Tying your politics to your view of Denver

[Count David]

The libertarian part of me doesn't really like what is going on in Denver.

I would never vote for Diana DeGette (thankfully, I no longer live in her district), because she is on the wrong side (IMO) of an issue that most libertarians, many liberals, and only a handful of conservatives support. In her case, I would be a single issue voter (or would simply leave her spot on the ballot blank). She cares too much about what people do to with their own money to entertain themselves.

Rep. Ed Perlmutter, however, is on the right side of it, and I will support him basically no matter what; I am a proud resident of his district once again.

[denverian]

Originally Posted by davebarnes

That is despicable description.
As a staunch, some would say militant, atheist, I take strong offense with being labeled a religionist.
But, at least, you did not label me a Papist which would cause my English ancestors to make a zombie attack against you.

lol!

[rumline]

Originally Posted by SkyDog77

Labeling people as "uppity" is about as condescending as you can get and is frankly uncalled for.

Saying that someone is uppity is calling out condescension, not exhibiting it. Case in point:

Originally Posted by SkyDog77

Reading Ayn Rand and believing that she was espousing the single truth for a path to a just society is no different than reading Karl Marx and thinking the same. It's an adolescent fantasy world not rooted in any reality. The only difference I can see is that most people outgrow their fascination with Marx after college. Libertarians, on the other hand, just seem to get more dug in.

So libertarians are simply living in an adolescent fantasy world and never grow up. Sounds a lot like condescension to me. I'll concede that my comment was flippant and not productive though.

Nowadays it's not so hard to be a small-L "libertarian"; both parties have moved steadily towards statism, or increasing the power of the state over the individual. The assault on the 1st (free speech zones), 2nd (attacking the "supply" issue but not really being concerned with the underlying causes of violence), 4th (NSA wiretapping), 5th (Patriot Act), and 10th (limitless expansion and perversion of the commerce clause) amendments in recent years are things that I strongly oppose. FWIW, I've never read Ayn Rand. I read Marx in college because it was assigned.

Originally Posted by SkyDog77

I studied it quite thoroughly. Even have a degree to back that up.

Maybe this would be better as a PM or another thread, but I find the evolution of political/social philosophies to be fascinating. Although I have not put much time into researching the modern evolutions. I've read the Federalist Papers, Thomas Paine, and John Locke. I have a copy of Leviathan that I've been meaning to get to. But anyway, do you know of good (academic, non-partisan) resources for learning about the changes in political philosophies since Marx? Even better if they include context about why/how those changes occurred.

[Phil75230]

America stands for freedom,
But if you think you're free,
Try walking into a parking lot,
And scratching car paint with your KEEEYYYSSS

Say filthy words to your mom,
then, go to school NAAKEEDDDD!

(my personal sanitized rendition of The Vandal's "Anarchy Burger")

Yep, "more freedom", the freedom of a coyote roaming the pastures and corn fields, really does sound like a brilliant idea!