Since leftists are many times proven to be utterly unable to deal with facts (A fact to a liberal is like kryptonite to Superman -- Larry Elder), I've gotten used to the snide sniping and sneering, insulting insider humor they use to unfocusingly, not quite make what in the ever-fuzzy leftist world, be inaccurately called a point.
What follows is the reason-free blathering of an alleged writer who calls himself DarkSyde (presumably because he doesn't want his friends and family shamed by what he does in the bathroom with his laptop). Following each of his "Ten reasons why you might not be a libertarian," ripping off both David Letterman and Jeff Foxworthy, will be a short comment.
Notice a propensity of newly minted Libertarians showing up lately? Perhaps it's just coincidence their ranks swelled in inverse proportion to George Bush's approval rating, ditto that so many are mouthing traditional conservative talking points. But what about the everyday gun toting townhall screamers and taxcutters and deficit hawks we see on cable news: are they really libertarian as so many claim, or just conservatives in glibertarian (sic) clothes? Here's a few warning signs.
Actually, Ron Paul isn't libertarian enough, and Fox News is far more fair and balanced than, say NBC. Also, we need to exclude commentators like Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity from this judgement, because they're commentators--not news.
- If you think Ron Paul isn't conservative enough and Fox News is fair and balanced, you might not be a Libertarian.
If you replace "brandishing" with the more accurate "carrying," I do have that right--although I prefer a 1911-type handgun. While pink shirts aren't specifically mentioned in the Bill of Rights, as is the bearing of arms, the fact was that the Code Pink ladies were noisy and disruptive, whereas the gun-toting attendee stayed well away from the melee.
- If you believe you have an inalienable right to attend Presidential townhalls brandishing a loaded assault rifle, but that arresting participants inside for wearing a pink shirt is an important public safety precaution, there's a chance you're dangerously unbalanced, but no chance you're a Libertarian.
Medicare is a creature of government, and its existence impoverishes everyone. I remember when there was no medicare, and in that time, the United States was a far better place in which to live.
- If you think the government should stay the hell out of Medicare, well, you have way, way bigger problems than figuring out if you're really a Libertarian.
I've never heard of a Supreme Court Justice (federal or state) that looks straight to the US Constitution (or the state constitution) to render judgement. If they did, there could be no conscription, no anti-drug laws, and the vast majority of police and regulatory agencies could not exist.
- If you rank Anthonin Scalia and Roy Moore among the greatest Justices of all time, you may be bug fuck crazy, but you're probably not a Libertarian.
There are religious libertarians--I have no idea how they make that leap, but they're entitled to their opinions, however wrong, as long as they don't try to force their will on others. There is no Constitutional justification for making drug use, prostitution or gambling illegal.
- You might not be a Libertarian if you think recreational drug use, prostitution, and gambling should be illegal because that's what Jesus wants.
I agree with this. Government should not in any way recognize or facilitate any religious organization. Nor should it discourage or hamper the free exercise of any religious activity unless that activity violates the rights of others.
- If you think the separation between church and state applies equally to all faiths except socially conservative Christian fundamentalism, you're probably not a Libertarian.
Government and all medical professions should be separated by Constitutional Amendment. Safety standards can be set and enforced by private regulatory firms. Individuals must use or not use the advice offered by these firms as they see fit. One's own judgement is crucial for his own well being, and should be the final screed. Private research organizations should be free to seek knowledge, to the limit of their abilities, as long as they initiate no force and cause no harm.
- You're probably not a Libertarian if you believe the federal government should remove safety standards and clinical barriers for prescription and OTC medications while banning all embryonic stem cell research, somatic nuclear transfer, RU 486, HPV and cervical cancer vaccination, work on human/non human DNA combos, or Plan B emergency contraception.
Any executions should be held by the intended victim against his attacker. Government should not be allowed to conduct executions, because it its inherent incompetence. The unplugging of Ms Schiavo's life support was not, should not have been a government issue.
- If you think state execution of mentally retarded convicts is good policy but prosecuting Scott Roeder or disconnecting Terri Schiavo was an unforgivable sin, odds are you're not really a Libertarian.
I don't see a relationship between the above issues, except that they are all government boondoggles. There is no Constitutional justification for the silly and destructive auto buyback program, nor for any kind of involvement with the medical industry. Nor is there any Constitutional justification for the existence of government education. I use the term "education" very loosely here. Lastly, I have no idea what the dropping of Ms Bachmann's name has to do with anything. Leftists, when they have no argument, will often attack individuals.
- If you argue that cash for clunkers or any form of government healthcare is unconstitutional, but forced prayer or teaching old testament creationism in public schools is fine, you're not even consistent, much less a Libertarian, and you may be Michele Bachmann.
And the number one sign: if you think government should stay the hell out of people's private business -- except when kidnapping citizens and rendering them to secret overseas torture prisons, snooping around the bedrooms of consenting adults, policing a woman's uterus, or conducting warrantless wire taps, you are no Libertarian.
I agree with this one, too. George W Bush took many strides toward establishing a new fascist state, here in America. B Hussein Obama, however, instead of dismantling Mr Bush's evil work, has acted to extend and intensify the fascist state. He has not varied from the path Mr Bush would've taken, had he remained President.
The above silliness doesn't address the problems of the totalitarian state, it merely suggests that the writer wants a totalitarian state headed by his guy. His lack of understanding of conservatism, libertarianism, and even socialism is appalling. But he does, like both the neocons and the socialists (but, I repeat myself) extoll the wonders of the totalitarian state even in his ignorance. Oh well. Such is the meandering mental journey of the victim of the government children's prison system.
As for me, if there be any state at all, it should follow the Constitution to the letter and make changes only by means of the prescribed Constitutional Amendment process.
Conservatives don't agree with me, or most libertarians on many things, and I happen to think that most elected conservatives are not really very different from most elected leftists. Two sides of a (base metal) coin.
I kind of don't think I'll be any more likely to become a regular reader of Daily Kos because of the dubious wit and utter lack of logic expressed by Mr Syde, but it is kind of exhilarating to once again learn the very limited mental acuity of the average leftist political writer. The only problem is, the government children's prison system is cranking out people whose abilities are similarly limited, by the millions. Imagine how angry they'll be when they find out!
A tip of the old battered fedora to Moxie Cathedra.
They've killed Freedom! Those bastards!