Note to democrats and republicans, the President is not Hitler.

[quixotecoyote]

Aren't you one of the folks who defended the Tea Party? Or was that the Libertarian Party-- you know, the other name for right-leaning Tea Party members?

Without too much of a derail, the Tea Party has too many wacky-*** theocrats to be synonymous with libertarianism.

 

[davefoc]

Aren't you one of the folks who defended the Tea Party? Or was that the Libertarian Party-- you know, the other name for right-leaning Tea Party members?

My cut at the tea party is very different than yours. The main driver for the tea party has been disgruntled people. Unfortunately there is a big pool of not quite normal people who are always disgruntled that make up a great deal of the publicized tea party supporters. These are people that have a wide range of racist or crack pot ideas or at the least non-mainstream ideas that will prevent the tea party from ever having any serious impact. There do seem to be some moderate, non-partisan small government types that strike me as reasonable in the party and perhaps it is those that you think of as libertarians.

 

[GreNME]

Without too much of a derail, the Tea Party has too many wacky-*** theocrats to be synonymous with libertarianism.

Libertarian Party does not always mean synonymous with libertarianism (regardless of what the party may claim). It's one of the main reasons I don't identify as Libertarian Party (which mostly consists of a non-commital arm of the GOP). But that's another discussion and not at all the point I was making with my statement anyway-- my point was that EGarrett has indeed identified with folks who have played the "president equals Hitler" card (though I've never seen him do so and doubt he would), so I'm less than impressed at the moral superiority displayed in the original post.

-----

My cut at the tea party is very different than yours. The main driver for the tea party has been disgruntled people. Unfortunately there is a big pool of not quite normal people who are always disgruntled that make up a great deal of the publicized tea party supporters. These are people that have a wide range of racist or crack pot ideas or at the least non-mainstream ideas that will prevent the tea party from ever having any serious impact. There do seem to be some moderate, non-partisan small government types that strike me as reasonable in the party and perhaps it is those that you think of as libertarians.

Again, my point again was that EGarrett has indeed identified with folks who have played the "president equals Hitler" card (though I've never seen him do so and doubt he would), so I'm less than impressed at the moral superiority displayed in the original post.

 

[EGarrett]

Libertarian Party does not always mean synonymous with libertarianism (regardless of what the party may claim). It's one of the main reasons I don't identify as Libertarian Party (which mostly consists of a non-commital arm of the GOP)

Really? What part of the GOP supports gay marriage and drug legalization?

 

[GreNME]

Really? What part of the GOP supports gay marriage and drug legalization?

Since when did those become standardized platforms of the Libertarian Party?

Nice to see how you focused on that statement and are conspicuously avoiding my other statement (about you having defended TP-ers before).

 

[Ladewig]

]Clinton and Hitler Compared[/url]
.

I followed the link and my favorite accusation concerning Clinton's similarities to A. Hitler: "Watch television for just an hour and you'll see at least one community service announcement to recycle." Indeed, a local television station encouraging viewers to recycle is exactly like Hilter's policies. Exactly!

 

[Ladewig]

Since when did those [gay marriage and drug legalization] become standardized platforms of the Libertarian Party?

From the http://www.lp.org/platform website. Items 1.2 and 1.3

 

[headscratcher4]

Bill: Ok, I get from your wackyness that Obama is a socialist (so he can equal Hitler in the "socialist" part of Nazi). But is he a nationalist? You guys confuse me. Hitler loved the idea of Germany and Germaness and its supposed cultural superiority over other peoples, reaces, ets. I.e. the "nationalist" part of national socialism, Nazi. But you guys...well, people like Beck, Palin, Buchanan, etc. keep telling me that Obma hates America. He wants to destroy it. He wants it to be subserviant to other nations, that he wants America to pay for its historical sins, that he doesn't believe in American exceptionalism, etc. So, I'm confused about your idiotic analogy: where is the "nationalism" in Obma's Hitler-like national socialism?

 

[GreNME]

From the http://www.lp.org/platform website. Items 1.2 and 1.3

How interesting it is that leaders of the LP still manage to come from GOP champions of the exact opposite (example 1, example 2), don't you think? I guess the last LP presidential candidate's change of heart after years of thuggery for the Religious Right completely disproves my comment of the LP as "a non-commital arm of the GOP," huh?

Even funnier, though, is the fact that this is where you guys are attacking my criticism of EGarrett's premise, since my main point is that the pretense of moral high ground is unfounded when it crops up in Libertarian circles and not just Democratic or Republican sources. Heck, the Tea Party, which has been banging the "less government" and other long-standing LP stances louder than ever has been shown in several protests to be likening the president to Hitler, but oddly I didn't see "note to Democrats and Republicans and Tea Partiers and Libertarians and others" in the thread title.

But hey, as long as you can fall back on party bylaws even though the party representatives have a long history of directly opposing them, then you've vindicated yourselves from my criticism, n'est ce pas?

ETA: I simply had to post this quote from the last link I gave, because it's comedy gold and exemplifies exactly what I meant by my argument about so many Libertarian Party members seeming like GOP-ers wearing different, more extreme clothes:

So President Obama does not deserve a comparison to the Nazis because the Nazis perpetrated a genocide? Pardon me, sir- isn't Mr. Obama perpetuating a genocide!? He has been accurately described as "the most extreme pro-abortion candidate ever to seek the office of President of the United States. He is the most extreme pro-abortion member of the United States Senate. Indeed, he is the most extreme pro-abortion legislator ever to serve in either house of the United States Congress."​

 

[NoScotsman]

This constant stream of crap is why I am not a member of your parties.

Supporting political parties (or joining groups in general) isn't consistent with critical thinking. Personally, I prefer to follow the truth wherever it takes me.

 

[Sunsneezer]

You know who else compared everybody to Hitler?

Hitler

 

[JimBenArm]

You know who else compared everybody to Hitler?

Hitler

 

[EGarrett]

Since when did those become standardized platforms of the Libertarian Party?

1.2 Personal Privacy

Libertarians support the rights recognized by the Fourth Amendment to be secure in our persons, homes, and property. Protection from unreasonable search and seizure should include records held by third parties, such as email, medical, and library records. Only actions that infringe on the rights of others can properly be termed crimes. We favor the repeal of all laws creating “crimes” without victims, such as the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes.

1.3 Personal Relationships

Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the
government's treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption,
immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or
restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices
and personal relationships.

Libertarian Party on Drugs
Click here for 2 full quotes on Drugs OR other political leaders on Drugs.

* Repeal all drug laws creating “crimes” without victims. (May 2008)
* The war on drugs threatens individual liberties. (Jul 2000)
-----------
Libertarian Party on Civil Rights
Click here for 4 full quotes on Civil Rights OR other political leaders on Civil Rights.

* Support individual’s right to choose, even if we disapprove. (May 2008)
* Repeal all laws against homosexuality. (Jul 2000)
* Right to complete freedom of expression includes pornography. (Jul 2000)
* Redress the wrongs of the U.S. towards the Indians. (Jul 2000)

http://www.saviorquest.com/news1/stosselgay.htm

Nice to see how you focused on that statement and are conspicuously avoiding my other statement (about you having defended TP-ers before).

Try backing up your statement with a link.

 

[NoScotsman]

You know who else compared everybody to Hitler?

Hitler

This board continues to disprove Godwin's Law

People just love to talk about Hitler...

 

[GreNME]

Try backing up your statement with a link.

You should maybe check out my last post. I've actually already addressed this.

Seriously, EGarrett, you don't maintain that Libertarians or Tea Party members haven't compared Obama to Hitler, right? I mean, after I've shown an example of a Libertarian doing precisely that, while echoing Religious Right ideologies on an issue (which is just a bonus), you're certainly willing to agree that this isn't a Democratic or Republican Party flaw, are you not?

I've backed up my statements with links in my last post. Now let's have a go at actually debating the topic you started.

 

[headscratcher4]

This board continues to disprove Godwin's Law

People just love to talk about Hitler...

You know who loved to talk about Hitler?

Goebles.

 

[EGarrett]

You should maybe check out my last post. I've actually already addressed this.

Seriously, EGarrett, you don't maintain that Libertarians or Tea Party members haven't compared Obama to Hitler, right? I mean, after I've shown an example of a Libertarian doing precisely that, while echoing Religious Right ideologies on an issue (which is just a bonus), you're certainly willing to agree that this isn't a Democratic or Republican Party flaw, are you not?

I've backed up my statements with links in my last post. Now let's have a go at actually debating the topic you started.

First, are you going to acknowledge that you did not know what the libertarian party stood for? If not, you must understand that it's impossible to have a conversation that way. It will just be you throwing out statements then ignoring them when someone takes the time to respond.

I'm not saying this to be rude. I was very thorough in last reply.

 

[GreNME]

First, are you going to acknowledge that you did not know what the libertarian party stood for? If not, you must understand that it's impossible to have a conversation that way. It will just be you throwing out statements then ignoring them when someone takes the time to respond.

I'm not saying this to be rude. I was very thorough in last reply.

No, I'm not playing some conditional game with you. If you don't want to admit the flaw in your original post's premise then you really don't have to. I've pointed out how the last LP presidential candidate was the main proponent against the two party issues you pointed out, yet since he's dropped those he's apparently hunky-dory to run as the national representative of the party. I've pointed out a self-identified Libertarian who not only plays the "Obama-Hitler" card, but actually parrots a GOP position (abortion, humanity at conception) completely.

Why don't you stop the red herring game and actually address why you failed to include the Libertarian Party and the Tea Party in your list of political affiliations you find to be part of the "constant stream of crap" in the OP?

 

[EGarrett]

No, I'm not playing some conditional game with you. If you don't want to admit the flaw in your original post's premise then you really don't have to. I've pointed out how the last LP presidential candidate was the main proponent against the two party issues you pointed out, yet since he's dropped those he's apparently hunky-dory to run as the national representative of the party. I've pointed out a self-identified Libertarian who not only plays the "Obama-Hitler" card, but actually parrots a GOP position (abortion, humanity at conception) completely.

Why don't you stop the red herring game and actually address why you failed to include the Libertarian Party and the Tea Party in your list of political affiliations you find to be part of the "constant stream of crap" in the OP?

I didn't cherry pick your point. I'm disputing the very first fact-based claim you made in this thread, which was wrong and based on lack of knowledge. You can't make claims based on faulty premises. So if you retract that claim or acknowledge that you don't actually know what the Libertarian Party stands for and/or were making claims without doing your research, then I'll be happy to continue and look at your other claims. In the meantime we're stuck on the very first fact-related claim you made.

 

[PixyMisa]

Considering my concerns about the Bush theocracy

Buzz buzz buzz...

So tell me specifically which actions Obama has taken that threaten the separation of powers, the rights of US citizens, or anything else that makes up the fabric of our country or the Constitution.

Continued all of Bush's policies and ordered the extra-judicial killing of a US citizen.

Even for me that last rates a hmm.