February 2017 Open Thread


Our monthly open thread. Post news tips about alt parties and independent candidates, discuss any story that should be posted here but has not yet been posted, or even delve into completely off-topic stuff…just avoid quarantined thread subject matter and things that could get us and/or you into legal trouble such as threats, libel, and copyright infringement.

News tips can also be sent to the IPR writers who have chosen to make their contact info available at https://independentpoliticalreport.com/about/.

Our videos this month, an IPR Open Thread tradition:

160 thoughts on “February 2017 Open Thread

  1. Tony From Long Island

    Latest Information on the Prohibition Party

    And in related news . . . a fabulous new invention – the horseless carriage – has been invented.

  2. Tony From Long island

    Meanwhile, the Republicans are nominating a prohibitionist for Attorney General.

    Working with Darth Trump might drive him to drink . . . but only white Russians. . . definitely not black Russians.

  3. Karl T. Knight

    Wow, the new Constitution Party website is a major improvement. Very nice looking – Much more “open” feeling then previous version.

  4. paulie Post author

    Flipping channels. New report that Trump has threatened the President of Mexico that he may send US troops into Mexico. More non-interventionism from our new non-interventionist president.

  5. Vg

    Anyone know what’s happening with the GOP in Alabama? An opportunity for minor parties? From the CP of Alabama facebook page:

    What is going on within the Alabama GOP? As it stands, it is being reported that at least half of our state senators and more than 30 Alabama State House members will not seek reelection in 2018. So far all those who have announced are republicans. There has never been a better chance to seek office with the Alabama Constitution Party. If you are thinking of running and would like to seek the Alabama Constitution Party nomination, please do not wait until the last minute and contact us today. info@cpalabama.org

  6. Nate

    via saboteur365:


    — Sarah Silverman (@SarahKSilverman) February 2, 2017″

    You might say who cares? That’s the wrong response to Sarah Silverman’s call for a military coup in the U.S.

    We’re being set up to accept either the overthrow, assassination, or impeachment of Donald Trump because he’s not a globalist stooge.

    The idea of a military coup is now firmly implanted in millions of minds of sheeple as “the final solution” to the Trump problem. These fools are so enmeshed in the egalitarian meme (We are all equal; we all bleed red; there is only one race, the human race; borders are racist) that they no longer care about their own extermination.

    Silverman’s call for a military overthrow isn’t just some stupid Hollweird whore mouthing off. It’s the (((power elites))) programming the country to accept it’s destruction.

  7. Bondurant

    It’s February of 2017 and I still yearn for the IPR days of olde when the comments were numbered. So much easier to follow and useful for replying to comments.

    RIP numbered comments. We hardly knew ye.

  8. George Phillies

    17:47 In the exceedingly unlikely event that we have a coup, it will be almost certainly the radical liberals calling for it who will be at risk of being put up against a wall and shot, hung with lamp cord from the nearest tree, or given the fate of Mussolini. The call for a coup is incredibly stupid, even for American politics.

  9. George Phillies

    The latest issue of Liberty for America magazine is out.

    Read it here: http://libertyforamerica.com/201701A.pdf

    Articles include
    National Political Convention
    Guest Editorial from Joshua Katz
    Raiser’s Edge
    Our Most Popular Column: Where Your Money Went:
    Johnson Campaigns
    Supply, Demand, and Economic Illiteracy

  10. Tylor Reinhardt

    You might see me congratulating the Independent American Party, and then going over and rooting on the Green Party, and wonder what’s up? The truth is I’m happy just to have a third party choice for me and everyone on the ballot (when I get a chance to vote.)

    The Libertarian Party may have bèen in all 50 states this past election, but it hasn’t always been that way.

  11. Thane Eichenauer (@ilovegrover)

    Caryn Ann Harlos was interviewed by Tom Woods recently. Tom Knapp gets a mention at 6 minutes in.

    “Ep. 844 After 2016, Where Is the Libertarian Party Today, and Where Is It Going?”

    “Caryn Ann Harlos is communications director of the Libertarian Party of Colorado and a member of the Libertarian National Committee.”

    I am happy to have spent 36 minutes listening to this episode.

  12. George Phillies

    In 2014, the Massachusetts United Independent Party gained major party (Political Party) status based on the success of its caniddate for Governor, Evan Falchuk. Falchuk managed not to lose control of his party during the State Committee elections in early 2016. He then did not run anyone for President, as he could have done with 11 electors and the strokes of several pens.

    He has now abandoned his party (which after the election moved from major to minor party (Political Designation) status, and become a Democrat. The party designation and its many members survives.

  13. dL

    This is cause for alarm.

    President Trump pledges to escalate the War on Drugs

    Well, no shit. And he also said that increased border control was going to a primary tool in the re-escalation of the war on drugs. Even if you honestly suffer the delusion that immigrants are threat to the welfare system or to your way of life, you should be smart enough o realize that the consequences of escalated enforcement against social/population mobility are a far greater cost and a far greater threat.

  14. Andy

    February 15, 2017 at 23:05
    This is cause for alarm.

    ‘President Trump pledges to escalate the War on Drugs’
    Well, no shit. And he also said that increased border control was going to a primary tool in the re-escalation of the war on drugs. Even if you honestly suffer the delusion that immigrants are threat to the welfare system or to your way of life, you should be smart enough o realize that the consequences of escalated enforcement against social/population mobility are a far greater cost and a far greater threat.”

    Don’t allow them to collect welfare or receive anything from the government. The same goes with their offspring (get rid of birthright citizenship). Do not make them American citizens, which means they can’t vote, and can’t gain any political power. If they commit a crime while here, arrest them and deport them.

    Your trying to equate drug prohibition with the invasion of Marxist welfare leeches, criminals, and third world religious nutjobs (as if you are going to have a free society by having these people here, who statistically receive welfare, and once becoming citizens (through fraud by falsely swearing that they will support the US Constitution), and vote in super-majorities to expand the welfare state and increase gun control) is pretty disingenuous.

    Open borders plus a welfare state is a position PUSHED BY COMMUNISTS. That’s right, it is a COMMUNIST position, and NOT a libertarian position.

    If a person sneaks into Disney World, or buys a ticket to Disney World, but then stays beyond the days allotted on their ticket, they become an illegal immigrant into Disney World, and Disney World security will deport these illegal immigrants if they catch them. This is how things would work in an anarcho-capitalist society.

    It is clearly apparent that “libertarians” who push for “open borders” (which the Libertarian Party platform does NOT call for, since the party’s platform says that it is OK to eject people who are a threat to security, health, or property (that means no welfare parasites, since welfare parasites are a threat to property)), are not only completely divorced from reality, and have NO IDEA of how to implement their agenda (since they are obviously politically inept), they are also pushing for something THAT WOULD NOT EXIST WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, AS AN ANARCHO-CAPITALIST SOCIETY WOULD HAVE ALL LAND PRIVATELY OWNED, WHICH MEANS THAT IMMIGRATION/MIGRATION POLICIES WOULD BE SET BY LAND OWNERS, WHICH MEANS THAT LAND OWNERS WOULD EJECT PEOPLE FROM THEIR BORDERS. So you all want something WHICH WOULD NOT EXIST IN A LIBERTARIAN SOCIETY. THERE WOULD BE NO OPEN BORDERS IN A SOCIETY WHERE ALL LAND WAS PRIVATELY OWNED, unless of course some property owner was mentally ill enough to allow every vagrant on the planet to show up on their land, but I doubt such a policy would last very long.

  15. Andy

    Do you want to see what a societal collapse looks like? Check out the documentary below about the Liberia. This is a country that was torn apart by civil war, and the people are living is poverty.

    How many of these people would hop on a boat or a plane and come here if the USA declared “open borders”, and especially if the USA declared “open borders” without ending the welfare state?

    Now consider that there are over 5.6 billion people in the world who live in what we would call poverty.

    The current population of the USA is about 325 million (not counting illegal immigrants, and other people not counted in census figures).

    Yeah, it suck to live in poverty, but reality is that everyone in the world can’t come here. Bringing large numbers of people who are living in crappy conditions into this country is just going to tear down this country, especially when you consider that the political enemies of liberty will use these people to implement their big government agenda on the rest of us, that is expansion of the welfare state and gun control.

    Watch the documentary below and while watching it, ask yourself how many of these people would come over here and get on welfare if given the opportunity. Remember, travel is a lot easier and cheaper than it used to be.

    Liberia is just one example of a country where people live in poor conditions. Liberia is a small country. Think about all of the people in China (over 1.3 billion people), India (over 1.3 billion people), Indonesia (over 260 million people), Brazil (over 207 million people), Pakistan (over 196 million people), Nigeria (over 186 million people), Bangladesh (over 161 million people), Mexico (over 122 million people), the Philippines (over 103 million people), Ethiopia (over 101 million people), etc…, that would like to come here, especially if it meant that they could get on welfare.

    Keep in mind that we already have a student debt crisis in this country, and we have lots of people who are unemployed or underemployed.

    Announcing “open borders”, especially under the present conditions under which we are living (as in a democratic welfare state), would be completely insane.

    If a ship pulled up in Liberia and an announcement was made that everyone who got on the ship could go live in the USA, and that they could get on welfare, and eventually become American citizens, how many people do you think would jump on that ship?

    Maybe a cannibal warlord would end up becoming your new neighbor.

    The Cannibal Warlords of Liberia (Full Length Documentary)

  16. Andy

    “Check out the documentary below about the Liberia. This is a country that was torn apart by civil war, and the people are living is poverty.”

    Should read, “about Liberia” and, “people are living in poverty.”

  17. LibertyDave


    Are you still letting your fear and hatred twist your mind? You got your statement about communists wrong.

    You stated: “Open borders plus a welfare state is a position PUSHED BY COMMUNISTS. That’s right, it is a COMMUNIST position, and NOT a libertarian position.”

    If I remember my history correctly the borders of communist countries had names like the Iron Curtain, the Bamboo Curtain, the Berlin Wall. These names denote closed borders.

    So the COMMUNIST position is closed borders and a welfare state, which is what you seem to be pushing.

    The Libertarian position is open borders and get the government out of the welfare business.

  18. Andy

    So how many of these people should come over here and get on welfare? You may say, “Abolish the welfare state?” Good luck with that. Now back in reality, again I ask, how many of these people can come over here and get on welfare?

    Top 10 Poorest Country’s In The World 2016

  19. Tony From Long Island

    Hey Andy, it hasn’t been called “welfare” for a long, long time. Your xenophobic and ethnocentric bias is showing. . . .

    The overwhelmingly large majority of people who receive Public Assistance receive it temporarily, as it is intended. There are lifetime time limits for receiving most assistance (thanks Slick Willy) . While there are exceptions and certain exemptions,they are not easy to reach.

    I know this because I actually went through the system. You don’t because all you do is rant about shit you know nothing about.

  20. dL

    So the COMMUNIST position is closed borders and a welfare state, which is what you seem to be pushing.

    Well, the original Manchurian Candidate(not the remake) had the commies posing as the right-wing cons. What was that quote from Angela Lansbury? Hmmmm, whip up enough anti-communist frenzy to elect a government with the powers to “make martial law look like anarchy.”

  21. paulie Post author

    Well, the original Manchurian Candidate(not the remake) had the commies posing as the right-wing cons.

    Sounds correct to me based on my experiences in both systems.

  22. paulie Post author

    Why Libertarians Will Never Stop Arguing About Immigration

    Mostly, because we’ve failed to distinguish ourselves enough from conservatives. We need to build a wall between libertarianism and conservatism and make conservative/authoritarian populists/nationalists pay for it. Then we need to round up and deport the ones who call themselves libertarians from libertarianism, but we need to do it very humanely. The ones who want to be considered libertarians should then be examined on an individual basis, provided their opinion of immigration has changed. And we need strictly enforced quotas as to how many right wingers are accepted as libertarians on an annual basis.


  23. Jim

    Tony From Long Island “The overwhelmingly large majority of people who receive Public Assistance receive it temporarily, as it is intended. There are lifetime time limits for receiving most assistance…”

    I don’t know about other states, but in Connecticut they also have to pay that money back if they ever get a job earning over a certain amount.

  24. Pingback: Thanks to IPR readers for 300,000 comments | Independent Political Report

  25. Jim

    I came across an old issue of LP News that had a table of cost/vote for President from 1976 – 1996. It used the sum of fundraising by both the candidate and the LNC (in the election year) for the calculation and then adjusted for inflation. It showed a remarkable consistency. All six elections resulted in a cost per vote of $7.64, give or take $0.26.

    It’s far from a perfect measure, but I thought it was interesting enough that I wanted to see what it looked like carried forward to 2016 and adjusted all numbers for inflation to 2016:

    ………………$ raised………..votes……….cost/vote
    1976….. $1,982,643…….173,819……..$11.41

    I don’t think it should be, but if Johnson’s revenue from 2011 is included (when he was in the Republican primary), that would raise the 2012 cost/vote to $3.58.

  26. dL

    Why Libertarians Will Never Stop Arguing About Immigration

    There is no libertarian debate. One side is the libertarian position. The other the authoritarian position. The authoritarian position claiming to be libertarian is limited pretty much to either the right wing identity politics of Hans Hermann Hoppe or the boorish enclave of conservative opportunism.

    The authoritarian position itself has little cachet within the LP. The one time the opportunists managed to invade the LP presidential ticket(2008), they had to pretend they had reformed their immigration positions. That’s not a debate. That ‘s a rout. Indeed, it bears pointing that the Hoppe’s (race) realistic position is not even meant for public debate. No Misean or Hoppean w/ any standing would even attempt to defend that position specifically in an open, neutral forum(evidenced by the fact that no one would take credit for those ron paul newsletters back in 2008). The position is purely meant to be consumed by an underbelly in the hopes of fueling a cadre cult not unlike Trumpism.

  27. Andy

    dL said: “The authoritarian position itself has little cachet within the LP. ”

    Yeah, I know, the authoritarianism of leftists posers who think that forced integration into a democratic welfare state has something to do with libertarianism is certainly annoying.

  28. Andy

    Here is a video put out by an English guy about how Muslim rape gangs in the United Kingdom have kidnapped young English girls and gang raped them.

    More “peaceful people crossing borders” and engaging in free market activities, huh?


  29. Andy

    Molyneux knocks one out of the park again!

    Stefan Molyneux: The Truth About Immigration and Crime in the Netherlands

  30. paulie Post author

    Molyneux knocks one out of the park again!

    Contradiction in terms. Molyneux is a pretentious gasbag who has more recently evolved into a more open racist and is pretty much not even pretending to be a libertarian anymore.

  31. Andy

    Open Borders Are Not Libertarian. They’re Communist.


    From the article: “When it comes to public education, libertarians will often argue that public schools should act as private schools would. Decision making should be decentralized to local communities, and schools should compete with one another in order to lower the tax burden and increase the quality of the education. No libertarian would ever dare argue that since the state controls public schools, that no student should be denied an education. No libertarian would ever argue that an education is a human right, since absent the state, no said right exists.

    Why then, when the state controls the borders, do libertarians argue that no one should be denied free movement, when absent the state, no said right exists? If everything were completely privatized, you would have no right to an education, and no right to travel freely on another man’s land without his permission.

    If libertarians aren’t going to argue that education is a human right that should be protected by the state in the absence of the complete privatization of everything, then they shouldn’t argue that free movement is a human right that should be protected by the state either. This isn’t to delegitimize the concerns that libertarians have with closed borders, but to instead show the many problems that exist with open borders. Hopefully libertarians open minded enough on the issue will begin to reconsider their position on immigration, and understand that open borders are not libertarian. Open borders are communist.”

  32. paulie Post author

    Shocker: UN Admits Migrant Crisis Plan To Overthrow West

    More classic racist/xenophobic garbage. In the age of Trump, right wing populists like Molyneux and Jones have moved away from libertarianism and towards an embrace of authoritarian racial/nationalist collectivism and bigotry.

  33. paulie Post author

    Open Borders Are Not Libertarian. They’re Communist.

    Bullshit. And “Liberty Hangout” is another terrible source. They should be more honest and rename themselves Fascist Hangout. Also, their argument is transparent bullshit, since no one is arguing what they claim. Instead, we are arguing against the concept of collective property by the state, which would be the only thing that would give the state a legitimate place to define trespass. The idea that the state has collective property rights over the nation is a very authoritarian one, and the complete antithesis of libertarianism.

    More importantly, this has been pointed out to you in many past threads and I’ve never known you to have attention deficit disorder, so why do you waste everyone’s time by continuing to make the same illogical arguments over and over again in so many different threads? Repeating bullshit endlessly does not transform it into anything other than bullshit.

  34. paulie Post author

    forced integration

    Congratulations, you’ve adopted the language terms of George Wallace, Lester Maddox et al from half a century ago.

  35. Wake Up

    Andy is making excellent points in this thread. I think he is 100% right. The Muslims and the Hispanics have no concept of liberty, and are not fit to live among us. They should all be sent packing. In 2020 when the LP endorses keeping America great by co-nominating President Trump for a second term I think we can get this into the LP platform, with the help of wise Libertarian petitioners such as Andy Jacobs and Eric Dondero and experienced political operative, hardcore Libertarian and Trump inner circle advisor and friend Roger Stone, along with the legions of Augustus Invictus and the American Front. Perhaps we can even get ahead of the game and make the necessary platform changes in New Orleans in 2018.

  36. Wake Up

    Andy Jacobs loves the Confederate battle flag just like I do.

    Andy Jacobs believes it is important to remember the USS Liberty just like I do.

    Andy Jacobs is against sodomite marriage just like I am.

    And Jacobs wants to control immigration just like I do.

    Andy Jacobs is for gun rights, and so am I. Personally I think we should use them to shoot all illegals on sight, and if it looks, sounds and smells like an illegal it should be considered reasonable to presume it is an illegal and shoot it dead.

    Andy Jacobs wants to kick the zionists, globalists, UN new world order and Israeli lobby out of the USA. Me too!

    Andy Jacobs hates taxes, and so do I.

    Andy Jacobs wants to end the fed, and I do as well.

    I bet Andy Jacobs doesn’t like the Rothschilds and the other hook nosed globalist bankers any more than I do.

    Andy Jacobs agrees with me about opposing the neocon wars for Israel.

  37. Wake Up

    Germany rose from the ashes when Hitler came to power and became great once again. At the end of the war it was reduced back to a state very similar to what it had been in 1932-33, but has since once again risen to be the leading power of a united Europe, which was Hitler’s idea to begin with. Many lasting achievements of German industrial deveopment, such as the Autobahn, date from the period of the Third Reich. If Hitler hadn’t come to power, Germany would have continued to suffer under the burden of crippling sanctions and would have never achieved its two subsequent periods of ascendance.

  38. Wake Up

    As I posted here in 2009 and 2010:

    Hola amigos and illegal wetbacks!

    We need a real third party to deal with the real issues in this country that all the parties are ignoring:

    The threat of Islamic terrorism and the rise of Islamic extremism around the world.

    The flood/invasion of illegal aliens taking away American jobs which will cause white people to be a minority in this country soon…has anyone wondered what will happen then?

    Abortion of White babies, which is contributing to this disturbing demographic trend if it is not outlawed.

    Corporations outsourcing American jobs – where is the paycheck for the White working class man going to come home to feed his family?

    The war on Christianity in our schools, courthouses, etc., and the war on Christmas.

    The Zionist bankers and their control of the money supply.

    The rising economic and military threat posed by China.

    The flood of dope on our streets and the leniency of the police and courts toward non-white street thugs.

    NAFTA/GATT/WTO/United Nations threats to American sovereignty.

    Multiculturalist brainwashing of our children.

    Filthy garbage of the worst imaginable sort being allowed in the movies, TV and on the radio, producing generations of degenerates.

    Feminization of the American male through the promotion of feminism and normalization of sodomy as a “lifestyle” – this can’t be helping our demographic trends! Before long this country will look like a cross between Mexico, Zimbabwe, Pakistan and Gomorrah if we don’t do something.

    While Wall Street is partying, the Zionist bankers are closing our factories and foreclosing on our farms.

    Is there a party, major or minor, that will rise up to address these issues?

    Will we do something before it’s too late?

    (and if that doesn’t make sense to you…

    Debemos asegurar la existencia de nuestro pueblo y un futuro para los niños blancos

    Si se puede!)

    Well Donald Trump answered the call, and that is why he is now the President. We’re going to Make and Keep America great again!!

  39. Wake Up

    God-Emperor Trump has a temporary alliance with right wing Khazar Jews. The goal is to get the Khazar Jews out of the US, and the remaining few out of Russia, former soviet nations, Europe and the Muslim world, and at the same time remove Muslims and predominantly Muslim ethnicities out of the US, Europe, Russia and other White nations.

    What’s in it for right wing Khazar Jews: Israel has a looming demographic problem. The Arab/Muslim population is outbreeding the Khazar/Jew population, even without counting the Occupied Territories the Khazars will soon find themselves outvoted in what they consider to be “their” country. There are no more large population of Khazar Jews left in the world except in Israel and the US, so the only way to get more Khazar Jews to Israel is to have a mass exodus of Khazar Jews from the US. Khazar Jews won’t feel welcome in an emerging White Nationalist ethno-state. Neither will Muslims, Arabs, Pakis, and so on. Eventually, they will be encouraged to self-deport or be deported en masse. Israel will then have put off its demographic date with destiny.

    What’s in it for Whites: This should be obvious. We get our countries back. For the first time in many centuries, White nations will be rid of both Muslims and Khazar Jews. In the US we will also turn back the invasions of Mestizos and orientals. Muslims and Khazar Jews can then be free to make war on each other in their own part of the world. If we are really, really lucky, Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, Mecca and Medina will all get nuked and the world will finally be rid of the scourges of Judaism and Islam once and for all. As an added bonus, we will also get rid of feminism, open perversion, race-mixing, communism, liberalism, and all the other social diseases spread by Khazar Jews in White nations. And, we will have law and order, with Negroid, Mestizo and Muslim criminal gangs and terrorists put in their place without the coddling they get thanks to liberal and commie Khazars.

    Why it had to be done: President Trump is wise to the ways of the Khazar Jews. He grew up in their stronghold of Jew York City. He knew that he could never rise to power without making a temporary alliance with right wing Khazars to help them prevail over moronic liberal Khazars who deny race reality and believe Israel can make peace with Arabs/Muslims through the intervention of a liberal world order led by a Khazar-dominated USA and that Whites, negroes, Muslims, alien races and Khazar Jews can all coexist peacefully in Europe and the US in a Khazar Jew led liberal world order.

    And why not make such a temporary alliance if it makes it possible to be elected and sworn in to power, and then proceed to create the policies needed to Make America Great Again and Make Europe Great Again?

    Trump’s love of the White Race is so great that he even sacrificed some of his own children by his ex-wives and allowed them to mix with Khazar Jews, which would be the only way KJ-ZOG would allow him to rise to power. Barron Trump is his true imperial legacy, not the children of his ex-wives who are now tainted by Khazar Jew blood.

    Let us all praise the wisdom of God-Emperor Trump and wait eagerly for the day when all the Khazar Jews and Muslims are in the middle east, killing each other off and leaving White nations alone.

  40. Wake Up

    So Bibi Netanyahu, the ancient Chinese, and every city in history that was surrounded by a wall… all commies? LOL libtards…

  41. George Phillies

    It appears that Nitwit Norman, not to be confused with Normal Norman, has returned.

    As a matter of historical accuracy, the Berlin was was effective for its intended objective. It cut a population flow out of East Germany that was having major demographic effects to a population flow that was not demographically significant. We cheer the occasional escapee, but those escapes were a tiny fraction of the very large flows before the commies built their wall.

  42. LibertyDave


    Andy continues is Anti-Libertarian rant against free trade in another thread. And his justification for restricting free trade is because he didn’t give his permission for those types of people to use the public roads.

    Then he insists that free trade is Communist because those types of people haven’t paid taxes to maintain the public roads and it communist to allow everyone to use public roads without paying taxes to maintain them.

    Then he makes the makes the absurd statement that if it weren’t for government there wouldn’t be any such thing as public roads.

    I guess this means that Andy is in favor of taxation as well as anti-free trade now.

  43. dL

    It appears that Nitwit Norman, not to be confused with Normal Norman, has returned.

    Any reason why this KKK garbage remains unmoderated?

  44. paulie Post author

    It’s a bit of a dilemma. A lot of what Andy posts lately is so close to this crap that I’m not sure I can draw a clear line between the two. I don’t want to treat his comments differently just because he’s a personal friend. There was a discussion of making a quarantine thread among IPR staff after someone calling him or herself IPR Lurker emailed us and that conclusion was not made after some back and forth.

  45. dL

    It’s a bit of a dilemma.

    You should take out the trash, particularly when it is advocating shooting people on sight based on nothing more than their appearance.

  46. Tony From Long Island

    Andy, Are you a government troll? You keep posting anti-libertarian hate garbage . . . maybe YOU are the troll.


    p.s. . . . a warning to all about the dangers of Alex Jones and his ilk.. . . you turn into Andy

  47. paulie Post author

    You should take out the trash

    Someone else’s turn to do the household chores around here. There are at least a couple of dozen people currently signed up who can take care of it. Would you like a login to help us out? We can also use help posting new stories, although that’s not necessarily a requirement.

  48. paulie Post author

    dL is signed up. Let me know if it worked. Deran, you can delete Nathan, but we have not come to such a conclusion about Andy even though some of the writers did indicate that preference. I can sign you up if you are willing to not delete anyone without a site consensus formed to do so first.

  49. dL

    dL is signed up.

    Hmm, haven’t received a notification RE: that. I assume you used the address I provide in the comment post form.

  50. paulie Post author

    yes. check your spam folder and if you still don’t see it try to log in then click lost password below the login

  51. dL

    Actually, did find the notification in spam. Unfortunately, reset password link results in an invalid key error.
    Might want to try to resend it. Trying to resend it myself through the form doesn’t re-send anything.

  52. dL

    I hit “update user.” Let me know if that generates a new email.

    no…interestingly, my comment posts are now being moderated. Do you have a public pgp key?

  53. paulie Post author

    It doesn’t work that way as far as I know. I create a user and set level eg admin, editor, author, contributor, etc. Then the automated system sends out an email with a password that I don’t get to see. Warren should be able to get it sorted out for you. We may also need to see if there is a more general problem with creating new accounts.

  54. dL

    Maybe Andy is hacking you! He’s afraid of being deleted!!

    And maybe dogs hate beef… I’m only moderating the anonymous spam crap

  55. Tony From Long Island

    My dog actually hated Lettuce! No matter what we tried, we couldn’t trick him into eating it! Once we stuck it inside some sloppy Alpo and when he was done, there was one licked-clean piece of lettuce in his bowl. I miss that dog! . . . . he did love beef, though.

  56. paulie Post author

    via Steve Chapman at reason:

    Jackson, Smith suspects, has declined in public estimation as his slave ownership and brutal policies toward Native Americans have acquired new significance. It probably doesn’t help that Trump’s approach to foreign relations has been described as “Jacksonian” for its pugnacity, unilateralism and contempt for human rights considerations.


    Trump might find a role model in Theodore Roosevelt, a fellow wealthy New Yorker with a taste for bold actions and expansive use of presidential power. It might be said of Trump, as it was of TR, that he wants to be the bride in every wedding and the corpse at every funeral.

    But Trump lacks his disarming enthusiasm, battlefield courage and love of the outdoors, and he’s not likely to leave a magnificent legacy for all Americans, as Roosevelt did with the national parks. Anyone who reflects on TR will not find reasons to admire the new president.

    As for other presidents, their fans can take heart from the prospect that they will rate better than Trump in future surveys. There is even hope for James Buchanan.

  57. paulie Post author

    I don’t remember which thread or who said it, but in a recent discussion someone made a point something like (paraphrasing):

    The Ron Paul newsletters contained some racist/bigoted stuff, but they never suggested any big government solutions to whatever they perceived as race problems, so they weren’t as bad as (X,Y,Z). Without getting into the irrelevant weeds about whether Ron Paul personally wrote any of it, at least this selection clearly suggests some government solutions:


    If the barbarians cannot loot sufficiently through legal channels (i.e., the riots being the welfare-state minus the middle-man), they resort to illegal ones, to terrorism. Trouble is, few seem willing to stop them. The cops have been handcuffed.

    Clearly, if the cops have been “handcuffed,” we need to unhandcuff them, as Lew Rockwell also suggested around that same time.

    Rothbard for his pat…



    The most detailed description of the strategy came in an essay Rothbard wrote for the January 1992 Rothbard-Rockwell Report, titled “Right-Wing Populism: A Strategy for the Paleo Movement.” Lamenting that mainstream intellectuals and opinion leaders were too invested in the status quo to be brought around to a libertarian view, Rothbard pointed to David Duke and Joseph McCarthy as models for an “Outreach to the Rednecks,” which would fashion a broad libertarian/paleoconservative coalition by targeting the disaffected working and middle classes. (Duke, a former Klansman, was discussed in strikingly similar terms in a 1990 Ron Paul Political Report.) These groups could be mobilized to oppose an expansive state, Rothbard posited, by exposing an “unholy alliance of ‘corporate liberal’ Big Business and media elites, who, through big government, have privileged and caused to rise up a parasitic Underclass, who, among them all, are looting and oppressing the bulk of the middle and working classes in America.”

    Rothbard blamed the LA riots not on racism and black grievances, but rather on slow and insufficient police response and “the moral and esthetic nihilism created by many decades of cultural liberalism.”


    Sending in police and troops late and depriving them of bullets, cannot do the job. There is only one way to fulfill the vital police function, the only way that works: the public announcement—backed by willingness to enforce it—made by the late Mayor Richard Daley in the Chicago riots of the 1960s—ordering the police to shoot to kill any looters, rioters, arsonists, or muggers they might find. That very announcement was enough to induce the rioters to pocket their ‘rage’ and go back to their peaceful pursuits.”

    “Devotion to the sanctity of person and property is not part of their value-system. That’s why, in the short term, all we can do is shoot the looters and incarcerate the rioters.”

    This is the same sort of thinking that forms the basis of a lot of what Andy has been posting about immigration lately. Andy also advances the idea that it’s morally justified for the regime to curtail immigration on the basis of ethnicity, nationality or religion based on the way large groups of people vote. But if this is true, turning again to the Ron Paul reports…

    “Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5% of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty, and the end of welfare and affirmative action.

    If that’s the case, wouldn’t mandatory birth control and eugenics/sterilization be justified on the same exact logical basis as Andy justifies immigration controls?

    And note again, it doesn’t matter here who wrote it. If it was Rothbard or Rockwell, who both expressed similar views under their own names, it may have made sense for Ron Paul to take the political hit and not out them. Why would he do that for someone named James Powell that few people have ever heard of? Note too that at various times when these reports have been brought up during his various political campaigns, Paul claimed that he had wrote them himself and/or that he stands by what they say, and at other times claimed implausibly that he had no idea what they said even though they went out for many years to hundreds of thousands of people under his name. Note too that’s it’s a falsehood that it was a tiny number of issues that contained such materials; that is based on a misinterpretation of the original TNR article that never claimed to have done a comprehensive survey of all the newsletters but rather just to be offering a few examples from the small sampling of newsletters they looked at. A later article provided a bunch more examples from additional issues and again never claimed to have looked at anything but a small sample of issues.

    It’s true that when you read passages like this in isolation, they don’t suggest big government “solutions”:

    “We are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, but it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings, and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers.”

    “I think we can safely assume that 95% of the black males in [major U.S. cities] are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.”

    But when you combine them with passages that talk about uncuffing the police, mass shootings by police, extrajudicial punishments, and indiscriminate mass incarceration, it all comes together. Couple that with support for politicians such as Strom Thurmond, David Duke, Pat Buchanan, Joe McCarthy, Richard Nixon, and now Trump (by various Rothbardians today) and you can see where “libertarians” against immigration rights really come from. And again, many of the same things are written over the course of quite a few years by Rothbard and Rockwell under their own names, and by many writers frequently published by Rockwell.

  58. dL

    Without getting into the irrelevant weeds about whether Ron Paul personally wrote any of it, at least this selection clearly suggests some government solutions:

    Great post Paulie. Those newsletters also advocated banning the video recording of the cops. And it should be pointed out that when those NLs came to light, no one would take responsibility for writing them. Apparently, they were penned supernaturally by Casper the Ghost. Which brings up a larger point: this stuff is not meant to be debated openly in public(message boards don’t count). They are meant to fester in an underbelly and aggregate around a jack boot cadre movement. Basically, you wake up one morning and wonder: where in the hell did this come from?

  59. paulie Post author


    Liberals and libertarians should unite to block Trump’s extremism
    What’s more, a “liberaltarian” economic agenda can serve as an alternative to snake-oil populism.
    by Brink Lindsey


    Ten years ago, in an article for the New Republic, I proposed that liberal-minded people across the political spectrum should unite to create a “liberaltarian” alternative to the populist right of the George W. Bush years. Since the governing conservatism of that time no longer reflected any serious attachment to libertarian principles, it was time to explore the possibility of a new kind of center-left infused with libertarian insights.

    Building on their shared cosmopolitan outlook and deep belief in individual autonomy, liberals and libertarians could develop a new public philosophy that highlighted their extensive common ground while compromising constructively on differences over fiscal and regulatory policy. The piece concluded with the following lines: “Can liberals and libertarians really learn to work together? I don’t know, but their alternative is most probably to languish separately.”

    Back then the argument fell on deaf ears. Liberals thought they were strong enough to go it alone and get what they want, while libertarians still feared the left enough to convince themselves that the populist right remained their friend. And now here we are: A right-wing populist demagogue has swept into the White House, and the Republican Party he seeks to remake in his image (and which seems none too resistant to the makeover) controls both houses of Congress.

    With the threat of war crimes and trade wars abroad combined with border walls, religious registries, and crony capitalism at home, liberals and libertarians are indeed languishing separately, although putting it that way today sounds absurdly understated. Not only are they out of power, but their most fundamental political commitments — to liberal democracy and the rule of law —are now threatened in a way none of us could have imagined possible just a few years ago.

    In this dark and menacing environment, the liberaltarian idea is relevant again — with an entirely new sense of urgency. The first, immediate task is to forge a liberaltarian alliance that can defend American democracy from the depredations of Donald Trump. This ad hoc project requires no rethinking or blurring of existing ideological boundaries. Rather, it asks only that committed small-d democrats from the left, right, and center put aside their usual differences to stand together for basic liberal norms and institutions.


    In those waning years of the Bush administration, I argued that the old Goldwater-Reagan brand of conservative “fusionism” — the alliance of free-market libertarianism and cultural traditionalism — was washed up. Rote rhetorical appeals to limited government and the free market remained, but the substance was exhausted. Social Security privatization was to have been the administration’s signature libertarian initiative, but it fizzled once it became clear that even Republican voters had no stomach for it. Virtually the only holdover from the Reagan days was support for tax cuts, now divorced from any accompanying concern for spending restraint — a caricature of free-market economics.

    Actually, looking back at Reagan’s actual record rather than his rhetoric, the same was true back then as well.

    All the energy and passion in the movement had shifted to nationalism, culture-war agitation, and a proudly anti-intellectual populism — think hostility to immigration, opposition to same-sex marriage, the Terri Schiavo affair, and the ascendance of strident, divisive voices like Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter.

  60. paulie Post author

    Basically, you wake up one morning and wonder: where in the hell did this come from?

    Distortion based on distortion. First, conservative-libertarian fusionism. Second, randroidian republitarian tendencies. Third, Rothbard’s quirkiness, frozen in time by his death in one of his phases where he tried to make unholy alliances with the racist far right. Fourth, Rockwell’s far right roots, long before then. Fifth, Ron Paul’s recent surge in popularity combined with his long standing ties with Rothbard and Rockwell. Sixth, the popular misconception, promoted by both big government left and big government right that libertarians are on the right. Seventh, Koch funding of small l groups pushing a conservative-fusionist agenda in keeping with their corporate interests and JBS roots. Eighth, talk radio and tea party prattle. Ninth, the alt-right aka altreich (old empire in German). Tenth, the troll army of privileged straight (or closeted) white male snowflakes throwing a tantrum over the loss of their privilege. And add to that, the rise of nationalist authoritarian populism on the right, culminating in Trump.

    Is it any wonder that the roots of libertarianism in liberalism and the left have been mostly lost, to most people whether they consider themselves libertarians or not?

  61. paulie Post author

    further from Brink Lindsey:

    …what remained of the Tea Party movement merged seamlessly into the Trumpenproletariat, and the Republican Party, far from becoming the vessel of a libertarian renaissance, embraced a nakedly authoritarian standard bearer.

    Liberals, on the other hand, remained confident that history was on their side — despite losing Congress in 2010 — until the late hours of November 8. Hillary Clinton had been poised to defeat a spectacularly incompetent opponent, and maybe take back the Senate. But not only had Donald Trump won a shocking victory, but the GOP retained both houses of Congress, held 33 governorships, and controlled the legislature in 32 states.

    Standing together to defend norms and institutions

    The election results mean more than a setback for liberals’ and libertarians’ policy ambitions. Indeed, worrying about mere policy defeats seems like almost quaint amid the grim exigencies of the Age of Trump. In a way that nobody alive today can remember, the basic integrity of American democracy now seems at risk.

    Rising to the challenge requires stout resistance against the usual partisan impulses. Already it’s clear enough that most congressional Republicans will not stand up to Trump, regardless of their private views: The lure of possible conservative policy victories, mixed with the fear of Trump’s popularity with the GOP base, will suffice to keep them in line. Democrats’ opposition can be counted on — but if early signs are any indication, much of that opposition will just end up making matters worse.

  62. paulie Post author


    Liberalism in the Balance
    Posted by Steve Horwitz
    What the new president has done in his first few days in office has hardly been surprising, even as it’s profoundly horrific. What has surprised me is the reaction by some libertarians, including at least one libertarian educational institution in a mass email, which has been along the lines of “well he’s doing some good things too and you can’t ignore them.” They then point to his desire to get rid of the ACA and several of his Cabinet and other appointments that suggest there will be deregulation (e.g. Betsy DeVos, Andrew Pudzer, Scott Pruitt, and Tom Price). Or they point to his talk of tax cuts. So, they argue, libertarians should be acknowledging the good stuff and taking advantage of an opporutnity here for positive change instead of just seeing Trump as Cheeto Mussolini.

    They couldn’t be more wrong in my view. What they fail to recognize is that the Bad Things that Trump is doing are Very Bad Things and that the Good Things they are hoping for are both much less important than the Very Bad Things and much less likely to happen. One friend has created a ledger document that lists the good on one side and the bad on the other. The problem with that ledger is that it is unweighted. A small tax cut, or freezing the minimum wage are, in my view, an order of magnitude less morally important than authorizing torture, suggesting Muslim registries, closing the border to refugees, ignoring the Constitution and the rule of law, revving up the US war machine, trying to muzzle the media, building a wall, undoing decades of peace and prosperity-enhancing global trade, threatening to send troops to Chicago, and so forth.

    I am as much of a radical libertarian as anyone, but I cannot fathom how self-described libertarians can think that marginal tax cuts, lighter FDA regulation, or even getting rid of the ACA (all of which I think would be welcome) even come close to balancing out the illiberal and inhumane policies listed above. The power given the state in those items in Trump’s agenda are a fundamental threat to liberalism and to domestic and global peace.

    He is a baboon flinging shit at the liberal tradition and the liberal order, while some libertarians sit around, covered with it, thinking that the drink of water he’s promising them later somehow offsets it.

    Why some, and I emphasize this is just “some,” libertarians have adopted this view is what puzzles me. I have several possible explanations:

    continue at http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2017/01/liberalism-in-the-balance/

  63. George Phillies

    Interesting polling number courtesy politicalwire.com


    anger at elites in Washington

    One sentiment that unites the fractured nation is fury at the establishment in Washington. Fully 86 percent of those surveyed said they believe that a small group in D.C. has “reaped the rewards of government while the people have borne the cost.”

    That includes 88 percent of Republicans and 85 percent of Democrats.

  64. Tony From Long Island

    Unauthorized workers are paying an estimated $13 billion a year in social security taxes and only getting around $1 billion back, according to a senior government statistician.

    Paulie, you have been quite prolific these last few days. However, the above is probably the point is one of your best.

    I argue that same point with the Trumpites and racists all the time. I wonder how they would all feel if the “illegal” people were all coming from Belgium.

  65. George Phillies

    Now open for Registration


    This year, the Libertarian State Leadership Alliance will be running its National Convention in Manchester, New Hampshire over the Memorial Day weekend. This will be a one-day, all-day event held on Sunday, May 28.

    Registration is now open. $99 per ticket. Pay by check or Paypal

    To register by check:

    Mail your check payable “LSLA” to Bo Brown, 1201 Buckingham Station Drive, Apt 4D, Midlothian, VA 23113

    To Register via Paypal: To send money, go to http://Paypal.org. Our email address for PayPal is statechairs@gmail.com

    The Conference Schedule:

    Larry Sharpe will be the noon keynote speaker. Michael Pickens will give an all-day candidate and training session.

    The conference schedule is below. We still have room for additional speakers and topics. We would be delighted to hear your ideas. Please send them to PoliticalCoordinator@LibertarianLeaders.org and Chair@LibertarianLeaders.org.

    The Future of the Libertarian Political Movement
    Sunday May 28, 2017
    Manchester, NH

    The Executive Court Banquet Facility
    near to the Manchester Airport

    With hotel and restaurant adjacent

    9:00 AM until late evening
    3 meals served on-premises. Cash Bar at dinner.

    Admission including meals $99
    To Register Register here

    Breakfast 9 AM or before

    Lunch 12 – 1:30 Lunch. Larry Sharpe, speaker

    5:30-6:30 interactions, Cash Bar
    6:30 dinner. After dinner speaker to be announced.

    Three tracks:

    Track A Candidate and Activist Training
    Michael Pickens training session all-day

    Track B Doing Politics
    Reviving less active parties (Perry, Paxton, Porter)
    Moving Parties to the next level (Porter, Traynor)
    Answering Questions (Jingozian)
    Libertarian History
    Outright Libertarians — Using FIJA to Protect Minorities (Mike Shipley)

    Track C Libertarianism
    Why Two Parties Guarantee Failure (Jingozian)
    Blocking the Alt-Right and Neo-Nazis (Josh Katz, Jody Weissman, Leslee Petersen, Mike Shipley)
    End the Surveillance State (Phillies)
    Peace now! End the warfare state

  66. dL

    Track C Libertarianism
    Why Two Parties Guarantee Failure (Jingozian)
    Blocking the Alt-Right and Neo-Nazis (Josh Katz, Jody Weissman, Leslee Petersen, Mike Shipley)
    End the Surveillance State (Phillies)
    Peace now! End the warfare state

    good stuff…

  67. paulie Post author

    I was going to liveblog, but due to a byzantine comedy of errors only made it as far as the parking lot before heading back 3 hours to Moundville Archaeological Park where I have been camping.

    Libertarian Party of Alabama
    February 25 at 8:04pm
    We are proud to announce our 2017/2018 Executive Committee of the LPA:

    Chair – Joshua Tuttle
    Vice Chair – C.J. Ezell
    Secretary – Nicole Jordan
    Treasurer – Ross Lowe
    Region 1 Rep. – Noah Rhys
    Region 2 Rep. – Aaron Watkins
    Region 3 Rep. – Gage Fenwick
    Region 4 Rep. – Zackary Redmond
    At-Large – Anthony Peebles
    At-Large – Jim Albea

    “Libertarian Party of Alabama Our Conventions take place across the state! We are looking at Montgomery for 2018!”

    “Libertarian Party of Alabama
    February 25 at 8:08pm ·

    A big thank you to everyone that came out and made this the LPA’s most successful Convention yet!
    And a very special thank you to Sarah Stewart, Danny Bedwell, and C Michael Pickens for being our guest speakers! Y’all rock!


    As close as we got:

  68. Thane Eichenauer (@ilovegrover)

    Nathan Larson, the Virginia state delegate candidate mentioned above, appears to have run for US Congress, VA-1, in 2008.
    He also was covered by IPR in 2008.

    From reading the article at fauquier.com I would find it hard to support the position of “Bo Brown, LPV president” that “the LPV would neither nominate nor endorse Larson’s effort to unseat Del. Scott Lingamfeter, a Republican, from the 31st District seat.”

    Larson apparently advocates for the abolition of the Virginia child protective services.

    His campaign web site is a wiki.

  69. Thane Eichenauer (@ilovegrover)

    It appears that there are some other factors at play in the Nathan Larson campaign.

    “When dad is a pedophile – In Colorado courts, parents have rights — even if they admit they’re attracted to children”

    “Boulder man sentenced in presidential threat”
    Nathan Daniel Larson, 29, sent an e-mail to the Secret Service last December stating, “I am writing to inform you that in the near future, I will kill the President of the United States of America.”

    “Larson uses sex offender registry as Radical Libertarian recruitment tool”

    Naturally I encourage all Americans to caveat lector.

  70. dL

    From reading the article at fauquier.com I would find it hard to support the position of “Bo Brown, LPV president” that “the LPV would neither nominate nor endorse Larson’s effort to unseat Del. Scott Lingamfeter, a Republican, from the 31st District seat.”

    Because his position on the “legalization of marital rape” views the female as the property of the husband. That’s enough to disqualify him from libertarian consideration. Alone. His platform looks to be around 80% hardcore libertarian and 20%(the red pill crap)imported from the 12th century. My guess is that the entirety of his campaign would center around the controversy of his 12th century “red pill” views.

  71. paulie Post author

    From reading the article at fauquier.com I would find it hard to support the position of “Bo Brown, LPV president” that “the LPV would neither nominate nor endorse Larson’s effort to unseat Del. Scott Lingamfeter, a Republican, from the 31st District seat.”

    You find it hard to support the position that the LPVA would not nominate or endorse someone who admits to engaging in rape and wants to legalize it, supports legalization of and practice of (and may well practice himself) raping small children, did time for threatening to assassinate the president, impregnated his transgender husband through systematic rape and abuse with the express intention of breeding a daughter for the purpose of molestation, drove said husband to suicide and is continuing to try to gain custody of the child? I guess your support for Invictus and Trump is starting to make more sense now.

  72. paulie Post author

    Via FB and businessinsider.com:

    There was one group noticeably absent from #CPAC, the biggest conservative conf. of the year… #Libertarians Why?

    “So maybe part of the reason the liberty youth is not here is there is no liberty on the stage,” he added. “It’s very much driven by Trumpism and nationalism.”

    Time to put a stake through the heart of the undead corpse or libertarian-conservative fusionism, as conservatism is firmly in the grasps of populist nationalist authoritarianism now. Conservative-libertarian fusionism works unnecessarily to drive a wedge between libertarianism and its more natural and long term historical appeal to the left.

  73. paulie Post author

    Indiana LPRC
    15 hrs
    The idea of not allowing people to cross borders can be rooted in two different thoughts. One, that the government is responsible for providing defense. To this end, refugees to the United States are heavily vetted and INDIVIDUALS who are found to pose a threat are routinely disallowed entrance.

    The idea that some individuals make it though and thus people with similar demographics should be barred is ludicrous and collectivist.

    The second reason that countries may disallow migration is protection of untapped resources. This is absolutely ludicrous to the Libertarian mindset. The only resources requiring defense are those which are actively owned.

    If you believe that the government should provide public defense of unfilled jobs, unpurchased property etc… you are assigning the idea of central ownership to those resources. This is a type of socialism which is incompatible with Libertarianism.

    Economically, resources which are as yet untapped indicate only potential opportunity. We should welcome anyone who wishes to come and fill the promise of that potential.

  74. paulie Post author

    Thomas L. Knapp
    February 27 at 10:20am

    The stories we’re seeing are not aberrations or excesses. They’re essentials, baked in elements of the “immigration enforcement” con. The idea that you can have a police state and only have it affect certain targeted populations is absurd.

    The Immigration Enforcement Police State is Here

  75. Andy

    “The idea that some individuals make it though and thus people with similar demographics should be barred is ludicrous and collectivist.”

    This is an idiotic statement that has no bearing in reality.

  76. Andy

    It is also collectivist for force integrate people, thus allowing them to use resources and infrastructure paid for by the American taxpayers.

    If one wants to allow everyone on the planet to have access to land, then do it on your own private property, and stop trying to force it on everyone else.

  77. paulie Post author

    This is an idiotic statement that has no bearing in reality.

    No, it’s a profound statement that has every relation to reality, because it is reality. Judging people as likely terrorists, welfare recipients or criminals on the basis of ethnicity, nationality, religion or race and barring them from large areas of a continent home to hundreds of millions of people on that basis is collectivist, not libertarian.

  78. paulie Post author

    force integrate people

    Language from the likes of George Wallace and Lester Maddox a half century ago, and no more valid now than it was then.

    use resources and infrastructure paid for by the American taxpayers

    As I showed in my comments above, they are American taxpayers too. Scroll up.

    do it on your own private property, and stop trying to force it on everyone else.

    The regime’s travel bans and migration quotas prevent that.

  79. Andy

    The fallacy of “open borders” is EXPOSED by the fact that this concept WOULD NOT EXIST IN AN ANARCHO-CAPITALIST SOCIETY, WHERE ALL LAND WAS PRIVATELY OWNED.

    Going back to my Disney World analogy, if a people snuk into Disney World, or if people bought tickets to Disney World, but then over-staid the time allotted on their tickets, it would be perfectly justifiable for Disney World security to round these people up and deport them, and nobody in their right mind would call compare this to Kristallnacht, like Council on Foreign Relation globalist scumbag fake “Libertarian” Vice Presidential candidate Bill Weld said about deporting illegal immigrants.

    The Johnson/Weld ticket dressed up the New World Order agenda with “libertarian sounding” rhetoric, as they pushed for gun control, the United Nations, forced vaccinations, Universal Basic Income, the Fair Tax, taxpayer funding for abortion, “Hillary Clinton is a wonderful public servant,” and mass immigration into a democratic welfare state.

    The current mass immigration agenda is pushed by CFR globalist New World Order types who want to bring down what is left of the US Constitution, and to usher in a one world socialist government.

    There is a BIG difference between free market immigration, which is what immigration would look like in an anarcho-capitalist society, and statist migration, which is what we have today.

    The ancap “Libertopia” society does not exist. We live in a welfare state. We have democratic elections. We have public property/infrastructure. We have forced association laws (see Gary “Bake the Cake” Johnson). We have a government that is supposed to be limited by a Constitution, which is largely not even followed anymore, and which much of the population is so ignorant about that they do not even demand that it be followed (and the statistics show that most immigrants have less regard for the Constitution than does the native population, and most of the native population is pretty damn ignorant about the Constitution, so this tells you something). We have political enemies in this country who want to use immigrants to push their own agendas, which include expanding the welfare state, enacting more gun control laws (with the end goal being the elimination of private firearms ownership), and to usher in a global government, and this is exactly what they are doing.

  80. Andy

    That Guy T, Taleel Brown, hits the nail on the head here.

    Open vs Closed Borders | What’s the Libertarian Position?

  81. paulie Post author

    “Libertopia” society does not exist.

    So in the meantime, make the border police state apparatus even bigger and more expensive, and round up and deport even more people? Sounds like incremental steps alright…towards totalitarianism.

    How would you like to have to go through border checkpoints and apply for entry every time you cross state, city or county lines? After all, you did not pay the local road taxes for the local and state roads there. Also, statistics show that people moving into their state or city or county use more welfare or commit more crimes or vote differently than people who have lived there all their lives, and so you should go through a process that’s similar to what immigrants or visitors have to go through when coming to the US if you want to move there, work there temporarily or travel through.

  82. paulie Post author

    We have political enemies in this country who want to use immigrants to push their own agendas,

    Mostly trumptards and their allegedly libertarian enablers.

  83. paulie Post author

    That Guy T, Taleel Brown, hits the nail on the head here.

    He must have hit the nail on his own head judging by these results.

  84. paulie Post author

    Troy Swezey
    February 26 at 12:09pm

    “We have respect for the press when it comes to the government, that it is something you can’t ban an entity from — conservative, liberal or otherwise. That makes a democracy a democracy versus a dictatorship. I think there is a vastly different model when it comes to government and what should be expected, and that’s on both sides.” – Sean Spicer, December, 2016

    Seems we became a dictatorship on Friday.

  85. dL

    We have political enemies in this country who want to use immigrants to push their own agendas,

    More like we have political enemies of liberty like Andy who want sovietize the united states in order to insulate themselves(and what they consider the authentic white race) from the competition of civilization. Sounds a lot like the old South African National Party apartheid rhetoric.

  86. Andy

    This video below illustrates just how insane the mass immigration “open borders” (something that is NOT even advocated in the Libertarian Party platform, as the platform touts the benefits of peaceful people being able to cross borders, but then it says that it is OK to REJECT people who pose a threat to “security, health, or property”) agenda is.

    This video came out in 2010, and it was estimated at the time that there were 5.6 BILLION people in the world living in what we’d call poverty.

    There are estimated to be around 7.5 BILLION people in the world today. The estimated number of people in poverty in 2010 was 5.6 BILLION, and that number gone up since then.

    The USA is the third most populated country in the world, with about 325 million people. The USA currently accepts 1 million legal immigrants per year (and who knows how many illegal immigrants come in each year).

    If “open borders” were announced right now, how many people do you think would show up here over the next year or two? I don’t think that it is unrealistic at all to say that that number could be 10-20 million people.

    Now consider doing this without changing any other laws, like the welfare state, forced association, birthright citizenship, etc…

    Now consider that travel has become easier and cheaper than it has ever been, and consider that there are many over-crowded countries, that have lots of poor people.

    China has over 1.3 billion people.

    India has over 1.3 billion people.

    Indonesia has over 260 million people.

    Brazil has over 207 million people.

    Pakistan has over 196 million people.

    Nigeria has over 186 million people.

    Bangladesh has over 161 million people.

    Mexico has over 122 million people.

    The Philippines has over 103 million people.

    Ethiopia has over 101 million people.

    Vietnam has over 92 million people.

    Egypt has over 92 million people.

    The Democratic Republic of Congo has over 82 million people.

    Iran has over 79 million people.

    I could go on, but I hope everyone gets the point.

    So how many of people from other countries should be able to come here? Remember, the pioneer days ended in this country a long time ago, and back then there was no welfare state.

    How many of the people showing up are going to end up on welfare? How many of them are going to show up at American hospitals to give birth, and then stick the American taxpayers with the bill?

    How many government officials in other countries would start up programs to help move people to the USA, just to get rid of them and to “make them America’s problem,” and/or to gain more political influence in the USA (remember, these immigrants can become American citizens, and register to vote, and their offspring gain instant citizen due to the birthright citizenship law)? There are lots of government around the world that have lots of poor people in their populations whom they would like to get rid of, and there are lots of governments that would like to gain more political influence in the USA.


    I’d like to see an anarcho-capitalist society as much as any hardcore libertarian, but this is NOT the way to go about getting one.

    Immigration, World Poverty and Gumballs – NumbersUSA.com

  87. paulie Post author



    It is considered to be part of the Tanton Network.


    John Tanton M.D. is an anti-immigrant activist “known for his racist statements about Latinos, his decades-long flirtation with white nationalists and Holocaust deniers, and his publication of ugly racist materials,”

    Tanton has long been linked to racist ideas — “fretting about the ‘educability’ of Latinos, warning of whites being out-bred by others, and publishing a number of white nationalist authors” — and is also closely affiliated with a number of white supremacist organizations such as the Pioneer Fund.


    … the group’s original mandate was to pursue “race betterment” by promoting the genetic stock of those “deemed to be descended predominantly from white persons who settled in the original thirteen states prior to the adoption of the Constitution.” It has funded Anglo-American race scientists as well as anti-immigration groups such as the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR)…

    “The Pioneer Fund [has] supported a variety of institutions working to legitimize race ‘science,’ including the IAAEE [ International Association for the Advancement of Eugenics and Ethnology ] and the journal Mankind Quarterly, which today is published by long-time eugenicist, anti-Semite and Pioneer grant recipient Roger Pearson. . . .[1]

    “Arthur Jensen, an educational psychologist focusing on race since 1966, got more than $1 million in Pioneer grants over three decades. In his famous 1969 attack on Head Start — the early-education program that aims to help poor children — Jensen wrote in the prestigious Harvard Education Review that the problem with black children was that they had an average IQ of only 85. No amount of social engineering could improve that performance, he claimed, adding that ‘eugenic foresight’ was the only solution.[1]

    “Roger Pearson, whose Institute for the Study of Man has been one of the top Pioneer Fund beneficiaries over the past 20 years, may provide the clearest indication of the kind of extremists supported by the fund. Pearson came to the United States in the mid-1960s to join Willis Carto, founder of the anti-Semitic Liberty Lobby. In 1965, Pearson became editor of Western Destiny, a magazine established by Carto and dedicated to spreading extreme-right ideology. Using the pseudonym Stephan Langton, he then became editor of The New Patriot, a short-lived magazine published in 1966 and 1967 to conduct ‘a responsible but penetrating inquiry into every aspect of the Jewish Question.’ Its articles carried such titles as ‘Zionists and the Plot Against South Africa,’ ‘Early Jews and the Rise of Jewish Money Power[,]’ and ‘Swindlers of the Crematoria.’ Pioneer support for all the groups linked to Pearson between 1975 and 1996 amounted to more than $1 million — nearly 10 percent of total Pioneer grants during that period.[1]

    “In recent decades, the Pioneer Fund has supported mostly American and British race scientists, including a large number of those cited in The Bell Curve, a widely criticized 1994 book that claimed that differences in intelligence were at least partly determined by race. According to Barry Mehler, a leading academic critic of the fund, these race scientists have included Hans Eysenck, Robert A. Gordon, Linda Gottfredson, Seymour Itzkoff, Arthur Jensen, Michael Levin, Richard Lynn, R. Travis Osborne, [the late] J. Philippe Rushton, William Shockley [,] and Daniel R. Vining Jr.[1]

    “Under [the late] Rushton’s leadership, the Pioneer Fund has continued to support extremists. According to Hold Your Tongue, a 1993 book by education expert James Crawford, the Pioneer Fund has ‘aided the Institute for Western Values — the same group [the late] Cordelia Scaife May [sister of far-right financier Richard Mellon Scaife ] paid to distribute [the racist nativist book] The Camp of the Saints — and in publishing the autobiography of Thomas Dixon,’ whose white supremacist novels helped spark the Klan’s 1915 rebirth. Recent Pioneer grantees have included white supremacist Jared Taylor and Pioneer Fund board members Rushton and Richard Lynn, who runs the one-man Ulster Institute for Social Research and has argued that blacks have a “psychopathic” personality. Pioneer also has given grants to anti-immigrant groups, including the American Immigration Control Foundation (AICF), the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), and Project USA, an anti-immigration group run by a one-time FAIR board member.

    “The other big beneficiary of Pioneer handouts is American Renaissance, a racist newsletter published by Rushton’s close friend, Jared Taylor, who recently argued in its pages that blacks are incapable of sustaining any kind of civilization. Taylor’s journal focuses on eugenics and alleged race-based differences in intelligence.”[1]

    That’s the kind of poisonous sources Andy draws on to make his immigration arguments. Garbage in, garbage out…

  88. Andy

    Here is an example of why lots of Americans are angry about immigration.

    Illegal immigrant has lived on American welfare for 20 years!?!

  89. paulie Post author

    Speaking about political enemies using immigrants to push their anti-liberty agendas, I would have to put groups like NumbersUSA, Pioneer Fund, John Tanton Network, American Renaissence, International Association for the Advancement of Eugenics and Ethnology, Willis Carto’s Liberty Lobby, and their associates at the top of that list.

  90. paulie Post author

    Illegal immigrant has lived on American welfare for 20 years!?!

    Disingenuous to post such rare and anomalous examples as “evidence” for your bad arguments. The actual evidence is that the welfare dependency rate is higher for native born citizens, as I and others have pointed out above. The statistics you typically cite are almost all about people who are on welfare for a short time and go on to pay a lot more into the system than they took out of it.

  91. Andy

    Notice the number of signs in the video below in Spanish that tell people how to sign up for WIC and EBT cards.

    Illegal Immigration & Welfare ( Aliens / EBT / WIC / Section 8 / California )

  92. paulie Post author

    There are lots of Spanish speakers who are US citizens, including some who were born in the US. You gonna deport them too? Also, as previously mentioned, yes, immigrants do often draw on government help briefly when they first come over, but then go on to contribute more to the system than they take out of it (whether contributing more to it than you take out of it is a good thing from a libertarian perspective is a separate question).

  93. Andy

    The people who push for this crap, or who naively believe that pushing for “open borders” without regard to the welfare state, and any other laws and market conditions that are in place, accuse anyone who speaks out against this of being an “immigrant basher” or a “xenophobe” or a “racist” or some other nasty sounding name.

    This is really a straw man argument because there are few people who advocate cutting off all immigration, and all travel from outside the country.

    The fact of the matter is that there are legitimate concerns that need to be addressed, like the welfare state, impact on the political system, impact on the crime rate, etc…, and failure to address any of these issues, shows an unwillingness to have a real discussion.

  94. paulie Post author

    accuse anyone who speaks out against this of being an “immigrant basher” or a “xenophobe” or a “racist” or some other nasty sounding name.

    And if they aren’t, the sources they cite are, like the ones you have been citing today as we can see above.

    This is really a straw man argument because there are few people who advocate cutting off all immigration, and all travel from outside the country.

    No, your sentence above is a strawman argument itself. One does not have to advocate cutting off all immigration, and all travel from outside the country to be an immigrant basher, xenophobe and/or racists. Most immigrant bashers, xenophobes and racists would not take things that far, but they are nevertheless immigrant bashers, xenophobes and racists.

    concerns that need to be addressed, like the welfare state, impact on the political system, impact on the crime rate, etc

    They’ve been addressed repeatedly. You show no signs of having looked at any of it and continue repeating the same discredited and long since refuted crap from racists, xenophobes and immigrant bashers over and over again as if it hasn’t been addressed repeatedly, kind of like Groundhog Day gone horribly wrong.

  95. paulie Post author

    There should be a great deal of shame in agreeing with the Cheeto Benito on that issue (or almost anything else).

  96. dL

    The fact of the matter is that there are legitimate concerns that need to be addressed, like the welfare state, impact on the political system, impact on the crime rate, etc…, and failure to address any of these issues, shows an unwillingness to have a real discussion.

    Freedom of movement/travel is not up for discussion. Period. If you think it is, wrong movement, wrong party.

  97. Chip Killington

    I live in AZ I know this land does not belong to us whites, we took it from Mexicans illegally. If anyone is illegal (nobody is illegal) it is the whites. Whenever I see a Hispanic family move in here it feels like justice, like the rightful claim-ants are taking back whats theres. Thats a big reason I favor open borders. Libertarians are for justice.

  98. Thane Eichenauer (@ilovegrover)

    As of February 28, 2017 at 00:26, I was of the opinion:
    From reading the article at fauquier.com I would find it hard to support the position of “Bo Brown, LPV president” that “the LPV would neither nominate nor endorse Larson’s effort to unseat Del. Scott Lingamfeter, a Republican, from the 31st District seat.”
    Since that moment I have come across additional information which I posted in this thread. Said information appears to have been incorporated into the article at fauquier.com which is substantively different than the original. The revised article is also missing a comment that I mentioned in my follow up comment.
    The original article can at this moment be accessed at:
    I hereby withdraw my original opinion.
    Paulie, I hope that you live long and prosper.

  99. Andy

    “Chip Killington
    March 1, 2017 at 01:23
    I live in AZ I know this land does not belong to us whites, we took it from Mexicans illegally. If anyone is illegal (nobody is illegal) it is the whites. Whenever I see a Hispanic family move in here it feels like justice, like the rightful claim-ants are taking back whats theres. Thats a big reason I favor open borders. Libertarians are for justice.”

    This is Social Justice Warrior nonsense.

    First of all, Mexico took that land from whatever native tribes were there. Second of all, this is about the here and now, not many years ago. This is not just about land. it is about all of the stuff that has been built on the land. Look at all of the infrastructure. Who built this infrastructure? Who paid for this infrastructure? Arizona would be worth a heck of a lot less if it were not for all of the stuff that has been built in Arizona. Few people even lived in Arizona until air conditioning was invented.

    So because the government of Mexico, which was founded by Spaniards, as in WHITE PEOPLE FROM EUROPE, modern day Americans, and more specifically, modern day Americans who live in Arizona, somehow owe something to people from Mexico, even though most people in Mexico have ZERO connection to Arizona, other than that it was one time claimed by the Mexican government.

    What does this have to do with people from the Middle East, or Asia, or Africa, or anywhere else? What does any of this have to do with anything that has happened in Arizona it was claimed by Mexico (the government of which was founded by people from Spain, which is in Europe)? What does any of this have to do with the problems that I brought up above, such as the existence of the welfare state, mass democracy, voting patterns, and birthright citizenship?

    Perhaps you should stand outside, pull down your pants to your ankles so your butt cheeks are showing, put some lube around your asshole, and then put a big “FUCK ME” sign on yourself, because this is basically what you are suggesting.

  100. Andy

    Some white guys of Spanish ancestry who conquered the tribes that were in Mexico, claimed Arizona, which was inhabited by a few Indian tribes, lost part of it in the Mexican-American War, SOLD the rest of Arizona in the Gadsen Purchase in 1853, for the sum of $10 million (in 1853 dollars).

  101. dL

    Perhaps you should stand outside, pull down your pants to your ankles so your butt cheeks are showing, put some lube around your asshole, and then put a big “FUCK ME” sign on yourself, because this is basically what you are suggesting.

    You need not worry about any lube. My guess is that placing “Fuck Me” signs over your asshole is not going to tempt anyone.

  102. Andy

    It would be nice if we lived in a world that operated on the concept of voluntaryism, and where people could move to different places and people would not have to worry about how those people are going to vote, and whether or not they are going to collect welfare, but this is NOT the reality in which we currently live.

    You’d best believe that the enemies of liberty, people like George Soros and Michael Bloomberg, are paying attention to demographic trends. Demographic trends impact elections due to voting patterns. The people who study this stuff know within a few percentage points that x group will tend to vote a certain way. This is a big reason why certain groups want all of these immigrants flowing into the country, because they know that they can use a majority of them to push their political agendas, namely, expansion of the welfare state, and more gun control laws.

    Don’t believe it? Do some homework on the issue. Here’s an article from the Washington Post about how demographic trends are having a negative impact on the right to keep and bear arms.

    The NRA will fall. It’s inevitable.
    Just look at the demographics.


    From the article: “The recent deadly shooting at an Oregon community college, like so many before it, isn’t likely to lead to new federal laws designed to curb dangerous people’s access to guns. While this understandably frustrates supporters of gun safety legislation, there is reason for them to be hopeful. The National Rifle Association’s days of being a political powerhouse may be numbered.

    Why? The answer is in the numbers.

    Support for, and opposition to, gun control is closely associated with several demographic characteristics, including race, level of education and whether one lives in a city. Nearly all are trending forcefully against the NRA.

    The core of the NRA’s support comes from white, rural and relatively less educated voters. This demographic is currently influential in politics but clearly on the wane. While the decline of white, rural, less educated Americans is generally well known, less often recognized is what this means for gun legislation.

    Polls show that whites tend to favor gun rights over gun control by a significant margin (57 percent to 40 percent). Yet whites, who comprise 63 percent of the population today, won’t be in the majority for long. Racial minorities are soon to be a majority, and they are the nation’s strongest supporters of strict gun laws.

    An overwhelming majority of African Americans say that gun control is more important than gun rights (72 percent to 24 percent). While the African American population shows signs of slow growth, other racial minority groups are growing more rapidly — and report even greater support for gun control.

    The fastest-growing minority group in America is Latinos. Between 2000 and 2010, the nation’s Latino population grew by 43 percent. Hispanics, which make up 17 percent of the population today, are expected to grow to 30 percent of the population in the coming decades.

    Gun control is extremely popular among Hispanics, with 75 percent favoring gun safety over gun rights.

    Asian Americans also represent a growing anti-gun demographic. Although only about 5 percent of the population today, the Asian American population is predicted to triple over the next few decades. A recent poll of Asian American registered voters found that 80 percent supported stricter gun laws.

    After the 2012 election, Republican officials said the party needed to do more to appeal to the growing population of racial minorities. Yet the party’s refusal to bend on gun legislation highlights the difficulty of such efforts. If the GOP compromises on guns to appeal to minorities, it might lose support among its core of white voters.

    Rural Americans tend to oppose gun control, with 63 percent saying that gun rights are more important than gun control. The country, however, is becoming less rural and more urban. Recent years have witnessed a significant increase in the number of people living in cities, with big metropolitan areas experiencing double-digit growth.

    This shift, like that on race, is a boon for gun control. Urban residents strongly prefer gun control to gun rights (60 percent to 38 percent), for reasons that aren’t hard to understand. When gun violence is on your television news every night and police are commonplace, people may come to view guns more as a threat than a savior.”

    MY COMMENT: Do you still think that demographics don’t matter? Look, it would be nice if everyone coming in the country was a libertarian, but this is just not reality.

    You may think, “Well, maybe they aren’t libertarian, but we can do outreach to them, and after they get exposed to us preaching the libertarian message, they will adopt libertarian principles.”

    How is this working out so far? Libertarians have a hard to reaching out to Americans who speak English, so are you really going to bring in a bunch of people from other countries, where English is not their native language, and some of whom do not even speak English at all.

    Libertarians have a hard time getting elected to local offices, and the party has actually lost a lot of ground in this area, as 14 years ago the party had over 600 people elected to local offices, and today we only have 145. The Libertarian Party has not elected anyone to a seat in a state legislature in 17 years, and the Libertarian Party has not elected anyone to a seat in a state legislature that actually served out their term as a Libertarian in 19-21 years.

    So I do not see any evidence that Libertarians are capable of reaching enough of these immigrant populations to make any kind of significant change in demographic voting patterns.

  103. Andy

    There’s no cause for alarm here. Demographic trends don’t matter, right? There is no agenda behind mass immigration, it is just a bunch of peaceful people crossing borders to engage in free market activities, right?

    Forget Immigration. It’s Big Government Hispanic Voters Want.


    From the article: “If we are to believe the polls, Hispanic voters love big government. Just adore it. They want more of it. Lots more. And they will vote to make that happen.

    Pundits are currently tying themselves into knots trying to figure out how the presidential candidates’ positions on immigration will impact their popularity with Hispanic voters.

    The answer? Who cares? What drives Hispanic voters is simple, and it was captured with shocking clarity by a Pew Hispanic Center poll in April.

    A mind-blowing 75 percent of Hispanics tell Pew they want bigger government with more services. Contrast that with just 41 percent of the American public that says it wants bigger government with more services. (Some 45 percent of the general American population wants smaller government with fewer services. For Hispanics, it’s 19 percent.)

    This Hispanic love affair with big government isn’t a short-term result of the Great Recession. It isn’t a temporary product of the first-generation poverty; immigrants, legal or otherwise, have always struggled through in America. This affection for big government is uniquely cultural for Hispanics, and so strongly embedded that it apparently persists for generations.

    Some 81 percent of first-generation Hispanic immigrants tell Pew pollsters they prefer big government. In the second generation, it’s 72 percent. By the third generation, the number is just shy of 60 percent. Contrast that, again, with the mere 41 percent of the general American population that feels the same.

    Part of this probably comes from the fact that most Hispanic immigrants, legal and illegal, come from countries with deeply socialist and often quasi-dictatorial governments. This is what they are used to, except that here, the government benefits are much more generous, providing a standard of living that far exceeds that of their countries of origin in most cases.

    By our measurements, this standard of living is abject poverty. But when you come from a Guatemalan village with a single well and you’ve spent your whole life carrying water from that well in buckets for cooking and you’ve never seen a doctor, flipped a working light switch, or experienced indoor plumbing, our lowest standards of living must seem like Nirvana.

    Why push your children to excel when by merely coming here and putting your American-born children on government programs, you’ve already provided a life for them far beyond what would be possible, or even fathomable, where you come from? You, too, would develop a near-religious fervor for government programs, as Hispanics apparently have, had this been your history.

    It wasn’t Barack Obama who was the face of amnesty in the media during the high-pitched debate over that law in the middle of the decade. It was John McCain, who got a mere 31 percent of the Hispanic vote in 2008, compared to 67 percent for Obama. In fact, this erosion of Hispanic support for Republicans who are staunch supporters of amnesty has continued steadily and rapidly since 2004, when George Bush, a hardcore amnesty supporter, won 44 of the Hispanic vote. Romney is currently polling at 25 percent, according to USA Today.

    The reason for this is simple. As the millions of Hispanic illegal immigrants who came here in the 1990s and their children gain voting rights and come of voting age, they are figuring out — correctly — who the big-government candidates are and supporting them. This is why Obama, one of the biggest-government candidates of all time, is running away with the Hispanic vote in polling done before he called off federal immigration enforcement in Arizona this week. Hispanic support for Democratic candidates is in direct proportion to their mutual fervor for big government.

    And why is this fervor increasing? Hispanics are in many ways more desperately dependent on government in the second and third generations than they were in the first. As the Washington Post reported, second-generation Hispanic immigrants are now failing to graduate from high school at a higher rate than blacks.

    The stereotype of the illegal immigrant who comes here with only a heartfelt desire to do the jobs Americans don’t want in the hopes of pulling himself up by the bootstraps is a dangerously deceptive one that simply doesn’t persist in subsequent generations.

    The proportion of Hispanic children being raised by a single parent is higher in the third generation than in the second, the New York Times reported.”

  104. Andy

    Now somebody may say something like, “You are just stereotyping people. Not everyone that is _____________ (fill in the blank) believes this.”

    Well no kidding. There is some diversity of opinions within all groups. I am pointing out the overall demographic trends, NOT the exceptions.

    This is the the type of data that our political opponents study. Libertarians would know this if they were actually serious about winning elections or advancing their philosophy.

    The fact that we have a welfare state no doubt self selects a lot of the wrong type of people to come here.

    I see no evidence that Libertarians have made any real progress toward eliminating the welfare state, or toward reaching out to immigrant groups and getting them to change their political ideologies in large numbers.

  105. dL

    You’d best believe that the enemies of liberty

    The only enemies of liberty I see around here is you and your fascist American Freedom Party cohorts.

  106. George Phillies

    The above debate shows how this web site is becoming close to wrothless. I hope the owners will impose needed reform.

  107. dL

    The above debate shows how this web site is becoming close to worthless. I hope the owners will impose needed reform.

    I will debate anyone w/ civility. But I will not give truck to vapid white supremacism, particularly when the same garbage is repeated over, over, over, over and over again. Particularly when that garbage is backing some the worst, putrid form of authoritarianism currently being practiced by this government.

  108. Jim

    Andy –

    I can’t stop laughing. That article you posted on gun control trends is absolute garbage. If you click on the article, and then click the link to the actual Pew poll, it shows EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE of what the article claims.

    Overall support for gun control peaked in 1999/2000 and support for gun rights in 2016 is at an all time high back to the beginning of the poll in 1993.

    Broken down by race

    White support for gun rights bottomed in 2000 at 31% and has risen to 61% in 2016.

    Black support for gun rights bottomed in 1999 at 12% and has risen to 31% in 2016.

    Hispanic support for gun rights (poll began in 2009) was at 19% in 2009 and had risen to 30% in 2016.


    So much for demographic trends on gun control.

    The National Opinion Research Center (University of Chicago) has a poll going back to 1972 asking about support for requiring a police permit before purchasing a firearm and that shows the same trend: support for a police permit peaked in 1998 and opposition is at its highest level since the late 1970’s.

  109. Jim

    George Phillies “The above debate shows how this web site is becoming close to wrothless.”

    Would you prefer to switch the debate to your support for a minimum wage?

  110. George Phillies

    It would be an improvement. Mind you what I actual said was that the standard libertarian argument against the minimum wage was economically illiterate blatherskite written by people who seemed to have no understanding of how a fast food stand works. That’s not a for or against, is a ‘this against argument is a complete crock’.

  111. Jim

    George Phillies “That’s not a for or against…”

    Fair enough.

    You wrote that “the law of supply and demand refers to a situation in which there can be substitution.” I think your view of substitution is overly narrow when it comes to employment. Some jobs can be replaced with no jobs. An usher at a movie theater, for example. Or people who pump gasoline (outside of Oregon and New Jersey.) Those are value added services. If they disappear, demand for movies at theaters and gasoline remains unchanged, but service is poorer. It could also be the case that, if the cost of employing someone rises too high, it becomes cheaper to replace them with technology. Cashiers are a good example of this, as many supermarkets are moving to self-checkout stations. Demand for food is unchanged, but the need for employees is reduced because of the relative change in the cost of capital investment. Another problem is exports. If the cost of production rises so high in the US that manufacturers can’t compete with foreign production, they may move their facilities offshore. Both demand for the product and employment may remain unchanged, but that employment may be shifted to areas with a lower minimum wage.

    I will grant that studies about raising the minimum wage are inconclusive. Most employment is not impacted by a rise in the minimum wage because 95% (give or take) of people already earn more than the minimum. And the minimum wage increases that have been enacted have generally been small enough that they can be absorbed without noticeable disruption to either prices, earnings, or those who are earning the minimum. But raising the minimum from $7.50 to $15 would be noticeably disruptive and cause fewer employment hours.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *