OK, but the Patriot Act wasn't about military funding anyway. It was the expansion of federal power to intrude on people's lives, and that's something I'd expect any libertarian to scream and yell about.

 

Right, but military funding equates to wasteful spending to most folks, especially 10 years later. And since 9/11 was widely the result of a failure of intelligence, I think the expansion of intelligence powers provided by the Patriot Act was a reasonable move, just like despite the enlargement of government, I was ok with Bush creating the Department of Homeland security. Clearly what we had wasn't working, so he tried to fix it.

 

I don't think many libertarians are upset about expansion of government relating to defense/foreign policy issues. That's not something the private sector can handle on its own.

Dick Armey and Freedomworks (and by extension the Kock brothers), among others, have been involved from pretty much the start.

 

I get to be Balta and make a completely unreasonable connection:

 

"So, you're saying all people with money and power are evil?"

Right, but military funding equates to wasteful spending to most folks, especially 10 years later. And since 9/11 was widely the result of a failure of intelligence, I think the expansion of intelligence powers provided by the Patriot Act was a reasonable move, just like despite the enlargement of government, I was ok with Bush creating the Department of Homeland security. Clearly what we had wasn't working, so he tried to fix it.

 

I don't think many libertarians are upset about expansion of government relating to defense/foreign policy issues. That's not something the private sector can handle on its own.

My understanding of true libertarianism is that it wants smaller government, ESPECIALLY in foreign policy. Listen to someone like Ron Paul, who, despite being a bit crazy, sticks to a true Libertarian agenda.

 

OK, but the Patriot Act wasn't about military funding anyway. It was the expansion of federal power to intrude on people's lives, and that's something I'd expect any libertarian to scream and yell about.

 

 

libertarians did scream about it. People like Ron Paul and such.

That's a fair criticism, but I think there's a difference between expanding intelligence powers and increased military funding right after being attacked, and spending trillions bailing out companies/people and subjecting the country to Obamacare and the like.

 

i forgot, name calling is especially important within the tea party. (socialist, obamacare, etc) Like little children.

libertarians did scream about it. People like Ron Paul and such.

Yes, that's why I used him as an example in a later post. He's an actual libertarian.

 

i forgot, name calling is especially important within the tea party. (socialist, obamacare, etc) Like little children.

Obamacare isn't exactly name-calling, I think you are stretching here. Your "like little children" comment is more name-calling than simply referring to the healtcare initiative as belonging to Obama, which it sort of does, for good or bad.

 

i forgot, name calling is especially important within the tea party. (socialist, obamacare, etc) Like little children.

 

Because the Democrats don't do that at all...

I get to be Balta and make a completely unreasonable connection:

 

"So, you're saying all people with money and power are evil?"

 

No, you get to ignore the very specific post I made addressing that issue.

Because the Democrats don't do that at all...

 

so be the bigger and better man. (not directed at you specifically)

Obamacare isn't exactly name-calling, I think you are stretching here. Your "like little children" comment is more name-calling than simply referring to the healtcare initiative as belonging to Obama, which it sort of does, for good or bad.

 

so should we re-name any/all iniatives brought on by Presidents.

 

How does BushTarp sound?

so should we re-name any/all iniatives brought on by Presidents.

 

How does BushTarp sound?

I really don't get your crusade here. You really think ObamaCare is an insulting moniker? I don't see it. If you want to call it BushTarp, feel free (its actually kind of funny), or if you want Bush to own Iraq, it can be BushRaq.

 

ObamaCare has been turned into an epithet for evil Democratic policies.

ObamaCare has been turned into an epithet for evil Democratic policies.

 

exactly.

 

and can anyone give an example of this type of name calling/association being used historically?

 

In addition, I'm sure, the way this turned out, was not 100% of what he wanted. There was a lot of horse trading going on in Congress (house and senate) that he had no control over, but in the end it was the only way to get the 60 votes they needed to overcome yet another Republican filibuster.

No, you get to ignore the very specific post I made addressing that issue.

 

It was a joke.

ObamaCare has been turned into an epithet for evil Democratic policies.

Just like the term "liberal", but I still don't see how either is an insult or name-calling. Its just a label, and I see no offense in it.

 

 

i forgot, name calling is especially important within the tea party. (socialist, obamacare, etc) Like little children.

 

i didnt see uneducated, white people on that list?

 

Yep.

Put in the context of the political discussion in this country, it most certainly is meant as an insult.

exactly.

 

and can anyone give an example of this type of name calling/association being used historically?

Bush's war.

Put in the context of the political discussion in this country, it most certainly is meant as an insult.

 

Wow.

Wow.

It's the same as someone using Tea-Partiest in a derogatory way.

 

**Dodges Kap's almost guaranteed shot at me for even mentioning Tea Party**

Put in the context of the political discussion in this country, it most certainly is meant as an insult.

Oh please. You could propose a plan for health care right here in this forum, and I could label it StrangeCare - is that an insult? I just don't see it.

 

It's the same as someone using Tea-Partiest in a derogatory way.

 

**Dodges Kap's almost guaranteed shot at me for even mentioning Tea Party**

Um...when we want to deride them, we almost universally use the easy insult "Tea-bagger".

The problem is that, at the top level, it isn't grass roots. It's funded by powerful and wealthy people.

 

and by your definition, who exactly is grass roots? anything that gains influence will have corporations jump in and try to corrupt the process to gain an advantage.

"The worst thing in American Politics" isn't on that list. But it's that.

 

this type of stuff is worse IMO. the bribes and corruption.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/10/business...tml?_r=1&hp