Comments on: Libertarians Still Lusting for Palin?

By: Steve Roberts

Steve Roberts — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 23:31:06 +0000

First ,i do not hunt.However if we had no hunters deer would take over the world. Already where i live many people hit them in cars.This causes not only damage to the car but some time Injury to people. I don't know about moose but i suspect that the ones you see are in a protective area. Often animals there are tame. Most animals if not hunted would over populate,and then many would starve to death .Personally i had rather be shot and die quickly ,than suffering the slow death of starvation.

By: Steve Roberts

Steve Roberts — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 23:17:24 +0000

For the ones who don't support Palin You must have supported Obama.You will soon reap what you have sown.

By: Lester Ness

Lester Ness — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 06:21:44 +0000

According to my favorite crazy evangelist, Brother Stair, she is a tool of the Illuminati. Of course, everything is a conspiracy to Stair!

Lester Ness

Kunming

China

By: timmy ramone

timmy ramone — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 23:56:50 +0000

Brad Smith: And you seem just as desperate to prove mine. I can’t speak for Mr. Bovard, but I don’t think he had it in mind to impugn the nation’s moose hunters when he made his remark about Sarah Palin. Besides, at this point she probably IS “America’s best-known moose hunter.” As I said before, your indignant over-reaction to Bovard’s innocent quip reeks of political correctness and deserves no further comment.

By: petey

petey — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 20:41:27 +0000

“Palinâ€™s â€œzero tolerance for government corruption.” ”
ha, ha, ha.

By: Eugene Costa

Eugene Costa — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 17:49:00 +0000

This is classic doublebind, examined in depth by both Bateson and Laing, among others.

It might be paraphrased logically in various ways–”You must do X and avoid Y, but you must do it freely and by your own choice.”

I will not bother with the theology, but at base it is just another version of state and society as a “moral order”, with the economic and financial arrangements designed to enforce it by default.

This is, partly at least, why I do not consider either Paul, or those who follow him as a messiah, whatever their exoteric dogmas, “Libertarian.”

When William James appropriated a few isolated ideas of Charles Sanders Peirce’s “pragmatism”, and even appropriated the name for his own botched doctrines, Peirce, interestingly enough, politely informed James he was wrong, then changed the name of his own system to “pragmaticism” to distinguish it from James’ “pragmatism”.

It may be time to do the same with “Libertarian”, leaving that name to what the Paulists and others have expropriated, and if I may say, so, thoroughly botched.

Rothbard was much more penetrating, as is Bovard.

By: Eugene Costa

Eugene Costa — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 17:27:08 +0000

The question occurred to me a while ago that, given, say, Austrian economic theory, and humankind’s supposed material motives, why is espousing the theory, including that of the “Libertarians” who make the economic theory a central item of their “philosophy”, not profit-making?

Or is it?

Admittedly, on the surface the question looks both deliberately perverse and very naive.

By: richard vajs

richard vajs — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 11:28:21 +0000

Libertarians in love with Palin? Oh, boy I give that match like zero chance. Ask any Libertarian about getting money from other Libertarians. Libertarian men are el cheapo. I have passed the hat at Libertarian functions and saw lots of ones and an occasional fiver go in. Lots of “I’ll give laters”. Readers of this web site can see that poor Raimondo has to stand on his head to raise $70K every quarter. So what kind of Sugar Daddy would your average Libertarian Joe make?
Watching Keith Olbermann on his show last night, I heard that in the 7 weeks since that backwoods Leona Helmsley arrived, the GOP has had to shell out $150K for her clothes and travel. She doesn’t order her clothes from some outfitters – more like Neiman-Marcus and Saxs. And the Palin brood doesn’t do Motel 6 and order in pizza. Genuine moose burgers from room service at the Plaza must cost a blue fortune.
So dream on you lovesick Libertarians. For your sake, I hope that you never capture the heart of this Imelda Marcos of the tundra.

By: Ira Epstein

Ira Epstein — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 03:59:03 +0000

I think Libertarians have the understanding that virtue cannot exist without choice. It is only in a society where people have the right to choose hookers, drugs, and gambling that true virtue can exist. So it is not because Libertarians care nothing about morality or virtue that they think vices should not be crimes. Rather it is because Libertarians think virtue and morality are all important, and it is only in a society where people are free to make bad choices that morality and virtue can exist. Albert Jay Nock does an excellent job on elaberating on this point in his essay “On Doing the Right Thing”

By: Eugene Costa

Eugene Costa — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 15:45:46 +0000

I also agree that from this small sample (I will not be reading more if I can help it) this “Spengler” is an offense to the tradition of German Scholarship, including Oswald Spengler, at least as it was before the Nazis went a long way toward destroying it.

It might be noted, as you doubtless well know, that the “Dark Ages” weren’t “Dark” in much of the world, as in the East, including Constantinople and later–of all places–Baghdad.

The peculiar apprehension of the “Dark Ages” among the British and Americans deserves a subtle tome. It is a pity Arnaldo Momigliano is dead–he might have managed it. As it stands, Twain’s Connecticut Yankee will have to suffice for a few unconscious themes–that all modernity, for example, descends from the Englishman’s emergence from his own long and very recent “Dark Age”, punctuated too shortly obviously, by the Roman Occupation.