Justin Amash's Vision for the Libertarian Party
The Libertarian former congressman on the Mises Caucus takeover, his embrace of "liberalism," and political strategy.
HD Download"I think that the [Libertarian Party's] emphasis should be on getting us back to our roots as a country," says Justin Amash. "What this country is about is liberalism in the classical sense, the idea that people should be free…to make their own decisions about their lives, and government to the extent possible should just stay out of it."
Amash was a Republican congressman from Michigan once described by Politico as the House's "new Ron Paul" because of his willingness to buck party-line votes on principle. He switched his party affiliation to Libertarian in his fifth and final term, making him the party's highest officeholder since its founding in 1971. He explored a run for the Libertarian Party presidential nomination in 2020 before changing his mind, paving the way for a run by longtime Libertarian Party member Jo Jorgensen.
Amash was in Reno, Nevada, during the Mises Caucus takeover of the Libertarian Party. He is not a member of the caucus but plans to remain in the party.
Reason's Nick Gillespie sat down with Amash in Reno to ask him about his views of the Mises Caucus, his vision for the future of the party, and his political ambitions for 2024 and beyond.
Produced by Nick Gillespie and Zach Weissmueller; edited by Adam Czarnecki and Danielle Thompson; camera by James Marsh and Weissmueller; sound editing by John Osterhoudt; additional graphics by Regan Taylor and Isaac Reese.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Holy shit, it's article dump Friday. 12 Articles after the lynx?
I even have made $30,030 just in five weeks straightforwardly working part-time from my apartment. (res-32) Immediately when I've lost my last business, I was exhausted and luckily I found this top online task & with this I am in a position to obtain thousands directly through my home. Everybody is able to get this best career & can gain more dollars on-line going this article..> https://Www.Profit97.Com
I even have made $30,030 just in five weeks straightforwardly working part-time from my apartment. (keb_05) Immediately when I've lost my last business, I was exhausted and luckily I found this top online task & with this I am in a position to obtain thousands directly through my home. Everybody is able to get this best career &
can gain more dollars online going this article.......... http://getjobs49.tk
You would think with AI being sentient now, even Reason's spam filter would catch an obvious (and duplicated) spam link like this.
Amash is fine. But he is also irrelevant.
His "greatest" attribute was his ability to stick his thumb in Trump's eye when the rest of his party was unwilling. That got him a lot of press. But that will get him jack and shit now that he isn't part of the GOP (and Jack missed the campaign tour bus). The press doesn't care. Trump is retired to Florida.
Trump may (possibly???) be retired, but He STILL lusts something GAWD-awful for some MORE press coverage!
Here is the latest!
STOP THE PRESSES!!! INSERT HOTTEST NEWS FLASH!!! BREAKING NEWS!!!
Trump finally (Sort of) concedes!
My most-senior inside contact at the Shadow White House has surreptitiously slipped me an advance copy of the ex-lame-duck POTUS’s concession speech. Without further ado, here it is:
Friends, non-foreigner-type True Americans, and all who Make America Great Again, lend me your ears! I come to bury Biden, not to praise him. Biden and his minions stole the elections, and we must dishonor that! To Make America Great Again, we must invent the most fantastic, fabulous, YUUUGEST BIGNESS EVAH SEEN, in the ways of truly factually fictitious, but Spiritually and Metaphorically True, NEW Republican ballots! Because I have directed My Generals and My Scientists to research the current and past performance, efficacy, and patriotism of one-party states, versus multi-party states. As I have directed them to, My impartial, unbiased, data-driven council of My Generals and My Scientists have determined that yea verily, one-party states work better! Therefore, we must all strive for the Glorious Day, when America becomes a one-party state, under the One True Party, the Republican Party!
But for now, the courts have sided with Biden and his camel-toe, and Antifa, BLM, and all the Marxist terrorists. We must let the courts have it their way, with mayo on the side. I mean, with Mao Tse Tung on the side, but without the Proud Boys standing back and standing by. Thank you, Proud Boys, for having stood by me. Also, thank you, Steve Bannon, Vladimir Putin, Kim Ill Dung, and Pepe the Stolen-Intellectual-Property Frog. Pepe, watch out for Miss Piggy, she and her “pre-nuptial contracts” will clean your clock, just like Melania is set to clean mine soon! But I digest.
So we can’t disrepute what the nasty courts have said, or there might be civil war. Sad! The courts aren’t very American these days! And if you don’t like what I just said? Well, I’m sorry that you feel that way!
So congratulations to Biden for having stolen the elections! This is America, so we must properly honor the decisions of the courts, in a dishonorable way! Biden can come and live with us in the White House, per the wishes of the courts. He can pour our covfefe for us, for Steve Bannon, Pepe the Frog, and I, and Jill can make sandwiches for us. We promise to call him POTUS, and her, First Lady! POTUS of covfefe, and First Lady of sandwiches, that is! Hey Biden! Get yer butt over here! Pepe needs some covfefe!
That setup will get us by for a little while! Meanwhile, we can schedule the NEW run-off elections, this time without any fraudulent so-called “Democratic” votes being allowed, and we can do this RIGHT the next time!
Meanwhile, congratulations to Joe Stalin-Biden, on being elected POTUS of pouring covfefe for Pepe!
Oh look, the Democratic Party representative just showed up.
Who, you mean Trump and His Lame Speech above? Yes, Trump is doing YUUUUUGE favors for the Dems, by REFUSING to EVER do the right thing (the RIGHT thing, not the rightIST thing), and take BACK His Big Lie, foursquare and forthrightly!
Shillsy's motto is "If you can't fight it, shitpost it into oblivion".
Mammary-Fuhrer's motto is long but insidious: "We Moose-Fuckers in Innermost Islamic Canuckistanistanistanistanistan will weaken the USA by getting the Rethugglicans to IGNORE the absurd wokeness of "team D" in the USA, and ignore high taxes, high regulations, and ridiculously large-Government-Almighty policies as well, and, per the MOST Excellent Leadershit of The Donald, we'll get "Team R" to focus almost EXCLUSIVELY on How The Elections Were Stolen From The Donald, instead!!! Then Team D can take over and weaken the USA... And then we Moose-Fuckers can INVADE and take over!"
Pick up on the Oswald Mosley goon irritated that an actual libertarian can see through Orange Hitler National Socialism. May Father Coughlin make an offering on its behalf at the Shrine of the Little Flower and go in peace and infiltrate no more. (https://tinyurl.com/3k65fvnd)
You're a complete nutbag.
Yea, it was totes great of him that he supported the deep state illegally spying on and trying to frame the elected president, and helped install a cabal into power, taking choice away from the American people and making life much worse now.
Great stuff there.
Read the below to see who was into "...taking choice away from the American people..."
Der TrumpfenFuhrer ***IS*** responsible for agitating for democracy to be replaced by mobocracy!
https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/24/politics/trump-election-warnings-leaving-office/index.html
A list of the times Trump has said he won’t accept the election results or leave office if he loses.
Essential heart and core of the LIE by Trump: “ANY election results not confirming MEEE as Your Emperor, MUST be fraudulent!”
September 13 rally: “The Democrats are trying to rig this election because that’s the only way they’re going to win,” he said.
Trump’s constant re-telling and supporting the Big Lie (any election not electing Trump is “stolen”) set up the environment for this (insurrection riot) to happen. He shares the blame. Boys will be boys? Insurrectionists will be insurrectionists, trumpanzees gone apeshit will be trumpanzees gone apeshit, so let’s forgive and forget? Poor Trump was misunderstood? Does that sound good and right and true?
It really should immediately make us think of Krystallnacht. Hitler and the NAZIs set up for this by constantly blaming Jews for all things bad. Jew-haters will be Jew-haters, so let’s forgive and forget? Poor Hitler was misunderstood? Does that sound good and right and true?
No matter how hard Reason tries, Amash will never be a real libertarian.
So dreamy
If Justin Amash isn't a real libertarian, then neither is Ron Paul.
Hahaha... whew... how so?
Tell me where they're in substantial disagreement.
Ron Paul introduced a motion, and voted, that the impeachment was unconstitutional.
Justin Amash not only considered the impeachment to be constitutional, he voted for impeachment.
I'd call that a "substantial disagreement".
You know Ron Paul isn't in Congress anymore and hasn't been since 2013, right?
But I get it. It has nothing to do with libertarian philosophy or legislative policy. It has to do with fealty to Trump. That's the difference between a real libertarian and a fake one, apparently.
Leftists really lack intelligence.
It doesn't seem if you really wanted to debate your failed witticism. You could provide examples for debate if you felt it was lacking and that's what it seemed you want, but you didn't.
Yes, you’re right, obviously I meant Rand Paul.
So you believe that Ron Paul would have supported the unconstitutional circus and waste of money and time that was the impeachment? Please, do make an argument!
Amash is more interested in self promotion than advancing libertarian ideas.
Amash does not understand the definition nor the value basis of a moral right. But this is the common failing of all mystics whose grounding comes second-hand from an invisible thing that never existed. Nor does he understand the mathematical certainty with which the LP has for 50 years quietly repealed cruel and hateful laws, put conscription into a coma and demonstrably reversed the growth of the federal personnel roster. Before 1931 only communist and fascist parties used spoiler votes to change laws.
Yes, this, "...blah-blah-blah God-given rights", my aching butt!
I will now demonstrate, logically and impeccably, that Government Almighty is the boss of God Almighty…
Here is PROOF!
We read in the papers, every day almost, of federal judges (servants of Government Almighty) sitting in judgment (using their magical mind-reading powers) about whether or not our religious beliefs are "sincerely held", or not.
Yet I have NEVER heard of ANY credible evidence concerning God Almighty, sitting in judgment about whether or not our beliefs in Government Almighty are "sincerely held", or not!!!
Brain case closed!!!
Nah, Trump is still very active.
That said, Amash was irrelevant pre-Trump. And he will remain so.
Also, layering the irrelevance, even if Trump isn't retired, current Presidential poll numbers clearly indicate #NeverTrump isn't the platform it used to be.
The funny thing is that Amash probably could have gotten Trump interested in some of his ideas. Trump is a deal maker. But all these assholes were more focused on their TDS than getting things accomplished.
Mike, the computer in Heinlein's "Moon is a Harsh Mistress," experienced a pleasurable sensation when converting hundreds of thousands of megatons of kinetic energy on top of haughty looter politicians' fiefdoms. I experience something similar at the sobbing, moaning, whining, carpet-biting and wailing of a coercive Kleptocracy looter like Ted over the defeat of Orange Hitler, Shrillary or Wallace. Cry, baby, cry!
I’m far more libertarian than you are. You’re just an infanticidal anti christ bigot. And I say that as an agnostic.
I'm not sure Hank is sane enough to qualify as anything beyond just "insane".
That’s possible. We should make sure he’s in a proper insane asylum.
He named 2 post offices sir. Give him credit.
Which is why the Mises Caucus won't support him, because he did not support their savior Trump.
The amount of ignorance you demonstrate here daily is amusing. Tell me you've never read the mises caucus statements or stances without telling me.
Facts? Why read or learn anything that may change one's biases when there's a perfectly good narrative and in-group beliefs? Odd how the progressive commentariat are inflexibly conservative when it comes to their beliefs.
https://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/touching-the-raw-amygdala-an-analysis-of-liberal-debate-tactics-preface/
Amygdalaic reaction is a motherflipper, and tends to short circuit critical thinking. Combine it w/ bias, lack of intellectual maturity, and the need to be in a group, and the results are pretty ugly.
Stupid or lying?
Why not both?
"Which is why the Mises Caucus won't support him, because he did not support their savior Trump."
Stuff your TDS up your ass.
Eat shit and die, assho0le.
The mises caucas doesn't support amash because amash isn't a libritarian
The Mises Caucus doesn't support Amash because Amash isn't a Rothbardo-Hoppean anarcho-reactionary.
It can't be because he was a bein pensant who thought he'd get some positive press by lying about the Mueller Report and it backfired on him.
What is more plausible, that Justin Amash, the most libertarian and most transparent member of Congress and a devout Christian, voted to impeach because he believed Donald Trump had violated his oath of office and obstructed justice in the course of the Mueller investigation, or that he was secretly an unscrupulous, lying attention whore?
Trump wasn’t impeached for obstructing justice with the Mueller report. You’re getting your narratives crossed.
No, I'm not. Look it up. Abuse of power and obstructing Congress, not Russian collusion.
I wasn’t aware that Mueller was a member of Congress.
The obstruction of justice article occurred by trying to fire Mueller, but was ultimately dropped. The obstruction of Congress article stuck because he was instructing administration officials to refuse to submit to House subpoenas to give depositions during the inquiry.
So he wasn’t actually impeached for the Mueller investigation, but that’s the reason Amash impeached him?
Nothing secret about Amash being an unscrupulous lying whore, you pathetic fanboy
Lol. This is where brandy got his thesis.
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/libertarian-gop-alt-right/
James Larratt Battersby doubtless felt the same way about Parliament: We may be certain that the betrayal of Adolf Hitler will be avenged, or rather, as He himself said on 30 January 1943: “Every nation and every individual is being weighed in the balances, and those found wanting will fall. God will be a Just Judge.” James Larratt Battersby—The Holy Book of Adolf Hitler
Yes, nothing like standing up for corruption in government to burnish those liberaltarian bonafides. Like the rest of the terminal TDS sufferers he did this to himself. I'm sure he'll get a fat check from ACT Blue for his service though.
And Brandyshit will get a well-deserved rep as a fucking partisan ignoramus.
future tense?
Quit pushing this poseur cosmotarian down everyone's throats, Reason. He's not going to be able to save you from the Paul's and the outside-the-Beltway Mises barbarians.
He burned all his credibility when he lied about the contents of the Muller Report.
"Expert Christian Theologian" The Great Marxist-Mammary-Necrophilia-Fuhrer burned all of Her credibility when she lied about Jesus being pro-suicide and Pro-identity-theft!
What do you think that Jesus is going to think about you lying that I said he was pro-suicide and pro-identity-theft?
Does your bum feel hot, Shillsy?
Hey Mamma the Highly Esteemed, Expert Christian Theologian!
https://reason.com/2021/03/24/for-the-first-time-a-majority-of-republicans-support-same-sex-marriage/#comment-8822506
Have you figured out yet, how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Many of us are waiting with bated breath!
Also, how is Your Followership building up? I mean, for Your “Expert Theologians for Worshipful Methods of Identity Theft”? Where do we subscribe to Your Newsletter?
Hear, hear, HEAR ye the self-righteous preachings of MammaryBahnFuhrer! (Imported below). She knows JUST the right “Popular-with-the-Cool-Kids-in-Her-Own-Mind” theology to espouse, along with wearing JUST the right purse, hairstyle, whorestyle, and other accessories! Meanwhile, in the EXACT same source, She engaged in identity theft! Her heart, in truth, is a ravening black hole of hypocrisy, greedy self-righteousness, and other evils!
Now, the preachings of The Great Mammary. Note that She picks the verses that say that the right BELIEFS and whorestyles get you “in” with the “in” crowd, and then you’re free to engage in ID theft and other evils, at will!
Mammary-style whorestyles - preachings below:
It amazes me how Americans living in a purportedly Christian culture don't even understand the basic tenets of its theology.
Pretty much the whole point of Christianity is that everyone has sinned and is worthy of damnation so God became a human and took our punishment for us. And the libertarian angle is, that you still have a choice to accept or reject the gift already given.
Ephesians 2:8-9 ESV: For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
Romans 6:23 ESV: For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
John 3:16-17 ESV: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
We can pick and chose our Bible verses to justify ANY evils we WANT TO justify! And YOU equate "fashionable theology to justify ANY evil shit that I want to do" with Your fashionable hairstyle and whorestyle! Got the right fashionable BELIEFS, and so then The Queen can do WHATEVER she wants! Your BELIEFS will protect You from the consequences of Your evil actions? Do You not GET this, Oh Fashionable Queen of the Internet Cesspools?
Mammary-Necrophilia-Fuhrer, Supreme Demonic Director of Decay, Destruction, and Death, will now SPEAK! HARKKK silently and RESPECTFULLY, all ye lowly heathens, as She Directs Death, and announces WHICH few of us MIGHT deserve to live, and WHO all deserves to DIE-DIE-DIE!!!
https://reason.com/2022/01/25/did-these-three-officers-willfully-deprive-george-floyd-of-his-constitutional-rights/?comments=true#comment-9323626
“You should really join ᛋᛋqrlsy, ᛋᛋhrike. You two goosestepping fascists offing yourselves would definitely be a mitzvah.”
-Quote MammaryBahnFuhrer the "Expert Christian Theologian"
So Mammary-Necrophilia-Fuhrer, Supreme Demonic Director of Decay, Destruction, and Death... WHEN are You going to STOP stealing the IDs of Your victims, and then posting kiddie porn in THEIR names, and then blaming THEM?
Inquiring minds want to KNOW, dammit!
Hey MammaryBahnFuhrer… How is Your new org coming along? Are You gaining many new converts and perverts to “Expert Christian Theologians for Identity Theft?” And where do we sign up for your newsletter?
In https://reason.com/2021/03/21/why-we-still-shouldnt-censor-misinformation/#comment-8818090 Mamma fesses to her being an identity-thief and sock!
chemjeff radical individualist
March.21.2021 at 4:27 pm
Uh oh, I think you left your sock on.
Reply
1. SQRLSY 0ne
March.21.2021 at 5:06 pm
Yeah, sigh.
Hey MammaryBahnFuhrer, Expert Christian Theologian! Did Jesus appear to You in a vision, and tell You that ID theft is a GREAT, wonderful thing? Or ARE You Jesus, returned to us, maybe? Are You necrophiliac-Jesus, push-people-to-suicide Jesus?
The nature of Your Perfect "Expert Christian Theology" (followershit of Jesus) is illustrated by You words, Perfect Viper!
AFTER one presents the facts (and the well-reasoned and ethical “right thing to do”), and the stupid and evil still resist… Because they are stupid and evil… Then one has to shrug, and say to oneself, “all that is left to me now, sad to say, is to warn others that we are dealing, here, with stupid and evil people”. John the Baptist AND Jesus had to deal with the same thing. Or do you think that THEY were stupid and evil, stupid and evil one?
https://biblehub.com/matthew/23-33.htm =
You brood of vipers, how can you who are evil say anything good? For out of the overflow of the heart, the mouth speaks.
Jesus dude, take your meds.
That was some crazy shit, even if your name is sqirlsy. Should warn the FBI that we've probably got a shooter.
He's a spastic asshole who really deserves no engagement at all.
Super-Perv-Predator-Sevo the Pedo, Hippo in a Speedo, AKA “SmegmaLung”, LOVES and supports Mamma the Highly Esteemed, Expert Christian Theologian! Two peas in a pod! What an UDDER surprise! MILK that Marxist-Mammary-Necrophilia-Fuhrer for ALL that She is worth, Super-Perv-Predator-Sevo the Pedo, Hippo in a Speedo!
Brilliant wordplay, as per usual. Truly the Poe of our times - bound to die gibbering and syphilitic, only for his genius to be discovered and rehabilitated by a more advanced and enlightened people.
The crazy shit comes from Mamma the Highly Esteemed, Expert Christian Theologian! NOT from me! Ass is documented right above! What is YOUR excuse for blaming it on me, instead of on the source? Oh, let me guess... You belong to the same tribe as Mamma the Highly Esteemed, Expert Christian Theologian!
The problem wasn't what you claim he said, it's what you said. You've got problems.
I'm not an authoritarian that belongs to the CORRECT tribe of authoritarians, right, right-wing wrong-nut? THAT is my Great Sin, no doubt!
You resent the hell out of the fact that many other people are flat-out, better, more honest people than you are, right? More “live and let live”, and WAAAY less authoritarian?
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/in-love-and-war/201706/why-some-people-resent-do-gooders
From the conclusion to the above…
These findings suggest that we don’t need to downplay personal triumphs to avoid negative social consequences, as long as we make it clear that we don’t look down on others as a result.
SQRLSY back here now… So, I do NOT want you to feel BAD about YOU being an authoritarian asshole, and me NOT being one! PLEASE feel GOOD about you being an authoritarian asshole! You do NOT need to push me (or other REAL lovers of personal liberty) down, so that you can feel better about being an asshole! EVERYONE ADORES you for being that authoritarian asshole that you are, because, well, because you are YOU! FEEL that self-esteem, now!
Dear Plucky Squirrel, In Credere, Obbedire, Combattere grade school we were taught that True Christians™ sell all their property and give the money to the poor, THEN follow the Savior. How is it that invisible (to me) Mutha Shame Trumpanzee fails to sell PC and give money to poor and is instead schaissepfosting Reason readers? Your fan, Boris
Mutha Shame Trumpanzee sells PC and gives money to poor in AN INVISIBLE WAY, in followershit of Her Dear Lord Der TrumpfenFuhrer!!!
https://www.thedailybeast.com/mypillow-guy-mike-lindell-punts-timeline-for-trump-retaking-power-as-august-conspiracy-theories-get-wackier
MyPillow Guy Punts Timeline for Trump Retaking Power as Conspiracy Theories Get Wackier
https://www.salon.com/2021/08/22/mike-lindell-still-in-trumps-good-graces-has-new-prediction-reinstatement-by-new-years/
The Lord Trump didn’t return to us as scheduled, but the Second Coming is now re-scheduled. You can TRUST us THIS time, for sure!
The Lord Trump DID return to us faithful ones, but He did it in an invisible way! Hold strong in your Faith in Him!
The Lord Trump didn’t return to us yet, this is true! It only did NOT happen because YOU were not faithful enough, and didn’t send Him enough donations!
The Lord Trump didn’t return to us yet, but He DID miraculously protect us all from the VERY worst forces of Evil, which is Der BidenFuhrer! Hold fast in your Faith… Lord Trump will come back VERY soon now! Especially if you send Him more money!
The Lord Trump moves in Mysterious Ways! All will be revealed SOON! Especially if you have Enough Faith to DONATE till it HURTS!
So the Terato-thing its own mother regrets not having drowned at birth is still spewing hatred at Reason subscribers? I recommend Kreep-tonite. Press the Mute Lewser button and suddenly the shrieks of Positive Christianity! Death to the Selfish Jews! Liberals are Satan! Enslave those Bitches! all subside as if a telescreen had been switched off. When you look, before you log in, at the infiltrators, fifth columnists and Trojan horses-asses trying to disrupt us, the mute tranquility is all the more soothing.
"the Mises Caucus takeover of the Libertarian Party"
Damn libertarians and their votes! Reason demands superdelegates to help prevent future "takeovers"!
Why can't they just lightly complain about democrats and authoritarianism instead? Don't they know liberaltarians need paid gigs from leftist newsrooms?
So Trumpanzees are now libertarians? Libertarians understand that losing is winning when it repeals Kleptocracy laws. Trumpanzees think losing is winning because they can't add or count any better than the Dems! But the advantage of a cheap commodity is that, for the price of a hotel and golf course, you can get hundreds of rednecks who hate Ayn Rand to mob a small party convention not protected by Capitol Police.
Ass long ass there are NO talkers-backers among the hotel's paying guests at our conference center, we may safely conclude that Our Stellar Ideas have taken over, yea verily, the entire UNIVERSE! We have followed in the footsteps of Marxist-Mammary-Necrophilia-Fuhrer, and becum QUEENS of the internet cesspools, with ZERO opposition in sight! ALL have been SILENCED by "My tribe's lies leading to violence against your tribe GOOD; Your tribe's lies leading to violence against My Sacred Tribe BAD! VERY bad!!!"
All Hail the overwhelming silence among the hotel's paying guests at our conference, which PROVES Our Eternal Victory!!!
That’s not connected to reality in any way Hank. I hope you have someone taking care of your meals and keeping your living space clean.
Hey, losers--maybe you didn't notice, but your loser asses just got handed to you.
By a supermajority.
No one cares what you have to say. Go cry over at Vox.
Losertarians - Your claim to fame, your crowning achievement, was coming in a distant third in a popularity contest between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.
Ha!
4th times the charm on this?
I stand by what I said, Reason is very afraid of the Mises Caucus.
Any actions except "I know you mean well, but lighten up the boot just a bit" is too ruffian for them.
Reason circa 1943 Germany: "Are Concentration Camps Might Really an Efficient Solution to the Jewish Problem?"
Another Dave Smith plug: listen to his podcast from Wednesday. He straight hammers Reason.
The Mises crowd hates Reason, Cato, and every libertarian organization that doesn't worship 90s Rothbard.
Cite?
Are you familiar with Michael Heise, the Mises Caucus, the Ludwig von Mises Institute, or Rothbardian anarcho-capitalists in general?
So no cite.
Do I have a list of timestamped statements? No. I really don't care that much.
You had a list of who they hate, but no list of any evidence. In fact no evidence whatsoever.
You were responding to my post about Dave’s podcast which you obviously didn’t listen to. He specifically was disappointed in Reason’s coverage because he doesn’t hate them. (Although if they continue to imply he’s a racist that may change). He said the same coverage from progressives was expected and he actually welcomes it.
Dave Smith holds no official position within the LPMC, but he has been plenty dismissive of the "Beltway libertarianism" he associates with Reason and Cato on other podcasts. Hang out in the Mises Caucus FB group for a little while, or listen to Tom "Don't Ask Me How Old My Much Younger Ex-Wife Was When We Started Secretly Dating" Woods.
You realize you made your claim in response to my post specifically about Dave’s podcast, so minimizing him now is quite the weasel move. But it seems in character. Being “dismissive” of the people that have been running the show with no success for decades is not the same as hating them.
I’m not on Facebook. Not sure what Tom Wood’s wife’s age has to do with anything. Sounds like you’re just projecting, so at this point it’s appropriate to just say: cry more bitch.
Reason now understands how the anarcho-socialist infiltrators infiltrating the LP and ruining its platform for a full 46 years made it vulnerable to an Anschluss by harder, angrier, anarcho-fascist infiltrators. The exact same pattern unfolded in Weimar Germany before the Austrian took that over.
Amash was a Republican congressman from Michigan once described by Politico as the House's "new Ron Paul" because of his willingness to buck party-line votes on principle.
You will notice a pattern that mainstream media gets excited about a Republican that bucks his party vote. See: John McCain.
The media tends to have a different view of Democrats who buck party line.
Remember the heartfelt obits to McCain here at Reason? Good times.
>>during the Mises Caucus takeover of the Libertarian Party
it was just a convention guys, no bloodshed.
Not even "mostly peaceful protests".
Were there shoes on desks? INSURRECTION!
AOC should call me when she's fearing for her life but she never does.
You can have AOC, I'll take Mayra Flores
I’m thinking of a bi-partisan effort.
That's their own language, not Reason's characterization.
"What this country is about is liberalism in the classical sense, the idea that people should be free…to make their own decisions about their lives, and government to the extent possible should just stay out of it."
This is certainly good stuff. There's a particular illiberal movement that grips this country and all of its major institutions right now. I'll try to listen to this interview and see if he mentions it.
I'm kind of curious about the booing he got while reading the Mises quotes on anarchism. The Mises caucus, from what I've read here in Reason doesn't strike me as anarchistic. The anarchist side of big-L Libertarianism strikes me as the old-school, aspy end of the party who all have ponytails.
I guess I'm thinking of... oh, I dunno, The Amazing Atheist types.
Admittedly, purely optics but @10:23-11:07, Amash saying "Bolder messaging is important, but edgelording, crazy messaging, saying crazy things just to say crazy things hurts the cause." and the cut to Nick staring at his phone made me LOL.
Did he specify what crazy things he’s talking about?
No. It was in the context of pulling down the messaging about bigotry but, given the vagueness, it wasn't clear one way or the other what Amash was talking about. That's what made it funny, IMO. Like Amash is sitting there telling Nick "We shouldn't be sending out crazy, edgelording messaging like libertarianism means supporting drag queen strip bar story hours for 4 yr. olds." and Nick is staring at his phone.
It's pretty hard to square the Mises Caucus with old fashioned anarchism. Hoppe, their hero and self-proclaimed anarchist, advocates strict border controls. What? How? Maybe he will send the AnarchoINS to patrol the fence that was funded by the AnarchoTaxes? Other elements of the Mises Caucus want to prohibit fractional reserve banking. How? With the AnarchBankingPolice?
Eat shit and die, TDS-addled pile of shit.
Hoppe: their hero, advocates strict border controls.
Cite? Honestly. I have not seen this evidence.
Amash also shares the Jacksonian fear of banks, shared by Lysander Spooner. This they project upon the Fed which was organized to cash in on selling supplies to European warmongers with reduced risk. Many libertarians have lived and worked in several countries, know more than a single language and have close experience with murdering police states that make the DEA look like pickpockets. Almost nobody at the convention has done a lick of work outside the US. Fed and 2A are assets until such time as there are, say, 6 libertarian countries. There are 0 now.
That brand of LP anarchists is the "voluntaryist" faction concentrated in the Radical Caucus, formerly best exemplified by tie-dye wearing Mike Seebeck and pink-haired Caryn Ann Harlos.
MiCauc leadership identifies almost entirely as Rothbardian anarcho-capitalist, but their brand of anarchim is more along the lines of Hoppean right-wing reconstructionism.
I can find some references to MC folks (the interview w/ pleather jacket doesn't count) talking about rothbard, but your assertion re hoppe is not standing up.
Their entire approach to borders is influenced by Hoppe. Dave Smith praises Rothbard and Hoppe in the same breath constantly in interviews. He castigated Josh Smith for dissing Gary North (a Calvinist theonomist) in a conversation with LPMC critics, because North is a fellow Rothbardian and right-wing ally. The MiCauc-adjacent postlibertarians who travel in the same circles are open, dyed-in-the-wool Hoppeans, some of them avowedly far-right.
You sound like someone who thinks "libertarian socialist" is a sensible term
"Libertarian socialist" is a sensible term, just not a position I agree with.
LOL
So, just your assertion and interpretation? That's fine, if weak, but your dislike for the MC doesn't make your claims factual. As for 'avowedly far right,' get me a fainting couch, the LP tent is simply not big enough for allowing freedom of thought or expression.
Is the LP big enough for illiberal ex-libertarian Hoppeans who believe people who don't share their ideological approach and hatred of democracy should be expelled from society? No, I don't think it is.
Yes, it is. But Amash participated in an abuse of power by Democrats and an impeachment based on lies and fabrications. Whether Amash was doing that deliberately or whether he was simply too stupid to realize what he was doing, he should never hold public office again, and the LP should kick him out of the party.
You don't get a favorable write-up in Politico by not participating in that coup.
"...and an impeachment based on lies and fabrications."
Yes, based on the lies and fibs of Trump and His Trumplings!
https://reason.com/2022/02/11/sidney-powell-disowns-her-kraken-saying-she-is-not-responsible-for-her-phony-story-of-a-stolen-election/ (Yet another Powell article)
https://reason.com/2021/03/23/sidney-powell-says-shes-not-guilty-of-defamation-because-no-reasonable-person-would-have-believed-her-outlandish-election-conspiracy-theory/
Sidney Powell Says She’s Not Guilty of Defamation Because ‘No Reasonable Person’ Would Have Believed Her ‘Outlandish’ Election Conspiracy Theory
Which particular lies are you wanting to hear and believe today, hyper-partisan Wonder Child?
You're confused. Amash voted in the first impeachment, which had nothing to do with the 2020 election.
You're confused. The Donald cooked up all sorts of crooked shit (threatening to withhold funds for Ukraine, which had already been approved by Congress) unless Ukraine played footsie with The Donald, so that The Donald... Wait for it now... could WIN THE 2020 ELECTION!!!
Sidney Powell is just "merely" yet MORE evidence that NO lies are beneath Trump and His Legions of Trumplings!
(But Trump and Trumplings are congenitally hyper-allergic to what is utterly alien to them... Truths that don't make them look good!)
Your are full of it. Sydney Powell has nothing to do with the first impeachment. You demonstrated your ignorance and are now back pedaling
"Amash voted in the first impeachment, which had nothing to do with the 2020 election."
THIS is what YOU said! Which is ass-wrong ass-can-be, ass I have demonstrated, He Who Talks Out of His Asshole!
No, my statement is correct: the first impeachment had nothing to do with the 2020 election because the 2020 election hadn't happened yet.
You were clearly confused about this because you cited Sidney Powell as a justification for the impeachment.wrong.
"No, my statement is correct: the first impeachment had nothing to do with the 2020 election because the 2020 election hadn't happened yet."
And I wrote... "The Donald cooked up all sorts of crooked shit (threatening to withhold funds for Ukraine, which had already been approved by Congress) unless Ukraine played footsie with The Donald, so that The Donald... Wait for it now... could WIN THE 2020 ELECTION!!!"
The Donald and His Lies (and the lies of His Trumplings) concerning the 2020 elections, before, during, and after the elections have been running a continuum!!! ALL of this time!
The Donald lied... He is lying now... He will almost definitely lie in the future!!! So will His Trumplings!!!
This is like Noy-Soy-Boy-Toy getting caught trying to rob the bank, and saying, "But I never robbed the bank!!! My bank-robbing is a future, hypothetical event, and my so-called 'crime' is in the future, so my attempt at bank-robbing is TOTALLY unfair and illogical!!!"
"...so my BEING ACCUSED OF an attempt at bank-robbing is TOTALLY unfair and illogical!!!" I meant to write...
Just as The Donald (in the eyes of His Trumplings) can NEVER be charged with elections-associated bad deeds, fairly, until THE VERY DAY that elections are in progress? WTF?!?
The standard for impeachment isn't "bad deeds", it's "high crimes and misdemeanors". If an impeachment doesn't meet those standards, it's an abuse of power. I opposed Clinton's impeachment for the same reason.
Yes, you did. After you screwed up and confused the two impeachments, you tried to cobble together some argument to distract from your ignorant ramblings.
So then we must logically conclude that... Wait for it now... WINNING THE 2020 ELECTION (through POTUS-playing hanky-panky with Congressionally-approved spending, which IS the spending rice bowl of Congress, and NOT the POTUS, per the USA Cunts-tits-tuition) has nothing to do with the 2020 election because the 2020 election hadn't happened yet!!! Bravo!!! How impeccably logical!!!
When Plucky Squirrel is through teaching Trumpanzee how to tie shoes without opposable thumbs, I have Jehova's Witless friend who needs to convert to Mohammedanism. Weeth your patience, this can be done! Your fan, Boris
Whoa, too hot to handle, by far!!! Not fair!
Lemme see if your Jehova's Witless friend can be converted to Scienfoology, as a MUCH easier project!!! Ale Run Hubba-Bubba will show me The Way here!!!
Condemning bigotry is policing thought, and we can't have that.
Condemning Trump is inexcusable, and an act of heresy.
Condemning Trump for a tariff or a border policy is one thing. Participating in an impeachment that even the media now shuffles around and admits was all based on bullshit information that was created out of whole cloth by deep-state operatives is another.
Umm, Trump was not impeached over "Russian collusion ".
He was impeached because a fat Ukrainian American captain thought trump was betraying the State Department. Just look at the testimony. He thought embedded policy makers should have more say than an elected president.
I do believe there was a phone call that was materially relevant.
The transcript was released. It wasn't relevant.
Lol
How was it relevant, Jeff?
Here's the transcript of the Trump/Zelensky phone call: https://www.scribd.com/document/427411245/Trump-Zelensky-trancript
Trump must be the first person in history to ever be impeached twice based on evidence that completely exonerated him.
Did you even listen to the witnesses? Do you know who they are?
We have the official transcript of the full phone call, plus Zelensky's statements. There clearly was no "impeachable offense" there. Amash knew that. That's why Amash is guilty of abuse of power and should never hold public office again and should be kicked out of the LP.
The phone call where he didn’t actually make a quid pro quo?
Which was apparent at the time, though the media and the orangemanbad cult argued the the opposite, as they always do.
First impeachment: "abuse of power" over the Zelensky call. Reasonable people can disagree whether it was a "quid pro quo" but the call exists and isn't made up.
Second impeachment: "inciting insurrection " over Jan. 6. And Reasonable people can disagree but again his speech is not made up or fabricated.
Stop pretending political acts are reasonable just because you applauded both actions like a trained leftist seal.
Of course, the only reasonable positions are Jesse's.
No, you’re just an unreasonable partisan who hates Trump. You also lack scruples and any integrity.
Loving Trump is partisan: only Republicans do it. Hating Trump is multipartisan: Democrats, dissident Republicans, independents, Libertarians, Greens all do it.
Hatred for the president because of his personality is childish.
They hate his personality, but they don't hate him entirely because of his personality. They hate his poor character, his lack of common decency, his constant bragging, his shocking ignorance, and his deluded megalomania.
So his personality.
Those are all aspects of his personality….
'They hate his personality, but they don't hate him entirely because of his personality. They hate his poor character, his lack of common decency, his constant bragging, his shocking ignorance, and his deluded megalomania.'
Weird, there are many who have thought the same about biden for his entire career. Trump only had 4 years in office.
Biden is a rapist and a child molester. That’s on top of his treasonous activities selling his office to the highest bidder.
Loving Trump is partisan: only Republicans do it. Hating Trump is multipartisan: Democrats, dissident Republicans, independents, Libertarians, Greens all do it.
Except for all those Democrats who handed him the win by giving him states Obama won handily.
We get it Jeffy, you hate Trump.
And also has no idea who reasonable people are or how they think.
Yes, Amash abused his power. And that's why he should never hold public office again and should be kicked out of the LP.
I'm sure the LP will expel Amash for being disloyal to an unhinged Republican president who feels he's above the law.
No, the LP won't expel anybody, even under the Mises caucus, and not even an authoritarian asshole like Amash. It's not who they are. It's also why the LP is worthless.
Amash an authoritarian? Either you're a blindly partisan idiot detached from political reality, or you're trolling. Illiberal conservative Republicans admire and praise Trump's authoritarian tendencies, though, his willingness to fire constructively critical voices in his administration and his complete lack of regard for legal procedure, so you shouldn't you consider that an asset rather than a liability?
Yes, and I explained why: Amash participated in a Democrat-led abuse of power, trying to remove a duly elected president of the US via an unjustified impeachment process.
Actually, the problem here is that you are either a blindly partisan idiot or that you actually believe a failed Republican who is trying to salvage his reputation by spouting libertarian platitudes.
Really? What "authoritarian tendencies"? By the standards of the 21st century presidency, Trump has been less authoritarian and more respectful of the Constitution than both his predecessors and his successor.
But it shouldn't surprise us that someone who defends Amash perpetuates the lie of Trump being "authoritarian".
All I do is consider you someone who is either a victim of left wing propaganda or a liar. Which is it?
Seems the new number two is just like the old number two. Shit.
No one is saying he didn’t give a speech. We’re saying you’re a partisan fucking moron if you construe anything he said in that speech as “incitement”. Doubly so if you ignore the fact the violent douchebags broke into the capital well before he was anywhere near the end of it.
This is the difficult the for those functionally crippled by their biases, sorting out how cause and effect and timelines work. If trump was in one location, speaking, and the protest, riot was in another location, already in progress, there is no way that trump incited anything. If the riot occurred after, or if people left his speech and went to the capitol, then, this was incitement. The latter does not fit the left/progressive model for rightist behavior, stupid cultists who hang on every word from 'dear leader's' mouth, so requires cognitive dissonance.
Confession via projection is an immutable law of physics governing leftist behavior
Not at all. I encourage everybody, libertarian, conservative, and progressive, to condemn every demonstrable instance of bigotry.
But you're not interested in condemning bigotry, you are interested in self-aggrandizing bullshitting.
Amash's inexcusable conduct wasn't that he "condemned" Trump, it was that he actively participated in an abuse of power by the Democrats.
The projection is unreal. Amash didn't force Trump to abuse his presidential authority and interfere with the Mueller investigation. He earned impeachment all on his own. It doesn't matter what the Democrats' motives were or whether there was any merit to the investigation in the first place.
He did neither of those things, except in the imagination of deranged authoritarians like you.
The Democrats' motives may not matter for the impeachment (after all, they lost), but they do matter in judging Amash when he chose to join them.
Because anyone who doesn't kiss Trump's pinky toe ring and imagine God sent him to save America is an "authoritarian." Sure.
Either one "kisses Trump's pinky toe ring" or one gets into bed with the Democrats? Those are the only two possibilities that you are capable of imagining?
Are you really that stupid, or do you just spout propaganda and hope other people are that stupid?
Both impeachments of Trump were massive abuses of power. Observing that has nothing to do with whether one likes or dislikes Trump.
If there's a third option, you haven't thought of it yet, because you're fully puckered over here.
It is well within the House's purview to impeach a president who doesn't believe in ethics or acknowledge the limits of his own authority.
They can. Well, and when they do, they engage in an authoritarian abuse of their power, and people who participate in such an abuse of power have no place in any institution calling itself "libertarian".
We're not discussing the merits of Trump here, we are discussing whether libertarians should welcome a failed Republican into their fold.
If you’re thinking is so binary you can’t imagine more than those two options, then you’re a simpleton.
That’s just it. Amash, Reason and much of the libertarian establishment became the very caricatures of the right-wing law-and-order types that they so often criticize:
“Who cares if he didn’t do what he was accused of! He’s obviously guilty of SOMETHING!!”
“You’re getting all hyped up about a fair trial? We’ve got justice to administer!”
“Who are you to question the integrity of our noble boys in blue?!”
Are any of those comments a right wing law-and-order type talking about an inner city gangbanger or regime libertarians talking about Donald Trump? I can’t tell.
I don't want to be too critical of Amash here, but had I been doing this interview, when he got to the place where he says there are millions of people who agree with these principles, we just need to bring them into the party.
There are a particular set of issues that have been burning a hole in the center of our nation for the last... I'll be conservative and say, 28 months... where literally millions of Americans were positively VIBRATING for the chance to find a home with someone... anyone who would speak out against this small set of issues, and stand up for them. This isn't the 1990s. Vague speeches about meta-issues of freedom aren't going to cut it. I want to know what you're doing about policy X which gripped our nation for over two years and appears to put us on the path of internal destruction. I know, I know, you might have had to stand in a crowd somewhere where someone had on a MAGA hat... I know, that's a tough pill to swallow, but if center-left Democrats can make nice with actual racists to get their agenda down our throats, then you might have to take that MAGA hat-wearing bitter pill as well. Just stand next to them. That's it. Just be in the same room.
Well said, as always.
It's like the episode of Fire Fly where Jane says they need a distraction, then when it happens they do nothing. But, you know, worse because that was 2 mins and this is 2 fucking years.
The "rise of the independents" is over..and it fact it never was. The LP has ejected the bolshies and thumb suckers and can now move on to smash mouth pro liberty and anti-woke policies..there are millions and millions of folks who are sick and tired of the authoritarian propaganda being shoved down their throats by the Federal Govt and corporate HR departments...the GOP has no guts to slash the beast...these folks will come over if targeted.
I heard that. But you won't find it here at Reason. If the Mises Caucus is serious I might pull the lever for the Ls again. But if it's Amash I'm a Republican.
Same, voted gore in 2000, bush 04, Johnson 08, haven't voted since. The left is pushing me to the r
The GOP has no guts to slash the beast that is federal spending *because the votes aren't there*. They're just taking orders from the voters, and the more "conservative" ones at that. But the votes *are* there to make progress on other fronts, such as "public health" restrictions and mandates, consumer choice when it comes to manufactured goods and materials, and culture war bullshit where the oppression comes 90% from the "left". And the GOP does lead on those things now when they're in a commanding position. 5 years ago, not so much.
True, largely because the backlash against Governor Reagan and President Nignew's coercion helped the SDS, CPUSA, FREEZE and SURRENDER movements with foreign funding to completely infiltrate the Dems in a replay of the Greenback, Anti-Monopoly and People's Party infiltration backing the communist manifesto. By 1980 communist anarchists had a toehold in the LP and ordinary communist-socialists controlled the Dems. With the LP neutered, christiano-fascism had no competition.
Why would national conservative culture warriors leave a right-wing party with power to join a right-wing party without power (run by self-styled anarchists who also want to legalize all drugs and prostitution and fetishize a political theorist who defended legally starving your children)?
Why do faggot leftists like you call yourself libertarian?
Libertarianism is not a "right-wing" ideology, Trumptard.
Faggot leftist avoids question, resorts to dumbass script
Sooo Dreamy.
So what exactly is the difference between the Mises Caucus and MAGA Republicans?
Why would anyone consider voting for a Mises Libertarian candidate when Trump or a Trump clone can give you a much better impersonation?
The real vibe that I get around here is that the Mises-friendly crowd want a party that will "fight back" but they are less particular about what they will "fight for". They want someone who will loudly oppose COVID lockdowns but may not have a well formed idea about what an acceptable public health policy might look like.
Just being opposed to things doesn't work as a general rule. Look at Team Blue in 2004 - the entire campaign was "Bush sucks because of the Iraq War". It didn't work. Look at Team Red in 2012 - the entire campaign was "Obama sucks because of Obamacare" and it didn't work. Team Blue winning in 2020 on an essentially anti-Trump platform is the exception not the rule. Successful candidates generally have to put forth a vision that potential voters can easily visualize and buy in to. In 2008 it was "hope and change". In 2016 it was MAGA. What is this pro-liberty vision that the new Libertarian Party wishes to put forth?
(And no the Sarwark LP didn't have much of a vision either.)
What makes the Mises Caucus similar to MAGA Republicans Lying Jeffy?
They seemingly both hate the authoritarianism and post modernist threats of the left. Which scares jeff the most.
My honest guess is, if you gathered all Americans into one large room and said, "Everyone who opposes lockdowns and vaccine mandates go over here, aaaand *checks notes* everyone who supports lockdowns and vaccine mandates step over there" there were libertarians who were uncomfortable with the fact they they were standing in a crowd with real, honest-to-goodness anti-vaxxers (the real definition, not the new one that's been updated for modern audiences) and some of those were wearing MAGA hats. Not wanting anything to do with that, they instead either sat the whole thing out or went along with the pro-lockdown, pro-vaccine group and were perfectly happy to be amongst actual racists and people who loudly proclaimed they'd have turned Anne Frank in.
Unfortunately, because of how divisive COVID policy was, that's literally your choice. You're against lockdowns and vaccines in principle, but that means you're going to be in the same room with real, no-shit Jenny McCarthy-vaccines-cause-autism types.
Those of us who opposed the lockdown of hundreds of millions of people, and a forced medical procedure with an experimental drug understood who was standing in the same room with us.
Based on everything I can get a read on from Amash is he was nominally in the first group, but was never really comfortable with the people he was in the room with, so spent a lot of his time and energy condemning them.
"Hey, Justin, glad to see you're in the anti-lockdown group, I wanted to talk to you abo..."
"OMG, DID YOU SEE WHAT TRUMP TWEETED! OMG, TRUMP IS AWFUL! DID I TELL YOU HOW AWFUL TRUMP IS?"
"Yeah, about 30 seconds ago..."
"WELL HE'S WORSE NOW!"
"yeah, Ok, Mr. Amash, but I wanted to discuss strategy on how we mi..."
"TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP TRUUUUUUUUUMP!"
"Can we please talk about lockdo..."
"Yeah, against them. TRUMP TRUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUMPPPP!"
You're against lockdowns and vaccines in principle
Should be 'against lockdowns and mandated vaccines in principle'.
Politico: He bucks the GOP party line! So dreamy!
Meanwhile... [cue Rand Paul repeatedly dressing down Fauci]
Rand Paul is persona non grata at Reason despite the fact that he's done more to promote liberty in the last two years than Reason has done for 20 fucking years. But his dad is a racist. It is known. Turns out podunk rep Amash will save the nation because he voted to impeach Trump in a kangaroo court. So dreamy.
It seriously is incredible. The government was (is?) spending tax dollars to do viral research with an oppositional foreign power that looks near certainly to have led to an outbreak that killed millions of people worldwide and was used, again worldwide, to literally concentrate people in camps and centralize power and not only can Amash not find his own libertarian ass with his 'no lockdown' and 'no mandates' hands, he's going along with the "Impeach!" cheerleading while Rand Paul is repeatedly saying "I support vaccines, I don't support mandates" and raking Fauci over the coals for it back while major media outlets were still calling it a conspiracy theory.
Rand's crime was not about his dad. His crime was that he didn't spit in Trump's face at every opportunity. Like Amash.
That's it.
I'll note that I was extremely disappointed when it was reported that Trump had told Rand to fuck off with his "balance the budget" stuff. The difference is that Rand made a choice- stay in the party and continue to try and push his policies even if it means they aren't priorities- while Amash made a different one- be an antagonist to your party and get nothing done ever.
Meanwhile... [cue Rand Paul repeatedly dressing down Fauci]
I didn't have to cue it. It was all over my mentions without me doing anything.
This was theater. You understand that, right? It was for generating clicks and likes and donations. Did anything actually happen as a result? No? So this actually illustrates my point. Rand Paul was VERY ANGRY and he said MEAN WORDS against a hated enemy of the tribe, and that's all that is needed now for success on Team Red. Now, without googling, can you tell me what legislation Paul proposed concerning the CDC or Fauci? Does it matter?
And that is what I see from the Mises Caucus. An emphasis on emotion and outrage and fighting. But for what?
Uhm, he called out someone who was advising ridiculous mandates, contradictory orders, outright lies. YES, that shit is popular, because it's standing up to authoritarianism. Even if it's theater, then GOOD. We need to get people cheering AGAINST authoritarianism.
But it was more than theater because he had actual substantive points, such as the years and years of studies showing that cloth masks are useless, and that mask mandates in general don't work (because it encourages people to use masks improperly, which can be worse than no mask). He pointed out how wrong these policies were BEFORE IT WAS POPULAR.
Rand Paul isn't perfect but he's the best we've got right now.
Once again:
"I don't know what the good option is. I do know the better option is not the best option and, so, it's really not any better than the objectively worse option." - chemjeff radical individualist
Chemjeff: Maybe not the avatar the Libertarian party needs, but definitely the one it deserves.
Haha, Jeffy tries to so hard to play the intellectual, but he’s really not that bright.
He also questioned Fauci about NIH members making royalties from the same drug companies they oversee.
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/nih-covid19-pharmaceutical-companies-royalty-payments/2022/05/15/id/1069975/
You talk about theater but defend the impeachment theater above. Lol.
"This was theater. You understand that, right? It was for generating clicks and likes and donations. Did anything actually happen as a result?"
What exactly was Rand Paul supposed to do, Chemjeff?
Lie back and enjoy it.
Many libertarians pretended the lockdowns and disruption were no different than a standard quarantine, even those who weren't infected.
Some here claimed it is a violation of the NAP to do anything that can ever increase the risk of anyone else, which would basically grant government total power. Every action a human makes can effect someone else.
So you’re saying you drive around with a bear in your trunk that attacks people?
bear in your trunk
MonkeyBear Pox!Yes. His name is Steve.
"..."TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP TRUUUUUUUUUMP!"
"Can we please talk about lockdo..."
"Yeah, against them. TRUMP TRUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUMPPPP!"..."
Pretty sure that was Brandyshit being interviewed.
The Mises Caucus is similar to MAGA Republicans because they both oppose interventionist wars. They are both opposed to identify politics and do not have fine sensibilities when it comes to coarse language, crude humor, or negative personality traits.
Those are the main similarities. Otherwise there is little similarity between Mises Caucus platform and MAGA interests. MC is more in favor of open trade; MAGA is interested in protectionism. Most MC people (but not all) want controlled but continuous immigration, while MAGA wants dramatically reduced immigration. MC is staunchly in favor of controlling government spending and money printing, while MAGA is ambivalent about that. MAGA is nationalistic, while MC is ambivalent about nationalism.
There is a lot of overlap in the type of people who support both movements. I myself was a former Democrat who became Trump supporter in 2020 and then joined the Mises Caucus and LP. I consider myself MAGA, but not a Republican. I think the main similarity with MAGA and MC is populism. Both see that the government is being run for the benefit of the politically well-connected, and that this system threatens our short-term prosperity and our long-term political freedom. Both are radical in favor of devolving the power away from the federal government. That means that there are a lot of potential recruits from the MAGA movement, and these people have energy and motivation to give.
>>what an acceptable public health policy
there is no public health. start there.
Imagine having to tell that to the most libertarian poster here who goes by the moniker of “radical individualist”?
Of course there is. There are communicable diseases that are easily spread in urban environments. This is a problem and it continues to be a problem even if we don't like the collectivist solutions to the problem.
And Jeff demonstrates how one rationalizes authoritarianism built off concern of others.
So what’s your policy prescription that keeps liberty intact and isn’t collectivist trash?
I mean, you must have one since you’re demanding it of others.
Sure. My idea is, in the event of a pandemic, the government offers incentives to people and businesses to follow appropriate public health guidelines. The incentives could be in the form of tax rebates, subsidies, "stimulus checks", or they could be something like temporary employment to deliver food and supplies to those most at risk, and/or government contracts for businesses to provide those supplies. (After all - even if the government had chosen something like the "Focused Protection" strategy for COVID - there would still have to be an army of people to deliver food to the at-risk elderly in their homes. Who was going to do this?) The CDC or state public health agencies wouldn't then have the power to force anyone to stay at home, they would instead be a fact-finding body that would deliver the best available data to government leaders for how to adjust the incentives to best stop the spread of the pathogen. The incentives would be voluntary, no one would be forced to accept them, but they would be large enough, depending on the level of the threat, to induce most reasonable people to follow the public health guidelines.
Now this idea is of course not perfect, this incentive system is open to abuse, and it would potentially be very expensive. But it's better than forcing people to stay in their homes, is it not?
So your idea is for the government to steal money at gunpoint and then redistribute it and dole it out to those who comply with irrational government mandates. Well, maybe that's a good progressive idea, it's not a good libertarian idea.
Is it better or worse than lockdowns and mandates? Hmm?
I’m not sure using tax dollars to bribe people and businesses is an individualistic or libertarian approach, but I will admit that’s a damn sight better than locking healthy people in their homes, so points for that even if I disagree with your solution.
Radical individualists for a giant new bureaucracy!
The answer seems to be to give people the best possible information so they can make good choices. Instead of mandates, give advice. "We suggest that businesses that function in indoor settings either move outside, use telecommuting, increase ventilation, or greatly decrease customer capacity." If the business wants to stay open, then it stays open. If it wants to close, it closes. If customers want to take the risk of coming, they can. Why threaten people with government penalties, when community action can stop the spread anyway?
You one of those "society doesn't exist, there is no 'public,' and the state is a myth" hyper-individualists?
Oh, the state definitely isn't a myth: the state taxes, regulates, destroys, discriminates, and oppresses.
Furthermore, it is people like you who are the "hyperindividualists": in your world, there is the state and the individuals, nothing else. The state destroys civil society, community, and voluntary associations, as you can see demonstrated in every social democracy and socialist state.
Libertarians, on the other hand, believe in a society based on voluntary association and private relationships, the very opposite of "individualism".
Just being opposed to things doesn't work as a general rule.
...
(And no the Sarwark LP didn't have much of a vision either.)
"You were failing with your old vision, and after reading an article/listening to an interview of the outgoing faction, I don't know what your new vision is. I do know simply changing things without vision won't fix anything. You should just stick to losing with the old vision because I don't know what the new vision is and, uh, I'm a political genius who knows what reasonable people disagree about!" - chemjeff radical individualist
This reminds me of the Joe Rogan episode, where Lying Jeffy initially said he wasn’t familiar with him, but within a few days he had a very strong, well informed negative opinion of him. It was a total coincidence that it was the exact same opinion that the lefty narrative was.
Or how the two very well cited and established doctors who appeared on Rogan were wrong without hearing them, but simply because they were on Rogan.
Read this in Jeff's lisping fat tongue mouth voice.
My comment is general, not specific to this article.
The Mises crowd wants to fight. I understand that.
Have you bothered even spending 5 minutes on their website? Or is this your usual ignorance based concern trolling?
We all know the answer.
They don’t pander to democrats, so Jeffy hates them.
We live in a two party, winner take all system. In such a system, you have to identify who the top two candidates/parties are and vote for one of them. So, in elections, you make your pick between "MAGA Republicans" and "progressive socialists".
Your main area of influence in the US political system is by actively participating in party politics and voting in primaries, not in the main election.
I'm sorry if all of that is news to you; try to educate yourself about the political system you live under.
"So what exactly is the difference between the Mises Caucus and MAGA Republicans?"
This tells me you have listened to NOTHING from the Mises Caucus. Until you actually listen to people like David Smith, or read position papers from McCardle, you will beclown yourself with terribly uninformed sophist nonsense like the quote above.
Seriously, Chemjeff. I periodically enjoy conversations with you. But it is obvious that you have done ZERO to investigate the Mises Caucus and are merely spouting what your besties have said.
The most important difference is that the Mises Caucus is wasting its time on the LP, while MAGA Republicans are at least putting their force behind a viable political organization.
Sarwark administered, and meddled little in what the proletariat was doing. Sarwark is trusting, like Gary Johnson, easy game for Jabba The Hutt to ambush with "What about a leppo?" Smarmy anarcho-communists similarly got their crowd to boo and hiss Sarwark before the "let's fake reality" trap where Hitler comes to life and registers Libertarian. Trumpanzees chortle to this day that Gary didn't know where God fought Allah in 1100, and Nick fell for an altruist lifeboat ethics trap.
It wasn’t a trap. He held a stupid position and Dave tried to find the boundary of that stupid position, and Nick didn’t have one.
Without picking up a calculator, I estimate that difference at 0.0000000003 centihitlers.
That’s because you’re a moron. But you’re hilarious so I don’t generally hold it against you.
Amash thinks the LP should be about winning elections.
Translation: Libertarian must surrender the LP to power seekers.
The LP is a political party. You're aware of that, right?
The Reason reaction to the Mises Caucus is pretty interesting but not surprising. Since 2015 Reason, Cato and the rest of the libertarian establishment have been redefining the meaning of the word. When evil orange man reared his ugly head the wagons circled and we were told that hey, it turns out the establishment they had all railed against for decades was actually the adults in the room and we should be very afraid that this unknown evil guy, who beat the the known evil, was the real threat to liberty . The ACLU went full on leftist. Turns out if you kinda liked Ron Paul you were a racist. When the Covid Nazis imposed their tyranny on billions Reason gave us billions of pixels splitting hairs about treatments and safe and effective vaccines. Turns out vaccines are safe and effective. Even when they aren't. Gender reaffirming surgery on toddlers is the new liberty frontier. Long story short the libertarian establishment joined hands with the extreme left and redefined the term libertarian. I no longer consider myself a libertarian by that definition. Reason is now completely staffed by hack "journalists". We can only hope that the rise of the Mises caucus will give rise to a better level of libertarian journalism and Reason will be relegated to the dustbin of history.
This.
Though I think sadly it’s irrelevant what the LP out any libertarian publication does. The best we can hope for is a massive conservative backlash against the left, not very libertarian but still better than the alternative.
Meh. Judging libertarianism by Reason and Cato is like judging conservatism by Max Boot and Jennifer Rubin. Pretty much all of the idiotic bleatings get responded to in the comments with “WTF are you babbling on about?”
One thing that bugs me about him is that whenever I would see him being interviewed in the mainstream media, he focused on matters of congressional processes, such as how bills are crafted by the leadership without the chance for ordinary congressmen to have input. Instead of talking about the actual libertarian issues of massive government overreach.
Oddly enough he has talked badly of MGT for requiring votes on every bill since she is against voice votes from aides.
Huh? What is MGT? All I can think of is Marjorie Taylor Greene, but those aren't her initials.
Mtg. Sorry.
Wonkiness is what wins elections.
That's why a woman (who's damned easy on the eyes) just flipped a congressional seat with a campaign sign that literally reads:
Dios
Familia
Patria
Once people learn not to expect honesty from looter politicians, disappointment is greatly reduced.
No antichoice mystic understands objective standards or individual rights. Observe that Amash cannot grasp how LP spoiler votes--like pawn power in a chess match--back the Kleptocracy parties into having to choose to repeal bad laws to keep from losing seats, salary, claws in the till. But the gored LP is still better than the alternatives, and Amash is preferable to Linseed Graham Cracker, Orange Hitler or Joe Presbyophrenic Biden. All the infiltrators care about is that the Austrian was not Ayn Rand.
Ron Paul is a Republican girl-bullier who impersonated a Libertarian once. Amash is a Republican girl-bullier who still impersonates a Libertarian. There is a difference.
Yes but are either fans of Comstock?
Hank covets a woman's ability to procure abortions.
He’s jealous he can’t murder babies and get away with it.
The Libertarian party can't seem to grab hold of it's purpose... Problem is; there platform is 90% in-line with the Republican platform. As such they use 'bad faith' tricks to try and separate them from Republicans. Yet everyone knows; The whole roots of the Libertarian party was to be-rid the RINO'S of the R-Party.. The 'bad faith' tricks introducing LINO'S isn't a winner.
Truthfully the Libertarian party would be better named the USA Patriot party; but in this Nazi-Addled Nation such names put you on Nazi witch-hunting lists. That is how bad the USA has been conquered by Nazi's (National Socialists).
Perhaps the *Real* Republican party?
The US has a two party system. If you want to make the country more libertarian, the way to do that is to work within the two parties: influence their platforms, vote in primaries, run as a candidate.
This is a good thing. Politics is the result of culture, not the other way around. Libertarians hoping to use politics and elections as a way of making the US more libertarian have already bought into a progressive, authoritarian world view.
Everyone's got a plan to improve the Libertarian Party. It needs lots of improvement.
But Amash had a chance to actually do something, if he had stayed in Congress. Which he may have done just by not joining the Dems in a ceremonial impeachment of Trump, alienating the smaller government voters who elected him.
The first impeachment was not ceremonial, unless you think that Clinton's impeachment was ceremonial also, due to there being no chance of conviction by the Senate. Only Congress gets to decide what qualifies as "high crimes and misdemeanors", so if they vote to impeach, then they thought the President had committed impeachable offenses. NOYB2 talked about that impeachment as being an "abuse of power", so clearly, everyone agrees that a government official abusing their power is a bad thing. People might just disagree over whether a particular action was an abuse of power.
The House obviously thought that Trump had abused his power in withholding funding appropriated by Congress in order to pressure Ukraine into announcing an investigation into the Bidens. The Republicans in the Senate (with the sole exception of Mitt Romney) didn't agree that it was an abuse of power or perhaps that it didn't rise to the level of warranting removal from office. There was nothing ceremonial about any of that, to me.
“The House obviously thought that Trump had abused his power”
Not obvious at all. Democrat members of the house stated they were going to impeach him before he took office. They were just looking for an excuse.
They certainly took their time, then. They waited 2 1/2 years.
In seriousness, though, which House Democrats stated that they were going to impeach him before he was inaugurated? That a couple may have said that doesn't mean anything to the other 200+ necessary to make a majority vote of the chamber.
Eat shit and die, asshole.
"The House" doesn't "think", it's just an institution. The House consists of members with individual thoughts and opinions.
The house members who voted for impeachment wanted to get rid of Trump by any means necessary because they thought Trump was an existential threat to US democracy; that's why they were willing to abuse the impeachment process. We know that because many of them told us so from the day Trump was elected.
So, don't try to portray this as an honest vote. The impeachment vote was a deliberate abuse of power, motivated by delusions and hysteria.
We know that because many of them told us so from the day Trump was elected.
Just like in my reply to R Mac, how many said that? I'd like to see the list of House Reps that made such statements and what they said and when they said it.
So, don't try to portray this as an honest vote. The impeachment vote was a deliberate abuse of power, motivated by delusions and hysteria.
What delusions? What hysteria? Was the main accusation against Trump false? I saw plenty of evidence that it was true. Was it not an abuse of power to use aid the law required to be provided as leverage to pressure Ukraine to announce an investigation of the Bidens? Incumbent presidents already have the advantage of the attention simply being in office gives them when campaigning for reelection. You want to make it okay for the President to leverage his power to get foreign countries to dig up dirt on his opponents, too?
Trump pressured Ukraine to actually investigate Hunter Biden after Joe Biden had previously interfered in such an investigation.
Joe Biden, in fact, had threatened to withhold foreign aid in order to get the prosecutor that was inconvenient to him fired. This was likely an abuse of power by Joe Biden as VP. Given what we now know, it was an attempt to protect his own family and hide his own corruption.
Asking for, or even pressuring, a foreign government to investigate corruption by US officials is a legitimate use of executive power. Joe Biden wasn't even a candidate at the time, but even if he had been, it would still have been legitimate.
Trump is indeed required to spend foreign aid as allocated by Congress, but he can temporarily block it to ask Congress to change its allocation; as it turns out, Trump removed the block on his own. Even if he hadn't, this wouldn't have amounted to a "high crime and misdemeanor".
Correct. Not only is is perfectly fine to get foreign countries to "dig up dirt on political opponents", it is the duty of the executive branch to do that.
What is not OK is to abuse the power of the FBI to tarnish the reputation of an opponent with fabricated information, or to use the IRS, FBI, and other organs of the state to hassle and selective persecute political opponents, which is what Obama and Biden have done.
Joe Biden, in fact, had threatened to withhold foreign aid in order to get the prosecutor that was inconvenient to him fired. This was likely an abuse of power by Joe Biden as VP. Given what we now know, it was an attempt to protect his own family and hide his own corruption.
Okay. Let's go with this. What power would Joe Biden have used, as VP, to withhold aid? By what law or authority could he do that? That's right, he had none. He was representing the Obama administration. Only President Obama would have had any authority to actually order it withheld that, and even then, it could be that he would need Congress to act as well. VPs only have whatever authority and policymaking role that their President assigns them. Constitutionally, they have the role as President of the Senate, being a potential tie-breaking vote there, and being the spare if the President is incapable of acting, and that's it. If Biden wanted the aid withheld, he would have had to explain to Obama why before Obama would actually sign any order to make it happen.
This document includes testimony from the former ambassador to Ukraine, John E. Herbst, that explains the firing of Shokin.
"By late fall of 2015, the EU and the United States joined the chorus of those seeking Mr. Shokin’s removal as the start of an overall reform of the Procurator General’s Office. U.S. Vice President Joe Biden spoke publicly about this before and during
his December visit to Kyiv; but Mr. Shokin remained in place."
The Ambassador said that another controversy relating to the resignation of the Minister of Economy a couple of months later led President Poroshenko to call for his removal. Shokin eventually resigned. There is plenty of evidence that many in the EU and IMF were unhappy with Shokin, and that it wasn't just Biden that wanted him gone. The idea that Shokin was investigating Burisma actively when Biden called for him to be removed looks to be narrative created well after the fact to justify the accusations against the Bidens. If anything, I've seen multiple articles to the contrary. Here's one. The idea that Shokin was fired to prevent him from investigating the Bidens probably came from Shokin as a way to try and spin him being pushed out over possible corruption on his part.
Asking for, or even pressuring, a foreign government to investigate corruption by US officials is a legitimate use of executive power. Joe Biden wasn't even a candidate at the time, but even if he had been, it would still have been legitimate.
And to avoid the appearance of it being a political dirty trick, any such request should go through formal channels, not the personal request of the President himself. And at that time, Biden was almost certainly going to run, even if he hadn't formally announced it yet. I'd have to look up the timing, but that's how I remember it.
Trump is indeed required to spend foreign aid as allocated by Congress, but he can temporarily block it to ask Congress to change its allocation; as it turns out, Trump removed the block on his own.
The block was only removed on Sept. 11, 2019, well after the the White House would certainly have learned of the whistleblower complaint made in mid-August. So, I wouldn't say that he removed the block "on his own."
Even if he hadn't, this wouldn't have amounted to a "high crime and misdemeanor".
Again, that is a matter of opinion for members of the House and Senate to decide.
Correct. Not only is is perfectly fine to get foreign countries to "dig up dirt on political opponents", it is the duty of the executive branch to do that.
It is the duty of the executive branch to see that the laws are faithfully executed. It is not the duty of anyone with investigative and prosecutorial power to target political opponents with the aim of stirring up controversies over nothing. (Especially since the dormant investigations into Burisma centered on 2010-2012, more than two years before Hunter Biden was on its board.) And it seems that you agree, when you then say,
What is not OK is to abuse the power of the FBI to tarnish the reputation of an opponent with fabricated information, or to use the IRS, FBI, and other organs of the state to hassle and selective persecute political opponents...
Biden made the threat implying that this authority had been assigned to him; it's irrelevant whether he was lying on top of making the threat. It also isn't relevant whether people in the EU wanted Shokin gone as well. The fact remains: Biden made a threat to withhold US funds in order to remove someone who was investigating his family.
We're not talking about whether this was politically wise, we are talking about whether it was an impeachable offense.
This was an on-the record call from the president to a foreign leader; that is the highest level "formal channel" we have. If Trump had instructed some underling to do this behind the scenes, you would be accusing him of trying to do this clandestinely.
Again, that's irrelevant to the legality of it.
Yes, and they predictably rejected these accusations almost along partisan lines, which is my point: the accusations were politically motivated and scurrilous. It's not just the nature of the accusations and the evidence that tells us this, but also the outcome of the votes.
Ukraine is a deeply corrupt country, and Hunter Biden's involvement in Ukraine was a deeply corrupt action by a family member of a US president; we have overwhelming evidence for that now. So the investigation was fully justified.
Given the precedent that Democrats have set, hopefully a Republican Congress will tie the administration in knots after the mid-terms by impeaching Joe Biden over his corrupt actions, even if they can't get the majority to convict. Maybe that will at least prevent Biden from doing any more damage to the US economy and US democracy than he has already done.
The fact remains: Biden made a threat to withhold US funds in order to remove someone who was investigating his family.
No, that isn't a fact. As far as I can tell, Shokin himself is the only one that's ever said that the investigation into Burisma was active at the time he was pushed out, contradicting other anti-corruption groups and prosecutors in Ukraine. And there has never been any official investigation into Hunter Biden himself for his work on Burisma's board, as far as I've seen. Everything I've ever read was that the investigation was focused on a period at least two years before Hunter Biden joined the board of the company. If you're going to say that it is a fact that Joe Biden was motivated by protecting his son, then you need to show something verifiable that Shokin's office was even concerned with Hunter Biden at all at that time.
This is why it does matter that other countries' representatives wanted Shokin out. It was a known fact, which I provided evidence to back it being a fact, that Shokin was pushed out because of widespread belief among countries trying to support Ukraine that Shokin wasn't doing enough to fight corruption and may have been compromised himself.
This was an on-the record call from the president to a foreign leader; that is the highest level "formal channel" we have. If Trump had instructed some underling to do this behind the scenes, you would be accusing him of trying to do this clandestinely.
How often do Presidents get involved in criminal investigations? Even high profile ones? No, if Trump had assigned this to regular officials, I would not say that he was trying to do it "clandestinely". What I meant by "formal channel" was the way any case not politically charged and high profile would have been handled. Undoubtedly, there are parts of the DoJ and/or State Department specifically assigned to cooperate with foreign governments in investigations involving U.S. citizens. Using them would have been fine, if there really was anything to investigate.
Trump only got involved personally in this because Joe Biden was a possible 2020 opponent. Otherwise, there would have been no reason for him to give two shits about it. And, if I remember correctly, the planned topics for that phone call didn't include anything at all about the Bidens or the whole DNC server conspiracy theory. That's what got the call the attention it did, as much as anything. That at least some of Trump's advisors were stunned that he would bring that up in that call. I think Barr had no idea that Trump was going to bring him into it, either.
Yes, and they predictably rejected these accusations almost along partisan lines, which is my point: the accusations were politically motivated and scurrilous.
And you don't seem to recognize that this would cut both ways. If the vote on the accusations coming out almost entirely along party lines was a sign that the Democrats were politically motivated, then so would the rejection of the charges by virtually all Republicans that they were politically motivated. In reality, the charges needed to stand on their own merits. You are just assuming bad motives on the part of the Democrats and are excusing Trump and the Republicans in Congress the same way you were accusing me of doing for the Democrats.
I don't believe for a second that you'd accept the same kind of arguments in defense of a Democrat that you are making in defense of Trump. You skipped right by my pointing out how you are defending Trump getting personally involved in trying to get an investigation into Joe and Hunter Biden while simultaneously claiming that the FBI (while Obama was President) went after Trump for political reasons.
So, leaving the motive aside, you admit that Biden used the threat of withholding aid in order to pressure a foreign government to do his bidding.
I don't know, and it doesn't matter. In this case, a foreign nation was supposed to investigate corruption by the former VP's family. The leader of the foreign nation needs to be told and reassured that the US government is OK with this.
And that is a perfectly legitimate motivation. It's the same motivation Biden, Obama, and Hillary had when investigating Trump.
No, it doesn't "cut both ways" because only one side actually started the impeachment process.
I did, in fact, make those same kind of arguments against the impeachment of Bill Clinton.
I had no problem with the FBI investigating Trump, and I have said so in the past. Where the FBI and the Obama administration crossed the line is when they accepted obviously fabricated evidence, used it to obtain FISA warrants under false pretenses, and leaked information to the press repeatedly.
Well, you can go to Google and do the search yourself.
Way to shift the burden of the proof. It's your claim, you do the work of supporting it.
We're not in a court case here, we're having a discussion and explaining our position. Sorry if you're unclear on the difference.
Even if I did provide the list of people, you'd not change your opinion anyway, you'd just make more excuses for Democrats.
BTW, just so you know the level of idiocy to whom you are replying, here's the steaming lefty pile of shit justifying murder of an un-armed protester as a preventative measure:
"JasonT20
February.6.2022 at 6:02 pm
“How many officers were there to stop Ashlee Babbitt and the dozens of people behind her from getting into the legislative chamber to do who knows what?...”
Eat shit and die, asshole.
That there is a burden of proof on the person making a claim is general principle, not just for legal matters. I don't have to accept that what you say is true if you won't back it with verifiable facts. With my recollection being that one or two Democrats may have said something like that by the time Trump took office, I'm certainly not going to bother looking it up if you won't bother trying to source your claim of "many" Democrats having done so.
As for changing my opinion, you aren't going to do that if you don't even try to support what you're saying with verifiable facts. You're just going in circles saying the same things Trump and his cronies have been saying all along about the "Russia hoax", Burisma, Crowdstrike, and the like. You act like it's all been proven already, when it's only hardened Trump supporters that are buying what has been offered as 'proof' of at least 90% of that stuff.
Well, here is a valuable lesson in life: obligations only exist to the degree that you can enforce them.
Who are you kidding? You're a partisan bigot and troll. Nothing I or anybody says will change your mind.
The fact that Biden and his son are deeply corrupt has been proven from (1) their net worth, (2) Hunter's E-mails, (3) witness statements. Of course, they will never have to answer for this in a court of law.
As for "Russia collusion" and both impeachments, Democrats had their chance to present their evidence, and there was nothing substantive there.
Well, I'm not a "hardened Trump supporter" and I didn't vote for the guy. I'm not even a Republican. I'm an immigrant who has seen left wing parties destroy a country and the US under the Democrats is going down the same path: inflation, political witch hunts, fomenting ethnic conflicts, takeover of the private sector, it's all there.
But as I've also said: all I can do is warn Americans about it. If you fall for that crap, you deserve all the pain and misery you'll get. You're a fool.
Who are you kidding? You're a partisan bigot and troll. Nothing I or anybody says will change your mind.
I think we both have pretty distorted views of who the other person is and what we believe. You said you aren't a hardened Trump supporter and didn't vote for him. Fair enough. I have assumed otherwise due to having seen so many Trump supporters make similar arguments to what you have made. But I am also not a Democrat partisan, nor do I see myself as a 'bigot' or 'troll'.
I registered Republican when I was 18 and eligible to vote and stayed that way until 2018. Prior to 2016 I had voted for the Republican candidate for President more often than the Democratic Party candidate. The previous votes that I would go back and change if I could were the two times I voted for Bill Clinton. I only voted for Hillary because her opponent was Trump. Even Ted Cruz may have gotten my vote instead, though more likely I would have voted minor party or written in Cthulu as a protest vote. I definitely would have voted for Rubio or Kasich. (Why vote for the lesser of two evils when you can vote for the greatest evil?) Joe Biden got my vote for the same reason - Never Trump.
I have moved left over the last decade or so, relative to where I once was, but a lot of that is due to what I see in the Republican Party failing to make a positive case for their policies. Instead, they have focused more on performative, reactionary politics in their appeals to voters while pursuing economic policies that benefit the corporate interests of their big donors. A true center-right party that argued in good faith with reason and facts might have been more convincing and kept me from moving the other direction.
We may never see eye to eye, but I am no troll. I argue based on what I really think and try and back it up with facts and logical thinking. When I don't live up to that, I want to know. That is why I want the people I argue with around here to be providing facts that prove me wrong.
The fact that Biden and his son are deeply corrupt has been proven from (1) their net worth, (2) Hunter's E-mails, (3) witness statements. Of course, they will never have to answer for this in a court of law.
And that's where the allegations need to be proven - a court of law. Until the allegations of their corruption are subjected to scrutiny in a neutral forum, we should all be skeptical. You want the same for allegations against political figures on the other side, I assume.
So, as far as I'm concerned, you're just as deplorable as the Democrats.
You can read Hunter Biden's E-mails yourself; they are authentic. You can see recordings of Biden's statements: about how he pressured Ukraine, how he lies about knowing anything about Hunter's business deals, etc. You can look at the Biden's finances and property.
You can also read the Trump/Zelensky transcript yourself. And you can look at the evidence Democrats have presented.
In a free country, you are supposed to think for yourself and evaluate evidence for yourself. But you live and think like an obedient follower in a socialist dictatorship: you want state courts and state institutions to tell you what to think and what to believe.
You have already stated that you are unwilling to engage in reasoning based on facts, that you only accept the conclusions of courts and what you call a "neutral forum".
(But, of course, when the official state institutions, like the Senate, don't agree with your party's views, you don't accept their conclusions either.)
Does it strike anyone as just a wee tad ironic that the only place looter Kleptocracy Republican and Democrat sockpuppets are allowed to schaissepfost and fling ordure in each others' faces is the Reason comments section? Each faction expels the other from its own echo-chamber platform. So libertarians were treated to endless reruns of Gee-Oh-Pee attack commercials--before the advent of the Mute Lewser button. The other faction sends only Tony, who does a reasonable job of mopping the floor with about 100 Trumpanzees.
I often wondered if Republican joints censored like leftard joints did.. Course all that's left in main stream for Republicans is Fox News comments.. Ever been shut-down on Fox Comments? I've been shut down on all of them for using curse words like "U.S. Constitution"... Ya; they are that bad...
Trumpanzees lol... One thing I did notice right away was the astonishingly more logical arguing going on at Republican leaning sites... I sure don't miss the entirely pointless and detaining 2nd Grade name-calling that was always the flag-ship of the [WE] gang party sites.. Those leftards are entirely unreasonable and miserably human beings. At least terms like Nazi(National Socialism) has a logical point behind it.. Trumpanzees... What's the point of that one short of enticing Party-Line [WE] Gang-Mentality??
Hank is suffering from dementia. I also suspect he was a crackpot long before that. Kind of like Hihn was towards the end.
"...Trumpanzees..."
TDS-addled shit-piles assume that kindergarten 'clever names' will support their obsession rather than make it clear we are dealing with infantile intelligence.
I'm ambivalent about this whole thing.
However I think that the Mises Caucus reaction to the Libertarian Party's reaction to the Democrat's reaction to the Republican's reaction to the Covid virus wasn't a philosophical or principled reaction. It was a just convenient excuse.
Bad News: I would expect Mises Caucus' future behavior to mimic their current behavior - irrelevant.
Good News: Irrelevancy is the Libertarian Party's stock in trade.
Politically, the LP will always remain irrelevant in our two party system.
But culturally and educationally, members of the Mises caucus have done a lot for promoting and educating people about libertarian ideas.
The main benefit of the Mises caucus winning over the LP leadership is that the LP won't keep misrepresenting "free market progressivism" and radical individualism as libertarianism.
The LP has no possibility of effecting the outcome of even local dog-catcher elections; the LP is irrelevant.
We should be alert to those in either major party who promotes libertarian ideas, such as Trump (and I recall absolutely zero D's who, in my lifetime did so, other than JFK reducing taxes) and do our best to support them. Are you reading, assholes Brandyshit and lumberjackpileofshit?
The LP can do as it pleases; it will affect the comments section here and Liberty Unbound, if it has not yet descended into the 'Jesus said' hole they were aiming at years ago when it became unreadable.
It won't have a noticeable effect anywhere else.
You always here people regurgitate "libertarians can't get elected" and sadly they're basically correct. But why? The real reason is not that we don't have the best ideology, it's because most people still believe in a democratic republic. As such, those parties that except campaign contributions from the Fasci and their corporations are the ones that are going to be able to buy the necessary media coverage to get elected. FYI: Fascism; the merger of state and corporate powers. Just look at how much they raise as compared to how much we raise. I don't know of any single country in history that has ever been able to politically stop the Fasci from taxing and impoverishing the civilian population. I would be a member again if the LP would face this reality and try to make everyone understand that the media is controlling and stop trying to compete with them on the media platforms they control. This therefore is more about education. We're letting them pull us under the circus tent they own and control and until we open the curtain to expose the fascism, we'll forever be swimming upstream.
We also need to mount, not an Insurgency but a Counter-Insurgency
We don't want to overthrow anyone. We want to restore the Constitution and Bill of Rights and prosecute those who have unlawfully abrogated it and take back the wealth they have stolen from we the people using a plethora of usurpations such as unconstitutional mandates, taxes, regulatory fees and various redistribution of wealth schemes.
Anyone who calls for overthrowing anyone is committing an insurrection and the Fasci will use their power as they are doing to the Jan. 6 protestors with their many false accusations to stop such a movement. One of their key witness is a former FBI and police informant as an example of how low they will stoop to protect themselves. Look at all the RHINOs who are now supporting unconstitutional anti-2nd Amendments legislation, that in and of itself an act of insurrection having taken an Oath to uphold and defend the Constitution.
How to stop them? We, the Counter Insurgency Studies and Observation Group (COINSOG) believes due to their power, nobody within the government itself will ever mount a serious prosecution against these criminals and the Judges are just as afraid/complicit as the prosecutors.
It is going to have to be a coordinated effort by all 50 state "unorganized" civilian militias. Trust me they are there, so find them and join. If we can force the government to indict, great, but if not which s most likely, we have to create our own civilian grand juries and we need thousands of people to get involved to not only get this done but to also protect everyone from the aggression and infiltration those in the government will attempt. There is only a little info presented publicly about COINSOG but they have a constitutional and 100% legal method and means of accomplishing the task of indictments and prosecutions with the primarily goal of taking back the $trillion confiscated from We the People and getting it back. Waiting and fighting over which politician/potentate is going to come along and solve the worlds problems is simply naive. We been voting for 235 plus years and where has it gotten us, other than distracted from accomplishing anything truly significant. Waiting for some hero/potentate to come along and save us is just pure ignorance. It took an entire society including many civilian militias and privateers to defeat the British and it will again take we the people to bring all the criminals to justice and take back what they have stolen. We need thousands of people in each State to show not only that we are serious, but that we are going to accomplish this goal and we are not going to let anybody stop us. If any blood is spilled, it will be those who are or are protecting the criminals who are the antagonists and we will defend ourselves.
When the time is right and the ranks of the militia are filled by those doing more than just running their mouths COINSOG will be contracting all 50 State Militias and I'm not talking about the National Guard, the U.S. military call the organized militia. Get to work everyone before it's too late.