political parties in the United States, students  
•       •       •

3753 clicks; posted to Politics » on 01 Mar 2013 at 11:39 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-03-01 11:43:53 AM
16 votes:
i204.photobucket.com
2013-03-01 12:01:20 PM
10 votes:
Conservatism, Real Conservatism, is strong in our nation's colleges and universities but the liberal media skewing the polls to make it seem like conservatism isn't strong.  In the 3 years I've been at Liberty University , not once has anyone asked what my political feelings are.  I bet the students at Stanford or the University of Michigan get asked all the time.
2013-03-01 10:43:05 AM
10 votes:
You have your whole life to be a sexless, uptight whiner. Why would you ruin your time in college?
2013-03-01 12:15:17 PM
9 votes:

IrateShadow: Libertarians these days aren't much different from mainstream Republicans except for their love of weed and bitcoins.


In Austin I saw a guy at a Ron Paul rally holding up a sign reading "SELF OWNERSHIP" on one side and "RAW MILK" on the other. If that doesn't get the kids fired up about Libertarianism, I don't know what will!
2013-03-01 11:53:41 AM
7 votes:

Solkar: hubiestubert: It's not just college kids, folks. Unless the party purges the Crazy Train, they're not going to get my vote either, and I'm in my early 40s. At this point, it's not just the social issues, but how economic issues are used to further those social issues, and how the refusal to contemplate prudent fiscal policy is draining the nation's coffers and impacting growth and opportunity. The party isn't just out of touch, the leadership is actively promoting an agenda that is curtailing the nation's future.

Not that a lot Libertarians are any better. The typical Libertarian candidate today promotes an agenda that is naught but a brand of NeoFeudalism that is even worse than their Republican counterparts. I had hopes for the Modern Whigs, but the TEA Party nonsense pretty much ate up their momentum, which is exactly what it was designed to do. The sad fact is, many Libertarians are just Republicans who want to smoke pot, and that is not the basis for real progress. We need better thinking, not just the same old, with a few whistles and bells to draw in the unwary...

Can you read my mind?


I see... mildly deviant smut, and early lunch cravings.
2013-03-01 11:41:31 AM
7 votes:

RexTalionis: hubiestubert: Not that a lot Libertarians are any better.

Libertarians are Republicans who are embarrassed to call themselves Republicans.


Libertarians are Republicans who admit that they can't do Calculus.
2013-03-01 12:02:04 PM
6 votes:

DamnYankees: hubiestubert: winds of the Hell of Being Flayed Alive will still and stall

No way you just made this up. What Iron Maiden song is this a lyric from?


Former Republicans got a lot of hells.

// it's all in the reflexes
2013-03-01 11:43:04 AM
6 votes:

dittybopper: So remind me again why I shouldn't vote libertarian?


i46.tinypic.com
2013-03-01 11:51:07 AM
5 votes:

Sounds like the GOP needs someone hip and cool to reach out to the youngster. What happened to this guy?

3.bp.blogspot.com

2013-03-01 12:46:07 PM
4 votes:

Ow! That was my feelings!: libertarianism is fine as a personal political philosophy, it makes little sense as a governing philosophy.


Maybe if you are one who believes that all social relations are business relations. But then you wind up with no real friends and have to buy friends. Maybe this is why Libertarians favor prostitution.
2013-03-01 12:26:41 PM
4 votes:

MisterTweak: dr_blasto: skullkrusher: you can't govern a large and diverse country with a anarchistic or even minarchistic government.

Anarchistic government? Is that where you vote for a president and he never shows up to work or immediately quits after election?

Rick Perry and Sarah Palin would like a word...


You're mistaking "Autistic government" for "Anarchistic government" it seems.
2013-03-01 12:16:49 PM
4 votes:

dr_blasto: skullkrusher: you can't govern a large and diverse country with a anarchistic or even minarchistic government.

Anarchistic government? Is that where you vote for a president and he never shows up to work or immediately quits after election?


Rick Perry and Sarah Palin would like a word...
2013-03-01 12:01:20 PM
4 votes:

Dancin_In_Anson: hubiestubert: It wasn't Romney.

In other words you voted for Obama.


AHA!!!! Indisputable proof that hubie is a libby-libby-libby-lib and should never try to claim he is a moderate or conservative because ehe voted for the Kenyan socialist.  Get out of our party and never come back you traitor!!!
2013-03-01 11:50:35 AM
4 votes:

hubiestubert: winds of the Hell of Being Flayed Alive will still and stall


No way you just made this up. What Iron Maiden song is this a lyric from?
2013-03-01 11:29:16 AM
4 votes:

hubiestubert: Not that a lot Libertarians are any better.


Libertarians are Republicans who are embarrassed to call themselves Republicans.
2013-03-01 12:48:59 PM
3 votes:

Somacandra: GAT_00: Because industrial feudalism is a really bad way to run the world.

Not all Libertarianism is equivalent to some Randian dystopia. There are many flavors and varieties of Libertarianism as there are of other kinds of American politics.

/registered Green


Well, yes, there are.  24, to be exact.

www.leftycartoons.com
2013-03-01 12:14:07 PM
3 votes:

skullkrusher: you can't govern a large and diverse country with a anarchistic or even minarchistic government.


Anarchistic government? Is that where you vote for a president and he never shows up to work or immediately quits after election?
2013-03-01 11:52:49 AM
3 votes:

Solkar: Can you read my mind?


b.vimeocdn.com
2013-03-01 11:48:35 AM
3 votes:

RexTalionis: hubiestubert: Not that a lot Libertarians are any better.

Libertarians are Republicans who are embarrassed to call themselves Republicans.




i865.photobucket.com
2013-03-01 05:07:47 PM
2 votes:

Rapmaster2000: You have your whole life to be a sexless, uptight whiner. Why would you ruin your time in college?


Uptight poon, son. Uptight poon.
2013-03-01 01:50:18 PM
2 votes:

Rwa2play: So the Pauls are just closet neo-conservatives confederates that start yelling "I'M A LIBERTARIAN" when people get wise to their BS.

2013-03-01 01:42:54 PM
2 votes:

partisan222: hubiestubert: The sad fact is, many Libertarians are just Republicans who want to smoke pot

THIS. And I will also add: Libertarians are just Republicans who want to have sex with women.


FTFA.
2013-03-01 01:38:11 PM
2 votes:

hubiestubert: The sad fact is, many Libertarians are just Republicans who want to smoke pot


THIS. And I will also add: Libertarians are just Republicans who want to have sex.
2013-03-01 12:27:13 PM
2 votes:

hubiestubert: The sad fact is, many Libertarians are just Republicans who want to smoke pot, and that is not the basis for real progress.


A large majority of my close friends are Libertarian for this reason. They think Democrats are hippies and Republicans are bat-shiat insane so they vote Libertarian/Independent.

Their mostly musicians... they can't help it. Well, they could, but there's pot to smoke!
2013-03-01 12:22:08 PM
2 votes:
Hey, I'm still a registered repub, have been for nearly 40 years. I did it so that I can vote for the worst possible candidate in the primaries (I was "Massachusetts Jew for Huckabee" in 2008) and it's sooo easy to say no when they call up and ask for money.
2013-03-01 12:22:02 PM
2 votes:
I feel like the Congressional gridlock is like a zit, with the GOP at the head. It's really painful and ugly right now, but there's no way it can stand the pressure. We just have to suffer through the pain a little longer until the gridlock pops and lets all that juicy freedom flow forth.
2013-03-01 12:19:05 PM
2 votes:

Dr Dreidel: DamnYankees: hubiestubert: winds of the Hell of Being Flayed Alive will still and stall

No way you just made this up. What Iron Maiden song is this a lyric from?

Former Republicans got a lot of hells.

// it's all in the reflexes


 If you have an influence over your youthful friend, you'd better exert it now. Otherwise, I will have you both sent to the hell where people are skinned alive it's that simple, understand?
2013-03-01 12:18:46 PM
2 votes:

Maud Dib: RexTalionis: hubiestubert: Not that a lot Libertarians are any better.

Libertarians are Republicans who are embarrassed to call themselves Republicans.

[i865.photobucket.com image 360x450]


*Shudder* Those pictures always make that lifestyle seem much easier than it looks. It's that kind of imagery that probably comes to mind in the average Tea party "patriot"--gun in hand, foot-on-a-ledge ala George Washington overlooking some kind of view with bald eagles flying overhead.

Buffalo chips is the first thing that comes to my mind. Horrible existence ... but to fair, very bootstrapy.

i.imgur.com
2013-03-01 12:06:04 PM
2 votes:

Libertarianism is often used as a rational for Social Darwinism which is hardly liberal on social issues.

These college students may be the subgroup where


Libertarian = Republican who likes marijuana and prostitutes.
2013-03-01 11:59:16 AM
2 votes:

dittybopper: GAT_00: dittybopper: So remind me again why I shouldn't vote libertarian?

Because industrial feudalism is a really bad way to run the world.

The polar opposite is just as bad, if not worse.

You can always quit a job and work for someone else.  It's much harder to quit your government.

/Don't argue from the extremes.



Wait, the libertarian is telling someone to not argue from the extremes?

Bwaaaa haaaa haaaaaaaa haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
2013-03-01 11:56:46 AM
2 votes:

cubic_spleen: Mercutio74: dittybopper: So remind me again why I shouldn't vote libertarian?

The only thing that libertarian fiscal policy leads to is a failed nation?  That's a good enough reason for most.

What Libertarians/GOP (like there's a difference in this country) really want is to live in Somalia, except without all the black people.


And fewer pirates.
2013-03-01 10:50:03 AM
2 votes:
The party of Angry Old Rich White Men And Batsh*t Crazy Christian Fundamentalists is having trouble rebranding. Couldn't be the actual message could it. Nah.
2013-03-02 11:46:31 AM
1 votes:

give me doughnuts: Nothing wrong with eugenics as an idea. It's just the implementation that always gets screwed up.


Starting with: trying to breed a better human is being done by existing humans.
2013-03-02 12:49:44 AM
1 votes:
Yep. The only thing the GOP has going for it is that the democrats are still the democrats.
2013-03-02 12:04:26 AM
1 votes:
What happened to the good ol' days when college kids joined fringe political cults like LaRouche or Ron Paul? Did their brainwashing camps go bankrupt or something?
2013-03-01 11:48:27 PM
1 votes:

GAT_00: industrial feudalism


Can you sum up "Industrial Feudalism"? I tried google but just came up with some libertarian nonsense I couldn't follow.
2013-03-01 11:34:19 PM
1 votes:
the gop is done

republicanism


left libertarian. voluntary charity. co-operatism, mutual aid. not mandated, but instead at the choice of the individual. hide assets to feed your families. localize. is this shiat crazy:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEe_eraFWWs ?

a necessity, build your communities. the national parties are done. go to state county neighborhood. the feds lost once they gave up control of the currency to private banks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewRjZoRtu0Y

there is no reason for discussion. it is done.

love your family, help them live. however you define it.
2013-03-01 09:09:52 PM
1 votes:

50 years?


2.bp.blogspot.com
media.salon.com
media.salon.com
media.salon.com
www.freewoodpost.com
media.salon.com
media.salon.com
media.salon.com
media.salon.com
watchseries24.com
1.bp.blogspot.com
media.salon.com
media.salon.com
media.salon.com

election.princeton.edu

www.wired.com

50 if it were 1.
2013-03-01 06:53:28 PM
1 votes:

dittybopper: So remind me again why I shouldn't vote libertarian?


Because most of us would rather live in a first world country.
2013-03-01 06:02:17 PM
1 votes:
Shame on those above who used the reductio ad somalium argument.
2013-03-01 05:03:47 PM
1 votes:

thrasherrr: skullkrusher: palelizard: thrasherrr: Let's propose a non-extreme example.

Say I'm broke. I decide to sell both kidneys to fund a whirlwind tour of all the orange countries on the map.
I'll spend the rest of my life on dialysis on the state's dime. Should I be allowed to do it?


I'd say no, same as donating a non-extraneous piece of your body, like heart, brain, spine, etc, since at that point you're selling your life (since without external support, you'd die).  I think the living/dying differentiation is a reasonable place to draw the line.  It may not be the best place, but that's where I draw it.

What you do with the money is irrelevant to the concept.  You shouldn't be able to sell both and donate the money to cancer kids.

On the other hand, if you sell a kidney and get in a car wreck and lose the other, I don't think there should be a penalty since we wouldn't have to pay for you if you hadn't sold the first kidney.  It's bad luck, sometimes that happens, and we just have to absorb the loss.  I doubt it would lead to a glut of kidneys on the market, with everyone thinking "Hehe, I'll get my cash and then if anything happens, the government will be on the hook for the tab".  I'm not saying no one would think that, I just don't think it would be a widespread issue.

not to mention that this argument could be made against the donation of living tissue. Whether you get paid for it or not isn't relevant to this scenario. It just increases the likelihood that the scenario might happen

Thank you two for thoughtful responses to a hard question.


oh, don't get me wrong. Selling organs is nasty. So is ass to mouth though. I don't wanna outlaw that either :)
2013-03-01 04:58:07 PM
1 votes:

Via Infinito: I hope you get plenty of kitty purrs. It's true that cats aren't particularly "sympathetic" but I always seem to feel better when my kitty is purring on me.


Is that a euphemism?
2013-03-01 04:14:00 PM
1 votes:

jigger: Rwa2play: So the Pauls are just closet neo-conservatives that start yelling "I'M A LIBERTARIAN" when people get wise to their BS.

Ron Paul is no purist libertarian, that's for sure. Rand Paul even less so (much less so). But to call them neo-conservatives means you don't know what a neo-conservative is.


Frankly, who the hell would?
2013-03-01 04:05:02 PM
1 votes:

Zerochance: OgreMagi: slayer199: Ah, good to see all the Fark libs and conservatives hating on the LP.  Republicans hate us because of our social liberalism and Democrats hate us because of our fiscal conservatism.     Both sides do everything they can to exclude the LP (and the Green Party) from the process.  Why?  Fear.  A party that promotes social liberalism, fiscal conservatism, personal responsibility and smaller government will resonate with voters.

Let's not forget both sides claiming Somalia is a libertarian paradise, thus proving they have absolute no clue about libertarianism.

Actually, a lot of us dislike Libertarians mainly because of their self-important, unsubstantiated smugness.  Something that is very clearly lost on both of you.


yeah, so what if I'm impotent. What's it any business of y... oh wait, nevermind
2013-03-01 04:01:27 PM
1 votes:

m00: Wasteland: As for who I am, I'm one of the people who'd be living with the secondary effects of your little hypothetical society shift- and yeah, that means I get to have an opinion and a voice in public policy on what is or is not generally permitted.  It's a little thing we call civilization.

Well, everyone is free to have an opinion. But our civilization was also built on the concept of natural rights, that cannot be granted nor taken away by government; only recognized and protected. And in fact this is government's chief duty. So for example, even if you were so hated in your community that the town unanimously voted to limit YOUR free speech or to toss YOU over a cliff and this was everyone's opinion and voice, no court would uphold the "Prop 20: Gag Wasteland and Throw Him Over a Cliff." That law would be unconstitutional.
I believe in this principle, although I don't necessarily agree with the specific natural rights that were chosen to be enumerated (so I'm not a strict constitutionalist). Personally, I think sovereignty over one's own body is a natural right. I also tend to think transactions that also happen between two consenting adults ought to be interfered with.
As for secondary effects... well, maybe we should improve society so that poor people don't have to sell organs. That it may currently be the case that poor people would be forced to sell organs is a separate thing from whether or not they should have the right to choose to. See what I'm saying?



/slight tangent
I don't believe in inalienable rights at all, frankly.  I consider them a cunning rhetorical fiction on the part of the founding fathers, a really nice counterpoint to use against the whole "divine right of kings" schtick... and not much else.  Our civilization is built on, at best, polite lip service to the idea.  Whenever people bring out the phrase "self evident," it's always a tip-off.

I have the inalienable right to equal treatment under the law of gravity, to receive due process of thermodynamics, and to ply my trade as a converter of oxygen to carbon dioxide for the duration of my natural life.  Those are the sort of rights that genuinely can't be taken away.  The rest of this stuff?  Man, this is all held together by fiat and social consensus.  And we damn well better remember it, because the Endowing Creator doesn't do a goddamn thing when those rights are ignored or suspended; whether by the society as a whole, or by individual citizens.

And I greatly prefer that interpretation.  Always keeping in mind that these "rights" are ultimately transient, fragile and arbitrary strikes me as a much better- and really, a much more reverent- attitude than "God/the universe/common sense says so."  If we were ever endowed with a social right by our Creator, it was the right to quit hitting each other any time we get around to it.

So yeah... different (and in my case, admittedly odd) underlying perspective here.
/end tangent
2013-03-01 03:58:29 PM
1 votes:

Craptastic: Wasteland: If there's a core "fear of Libertarianism," it's that unchaining all the giants at once will only drop us all squarely in The Hell of Do As Thou Will, surrounded by the older kids with the bigger sticks.

You hit the nail on the head right there.


I think it's ironic a favorite Libertarian book is called "The Road to Serfdom."  But if you know anything about Feudalism, it's basically a purely libertarian society.  There's no state.  It's just private manors and private manor owners voluntarily trading fealty for fiefs and protection rackets while making their own rules, it's also a terrible place to live you have nothing as your left with trading fealty for a roof over your head and food to eat.
2013-03-01 03:55:48 PM
1 votes:

jigger: tripleseven: I recall during the debate about HRC, every single libertarian I spoke to had these 2 talking points, and that's it:

1) I should be able to buy my insurance in a state where it's cheaper!
2) We need tort reform so those doctors don't have to pay anything for malpractice insurance.

Not a single one of them understood what risk pools were, or the repercussions of expanding the risk pool of a state by flooding it with more beneficiaries.

And they magically believed that health care costs would go down if a doctor wouldn't have to pay for malpractice insurance.  Sure, they wouldn't just pocket the difference, and besides, malpractice insurance is not the number one driving force in health care costs.

Really, that's the mental capacity of a libertarian.

"Tort reform" is not libertarian.


Even more indication "libertarians" are republicans trying to hide themselves from the stench of GWB.
2013-03-01 03:43:49 PM
1 votes:

Jackpot777: TV's Vinnie: jigger: TV's Vinnie: dittybopper: So remind me again why I shouldn't vote libertarian?

[i46.tinypic.com image 400x618]

http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ar_libertarianism_qa

She, like Dick

Damn it, why is Fark truncating some posts like this?


That's a pretty awesome truncation, though.
2013-03-01 03:16:16 PM
1 votes:
So, when will they finally be out of power then?
2013-03-01 03:11:00 PM
1 votes:

Felgraf: skullkrusher: tripleseven: skullkrusher:

exactly. Very few people are just donating organs while they are alive.

For some pretty good reasons, too.  Like, I may need it?  Hell, after I am dead, sure take what you need and toss it into the pool where it will be used based upon need.

I am sure the person who could really use that $50k is over the moon that you care so much for them that you, a stranger, is willing to tell them what they may do with their own bodies.

We don't allow it because allowing the selling of organs opens some NASTY floodgates and a shiat-ton of unintended consequences.

If organs can be sold, people can be pressured to sell organs, even if they themselves don't want to. Whether it's a "Nice family you got there. It would be a *shame* if they all got killed, unless you wanted to sell a kidney, eh?" coercement, plain old kidnapping and organselling, or a crapton of other stuff. Yes, those things are illegal. So's murder.

By banning organ selling, it prevents *any* of those from occuring, because there's no profit in doing them, because the organs can't be sold.

Repo: The Genetic Opera is not a how-to book.


I felt really awful when I found out that "A Modest Proposal" wasn't a cook-book.
/My kids felt even worse.
//The British aristocrats I sold them to are keeping a stiff upper lips about the whole thing.
2013-03-01 03:03:36 PM
1 votes:

Lando Lincoln: dittybopper: So remind me again why I shouldn't vote libertarian?

Because libertarianism is about as politically viable as communism? Less viable, actually. There are communist countries, but no libertarian ones. Unless you argue that Somalia is a libertarian state.


Then again, Fark threads on communism don't generate nearly as many page views.
2013-03-01 02:58:22 PM
1 votes:

m00: tripleseven: Oh, yeah, I had another libertarian tell me that he 100% believed that "the poor" should be able to sell their organs.

Anybody should be able to sell their organs. Why not? Don't people have ownership over their own bodies? I think do many people confuse permission with endorsement. If someone wants to hack off their own hand and eat it for dinner, I can't say I agree with that -- but what business is it of mine? I find it disturbing and offensive, but who am I to impose my judgement and tastes on another person?

I understand the point made a bit down-thread, that something is seriously wrong if we live in a society where people are so poor they are forced to sell their organs. But the solution isn't to make organ-selling illegal. The solution is to improve the economic situation so that people are not forced to sell their organs.



Whereas the practical reality is that, if you permit the poor to carve themselves up for sale piece by piece, it becomes one more excuse for people to claim that the poor are only poor because they're lazy/not dedicated enough- so let's dismantle a little more of those evil collectivist/authoritarian social safety nets.  Social permission becomes de facto economic endorsement.

"Why are you asking for a handout, you damn bum?  You still have both hands!"


btw, if you think this is hyperbole?  Think back to the poor and their refrigerators.  That's an actual argument that we have right now- that you can't really be poor if the shiathole trailer you rent comes with a refrigerator that's old enough to run for office.  "A pound of flesh" would be an economic reform slogan before all was said and done.  Book it.
2013-03-01 02:55:49 PM
1 votes:

Elvis Presleys Death Throne: HellRaisingHoosier: FTFA: Sophomore Miranda Onnen says after graduation, fiscal realities will begin to take hold for her generation and priorities will shift. "We're also the ones who are going to have to pay for Obamacare," Onnen says. "A lot of people don't necessarily connect those things. They say, 'Oh, well, health care is great. I get to be on my parents' health-care plan until I'm 26.' Well, once you turn 27, you have to pay for that. And especially with the joblessness rates being what they are, I think that's going to hit kids our age pretty hard."


What does a sophomore at Ohio State University know about the financial situation of life? Nothing. Mommy and daddy or John Q. Public is paying for her way right now.

Guess what kid? I don't want to pay for your education, healthcare, protection or social services either over the course of your life, but I did, because I want to live in a 1st world society and not some 3rd world libertarian shiat-hole.

I'm a Junior in college, pay for my school, work for my healthcare, live on my own, have purchased my own means of protection and don't draw from any social services, and I'm a Libertarian but have always hated Republicans. There's a lot of people like me. I don't think you know what you're talking about


are you studying at the University of Somalia? This is Fark, remember.
2013-03-01 02:54:56 PM
1 votes:

technicolor-misfit: palelizard: tripleseven: Buying an organ from someone because they "need the money" is also exploitative of the less fortunate.
It's not like they're selling a car or a piece of jewelry to make rent or something, it's irreplaceable.
If you cannot see the problem in that, you may be a "libertarian"

Goes along with the "I got mines, fark you" mantra.

So if they don't 'need' the money, it'd be okay?  Being poor, or less fortunate, doesn't make you any better than being rich.  It's their decision.  I hope they get a good market rate, and can use the seed money to change their life.  I'll note you want to keep them poor rather than provide another method to advance.  The purity of the downtrodden must be preserved!


I don't want to put words in tripleseven's mouth, but I'd be willing to bet that he actually supports a social safety net that will help someone change their life WITHOUT forcing them to endanger it and endure a lifetime of medical problems as a result of unfortunate financial difficulties.

"How come that girl can't suck a dick for food money if she wants to? Come 'ere, baby... Daddy will help you outta your troubles! What's the problem? I'm just trying to help her!"


Government so big that it cannot fit in your uterus but can certainly serve as a chastity belt when there's money involved.
2013-03-01 02:50:57 PM
1 votes:

thrasherrr: palelizard: We're rational people--we can draw a line to stop without carrying an idea out to the furthest flung conclusion.

Let's propose a non-extreme example.

Say I'm broke.  I decide to sell both kidneys to fund a whirlwind tour of all the orange countries on the map.
I'll spend the rest of my life on dialysis on the state's dime.  Should I be allowed to do it?


Given the state of our dialysis system, you'll only be a burden for a year or so.
m00
2013-03-01 02:35:42 PM
1 votes:

dittybopper: So remind me again why I shouldn't vote libertarian?


Because the Republican Party has claimed your vote, and you are a thief if you try to vote for whom you want rather than whom the Republican Party tells you.
2013-03-01 02:33:44 PM
1 votes:

skullkrusher: tripleseven: skullkrusher:

exactly. Very few people are just donating organs while they are alive.

For some pretty good reasons, too.  Like, I may need it?  Hell, after I am dead, sure take what you need and toss it into the pool where it will be used based upon need.

I am sure the person who could really use that $50k is over the moon that you care so much for them that you, a stranger, is willing to tell them what they may do with their own bodies.


We don't allow it because allowing the selling of organs opens some NASTY floodgates and a shiat-ton of unintended consequences.

If organs can be sold, people can be pressured to sell organs, even if they themselves don't want to. Whether it's a "Nice family you got there. It would be a *shame* if they all got killed, unless you wanted to sell a kidney, eh?" coercement, plain old kidnapping and organselling, or a crapton of other stuff. Yes, those things are illegal. So's murder.

By banning organ selling, it prevents *any* of those from occuring, because there's no profit in doing them, because the organs can't be sold.

Repo: The Genetic Opera is not a how-to book.
2013-03-01 02:32:47 PM
1 votes:

A Dark Evil Omen: "Libertarians" are a bunch of authoritarian corporatist gasbags who pay lipservice to social issues as a vote-getting strategy.


So they are politicians? Get outta here.
2013-03-01 01:56:48 PM
1 votes:
How can anyone be conservative, particularly in college? I was farking and taking bong hits and other drugs. Man, college was fun.
2013-03-01 01:54:52 PM
1 votes:

tripleseven: Oh, yeah, I had another libertarian tell me that he 100% believed that "the poor" should be able to sell their organs.


Sounds as if he already sold his brain.
Since it was unused, he probably got a good price for it.
2013-03-01 01:43:39 PM
1 votes:

slayer199: Ah, good to see all the Fark libs and conservatives hating on the LP.  Republicans hate us because of our social liberalism and Democrats hate us because of our fiscal conservatism.     Both sides do everything they can to exclude the LP (and the Green Party) from the process.  Why?  Fear.  A party that promotes social liberalism, fiscal conservatism, personal responsibility and smaller government will resonate with voters.


AHAHAHA. Libertarians? Socially liberal? Your 'best' politicians are Ron and Rand Paul- the eldest of which is an ob-gyn who is anti-abortion. You can't call yourself 'socially liberal' if personal choice only extends to people with a penis.
2013-03-01 01:42:06 PM
1 votes:

verbaltoxin: jigger: verbaltoxin: Legislative capture is bad. So let's make it easier and deregulate some more!

Make it easier to do what? Make regulations?

verbaltoxin: If you want corruption ended, then you need laws that will punish the powerful. To enforce those laws, you need..............government.

I guess it's watchers all the way down.

"Waa, I can't get my way whenever."

Welcome to being an adult. Your choices have consequences, and yes they affect others. When that happens, guess what? You face the consequences.

Unless you're a bank, apparently, and then in libertarian world, they should just get to do whatever they want.


Is it just me or Libertarianism just another buzzword for eugenics.
2013-03-01 01:37:52 PM
1 votes:

Felgraf: Would you advocate, then, thousands of charges of reckless endangerment (and at the very least, negligent manslaughter) to, say, the CEO of Bayer for the stuff that happened regarding Yaz?


was much more of a Erasure fan myself
2013-03-01 01:36:05 PM
1 votes:

jigger: Mr_Fabulous: Please name for me the specific financial regulations whose elimination would result in a government less (not more) beholden to the banking industry. Pretty please. With mutherfarking sugar on top.

Oh you want a list? Here let me thumb through the Title 12 of the US Code.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/12

It's no sweat. I've got all day to hang out on Fark with you good people.

Chapter 3 would be a start though.


"Which regulations?"  "All of them."

Are you Sarah Palin?
2013-03-01 01:20:05 PM
1 votes:

jigger: How did these banks get so farking big and powerful? farking government. They got so big because they own congressmen, they send their cronies into the regulatory agencies (only the big ones get to do this), they have the explicit guarantees from the government (and the winks and nods) that their assets will be protected, so gamble away, we've got your back. You think deregulation empowers the already powerful? You think they want deregulation? Hell no, they love regulations. That's what gives the powerful few the most power.


I often see this type of open-ended rant. Here's where it always evaporates into thin air...

Please name for me the specific financial regulations whose elimination would result in a government less (not more) beholden to the banking industry. Pretty please. With mutherfarking sugar on top.
2013-03-01 01:15:51 PM
1 votes:

slayer199: Wadded Beef: "F-you, I got mine" is social liberalism?

You're confused between social liberalism and fiscal conservatism.

Social liberalism means you can do whatever you'd like so long as you don't infringe on someone else's rights to do whatever they'd like.  Who you sleep with, who you marry, what drugs you like to do...is not a concern of a libertarian.  An individual is ultimately responsible for the choices they make, NOT the government.  That also extends to the poor choices as well.  If an individual makes poor life choices, that's on them...not on other citizens vis a vis the government bailing them out (and it also applies to corporations).

Fiscal conservatism relates to government spending.  Libertarians recognize the need for government when it comes to things like infrastructure, defense (though FAR smaller than it is now), and enforcement of laws/contracts.  The government is FAR too large, inefficient, and yes...we have a spending problem.

Your "Fark you, I got mine" is nothing more than an appeal to emotion.  Libertarians believe that people should be able to reap the rewards of success and if they so choose, donate their time or money to any cause they'd like.  Being are forced to do so at gunpoint (government) that is something libertarians would object to.  There will always be poor people but pretending that more government or government redistribution of wealth leads to prosperity is naive.  There's been a War on Poverty going on for 80 years and it hasn't made a dent in the average 14-15% that live in poverty.  In short, dramatically reduce spending and taxes across the board.


That is exactly what, "F*ck you, got mine," means. Someone's poor choices can add up and have catastrophic effects on others' well being. So after awhile, it can affect you and yours. Hence I do give a sh*t about people shooting themselves up with guns and/or heroin, or defaulting on their loans, because eventually those bad choices f*ck with everyone's ability to own guns, buy drugs and borrow money.

You just proved my f*cking point.
2013-03-01 01:07:22 PM
1 votes:

HeartBurnKid: Somacandra: GAT_00: Because industrial feudalism is a really bad way to run the world.

Not all Libertarianism is equivalent to some Randian dystopia. There are many flavors and varieties of Libertarianism as there are of other kinds of American politics.

/registered Green

Well, yes, there are.  24, to be exact.

[www.leftycartoons.com image 650x976]


24 kinds, all beating each other over the head with "No True Scotsman" sticks in internet forums.

An internet, by the way, that exists because of the government.
2013-03-01 12:51:34 PM
1 votes:
FTFA:


Sophomore Miranda Onnen says after graduation, fiscal realities will begin to take hold for her generation and priorities will shift.

"We're also the ones who are going to have to pay for Obamacare," Onnen says. "A lot of people don't necessarily connect those things. They say, 'Oh, well, health care is great. I get to be on my parents' health-care plan until I'm 26.' Well, once you turn 27, you have to pay for that. And especially with the joblessness rates being what they are, I think that's going to hit kids our age pretty hard."
How does the existence of HCR or not change this reality?  Regardless of whether or not it existed, you would still be facing a time in your life when you would not be able to be on your parents healthcare, you would need it yourself and you would have to pay for it.  Obamacare gives you an opportunity to not be raped by the for-profit industry by applying controls and exchanges.

/she be a kollage stoodent
2013-03-01 12:50:33 PM
1 votes:

Somacandra: I don't know if that conclusion necessarily follows from your premise but I don't know of any Libertarian candidates who have advocated that CEO's should somehow be above the law.


You can't have a successful party in the US that openly wants to make life harder for corporations.  The Super PACs would buy more tv time than can exist in the space time continuum.
2013-03-01 12:45:35 PM
1 votes:
Oh, and this...

i301.photobucket.com
2013-03-01 12:44:12 PM
1 votes:
deathstarpr.com

You have done THAT to yourself.
2013-03-01 12:39:33 PM
1 votes:
FTFA: Leone is a fiscal conservative, but when it comes to the GOP, he thinks the party needs to take a different approach to some issues.
 "They need to change their outlook, especially on social issues, which is why I identify myself more as Libertarian," Leone says. "But I think that they are still very much in the right in terms of economic issues, the Republicans are."

So in other words, you're a moran.
2013-03-01 12:35:11 PM
1 votes:

palelizard: Solkar: hubiestubert: It's not just college kids, folks. Unless the party purges the Crazy Train, they're not going to get my vote either, and I'm in my early 40s. At this point, it's not just the social issues, but how economic issues are used to further those social issues, and how the refusal to contemplate prudent fiscal policy is draining the nation's coffers and impacting growth and opportunity. The party isn't just out of touch, the leadership is actively promoting an agenda that is curtailing the nation's future.

Not that a lot Libertarians are any better. The typical Libertarian candidate today promotes an agenda that is naught but a brand of NeoFeudalism that is even worse than their Republican counterparts. I had hopes for the Modern Whigs, but the TEA Party nonsense pretty much ate up their momentum, which is exactly what it was designed to do. The sad fact is, many Libertarians are just Republicans who want to smoke pot, and that is not the basis for real progress. We need better thinking, not just the same old, with a few whistles and bells to draw in the unwary...

Can you read my mind?

I see... mildly deviant smut, and early lunch cravings.


Only *mildly* deviant? Other than that, pretty much spot on.
2013-03-01 12:29:13 PM
1 votes:

keylock71: My Libertarian friends get all bent out of shape when they can barely managed to get double digit numbers of support for their candidates, but they fail to see that they are the ones who have to convince the voters why they should support the LP. They spout platitudes and ideals, but hardly ever explain how these ideals will be achieved in the real world.


It doesn't help that they're smug, condescending bastards, even when their arguments are bottom-of-the-barrel retarded.
2013-03-01 12:26:28 PM
1 votes:

Noam Chimpsky: I never hear the Libertarian Party jump into these fiscal fights. They aren't making noise about the federal government's usurpation of state powers. "Defense of Women Act", and so forth. I bet if you polled all the self-proclaimed "Libertarians", they'd be all in favor of that shiat.


Well, the fundamental problem of the Libertarians in organizational terms (as opposed to philosophical terms) is that they're fundamentally about every person doing what they can do, up to the line where certain things  cannot be done by private enterprise.

Since the whole point is to not rely on centralized anything, and experts are experts by common consensus and thus actively denied by the party's functional philosophy... well, where that "this can't be done by private industry" line is becomes kind of a matter of the individual's personal opinion or knowledge.

The problem (again, from an organizational/vote-getting perspective, not a philosophical perspective, by the libertarian philosophy this is fine) is not that if you asked a libertarian whether (your example) the VAWAct falls under the government overreach category they wouldn't have an answer.  It's that if you asked five libertarians the question, you'd get eight mutually-exclusive answers.
2013-03-01 12:20:25 PM
1 votes:

dr_blasto: Anarchistic government? Is that where you vote for a president and he never shows up to work or immediately quits after election?


If he quits, you just up-twinkle somebody else for the job. It's all good, brah.
2013-03-01 12:12:17 PM
1 votes:
Libertarians these days aren't much different from mainstream Republicans except for their love of weed and bitcoins.
2013-03-01 12:12:03 PM
1 votes:

Muta: Conservatism, Real Conservatism, is strong in our nation's colleges and universities but the liberal media skewing the polls to make it seem like conservatism isn't strong.  In the 3 years I've been at Liberty University , not once has anyone asked what my political feelings are.  I bet the students at Stanford or the University of Michigan get asked all the time.


If you mean "real conservatism" as in the actual meaning of the word 'conservative' instead of a shoddy synonym for 'right-wing', plenty of college folk are openly conservative.  Those people are also Democrats, because the primary conservative factions in US politics are currently subdivisions of the Democratic party, as the GOP has chased all theirs out in favor of hard-line radical reactionaries, which aren't remotely the same thing.

//I think at some point I said I'd stop pointing this out, I should stop drinking at work.  And message-boarding at work, I guess, but meh.
2013-03-01 12:08:57 PM
1 votes:

Car_Ramrod: College Republicans creep me out.


During the election one came to our house for polling and out reach stuff.  I couldn't help but wonder how stupid he was for supporting a political party with a platform that was sure to screw him over.  That said... if you want to move up in a political party, there are probably more long term opportunities for a college kid in the GOP.
2013-03-01 12:08:52 PM
1 votes:
I always thought it was for a different reason. College Republicans were my first experience with Republican talking-point spewing True Believers. Once you're exposed to those douche cadets, it really sours you on the party.
2013-03-01 12:05:30 PM
1 votes:

Felgraf: Except getting screwed over and lorded over can come from factions that *aren't* the government.


Quiet you, or I'll wall you up in the old coke oven!
2013-03-01 12:00:34 PM
1 votes:
The only "libertarian" principles these Libertarians have is drugs and samer weddings.
2013-03-01 11:59:22 AM
1 votes:
And even then, "Libertarian" is often just a stop on the road to outright "liberal."  It'll probably take just a couple more years of college (and if not by then, certainly grad school) for some of these kids to realize that libertarianism is just a big of a crock as regular old Republicanism.
2013-03-01 11:56:08 AM
1 votes:

DamnYankees: hubiestubert: winds of the Hell of Being Flayed Alive will still and stall

No way you just made this up. What Iron Maiden song is this a lyric from?


Buddhists be mad creative with their Hells...
2013-03-01 11:54:35 AM
1 votes:
You mean younger people don't hate gays, women, women's freedom to choose, minorities, non-Xtians, and people with less money.

that is fantastic!

You don't have to be an asshole to be a Republican. But it helps.
2013-03-01 11:50:50 AM
1 votes:

dittybopper: GAT_00: dittybopper: So remind me again why I shouldn't vote libertarian?

Because industrial feudalism is a really bad way to run the world.

The polar opposite is just as bad, if not worse.

You can always quit a job and work for someone else.  It's much harder to quit your government.

/Don't argue from the extremes.


I didn't, you did.  And a libertarian style government is in effect industrial feudalism.  It's not my fault if you view the truth as extreme because you don't like it.
2013-03-01 11:50:10 AM
1 votes:

dittybopper: So remind me again why I shouldn't vote libertarian?


The only thing that libertarian fiscal policy leads to is a failed nation?  That's a good enough reason for most.
2013-03-01 11:35:52 AM
1 votes:

dittybopper: So remind me again why I shouldn't vote libertarian?


Because industrial feudalism is a really bad way to run the world.
 
Displayed 88 of 88 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report