It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Libertarians-Isn't it annoying to see neo-cons trying to co opt your ethos?

page: 1
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:00 PM
link   
Not only are current Republican candidates trying to steal Ron Paul's thunder by asking for an end to the Afghan war, but the entire GOP seems to have slipped into pseudo-Libertarian garb since about nov of 2008. I would thin this would get kind of annoying to all the ACTUAL libertarian types on ATS. You had to listen to these very same people champion nation building in Iraq while they now criticize the current POTUS for the VERY SAME THINGS they supported under Bush.

Now, I know very, VERY few on ATS will ever admit to being a Bush-bot. It would be suicide to out yourself as a neo-conservative in the midst of so many so-called libertarians.

So, how about it Libertarians? ISn't it uncomfortable to have so many Republicans-in-hiding trying to jack your swagga?




posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:17 PM
link   
That depends on whether it is just pre-election posturing(most likely) or whether they have actually come around to a better way of thinking(not a chance in Hades).



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
That depends on whether it is just pre-election posturing(most likely) or whether they have actually come around to a better way of thinking(not a chance in Hades).


Well, it sounds like you and I know it is just posturing. I remember the same surge in pseudo Libertarian thinking after Clinton's election, especially the second one. And then all those people somehow went out and voted for Bush twice in 2000 and 2004?

Whats disappointing to me is that the few on here who do appear to be ligitmat libertarian-minded folks dont really seem to mind too much that their ranks are infiltrated with war-mongering neo0con corporate apologists.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
That depends on whether it is just pre-election posturing(most likely) or whether they have actually come around to a better way of thinking(not a chance in Hades).


That is what I was thinking.
I have no problem with those that adapt the Libertarian ideas and principles. As long as it is just not the usual banter. But, it shows that the Republicans must see that these ideals are what America wants.
If they use it to get elected, then their feet must be held to the fire if they go back on it.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by macman

If they use it to get elected, then their feet must be held to the fire if they go back on it.


Considering this has been played out the exact same way over several decades, including the most recent 'tea party' co-optation by the very same NeoCons who got us into most this mess, somehow I'm less than hopefull that anyone will hold any feet to any fire.

I suspect the GOP like certain aspects of Libertarian thought, namely the 'small goverment' rhetoric that will by default benefit their corporate masters. But the anti war stuff? Please, the GOP are bought and paid for by the arms dealers and military contractors.

Just more posturing.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds

Originally posted by macman

If they use it to get elected, then their feet must be held to the fire if they go back on it.


Considering this has been played out the exact same way over several decades, including the most recent 'tea party' co-optation by the very same NeoCons who got us into most this mess, somehow I'm less than hopefull that anyone will hold any feet to any fire.

I suspect the GOP like certain aspects of Libertarian thought, namely the 'small goverment' rhetoric that will by default benefit their corporate masters. But the anti war stuff? Please, the GOP are bought and paid for by the arms dealers and military contractors.

Just more posturing.


Sorry, but just blaming the "Neo-Cons" just doesn't cut it anymore.

Obama campaigned on the whole Anti-War idea, yet here we are, still in both theaters and now adding what 2 more?



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by macman

Sorry, but just blaming the "Neo-Cons" just doesn't cut it anymore.


It does when these very same neo cons are now pretending to be libertarians. Are you one of them, perhaps?


Obama campaigned on the whole Anti-War idea, yet here we are, still in both theaters and now adding what 2 more?



Actually, he didn't. A MAJOR platform in Obama's campaign was increasing troop presence in Afghanistan. So fact check fail for you, sir.

But I have to wonder why you are bringing up Obama in an attempt to apologize for GOP neocon republicans-in-hiding? Almost as if you are maybe one of those former Bush supporting, Iraq-championing, pro-war Republicans-in-hiding now pretending to be a libertarian. You have all the hallmarks of one.
edit on 25-6-2011 by incrediblelousminds because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
Not only are current Republican candidates trying to steal Ron Paul's thunder by asking for an end to the Afghan war, but the entire GOP seems to have slipped into pseudo-Libertarian garb since about nov of 2008. I would thin this would get kind of annoying to all the ACTUAL libertarian types on ATS. You had to listen to these very same people champion nation building in Iraq while they now criticize the current POTUS for the VERY SAME THINGS they supported under Bush.

Now, I know very, VERY few on ATS will ever admit to being a Bush-bot. It would be suicide to out yourself as a neo-conservative in the midst of so many so-called libertarians.

So, how about it Libertarians? ISn't it uncomfortable to have so many Republicans-in-hiding trying to jack your swagga?


Quite uncomfortable. I didn't know I was a Libertarian until about 2 years ago. I voted for Bush in 2000, as he was an effective governor for my state. Sadly, that didn't translate and didn't vote for him in 2004. Now that I know what Libertarianism is, I am for the first time willing to label myself as a particular party "leaner". There is one thing in Ron Paul that I'm disappointed in: that he continues to be a Republican.

But now we have neo-cons attempting to assimilate anything that remotely sounds "Constitutional" for their own agenda. If they happen to get elected (after Obama is hit by a meteor made of cheese, stepped on by a giant, iron wombat, or dies by some other equally astronomically-against-the-odds method), they will slip into the de rigueur of fascism that U.S. Presidents can't seem to shake off.

We will have a choice of two dolls for the coming season:

Fascist Obama (with the kung-fu grip)
Fascist Romney (with new Morman Minuteman action!)

/TOA



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by The Old American
 


So, you voted for Bush in 2000? Well, at least you can admit it. Thanks for that!

We'll have to likely wait until 2016 to see all these guys go scurrying back to the GOP. Who knows, maybe the GOP will actually let ron win that time around!



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:45 PM
link   
I've noticed the change. I think it is deeper than just pretending they're Libertarians for the votes. I think it is reality hitting them in the face. I'm not saying libertarians are the center of reality, however, when it comes to the spirit of what was once the Republican party, libertarianism is where it is. Even Reagan believed that.

So am I surprised to see more and more republicans coming around? No. I'd be surprised if in these times of fiscal crises they didn't become more libertarian.

Oh, and neocon should be a term reserved for people who actually are neocons. Just because you're a republican, or voted for Bush does not make you a neocon.
edit on 25-6-2011 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
reply to post by The Old American
 


So, you voted for Bush in 2000? Well, at least you can admit it. Thanks for that!

We'll have to likely wait until 2016 to see all these guys go scurrying back to the GOP. Who knows, maybe the GOP will actually let ron win that time around!


Hah! I voted for Obama in '08! Take that truthiness!

We will bask in the glow of 4 more years of High Potentate Obama. Ron Paul will be too old or dead to run in '16, but Palin will win, with a cardboard cutout of Reagan as her running mate. Then a new Amerika will be born as everyone realizes that the Progressives were right: we are too stupid to run our own lives.

/TOA



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn

So am I surprised to see more and more republicans coming around? No. I'd be surprised if in these times of fiscal crises they didn't become more libertarian.


What you call 'coming around' I call 'pretending'.


Oh, and neocon should be a term reserved for people who actually are neocons. Just because you're a republican, or voted for Bush does not make you a neocon.


Strike a nerve? Bush was a a neo con. Support for a neo conservative and his policies makes one a neoconservative. Simple.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by incrediblelousminds
 


More 'if you're not with us your against us' mentality?

Neocons..Always think in absolutes.


You didn't strike any nerve. I just don't believe in calling people something they may not be.
edit on 25-6-2011 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by incrediblelousminds
 


I know you are trying to lump all Libertarians together and label them ex-Bushbots. To be honest, I don't see why the core values of Libertarianism isn't just as appealing to the left as it is to the right. Unless, of course, you are buying into the illusion that right=republican and left=democrat.

I'm a little surprised you are making that leap. There are many liberals (like me) who are all about the concepts of Libertarianism. If nothing else, it can serve as a mechanism to decentralize the power-elite and localize power and promote a more direct democratic structure.

Strawmen are used be both sides and in abundance. It's up to you if you choose to weaponize it to make a point. I think you are better than that and have seen much more fair assessments come from you.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by projectvxn
 


Well, yes. If you re a Republican, you are very much against the Libertarians. Which is my point. The GOP love to trot our their free market rhetoric, but their actions ALWAYS contradict those claims. So I would think that for the few on here who are ACTUAL libertarians, it would be quite annoying to see the Palin's and Bachman's and Bush's and their myriad supporters playing dress up with those ideals.

As for your continued contention with the term neo conservative, I would suggest you perhaps dont understand it has concrete meaning and is not just an epithet.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 02:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cuervo
reply to post by incrediblelousminds
 


I know you are trying to lump all Libertarians together and label them ex-Bushbots. To be honest, I don't see why the core values of Libertarianism isn't just as appealing to the left as it is to the right. Unless, of course, you are buying into the illusion that right=republican and left=democrat.


I am not trying to lump all Libertarians as ex Bush bots. Quite the contrary, actually. I am suggesting that may on here who CLAIM to be libertarians are actually Republicans, and that the few actual libertarians I know in real life are disgusted by this patterns, and yet I rarely see any calling out of such activity by the many so-called Libertarians here.

My hope is to call this out and see if any of the many on here who may be actual libertarians feel the same way, or if they prefer to go along with the illusion that many of the Republicans have actually 'seen the light', despite all evidence to the contrary.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds

Originally posted by macman

Sorry, but just blaming the "Neo-Cons" just doesn't cut it anymore.


It does when these very same neo cons are now pretending to be libertarians. Are you one of them, perhaps?


Obama campaigned on the whole Anti-War idea, yet here we are, still in both theaters and now adding what 2 more?



Actually, he didn't. A MAJOR platform in Obama's campaign was increasing troop presence in Afghanistan. So fact check fail for you, sir.

But I have to wonder why you are bringing up Obama in an attempt to apologize for GOP neocon republicans-in-hiding? Almost as if you are maybe one of those former Bush supporting, Iraq-championing, pro-war Republicans-in-hiding now pretending to be a libertarian. You have all the hallmarks of one.
edit on 25-6-2011 by incrediblelousminds because: (no reason given)


Hey, Sol Alinsky, your Rules For Radicals Crap does not work.

Obama has always been on the Anti-War bandwagon. Funny, he may have flirted with increasing troop size, but is now taking us towards 2 more theaters.

No, I did not vote for Bush. No I am not a Republican. Your crap is tired and old.
Instead of spending all your time thinking up witty labels in front of the mirror and then applying here, why don't you apply some logical thought?
Or, is labeling all you have?



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by incrediblelousminds
 


Thanks for the clarification. You have to admit that when most of us make fun of fundies and conservatives, it is usually veiled in sarcasm spiked with rapist wit. I guess I'm projecting...



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by incrediblelousminds
 


How?

I know quite a few libertarian republicans. Personally I consider myself a conservative libertarian.

Your whole "if it's not one thing it MUST be another" mentality is frustratingly annoying.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
reply to post by projectvxn
 


Well, yes. If you re a Republican, you are very much against the Libertarians. Which is my point. The GOP love to trot our their free market rhetoric, but their actions ALWAYS contradict those claims. So I would think that for the few on here who are ACTUAL libertarians, it would be quite annoying to see the Palin's and Bachman's and Bush's and their myriad supporters playing dress up with those ideals.

As for your continued contention with the term neo conservative, I would suggest you perhaps dont understand it has concrete meaning and is not just an epithet.


Funny, as you seem to support Obama, he supports the war in Afghanistan and Libya. The definition states that most Neo-Cons support this.



Neoconservatism in the United States is a branch of American Conservatism that is most known for its advocacy of using American economic and military power to topple American enemies and promote liberal democracy in other countries. The movement emerged during the early 1970s among Democrats who disagreed with the party's growing opposition to the Vietnam War and had become skeptical of the Great Society's welfare programs. Although neoconservatives generally endorse free-market economics, they often believe cultural and moral issues to be more significant, and so have tended to be less thoroughgoing in opposition to government intervention in society than more traditionally conservative and libertarian members of the Republican Party.[1][2] Many neoconservatives support the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya.



edit on Sat Jun 25 2011 by DontTreadOnMe because: fixed tag



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join