🚀 go-pugleaf

Mike Warren wrote:

> > I'm a libertarian with shades of conservatism added.
> 
> Hahahaha. Nice one.

  Normal people don't laugh at the truth that way.  Nor do they react
as strangely as you do elsewhere.
 
> > For example, I'm not open to trade if it's with our adversaries who
> > will exploit such trade to our disadvantage one day ultimately, [..]
> 
> Then you're just a cranky whiner, not a ``libertarian''. Your complete
> rejection of freedom would be more than enough to disqualify you here.

  Your absence of logic and poor thinking already disqualify yourself,
Mike.
 
> > You're assuming the government "should" intervene here and there
> > whereas in fact many consider this illegitimate.
> 
> You said it was stupid for the government to intervene in the public
> interest. I asked what other reason would be good.
> 
> > Government should merely enforce the laws, [..]
> 
> Isn't that ``public interest''?
> 
> > [..] and adjudicate as a neutral third party in the event of
> > conflict among citizens, [..]
> 
> Isn't that just a court system? I bet most people think a government
> court system is in the public interest (not libertarians, though; they
> think it should be private).
> 
> > [..] not behave as a service agency, parent, etc., [..]
> 
> Did I say they should?

  You and your fellow lefties imply that constantly, in demanding
government services of all kinds, as well as joining with power-hungry
judges in the common practice of "judicial activism."  (And you know
or you should know what that is, so don't respond with the stupid
question, "What's that?"  Such B.S. behavior doesn't merit a reply.)


  Dave Simpson