Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

8 Attacks on Freedom, From the Left and the Right

Americans are still relatively free.

If you look around the country today you will find that, despite the best efforts of their betters, Americans still enjoy a fair amount of freedom to do as they wish. But the nation's busybodies are on the case, and will soon take care of that.

Item: Now that Republicans effectively have repealed Obamacare's individual mandate—the decree that every resident shall buy health insurance, whether he wants it or not—states are stepping in and pondering whether to impose their own. So far nine states and the District of Columbia have taken up the idea, even though less than half of Democrats favor the mandate.

Item: Numerous cities are now looking with longing at rent control to keep housing costs in check. Irony alert: Many of those same cities also impose tight restrictions on land use, which limits the supply of, and therefore drives up the cost of, living space. This is an economic point so obvious even the Obama administration could see it: "The Obama administration ... is calling on cities and counties to rethink their zoning laws," Politico reported a couple of years ago, "saying that antiquated rules on construction, housing and land use are contributing to high rents and income inequality, and dragging down the U.S. economy as a whole." But why roll back regulations that raise the cost of housing when you can simply impose even more regulations to offset the effects of the first ones?

Item: The majority leader of California's state Assembly has introduced legislation that would impose a fine of up to $1,000 on any waiter or waitress who offers a plastic drinking straw to a customer without being asked. The Washington Post notes that this is part of a growing anti-straw movement, which is driven by alarm over the 500 million straws that are used every single day—which is almost certainly a fake number, seeing as how it is based on an unconfirmed phone survey by a 9-year-old boy. (Yes, really.)

Item: Two lawmakers in New York have introduced legislation to ban Tide Pods (those little plastic packages of laundry detergent), owing to the "Tide Pod Challenge," in which teenagers chew the things up for the delight of social media. Obviously, we don't want hundreds of children dying from such a phenomenon. Equally obviously, they aren't: From 2012 to 2017, two children died from eating detergent packets, which—as Reason's Christian Britschgi points out—is one-eighth as many children as died from swallowing batteries.

Item: The Seattle Times thinks it would be swell for Washington state to follow the lead of California and Hawaii, and raise the legal age for smoking and vaping to 21. Because while you can choose to risk your life in combat at that age, you shouldn't be able to choose to risk your life with Camels.

All of the preceding items reek of left-wing market interventionism and liberal nanny-statism, but conservatives often find freedom a loathsome inconvenience, too:

Item: New York Times columnist Ross Douthat recently suggested that American society would be much improved if we banned pornography. This, he argues, would lead to "better men" who are not "at once entitled and resentful, angry and ... caddish ... and frustrated that real women are less available and more complicated than the version on their screen." Interesting theory—but it runs up against the reality of how men treat women in times and places where porn is hard to come by, such as America in the 1840s or Saudi Arabia today.

Item: Republicans used to cheer free trade, but since Donald Trump rose to power they have turned sharply against it: 85 percent now think, wrongly, that free trade costs more jobs than it creates. Consequently, if an American chooses to buy a product from, say, China or Mexico, many Republicans would be happy to have the government step in with as much force as it can muster and say, "Oh no you don't!"

Item: Republicans also used to cheer immigration. But since Donald Trump rose to power they have had a change of heart there, too. This is probably the biggest current example of right-wing busybody-ism, and it is surely the worst, because it rests on so many dangerous premises.

There is, for instance, the belief that immigrants take "our" jobs. This presumes that somebody is entitled to a job in the first place. Not so. The only person entitled to decide who gets hired is the person offering the job. Nobody else has a claim on it.

Then there is the belief that too much immigration threatens America's identity. But America's identity, unlike that of most countries, has nothing to do with ethnicity or tribe. It is based on a set of eternal ideals, not a set of ephemeral genes.

So claiming that Latinos or Asians or some other group are "taking" "our" country from "us" is like claiming that Latinos or Asians are taking "our" theory of gravity.

America is freedom. If people come here to be free, they're not taking America—they're joining it. And they probably understand the country a lot better than the poor souls who worry that not enough Americans are being told what to do.

This column originally appeared in the Richmond Times-Dispatch.

Photo Credit: Foter.com

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Item: Republicans also used to cheer immigration.
    Its more about not cheering illegal immigration but some folks gotta keep that narrative alive.

  • sarcasmic||

    Now it's all about restricting legal immigration. Am I wrong?

  • Rhywun||

    Not to mention that the loudest support for the "tookerjerbs" theory is coming from unionized labor - i.e. erstwhile Democrats.

    I would argue that immigration is neither a Democrat or Republican issue. It's certainly far more complicated than the article implies.

    It's also at or near the bottom of any top-ten list of important issues facing the country. And yet it keeps getting trotted out by every side in order to beat the opposition over the head with it.

  • DiegoF||

    Until the last ten years there was a broad postwar consensus from both parties in favor of a moderately pro-trade, pro-immigration position, with the Democrats somewhat more hawkish on both because "tookerjerbs" but with the difference between parties dwarfed by differences between individual politicians.

    This was never going to hold. It was one of those things on which the biggest divide was between the elites and the public, and it was not going to survive the ongoing Californiazation of the Democratic Party, the "nonideological" populist candidate just waiting to swoop into the Republicans, and just the increasing polarization that will eventually swallow everything in its path. Soon there will be a leftist and rightist way to hang the toilet paper.

  • Hugh Akston||

  • loveconstitution1789||

    I am also for restricting legal immigrants but the largest Republican push is for curtailing illegal immigration.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    Are you still prancing about in silly libertarian drag, masquerading as something other than a right-wing authoritarian, or have you finally embraced your authentic, authoritarian. movement conservative self?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    I know that I am Libertarian. I also know that you are not based on how you talk around here.

  • Old Mexican - Mostly Harmless||

    Re: loveconstitution1789,

    I know that I am Libertarian.


    Liar.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Aw poor sockpuppet does not know what a Libertarian is.

  • Old Mexican - Mostly Harmless||

    Re: loveconstitution1789,

    Hey, imbecile, I've been commenting on libertarian matters here since I discovered Reason back in 2005. Who the fuck are you?I can tell you what it DOESN'T mean: imposibg your bigotry between peaceful and voluntary contractual agreements between nationals and foreigners who want to migrate to the US.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Some Mexican sock puppet: Sure you have. The Mexican handles seem to change daily.

    Good luck tool.

  • Rockabilly||

    Michael Hihn is one of Putin's internet robots programmed to spread discord in America.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Old Mexican is 1000x the libertarian you are, you little punk.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Old Mexican is 1000x the libertarian you are, you little punk.

    Meant for 'LoveCons', of course.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    It so cute when sock puppets come to each other's aid to show how not Libertarian they are.

    Narchists probably because sometimes the World just has to burn.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Palin's Buttplug|2.19.18 @ 3:36PM|#
    Old Mexican is 1000x the libertarian you are, you little punk.
    Meant for 'LoveCons', of course.


    Shut up, moron. All you do is lie.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    All you lefty clowns on here are obviously not Libertarians.

    Its funny when you jump between sock puppets.

    Who cares how long you have been here because Reason doesn't ban trolls like you.

  • Old Mexican - Mostly Harmless||

    Re: loveconstitution1789,

    I am also for restricting legal immigrants


    Why? Explain it to me like you actually thought about it instead of giving me the usual restrictionist bromides.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    I don't respond to sockpuppets like you.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Starting ...now.

  • Old Mexican - Mostly Harmless||

    Re: loveconstitution1789,

    I don't respond to sockpuppets like you.


    That's the extent of your discourse?

    You have NO idea, don't you?

  • Tony||

    Let's be honest, if there is a Russian troll lurking around here, he's one of the top contenders.

  • Res ipsa loquitur||

    Hmmmmmmmm

  • Ron Paul||

    It's a discussion board, not a glory hole.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Tony, the FSB from Russia called to let you know you forgot to pick up your check for 20 rubles.

  • Azathoth!!||

    Geez, OM, stop--you're part of the Hihn/Tony/Buttplug brigade now--one of the ranting lunatics.

    Please.

    Remember who you were.

  • Rhywun||

    That article is exactly what I expected, and a perfect case in point of what I'm talking about. It's nothing but "Republicans are racist" gussied up in their usual smug, overwrought style. The goal is to plant the seed in their readers' minds that there couldn't possibly be any objections to massive immigration that don't revolve around racism.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    Not all Republicans are racist. Not nearly.

    But everyone who voted for Trump was willing to appease bigotry for paltry, perceived partisan advantage, and anyone who accepts race-targeting voter suppression is a bigot.

  • Texasmotiv||

    Wow, false dichotomy much?

  • Old Mexican - Mostly Harmless||

    Re: Rhywun,

    The goal is to plant the seed in their readers' minds that there couldn't possibly be any objections to massive immigration


    What do you mean by "massive"? That would entail you possess the gift of foresight which only the very Gods possess.

    Can you at least make intelligent comments? No one is arguing for "letting everyobe in". Only what the Market wants, that's all.

  • Rhywun||

    In the real world, "massive" is whatever the majority of Americans says it is. If they feel the current number is too high, they'll elect someone who promises to lower it. Oh look, they did.

  • Old Mexican - Mostly Harmless||

    What you says makes no sense. You're saying in unequivocal terms that people who operate under a delusion get to define reality.

  • Rhywun||

    You're saying in unequivocal terms that people who operate under a delusion get to define reality.

    That is what elections are, in a nutshell.

  • DiegoF||

    Rhy, can you explain to me why the gays have such a fixation on Mike Pence? Has he done anything particularly awful? (He well might have, and it wouldn't surprise me; I just don't know of anything.) Also explain the appeal of Adam Rippon while you're at it, which is surely a far bigger mystery.

  • Rhywun||

    I don't know enough about Pence to explain that. I don't read our newsletters.

    Also, I don't know who Adam Rippon is.

  • DiegoF||

    Adam Rippon, I think I have the name right, is the mediocre figure skater, sort of a more boring Johnny Weir, who has "won the Olympics" by picking a Twitter fight with Mike Pence apropos of nothing. I just wanted to see if there's anything to it besides him drawing attention to himself--which, hey, can't knock a hustle. (I had noticed Pence being the target of pretty fervent hostility beforehand, and knew it wasn't "all cultural" like the hostility to Trump or gun rights, but figured it probably wasn't worth the histrionics either, and wondered exactly where in between Mike Pence lies.)

    Now that I think about it, I forget that you don't follow any sport except, I presume, football. Sad!

  • Tony||

    Mike Pence picked a fight with a gay figure skater who did nothing but exercise his right to criticize the asshole, which is why it became news. Republicans, always punching down. As for how bad Pence is, he was the worst Republican in the country (with the religious crap) until Trump came along and made everyone look normal by comparison. But I trust Omarosa on this one.

  • Maddow's Fleshlight||

    Mike Pence picked a fight with a gay figure skater who did nothing but exercise his right to criticize the asshole,

    How Tony thinks picking a fight works.

  • DiegoF||

    Do you have the goods on Pence, Fleshlight, since Rhywun is apparently so bad at gay?

  • Maddow's Fleshlight||

    No, I know nothing about it, mostly on purpose.

  • Rhywun||

    I'm slightly curious about this but only after it's been translated from Tony-ese, but then again... no, I'm actually not curious.

  • Maddow's Fleshlight||

    Yep completely full of shit. Even about being full of shit.

  • DiegoF||

    You're giving me a headache, man!

  • An Owl Named Dur||

    "Gay figure skater" is a redundancy.

  • DiegoF||

    You'd think that, but no. None of the other Americans this year are gay, for example. None of the figure skaters I know, either. But they're certainly overrepresented, that's for sure.

  • BigT||

    Pence at one point supported re-education for gays to make them straight. It's a bit crazy, but not violent unless forced.

  • Ariki||

    Wow Hihn you seriously need to see someone about your mental state.
    I am genuinely concerned.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    White Nationalism = Fascism Lite.

    Less filling and all that.

  • DiegoF||

    But does it taste great?

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    To white guys. You ever seen a brutha with a Lite?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Butt: Shut up, moron. All you do is lie.

  • DiegoF||

    Hey, give them some credit. It would appear this particular list of "attacks on freedom from the Left and Right" is 5-3 Left. Present circumstances seem to have gotten such that even they could not come up with a properly "balanced and evenhanded" pox-on-both-your-houses list. How very gauche, Reason!

  • Hank Phillips||

    Herbert Hoover actually reversed immigration while his enforcers were shooting people over felony light beer. That may be the blueprint Beauregard is trying to follow.

  • Old Mexican - Mostly Harmless||

    Re: loveconstitution1789,

    Its more about not cheering illegal immigration


    The current labor black market, which is what you're actually referring to, is the direct result of the current hostility towards legal immigration. So saying that GOPers are against illegal immigration 'only' is engaging in dishonest discourse.

  • Tony||

    This is a pattern. They're against abortion but also hostile to birth control.

  • sarcasmic||

    They're against abortion but also hostile to birth control.

    If someone believes that life begins at conception, then there is nothing inconsistent with that stance.

    Also, your argument is not exactly honest. Opposing federal funding of something isn't the same as wanting that something to be banned.

    "Republicans oppose federal funding of abortions and birth control! They want to competely ban abortions and birth control!" and the straw man falls down dead.

  • Tony||

    Life began billions of years ago in a manner we can only hypothesize about. And most birth control prevents conception, so what are you even talking about.

    The question should be more accurately framed: At what stage of development does a rights-bearing person come into being? And since we're talking about American law, God doesn't get a vote.

  • Hank Phillips||

    Read the first three words of the 14th Amendment... now try to understand them.

  • Azathoth!!||

    (laughing) The woman's rights also began at conception. On what authority do YOU defy the Will of Almighty God?

    So, if you say that her rights to.......abort a fetus........began when she was just a newly fertilized egg and her right to eventually abort a fetus was so strong that she had to be allowed to be born so that she could exercise her right to eliminate someone elses right to life?

    There are literal maggots just chewing away at your brain, aren't there?

    The right to life is pre-eminent over all other rights--because without it, one can HAVE no other rights.

    If you're not alive you don't have a right to free speech.
    If you're not alive you don't have a right to defend yourself.
    If you're not alive you don't have a right to privacy.
    If you're not alive you don't have a right to free migration.
    If you're not alive you don't have a right to anything. Because you aren't.

    And no one gives a shit what your pathetic God says, Hihnny.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    I bet I can eat twice as many of those delicious-looking Tide Pods as any of you.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    You start. Ready go....

  • damikesc||

    On the Left, 4 were based on actual legislation.

    On the Right, all 3 were based on opinion polls or op-eds and not, you know, legislation.

  • MasterThief||

    To add, of the 3 on the right there is a bit of a mischaracterization. I don't know of much of a popular push on the right to actually ban pornography even religious people are personally against porn. If we are to talk of porn bans, it is necessary to also note the feminist and leftist objection (as well as legislation proposed.) I can agree that there is a fair amount of protectionist talk on the right (and also on the left) but it isn't necessarily based in a rejection of free trade. Most of what I hear from the right in this regard is that the US has signed on to trade agreements that not only aren't free but are to our disadvantage, especially NAFTA. On the point of immigration, it is worth noting that the right is concerned about maintaining the positive aspects of our culture and sees illegal and less restrictive immigration as harmful to that culture. If open borders leads to a more collectivist and anti-libertarian nation, should we favor it?

  • damikesc||

    I don't know of much of a popular push on the right to actually ban pornography even religious people are personally against porn.

    Yeah, that was a stretch. Douthat isn't the most conservative guy out there, but looking around, I cannot find major right wing sites that have discussed that (outside of "You know, porn isn't doing relationships any favors"). I have seen none supporting Douthat.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    The Moral Majority/Focus on the Family American Taliban Christian Conservative bloc is solidly anti-porn. Hell, they hate and boycott Disney.

    The rot is deep in the GOP.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Butt: Shut up, moron. All you do is lie.

  • DiegoF||

    No, the antiporn shit is mostly left or "smart policy" centrist now. We are at a point where what remains of the religious right cannot do jack shit on anything except with an assist from the progs. That, of course, has often been forthcoming, from the 90s antiporn battles back to the antiliquor campaigns starting 100 years before. It would be nice to think that one benefit of this ridiculously polarized time would be to tend to preclude such coooperation--but no, I think they will find a way. Bipartisanship is hardly dead yet when it comes to fucking over the individual.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    The Moral Majority/Focus on the Family American Taliban Christian Conservative bloc is solidly anti-porn. Hell, they hate and boycott Disney.

    The rot is deep in the GOP.

  • MasterThief||

    *cont
    Now to check the left wing violations listed.
    It's debatable whether the states have the constitutional right to institute their insurance mandate, but the fact that democrats in general are divided in regards to this policy supported by their politicians is noteworthy. Rent control is a thing in pretty much any city and it's used to control their populations. The left is especially guilty here and it has broad support from constituents, but I don't know that it wouldn't be just as much of a problem from right wing politicians if they were elected to urban areas. The cries of their constituents to do something about housing tends to lead down that path. The tide pod and straw bans are typical nanny government meddling and I suspect voters don't support the politicians in their crusade of stupidity. Raising the age of vaping to 21 is foolish and as far as freedom goes is just as bad as alcohol not being legal until 3 years past legal age of adulthood. I can grant that this move is even more foolish due to alcohol being far more hazardous to those using the substance and the population at large.
    Hinkle really could have done better at picking anti-freedom initiatives from each side that are broadly supported by both politicians and voters on each side rather than these examples of politicians abusing their power.

  • DajjaI||

    Please do a story on the Lorde ban in Florida.

  • Old Mexican - Mostly Harmless||

    There is, for instance, the belief that immigrants take "our" jobs. This presumes that somebody is entitled to a job in the first place. Not so. The only person entitled to decide who gets hired is the person offering the job. Nobody else has a claim on it.


    Translation: What OM said many times before --jobs belong to EMPLOYERS.

  • buybuydandavis||

    But do employers own the immigration policy of the nation?

    I see no reason why US immigration policy should be crafted for the benefit of a minority of Americans who purchase labor to the cost of the majority of Americans who sell labor.

  • Azathoth!!||

    Translation: What OM said many times before --jobs belong to EMPLOYERS.

    ...except when they don't want to hire Mexicans who've immigrated illegally. Then they're rayciss and deserve what they get.

    FTFY--you wanna get the whole translation in for clarity.

  • wef||

    = Ross Douthat

  • Ron Paul||

    Why you keep name checking me guy I've never heard of.

  • Ron Paul||

    Right, but who are you guy I've never heard of.

  • Ron Paul||

    "Doesn't matter. "

    Agreed, you don't matter.

    And I will still never fuck you.

  • Ron Paul||

    "I rejected you first. "

    Nope. And I will still never fuck you guy who I never heard of.

    Sorry.

  • Ron Paul||

    "Ron Paul|2.19.18 @ 4:54PM|#

    No matter how much you neg me I'm never going to let you sleep with me"

    That's a time stamp. I'm not surprised that you don't understand what it does guy who admits he doesn't matter, that I've never heard of.

    Timestamps don't lie, guy who I never heard of, that admitted he doesn't matter.

    No means no.

  • Old Mexican - Mostly Harmless||

    Zero Liberty.

  • sarcasmic||

    Republicans claim to want government out of your wallet and into your bedroom.
    Democrats claim to want government out of your bedroom and into your wallet.

    In practice there is little difference between the two.

    FTFY

  • Tony||

    I don't know if the anti-porn thing is bigger than ever, but I've run across that agenda in unexpected places and it seems to be a thing lately for the Christianists. I want to have that debate. I really do. It would be more fun than the usual dour abortion crap and whatnot.

  • sarcasmic||

    Good luck finding someone to defend that. Time for you to rage against a straw man. As usual.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    We had the debate back in the 80s. I thought it was behind us.

  • Tony||

    I know! The issue came up at my job recently out of left field (this is not the sort of thing that usually comes up in my work, and it's a long story). Apparently there's this whole underground anti-porn movement thing among the moderate-to-bigly wacko Christians.

    Basically it's like arguments about drugs. Some people are addicted, but they claim it's inherently addictive and always destroys marriages.

  • sarcasmic||

    It's adultery in the mind, and it doesn't to marriages any good. I wouldn't go so far as to say it destroys marriage, but women don't like it when their man spanks it to women who are better looking than her. Kinda wears on her self esteem and creates resentment.

  • Tony||

    ^^ See?! It's like pod people.

  • Rhywun||

    Yeah, it's pretty easy to understand why the pro-marriage camp would be anti-porn.

    The question is, do they have any right to prohibit it? Of course not.

  • Tony||

    Wouldn't it be nice if we didn't have to go through the whole process where we inevitably discover the loudest anti-porn voices are the ones who like to watch people fuck goats and such?

  • DiegoF||

    I am not sure if it does, empirically, weaken marriages, or if it is inherently unhealthy. (I would very strongly suspect no on at least the latter. I have noticed the rise of a male-centered porn-abstention movement that is entirely secular and does not appear to have any feminist influence. I don't know how popular it really is, but it's interesting more from a sociological point of view than as anything with any actual clinical benefit, I imagine.)

    It's not hard to see why Christianity (and Judaism, Islam, etc.) would morally disapprove of porn! They have a tendency, of course, to overreach and assert empirical benefits for their moral teachings, but nonetheless insofar as these are the "pro-marriage" folks we're talking about, their antiporn stance is better characterized directly in terms of theological objections than to some sort of practical desire to preserve marriages by reducing resentment or whatever.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Marriage is the primary cause of divorce.

  • Paloma||

    The women don't have to be "better looking". They just have to be different.

  • Ron Paul||

    No matter how much you neg me I'm never going to let you sleep with me

  • DiegoF||

    Believe it! If you were able to resist even the seductions of Sacha Baron Cohen you are truly the straightest of us straights.

  • Ron Paul||

    Never gonna fuck you. Ever.

  • DiegoF||

    Or do this, as you so eloquently explained it to the Mises Institute.

  • Ron Paul||

    Yeah, to save face after I told you it would never happen.

    Sorry.

  • Ron Paul||

    Who are you, trying so hard to fuck me, again?

  • Ron Paul||

    Yeah, but who are you again, person trying to fuck me?

  • Ron Paul||

    Is that your explanation for why you're trying to fuck me?

    Because it's still never going to happen no matter how many of those pathologies you admit to

  • Juice||

    even though less than half of Democrats favor the mandate.

    Whoa, I know that all Republicans are literally neo-nazis, but I didn't realize that more than half of Democrats were too.

  • Lachowsky||

    The republicans created the affordable care act.

    I'll be damned. learned something today.

  • sarcasmic||

    The Affordable Care Act would have worked if it wasn't for those pesky Republicans!

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    They called it Romneycare.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    They called it ObamaCare and forced Americans to buy insurance under threat of death.

  • Mickey Rat||

    So, Obama had to do something, the ACA was something and its the Republicans fsult it was not something else?

    Your logic is flawless,...if you are insane.

  • Mickey Rat||

    The mandate is unpopular and guaranteed issue is popular. Neither are things the government should have aut hority to impose on the people.

    Government is the art of the possible, and sometimes undoing legislationbased on bad.assumptions leads to ugly results.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Since Congress won't repeal ObamaCare, Trump will help it implode.

  • AlmightyJB||

    Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right..

  • Rockabilly||

    Michael Hihn = Putin's favorite internet roBot

  • Hank Phillips||

    As usual, Hinkle's looter press puts cart before horse. Nick in effect chose the sitting prez 10 months before he nomination when he held the mic as The Don grinned Libertarianism? "I like it." One Ross Perot was enough, and the Outsider from Central Casting has hewed to the letter and spirit of the Republican Platform--with perhaps slightly less emphasis on the coathanger amendment copied from the Prohibition Party platform. The Dems can now shed their econazi advisors and stop trying to ban electricity and nationalize stuff. Yes over 96% vote for authoritarian looters, and that is what's behind those idiotic bills. The LP is growing, and that's the part that matters. The looters have no choice but to become less authoritarian.

  • BigT||

    "Then there is the belief that too much immigration threatens America's identity. But America's identity, unlike that of most countries, has nothing to do with ethnicity or tribe. It is based on a set of eternal ideals, not a set of ephemeral genes"

    Yes, America is built on a shared set of ideals. But inviting too many people to come here who do not share those ideals, or worse, who actively hate those ideals, is not a good idea.

    No organization can bring in too many outsiders without changing its basic nature. For the US, it's probably about 0.1% per year, or 300,000 legal immigrants. And we should require a bit of diversity in those immigrants, roughly in line with the populations of that group around the world. A merit system, with points for family already here, is a good idea. And let those illegals who are here already apply as well.

  • Ron Paul||

    Still not going to fuck you, guy, get over it.

  • Ron Paul||

    You say that now, after your clumsy attempts to fuck me were shot down.

  • Ron Paul||

    Who are you again, guy who I shot down who can't stop trying to fuck me, or get me out of his head, where I live rent-free?

    Because you're never going to fuck me.

  • Ron Paul||

    Why do you keep sharing your psychiatric diagnosis?

    I'm still not going to fuck you, you're nobody, and I matter.

  • Paloma||

    I swear if he starts talking about being free to gambol about the country....

  • buybuydandavis||

    Item: Open Borders
    Overwhelming the shrinking number of freedom loving Americans at the polls by importing an endless torrent of big government voters.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online