Thom Hartmann: My Answer to a Libertarian Caller Trashing OWS

That Cat is very Wise... =)

Perhaps he isn't a Libertarian, just a Hired Troll???

That is possible. At least someone is hiring these days.

Hooray!!! Lets work for the GOP??? =)

I would call him counter-libertarian or more generally, counter-right. I don't know that he is opposed to public protest per se, or just that he opposes ongoing perpetual protest. I'm not familiar with Thom's program, but I thought the caller gave away a hint to his politics when he thought to counter with a example of a pro-gun rights protest or an anti-abortion protest. In any case, many if not most people who call themselves libertarians today either use the word very loosely without understanding libertarian philosophy behind chapter one stuff, or they are in fact new/counter right social conservatives who are sharply anti-taxation and laissez-faire on business regulation, but very much pro-regulation on social issues

Hmmm, Home Grown Terrorists???

Yeppers.

Odd they never mention these folks in that context on the News... They always seem to make the villain the Hero, perhaps that was just how I viewed it??? =)

"They always seem to make the villain the Hero." That's correct, KB.

Thanks Leen, I was thinking it was Just Me... =)

Pro-lifers do commit most of the acts of terror in America... a bad example they are if there is one.

Exactly. They are pro-life but think they have license to kill

Coool, I did not know that... =)

Very well put!

Is this your standard response?

When I learn something New, of course, what would yours have been???
p.s. Whose your Stylist, I really Dig that Do... =)

The best description of Libertarianism I've ever heard came from Berkeley Breathed:

"I'd be a Libertarian myself ... except every Libertarian I've ever known is a tax-dodging professional complainer."

Hey Cool you are welcome sugarmountian... =)

Do you have any idea just how foolish you look when you post garbage like this?

Most of those that attended were not slave owners, but the insult was about the same. The move to free the slaves was bartered away in order to broker a deal to settle the issue of states rights versus federalism. Following the war and ratification there was a rush to grow cotton and tobacco to pay for the war ending the movement toward emancipation. This is a cycle that has been repeated throughout history:

Freedoms are frivolously traded away by the very representatives of the people, and quickly forgotten.

There you go again.

Must have done some reading. I'd say a look at Wikipedia under 'kleptocracy' with special attention to narco kleptocracy would give substance to the bipartisan tyranny which follows in the steps of its parent state : open air slavery detailed in the settlement of the Battle of Hastings in 1066 and temporarily modified by the rebellion of the hereditary executive in 1215 ( the Great Charter ) which included little things like right to trial ( Habeas Corpus ). That, of course, is abridge by the misnamed 'Patriot' Act...which gives the state free license to run domestic terrorism upon its citizens.
Don't believe me ? Read Glenn Greenwald at Salon sometime.

Ironic Indeed... =(

Those articles that you linked to are preposterous and have no credibility whatsoever.

Well said.

Well said Jan, and may I also mention the Pro-Life movement has been Violent in their protests to the extreme of killing abortion Doctors. I'm not sure I would want them taking over a park! :)

Right on, Jan!

Heh, They seem to do the same with their Bibles...

Stop it. Ron Paul isn't against Occupy. This "libertarian" is an idiot. Most liberarians know that it's absolutely constitutional to occupy PUBLIC lands. We are the public. Everybody I see knocking Ron Paul is arguing against a point he doesn't espouse because some jackass who supports Ron Paul is an idiot like this guy who called in to Thom's show.

Dr. Paul said that he was "against crony capitalism" when he mentioned supporting some very limited aspects of this movement. He has no objection, however, to allow crony capitalists to wage wars on Americas behalf (so long as tax dollars are not used) and would be willing also to issue letters of marque enabling them to do so. I'm afraid that he is a bit of a wanker.

Thanks for pointing that out.

Again. An incorrect argument based on a misunderstanding of Ron Paul's beliefs. He IS against foreign wars. Its not just an issue of taxes. Ron Paul is aware of the fact that tax dollars are a minor part of war funding. Most money that goes to fund wars is simply printed and paid back with interest from future tax dollars. Getting rid of fiat money would prevent every bullshit war we've had since WWII.

And again, you are arguing against a ghost. Ron Paul is the most anti-corporate candidate ever to run. Ron Paul is more dangerous to crony capitalism than every other candidate on any side running. He is against corporate personhood. Against the lack of accountability and lack of transparency of the corporate structure. Against corporations funding campaigns....he's so anti-corporation no one will give him any airtime cause mass media is corporate.

You completely misrepresent RPs opinions, then you call him a wanker based on your ignorance of what he stands for?

I'm not a diciple but I think he's by far the best candidate running. It's fine if you don't like Ron Paul but it would be better if you knew why. Who else is there to vote for? Obama? He's just smarter and better looking than GWB but his policies are the same: Corporate rule for all.

Pointing what out? His statement is completely inaccurate.

His own words.

It is spot on.

Sorry, I have to disagree. Although I'm not a Paul follower, I know that he's very much against our wars.

Wrong. Not his own words. He is more against crony capitalism than any other candidate in any party.

No. You are wrong. Stop it. RP is attacked because he is against the corporations that rule us.

Come on somebody. Bring an argument. All these arguments are bullshit based on a misunderstanding of his political/economic opinions. Vote me down. Fine. But bring something with it. Make a real argument based on knowledge and understanding. There are opinions in which I don't agree with Ron Paul, but who else will restore a legitimate democracy in this country. Obama is FOS. These other GOP candidates are an embarassment to human intelligence. RP said that foreign wars aren't in the best interest of Americans and our tax dollars shouldn't be spent on them. Is that his only reason. NO. What's your point. Make one please. Ron Paul is the only candidate for real change. If you don't like some of his policies. Fine. Vote for what you want in your own state. Your vote will be far more relevant and if you don't like your states decisions you can always go to another state. Now, if you don't like the laws you must abide, the options is: if you don't like it go to another country. I don't want to leave America. I want it to be free like it was supposed to be. I don't want to tell you how to live and I don't want people to pretend I need to "borrow" money from them when they create it out of nothing and charge me interest on it as if I am the dog that sits under their table begging for scraps. That's the same "money" that funded all these bullshit wars. RP is the ONLY candidate against this crap. He is the ONLY presidential candidate against the things that got us here. What's the alternative? Another 4 years of GWB 2.0: Obama?

Getting rid of regulatory agencies that are usually regulated by the industries they pretend to regulate doesn't do away with the judicial system. The judicial system, as flawed as it is, defends people from being taken advantage of by others regardless of the particular subject matter. A flat tax is not bad for the economy when you take away corporate subsidies and unfair financial benefits that the corporatocracy enjoys presently (which Ron Paul is completely against). We may differ philosophically but who do you support? Is he/she going to end our empiracle approach toward foreign policy? Our false economy built on irresponsible corporations? Corporate handouts? Corporate bailouts? Corporate personhood? Fake money "lent" to the rest of us at interest that the Fed creates out of thin air? Unlimited corporate political financing? I know what Ron Paul stands for. Who you got?

Wrong is wrong. Vote me down all you want but what your saying is inaccurate. Plain and simple. If the truth is unpopular. OK

I did not know that, Thanks for sharing... =)