Well said, as is his custom. Well past time that more people made this point and called a spade a spade and that applies on both sides of the 49th Parallel.
Unfortunately there are too many Bob’s on both sides of the border.
Ya, lets purge the party of these deadbeats. Enough of this sitting in government business. We have lost our purity of essence!
Democrat, Republican just two sides of the same coin. If anyone still believes that the two parties aren’t owned by the same interests theyre delusional. Puppets on a string in a political theatre.
I’m no Bob, the Tea Party is scaring the pi$$ out of the GOP and thier lossing much of thier traditional support base.
Fiscally Conservative, socially Libertarian, call me Frank.
Bingo! And if a party comes along that has different values they both pile on. Remember what the Liberals, Progressive Party, and the Media Party said and did Canada when the reform Party came along.
And if you remember the ultimate fate of the Reform Party and it’s platform, you will see the how current party system protects the status quo.
Partisan politics is not about identifying or solving problems, it is about accumulating and protecting power.
I’m just curious here but when someone says “socially libertarian” where do they stand on abortion? Are they pro-baby killing or against it? I’m guessing they want chix to snuff out as many lives as possible.
As far as “baby killing” goes, as a fiscally conservative and socially libertarian fella myself I would support it only if the little beggar really deserved it.
socially lieberal and fiscally conservative ….there ain’t no such beast and no such beast can exist, were in the h3ll would the money come from for the socially pissing away money when your con side don’t wanna tax??? (Lance, are U reading here:-))))
james, abortion is a “personal” and medical consideration, not a political question, bible thumpers never quite get that rite!!!!
james >
“…when someone says “socially libertarian” where do they stand on abortion?”
I wouldn’t speak for anyone else who calls themselves a social libertarian, but for me it means that I could care less what some crack head decides to do with their pregnancy providing that I don’t have to pay for it. Through my tax’s or otherwise.
“I’m guessing they want chix to snuff out as many lives as possible.” – James
You would be guessing wrong. Libertarian is not even close to meaning “Liberal” in the modern sense of liberal, quite the opposite.
Fiscally Conservative, socially Libertarian, call me Frank. Knight 99
There doesn’t seem to be much of a market for that. Most of these FC/SL mongrels are of the Gary Johnson type, who really are happier with the liberal, because their true desire is to spite true conservatives, who they feel ” done them wrong”. They should bear in mind that their children and grandchildren will bear the high cost of their forbear’s vengeance.
small c conservative >
“There doesn’t seem to be much of a market for that”
For reference another self identified Fiscal Conservative, Social Libertarian would be Danielle Smith of the Alberta Wild Rose Party. http://www.daniellesmith.ca/meet-danielle
the GOP for not being fiscal conservatives, even when they are the only fiscal conservatives in town.
Oh and you were doing so well Goldberg. But in the real world, there is no evidence that the GOP is really interested in fiscal conservatism. They had that chance from 2002-2006. Most of these FC/SL mongrels are of the Gary Johnson type, who really are happier with the liberal, because their true desire is to spite true conservatives, who they feel ” done them wrong”.
LOL. The butthurt, the projection. It’s too much.
Knight 99 @ 18:56, well said.
The left in the US is pretty well united under the Democrat banner whereas the Republicans are a rag tag coalition of big money establishment “conservative” progressives, social conservative progressives, conservative progressives (including so-called FC-SLs), and libertarians. The Tea Party is a grass roots loose coalition of the later three groups. Unfortunately, if any one of the above stays home on election night or goes it alone, as Virginia’s Gubernatorial election demonstrated last night (libertarian spoiler), the Dems win. This explains why the GOP can’t govern as conservative but only as progressives catering to the progressive independents of the mushy middle (switch hitters).
Given that libertarianism is the only political/economic system that can accommodate any consenting social arrangement that all variants of statism can only maintain at gun point, it is incumbent on all the mongrel conservatives above to fall-in with libertarians or slowly cede all power to the left (status quo default mode).
John Chittick >
In a nutshell, well said.
Canadian Observer;
So true! As a Reformer I watched as the message was stroked and the grassroots eliminated from the direction of the Party. I had to conclude that a hugh part of the political process is about gaining power at all cost and then feeding at the trough for as long as it lasts. This applies to all politicians no matter the stripe. I might be naïve but it seems that political parties do not have a very effective way of maintaining their philosophical purity. A party like Reform was a serious threat not to just the infrastructure of a fat government but all those who feed from it.
I still have faith in Harper but that is tempered by the realization of the strength of those who oppose him. Turdeau is just another handy tool being constructed to challenge. There is a significant corporate element who would profit from a Lieberal government. Harper rules with a inner elite thru necessity knowing where the majority of his elite’s conviction lie.
Well said, as is his custom. Well past time that more people made this point and called a spade a spade and that applies on both sides of the 49th Parallel.
Unfortunately there are too many Bob’s on both sides of the border.
Ya, lets purge the party of these deadbeats. Enough of this sitting in government business. We have lost our purity of essence!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1KvgtEnABY
Democrat, Republican just two sides of the same coin. If anyone still believes that the two parties aren’t owned by the same interests theyre delusional. Puppets on a string in a political theatre.
I’m no Bob, the Tea Party is scaring the pi$$ out of the GOP and thier lossing much of thier traditional support base.
Fiscally Conservative, socially Libertarian, call me Frank.
Bingo! And if a party comes along that has different values they both pile on. Remember what the Liberals, Progressive Party, and the Media Party said and did Canada when the reform Party came along.
And if you remember the ultimate fate of the Reform Party and it’s platform, you will see the how current party system protects the status quo.
Partisan politics is not about identifying or solving problems, it is about accumulating and protecting power.
I’m just curious here but when someone says “socially libertarian” where do they stand on abortion? Are they pro-baby killing or against it? I’m guessing they want chix to snuff out as many lives as possible.
As far as “baby killing” goes, as a fiscally conservative and socially libertarian fella myself I would support it only if the little beggar really deserved it.
socially lieberal and fiscally conservative ….there ain’t no such beast and no such beast can exist, were in the h3ll would the money come from for the socially pissing away money when your con side don’t wanna tax??? (Lance, are U reading here:-))))
james, abortion is a “personal” and medical consideration, not a political question, bible thumpers never quite get that rite!!!!
james >
“…when someone says “socially libertarian” where do they stand on abortion?”
I wouldn’t speak for anyone else who calls themselves a social libertarian, but for me it means that I could care less what some crack head decides to do with their pregnancy providing that I don’t have to pay for it. Through my tax’s or otherwise.
“I’m guessing they want chix to snuff out as many lives as possible.” – James
You would be guessing wrong. Libertarian is not even close to meaning “Liberal” in the modern sense of liberal, quite the opposite.
Fiscally Conservative, socially Libertarian, call me Frank. Knight 99
There doesn’t seem to be much of a market for that. Most of these FC/SL mongrels are of the Gary Johnson type, who really are happier with the liberal, because their true desire is to spite true conservatives, who they feel ” done them wrong”. They should bear in mind that their children and grandchildren will bear the high cost of their forbear’s vengeance.
small c conservative >
“There doesn’t seem to be much of a market for that”
For reference another self identified Fiscal Conservative, Social Libertarian would be Danielle Smith of the Alberta Wild Rose Party.
http://www.daniellesmith.ca/meet-danielle
the GOP for not being fiscal conservatives, even when they are the only fiscal conservatives in town.
Oh and you were doing so well Goldberg. But in the real world, there is no evidence that the GOP is really interested in fiscal conservatism. They had that chance from 2002-2006.
Most of these FC/SL mongrels are of the Gary Johnson type, who really are happier with the liberal, because their true desire is to spite true conservatives, who they feel ” done them wrong”.
LOL. The butthurt, the projection. It’s too much.
Knight 99 @ 18:56, well said.
The left in the US is pretty well united under the Democrat banner whereas the Republicans are a rag tag coalition of big money establishment “conservative” progressives, social conservative progressives, conservative progressives (including so-called FC-SLs), and libertarians. The Tea Party is a grass roots loose coalition of the later three groups. Unfortunately, if any one of the above stays home on election night or goes it alone, as Virginia’s Gubernatorial election demonstrated last night (libertarian spoiler), the Dems win. This explains why the GOP can’t govern as conservative but only as progressives catering to the progressive independents of the mushy middle (switch hitters).
Given that libertarianism is the only political/economic system that can accommodate any consenting social arrangement that all variants of statism can only maintain at gun point, it is incumbent on all the mongrel conservatives above to fall-in with libertarians or slowly cede all power to the left (status quo default mode).
John Chittick >
In a nutshell, well said.
Canadian Observer;
So true! As a Reformer I watched as the message was stroked and the grassroots eliminated from the direction of the Party. I had to conclude that a hugh part of the political process is about gaining power at all cost and then feeding at the trough for as long as it lasts. This applies to all politicians no matter the stripe. I might be naïve but it seems that political parties do not have a very effective way of maintaining their philosophical purity. A party like Reform was a serious threat not to just the infrastructure of a fat government but all those who feed from it.
I still have faith in Harper but that is tempered by the realization of the strength of those who oppose him. Turdeau is just another handy tool being constructed to challenge. There is a significant corporate element who would profit from a Lieberal government. Harper rules with a inner elite thru necessity knowing where the majority of his elite’s conviction lie.