Re: When I Look Upon Pelosi & Reid I Get......
Martha,
Let's see, a liberal believes in individual freedom, tolerance and generosity. This is what I believe.
And, it is what I believe, and what most libertarians believe, in my experience. The generosity part can get a bit fuzzy ... based upon various other posts from you, my perception is that you believe also in forced generosity ... such as taking from some, to give to others, and doing so under penalty of force. And, liberals don't believe in individual freedom when it comes to things like self defense and so-called "gun control".
While I am not an anarchist (which you begin to confuse with libertarians), I do believe in very minimal government. Libertarians are not of one mold any more than are so-called "liberals".
"Libertarianism is the view that each person has the right to his life in any way he chooses so long as he or she respects the equal rights of others. Libertarians defend each person's right to life, liberty and property-rights that people have naturally, before governments are created. In the Libertarian view, all human relationships should be voluntary; the only actions that should be forbidden by law are those that involve the initiation of force against those who have not themselves uses force-actions like murder, robbery, rape, kidnapping and fraud."
-- Charles Murray, author, What it Means to Be a Libertarian
Actually, Martha, if you examine history, you find that many, many things Americans now take for granted must come from government, at one time did come from the private sector.
You cannot have a society without rules.
Libertarians don't suggest we wouldn't have any rules. You exaggerate the philosophy, creating the classic straw man in order to attack what you perhaps have never truly examined. This is a common method used to attack the concept of less government and more liberty.
Regarding eminent domain, know that a sovereign nation has the power to take from anyone unless the people in that nation agree to restrict their government.
I'm referring to Kelo v. New London, as I suspect you realize(see
http://www.ij.org/private_property/connecticut/index.html). At one time, Americans understood their homes and businesses might be taken to construct a public road ... but now the the "conservative" Supreme Court you fear has taken the position that governments can seize private property for reasons much more specious and nebulous. Conservative indeed. Be honest here ... this has nothing to do with "... the building and maintaining of infrastructure like roads, sewers, etc.".
And,
Charles, do you really believe that the liberals here are the sort of liberals that are of the same ilk as the purported socialists with a bloody history?
? Frankly, Martha, I believe the main difference between a "liberal" and a bloody liberal is their degree of power. I spent a good deal of time working on behalf of environmental causes, and in those fights I met my share of liberals ... everything from the garden variety "small is good", to Stalinists. There is a stone's throw from those who feel we need to simply tax others a bit more (effectively at the point of a gun) to support their pet charity, to a more strident view that government need only seize the assets to use as it pleases. And, if the selfish rich refuse, then that "liberal" government will deal harshly with them.
Don't get me wrong ... I think there are many nice, decent, but naive people who simply want to do good ... but they want to do it by seizing my property and yours. Generosity? Some taxes are reasonable, but the true "liberal" usually can't articulate the limit to taxation. If you want generosity, then give away to your pet causes, as I do.
Finally, I think we saw an excellent example of where that liberal power leads when we witnessed the insanity of recent anti-self defense efforts. While Clinton and Reno were party to the deaths of scores of children, mothers and fathers over the latters' alleged involvement with illegal weapons, their party attempted to pass all manner of additional restrictions on private firearms ownership ... "for the children". Such restrictions have an infamous history, ignored by pseudo-intellectuals who refuse to study the past. And the political methods used by the "liberals" in this cause were disingenuous at best, and usually outright lies when reviewed in detail. Examine carefully the evolution of so-called "liberal" philosophy, and it is at least as bloody as so-called "conservative" philosophy. (Read "That Every Man Be Armed" by Halbrook for a fascinating look at self defense history.)
And now we have the lying liberals back in power, taking the place of lying conservatives. I feel so much better now. At least the conservatives got the fact that we are at war with radical Islamists ... I suspect the liberals will now try to be nice to them ...
What I find fascinating on this forum in particular is that so many who take responsibility for their own lives, their own families, and their own futures, are so willing to embrace failed "liberal" philosophy. And, to optimistically believe that "liberal" government will be so much better than that we've witnessed with Bush et al. I would have thought a forum filled with more mature individuals, most if not all who have created wealth by their own hard work, would bridle against so-called "liberal" solutions. Quite ironic.
I have a public service announcement.....Texas we recycle here I haven't taken an official poll of the surrounding area, but I think just about everybody does it and not everybody is a socialist scandivanian - I never hear anyone complain. They put a nominal charge on the property tax bill....it reduces how much you put in the garbage can so in turn I reduced the size of the can and thus pay about half of what I would otherwise, so its a good thing in a couple ways...
