Lame Duck Obama

[JosephH]

Libertarians are basically a crew of people who dream they, as first class passengers, have manned the the only available lifeboats on a sinking ship through great foresight, skill, and manly self-reliance. Only later it comes to light they actually manned those lifeboats with all the provisions after scuttling the ship thirty minutes prior while all the other passengers were sleeping. In the investigation that followed the libertarians claimed the steerage passengers were sinking the boat by their sheer numbers and they only did what was necessary for the strong to survive.

 

Empathy is definitely NOT part of the party platform.

[rob]

Libertarians are basically a crew of people who dream they, as first class passengers, have manned the the only available lifeboats on a sinking ship through great foresight, skill, and manly self-reliance. Only later it comes to light they actually manned those lifeboats with all the provisions after scuttling the ship thirty minutes prior while all the other passengers were sleeping. In the investigation that followed the libertarians claimed the steerage passengers were sinking the boat by their sheer numbers and they only did what was necessary for the strong to survive.

 

Empathy is definitely NOT part of the party platform.

 

Meh. In the real world most libertarians I've met believe that charities, churches and communities should take care of their own, not the federal government. I'm not saying I agree with that (I don't), or that I think that is good policy (I don't) but I think it's unfair to attribute hypothetical motive to people's political opinions. As I said, I think most people want what (they think) is best for America and their fellow citizens.

 

Suggesting that libertarians as a whole are sneaky fat cats consciously scuttling the ship and tip-toeing out with the lifeboats while everyone else sleeps is ludicrous. Have you ever tried to see things from their perspective? It's possible to disagree with someone without assigning a disrespectful interpretation to their motive, you know.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Libertarians are basically a crew of people who dream they, as first class passengers, have manned the the only available lifeboats on a sinking ship through great foresight, skill, and manly self-reliance. Only later it comes to light they actually manned those lifeboats with all the provisions after scuttling the ship thirty minutes prior while all the other passengers were sleeping. In the investigation that followed the libertarians claimed the steerage passengers were sinking the boat by their sheer numbers and they only did what was necessary for the strong to survive.

 

Empathy is definitely NOT part of the party platform.

 

You really are a small-minded, vitriolic, intolerant and petty little bigot, aren't you.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Libertarians are basically a crew of people who dream they, as first class passengers, have manned the the only available lifeboats on a sinking ship through great foresight, skill, and manly self-reliance. Only later it comes to light they actually manned those lifeboats with all the provisions after scuttling the ship thirty minutes prior while all the other passengers were sleeping. In the investigation that followed the libertarians claimed the steerage passengers were sinking the boat by their sheer numbers and they only did what was necessary for the strong to survive.

 

Empathy is definitely NOT part of the party platform.

 

Meh. In the real world most libertarians I've met believe that charities, churches and communities should take care of their own, not the federal government. I'm not saying I agree with that (I don't), or that I think that is good policy (I don't) but I think it's unfair to attribute hypothetical motive to people's political opinions. As I said, I think most people want what (they think) is best for America and their fellow citizens.

 

Suggesting that libertarians as a whole are sneaky fat cats consciously scuttling the ship and tip-toeing out with the lifeboats while everyone else sleeps is ludicrous. Have you ever tried to see things from their perspective? It's possible to disagree with someone without assigning a disrespectful interpretation to their motive, you know.

 

Some libertarians want to abolish the FDA and other important and useful government agencies. I'm not in that camp. As Tvash said, there is a wide spectrum of what encompasses libertarian beliefs.

 

I don't necessarily believe that private charities should handle all the social services for the needy, but I do believe we need to manage the scope (i.e. limit) of federal charities and make sure they are not abused by freeloaders. With a charity you at least get to give money to those you have faith will use it wisely - and withdraw support when you learn or suspect otherwise, or when need is less.

 

Fundamentally I want the government to mind its own business and let people live their lives. That's why I supported gay weed. I'd even support some profoundly stupid, posturing dumbass taking LSD and climbing and bragging about it on the internet - as long as he didn't hurt someone doing it.

 

 

[tvashtarkatena]

I try to take a Zen mind approach to meeting people - assume nothing, listen, engage. Seems to work OK. I don't tolerate open belligerence while speaking on a topic - its not fair to the rest of the audience, but those situations are quite rare. Even then, I offer to discuss things afterwards with the heckler.

 

I've run into kooky, but not out in out evil. I wasn't on the Titanic, so I can't comment on the lifeboat situation.

 

I've spoken to some pretty right wing folks and gotten compliments afterwards. They come armed with the typical anti-ACLU propaganda, but that's pretty easy to disarm with a few simple questions. Once they realize you're for real, they engage, just like anybody else. Once so engaged, I can learn something from them.

 

Find common ground, work outwards from there. You don't do that by condemning someone's motives before you've even attempted to figure out who you're dealing with. It's more fun to speak with someone who doesn't already agree with your point of view sometimes. Keeps your brain and spirit from stewing in its own bullshit. Stay friendly and you can plant an idea and maybe get one in return. Insult them and you've confirmed their propaganda.

 

Anyway, you never know what they've been through. Maybe their believe in self reliance because they had to raise their drug addict kid sister? Maybe, just maybe, there's something there to be admired.

[JosephH]

Oh, I've known and talked at length with no small number of libertarians of all stripes from mormons, Skousenians, survivalists to disaffected republicans and a veritable rainbow of tea colors in between. It's definitely a me-myself-and-mine culture marked with a decidedly superior pseudo-randian attitude, an all-too-convenient survival-of-the-fittest philosophy, and a remarkably narrow definition of 'our own'.

 

The libertarian platform is even more unrealistic, extreme, and delusional than the republican 2012 platform with regard to any and all aspects of what it takes to run a country. It's just another form of radical fundamentalism and kneejerk symptom of a basic failure to cope with the inherent complexity of reality. The ideal world where the libertarian platform could successfully manage a government of any size only exists in libertarian fantasies.

 

If they could build walls around our ghettos and pull the plug on them they'd be the first in line to do the deed because that in effect is precisely what their policies and platform would do. Their's is a Utopian vision which skirts just this side of a nightmarish Mad Max world for anyone less fortunate then themselves (and usually less white). And I'm the bigot?

 

Libertarians and the tea partiers live in insular and self-reinforcing bubbles similar to the one the neocons operated within or the one the 'we're-not-W-neocons' republican party just had dissolve on-screen before their disbelieving eyes. Throw in the conspiracy element most libertarians harbor to one degree or another and it's pretty hard to establish a productive, reality-based conversation with any but a very, very small number of them.

 

And try to "find common ground" or establish a political compromise with them writ large as party? Yeah, that would be great if yesterday they hadn't started running further, faster, and "purer" in exactly the opposite direction. About the only good thing I can say about libertarians is they will continue playing a not insignificant role in keeping the Whitehouse in democratic hands for a generation to come at this rate.

 

 

[rob]

Wow Joe, with such a generous and open-mind its hard to believe you haven't had any friendly conversations with people of differing opinions. Weird.

 

[olyclimber]

who doesn't live in an insular bubble? I know i count on mine, especially during the winter months....it keeps me warm.

[matt_warfield]

I have not read all the posts to this thread but can't help but join the fray.

 

Whether we like it or not, it is going to be a long fight for a third party of any kind to be legitimate in politics in the US. If we were all locked in isolation and forced to write down our principles, we would end up with a vast number of parties. But we have two with factions.

 

Political change happens at the speed of a glacier. In Montana the Libertarian candidate who opposed Senate candidate Rehberg pointed and fired a rifle in an ad at the camera which simulated Homeland Security surveillance. That technique will not get you elected.

 

The two party system is not ideal but it is reality. I spent years supporting Ralph Nader and Ross Perot.

 

You have to be relentless, persistent, and have an immense amount of patience to change the situation.

 

In the meantime, regardless of your political angle, NOTHING IS GETTING DONE in Congress. We have to solve problems one step at a time and the first step is to take care of immediate business and prove that we as a country can do so. China and Iran and Syria and Lybia and etc. are waiting to find out how much floundering we can do.

 

Also in the meantime I have to agree with Joseph that, right or wrong, the Libertarians siphon votes from the right wing which helps the liberal cause. It is the absolute definition of ironic.

Edited November 8, 2012 by matt_warfield

[tvashtarkatena]

Wow Joe, with such a generous and open-mind its hard to believe you haven't had any friendly conversations with people of differing opinions. Weird.

 

Reckon they're about as friendly as with his fellow climbers.

 

Zen Mind, Beginner Mind, my brothuhz.

 

Love that after-election glow...

 

Most self described libertarians I've spoken with (the definitive measure of truth!) are fairly moderate in their views. Yeah, the survivalists get some press, but mostly that's just a manifestation of people with a big hole in there lives they're attempting to fill - a disease most Americans are afflicted with to some degree. The Armaggedonauts have just turned it up to 11.

 

 

Edited November 8, 2012 by tvashtarkatena

[ivan]

 

In the meantime, regardless of your political angle, NOTHING IS GETTING DONE in Congress.

better than a buncha stupid shit being done?

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Wow Joe, with such a generous and open-mind its hard to believe you haven't had any friendly conversations with people of differing opinions. Weird.

 

Amen.

 

Another area where libertarians may find some common ground with the left is in their (typically) isolationist, or at least, non-interventionist bent. I'll concede that in the modern era the party most likely to start expensive wars is the Republican party, and they also seem to use that as a first resort to address any threat (e.g. Iran). wouldn't it be nice if say 15-20% of the republicans in congress were of a more isolationist/libertarian bent and voted to oppose new wars or continuing old ones indefinitely? Even with republican majorities, that could be enough to put the kabash on such policies. We need more diversity in our politicians not less, even if that means a few folks representing those views in congress or state legislatures.

 

[tvashtarkatena]

For the GOP, I'd advise:

 

Bolstering the fiscal argument by eliminating the military's blank check. Strong defense can be had for a lot less money. Demand that value.

 

Drop abortion and marriage. It's none of their business, and the country has already moved on. This cost the GOP big this time around. Real big. The GOP told itself it's all about the economy. Voters disagreed.

 

Divorce the Born Agains by pushing a true separation of church and state agenda. After all, they're a captive base. Who else are they gonna vote for? This would allow the above to happen. The GOP's world wouldn't suddenly end.

 

Accept progressive taxation in exchange for lower deficits.

 

Push to end the Drug War under the guise of government waste and personal liberty. Cut that budget!

 

Stop lying so much. Its a turn off, and it doesn't work these days as well as it used to.

 

End tax exemptions for superPACs that do not disclose donations and churches who openly play partisan politics. Close those loopholes - increase revenue. Again, this is an image/trust issue for the GOP - a big one.

 

Soften the zero tolerance immigration bullshit. It turns their new target constituencies: hispanics and women, off.

Edited November 8, 2012 by tvashtarkatena

[JosephH]

For the GOP, I'd advise:

 

Bolstering the fiscal argument by eliminating the military's blank check. Strong defense can be had for a lot less money. Demand that value.

 

Drop abortion and marriage. It's none of their business, and the country has already moved on. This cost the GOP big this time around. Real big. The GOP told itself it's all about the economy. Voters disagreed.

 

Divorce the Born Agains by pushing a true separation of church and state agenda. After all, they're a captive base. Who else are they gonna vote for? This would allow the above to happen. The GOP's world wouldn't suddenly end.

 

Accept progressive taxation in exchange for lower deficits.

 

Push to end the Drug War under the guise of government waste and personal liberty. Cut that budget!

 

Stop lying so much. Its a turn off, and it doesn't work these days as well as it used to.

 

End tax exemptions for superPACs that do not disclose donations and churches who openly play partisan politics. Close those loopholes - increase revenue. Again, this is an image/trust issue for the GOP - a big one.

 

Soften the zero tolerance immigration bullshit. It turns their new target constituencies: hispanics and women, off.

Except none of that is going to happen.

 

The republican strategy of the past forty years has been based on racism, homophobia, sexism, and xenophobia with a heavy dose of fiscal fantasy and war. And, if you look at the 2010 redistricting map on the county level, that strategy has been largely successful for them until Tuesday, but that strategy is now officially dead at the national level.

 

And so they aren't going to turn things around on a dime. There is simply no credible way to swing from a forty year campaign of sewing hate, division, and lies to one of an honest and sincere interest in change and compromise as anything but a charade and that's what they just got called on - a political charade. And they got called on it precisely because the all-too-clear gap between the messaging of their primary that suddenly chameleon-morphed into the entirely different messaging of the final Romney push.

 

- Forty years of racism and xenophobia won't allow them to sincerely and honestly embrace latinos.

 

- Forty years of sexism and chauvinism won't allow them to embrace women (nor are women now going to forget what republicans really think).

 

- Forty years of homophobia won't allow them to embrace gays or same sex marriage.

 

- Forty years of lying about the benefits of cutting taxes for corporations and the rich won't allow them to support fair and honest levels of government revenue.

 

Instead they're going to conduct an extended civil war, try to sell more insincere charades, and will far more likely move further right and less open to compromise and that's because their racially redrawn 2010 redistricting maps aren't going to let them do much of anything else at the state and local level.

 

And yeah, that's the exact same problem the core Beacon crew has: trying to believably turn around a sixteen year campaign of fantasy, lies, and them vs. us shit-talking of the rangers and land managers to one of an honest and sincere working relationships overnight when they still actually don't believe a word of the noise they put out on their paper, blog, and facebook they hope the world wants to hear - in other words a charade no different then Romney just attempted. Maybe they'll have better luck than him, but they will not be any more sincere.

[ivan]

i thought beacon-banter had been banned even from spray?

[tvashtarkatena]

If the GOP dropped marriage and abortion from the agenda, and vowed to end the War on Drugs (and the Dems didn't), I'd switch parties tomorrow.

[JosephH]

That's right and integrity and sincerity with it - but then once again, I'm not the one who brought the subject up now am I.

[ivan]

If the GOP dropped marriage and abortion from the agenda, and vowed to end the War on Drugs (and the Dems didn't), I'd switch parties tomorrow.

you're pissing on the grave of the hallowed hubert humphrey you insensitive bastard!!!

[tvashtarkatena]

JH, Seems like you've nearly single handedly transformed that State Park into the Rock That Must Not Be Named, no? Has it been us v them, or them v you?

Edited November 8, 2012 by tvashtarkatena

[ivan]

That's right and integrity and sincerity with it - but then once again, I'm not the one who brought the subject up now am I.

pat has a second chair he can lend you if you want

 

[tvashtarkatena]

If the GOP dropped marriage and abortion from the agenda, and vowed to end the War on Drugs (and the Dems didn't), I'd switch parties tomorrow.

you're pissing on the grave of the hallowed hubert humphrey you insensitive bastard!!!

 

No worries. This is akin to saying "If I won the lottery I'd buy all my friends new houses". I wouldn't start packing things up just yet.

[JosephH]

That's right and integrity and sincerity with it - but then once again, I'm not the one who brought the subject up now am I.

pat has a second chair he can lend you if you want

Dude, that chair has been empty for sixteen years.

[tvashtarkatena]

The 2nd Chair will now recognize the Gentleman from Oregon.

 

Anyone else bored stiff?

Edited November 8, 2012 by tvashtarkatena

[ivan]

when i'm stiff, i'm usually not bored

[rob]

Zen Mind, Beginner Mind, my brothuhz.

 

 

I didn't know you read Suzuki Roshi. Good book. Branching Streams is a good one, too. Have you been to the Zendo on Whidbey Island?