The difference between Libertarians and Statist/Progressive Totalitarians

by Skip

Jilletta JarvisA lady by the name of Jilletta Jarvis is running for Governor of NH and had a Letter to the Editor printed in the Concord Monitor (I do have to give credit to our local Pravda in doing so for a person completely antithetical to their political stances).  In it I read no real surprises – I am quite familiar with most of the Libertarian philosophy and agree with a lot of it, mostly, and some not at all.

I’ve copied the full Letter after the jump if you are so inclined (go ahead, you know you want to!).  What was surprising was not its content but with the vehemence those commenters I would place in the Statist / Democrat / Progressive / Socialist / Communitarian side of the aisle with which they ripped into her for absolutely no reason and no evidence with which to back up their vitriol.  Consider them kneejerk reactions with spikes attached to their knees; how DARE anyone just want to be left alone and participate in “group” activities only when they wish to!

I’ve also included the comments fully after the Letter but I wanted to bring them center stage.  These people have NO tolerance for anyone not of their own groupthink and have no problem in making that clear; an example from former ‘Grok commenter “Hunter Dan” (Dan Williams, a teacher, who I banned a while ago) showing right from the get-go how the Statist thinks.  Tell me, how did he go from her Letter to what he expressed in his comment?

Dan Williams
Sorry Jilletta – NH doesn’t need or want your ignorant, greedy, selfish ideas and your cherry-picking from our founding documents to suit your personal agenda. YOU LOSE!

And current commenter, Bruce Currie, had this to say:

Bruce Currie
Paula Werme An “inconvenience”? That’s not what Dan said. Glibertarians put their own unique spin on readings of the Constitution, which despite their self-serving claims to the contrary, is hardly the transparent document they claim. It was not written to support the self-centered fetishizing of the individual at the expense of the common good that glibertarians espouse.
Like · Reply · 1 · Nov 2, 2017 4:11am

Ah, Dan could tell that Jilletta is ignorant, greedy, and selfish just from that Letter.  Gosh, I’ve read that several times over and I can’t fathom how he gets from Point A to Point Pluto.  Is it selfish to be able to make one’s own decisions?  How does “greedy” play into not wanting Government make decisions instead of us for ourselves? What is wrong with the notion of being Free, of Freedom as a notion or in actuality?

What we are seeing here from both Dan and Bruce is that the common good trumps anything or anyone else – communitarianism on steroids.  Put another way, the Individual MUST give way to the Group.  Or put a better way, The State is more important than the Individual.  How DARE anyone hold to anything different.

And these were just the first two comments. Both also make the unsupported statements that Libertarians “read into” the Constitution things that are not there – but do not substantiate their claims.  I’d really like to know what the parts are and how Libertarians “pervert” it as in my readings, it turns out that I’ve had to readjust my thinking on the Constitution and what the Founders were trying to create.

And then a lady named Sandra Morrison (yes, from previous comments, she is quite the Lefty) really goes off the deep end with a smear and a slam:

Sandra Morrison
Sorry, I do not support the Free State Project. More radical than the left is. Geez, can we get some structure and balance in the picture!! No, I absolutely will not join you. N.H. is backwards enough already and sure does not need to slide further.
Like · Reply · 3 · Nov 2, 2017 5:39am · Edited

Well, isn’t that just a dandy outlook on a State you live in?  Nice to see we are “backwards” simply because we don’t wish to be part of the Progressive herd.  I don’t know about you, but while I moved to NH simply for a job, I grew to love it because it ISN’T like any of the other States I’ve been to.  Yet, Sandra et al wish to do exactly that – turn us into just yet another Socialist State.  It is also clear she has assumptions about others that don’t think or believe as she does as this next exchange shows.  Here, clearly shown, is Progressive projection – accusing others of a stereotype that she herself is showing:

Jilletta Jarvis · Candidate for NH Governor 2018 at New Hampshire
I am not a member of the Free State Project.
Like · Reply · 8 · Nov 3, 2017 9:57am

Sandra Morrison
Jilletta Jarvis If you are a Libertarian you are a supporter of the free state movement because most of them are Libertarians.
Like · Reply · Nov 3, 2017 10:10am

And this is typical of most Progressives – they conflate the two and then disparage both. And look – a mandatory “shove” into a community (the FSP project). Again, they just can’t conceive that someone just wishes to stand alone.

And of course, Bruce piles in and agrees with Sandra, emulating what the Democrats used to with “TEA Party” back in the day – anyone that disagreed with them HAD to be an extremist TEA Partier – even those that had never been to a TEA Party event.  It’s an easy way out of what must be a mind-numbing sensation of “what, they believe differently?”.  And are immediately seen to be an existential threat to their Statist worldview.

I’m going to stop the mini-fisking here – you can read them for yourself.  What I think, however, is the worst example is summed up by this line:

If one really looks into what libertarians believe, it can be summed up as: “I’ve got mine. I want more. Taxes are slavery. Screw the rest of you.”

Closed minds – and makes it clear that there can be NO common ground with Progressives.  Frankly, I blame them for the ever-widening schism between us all.

************

The Letter (emphasis mine):

My Turn: What ‘Live Free or Die’ means to me

By JILLETTA JARVIS
For the MonitorThursday, November 02, 2017

We live in the “Live Free or Die” state, and that means different things to different people.

I love my state. The people here are strong-willed, independent in spirit and mind, and not willing to take “guff” from anyone. Do we have our problems? Yes, everyone does. But we are willing to roll up our sleeves and deal with those problems. From writing letters to our representatives, to standing in the pouring rain to protest an injustice, to getting on a plane to help those in need, you will find New Hampshire there. We are competitive and hard-working. We don’t expect something for nothing. We are proud of our accomplishments. We are New Hampshire.

So, what does it mean to “Live Free or Die” to me specifically? It means that the people in my state should be allowed to make choices for themselves and their families. To have that freedom to decide where my money goes and who I support (businesses, charities, political figures, sports teams, celebrities, etc.). It means making the choices that affect my family without the government telling me what those choices must be. It means being able to walk down the street and say hello to random people I’ve never met before and having them say hello back to me because neither of us fear each other.

It means driving down the highway with my seatbelt on because I made the personal choice to do so, not because a government told me I had to. It means having a government that is run by the people, not by the upper 1 percent who don’t care what the average person wants. It means doing whatever I can to make sure that others have these same freedoms. It’s supporting my neighbors’ right to disagree with me, their right to shoot off fireworks on a Friday night.

With freedom comes responsibility.

We have lost many of our freedoms over time and more are being restricted. It is important for us all to respect one another’s rights instead of just wanting what benefits us individually. We must remember that every right we restrict is one step further away from our state and federal constitutions. We must also remember that our elected officials change each time we vote. You may trust the current administration to protect a right when they pass a law, but will you trust the next administration to uphold the same way? Each time a right is restricted in some manner with a law this is something you should think about before agreeing or disagreeing with it. I prefer not to pass laws that conflict with our constitutional rights, and here in New Hampshire I believe that I am not alone in this.

New Hampshire’s Live Free or Die mentality cries out for independent choice and thought. Most of New Hampshire still participates in town hall meeting forms of government – a wonderful tradition that allows us to participate in what happens in our communities.

New Hampshire is a wonderful state, and when our Founding Fathers first looked upon this area they knew this was a place for the independent family to grow unfettered by corruption and regulation of their every move. I would like to keep it that way. Will you join me?

(Jilletta Jarvis of Sandown is a Libertarian candidate for governor.)

 

Dan Williams
Sorry Jilletta – NH doesn’t need or want your ignorant, greedy, selfish ideas and your cherry-picking from our founding documents to suit your personal agenda. YOU LOSE!
Like · Reply · 2 · Nov 2, 2017 3:16am

Paula Werme · Aspiring vagrant at Self-Employed
And the truth comes out for one liberal? The Constitution is an inconvenience? We can move to straight up socialism if we just got rid of the pesky thing? I didn’t read anything in this column to support your attack.
Like · Reply · 8 · Nov 2, 2017 3:58am

Bruce Currie
Paula Werme An “inconvenience”? That’s not what Dan said. Glibertarians put their own unique spin on readings of the Constitution, which despite their self-serving claims to the contrary, is hardly the transparent document they claim. It was not written to support the self-centered fetishizing of the individual at the expense of the common good that glibertarians espouse.
Like · Reply · 1 · Nov 2, 2017 4:11am

Rick Notkin · Needham High School
Dan: “greedy”? I must have missed that. Making decisions that affect your life is greedy?
Like · Reply · 8 · Nov 2, 2017 5:25am

Linda Mongan
Bruce Currie
Dems do not have their own spin on the Constituition Bruce?
Like · Reply · 5 · Nov 2, 2017 6:09am

Dan Williams
Paula Werme READING COMPREHENSION! I never said that the Constitution is an unconvinced. My point was that Libertarian’s cherry-picking minutiae out of it to support their ideas while completely ignoring entire swaths of it is an all-to-frequent occurrence and very dangerous for our nation.
Like · Reply · Nov 2, 2017 1:01pm

Patricia Snyder
Paula Werme You obviously are not a follower of Trump. There is no one that cares less or knows less about the Constituion than he does. .
Like · Reply · 2 · Nov 2, 2017 5:09pm

Bruce Currie
WM Bunker “WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness….” Note the use of the word “among” in the Declaration of Independence.
Like · Reply · Nov 2, 2017 7:12pm

Jilletta Jarvis · Candidate for NH Governor 2018 at New Hampshire
Dan Williams Thank you for your honest thoughts. I’m not sure what Libertarians you have spoken to and I’m sorry for your notions of “all libertarians”. I try not to judge all people based on their party because we all have crazy people who don’t represent our beliefs in our parties. What can you do? Anyway…I do believe in our State Constitution. We have an amazing document here in NH that clearly spells out the government’s roll. It is here to protect life, property, and the equal pursuit of happiness. I don’t believe that the government should be overreaching, overtaxing, or that it should not be held accountable for not upholding these basic guidelines. I am not re-interpretting the constitution in my write-up of what this state means to me. I am giving my honest feedback on the state motto.
Like · Reply · 9 · Nov 3, 2017 9:56am

Spencer Dias
Cherry picking, eh? Ignorant? Greedy? She wants people to make decisions for themselves instead of a government. Individuality is a concept that is under threat. It’s a concept that is near and dear to the hearts of Americans and Granite Staters alike. Greedy are those who use government to seek their beliefs be imposed onto others.
Like · Reply · 9 · Nov 3, 2017 10:41am

Dan Williams
Jilletta Jarvis OK, let’s try this again: Are you . . . 1) Pro-choice? 2) Pro-gay marriage? 3) Pro-environment? 4) Pro-union?
Like · Reply · 1 · Nov 3, 2017 3:35pm

Jilletta Jarvis · Candidate for NH Governor 2018 at New Hampshire
Dan Williams I believe that abortion is something that should be between the mother, father and medical professionals. I could not have one, but I don’t believe a politician should be making that choice for anyone.. I am pro-gay marriage. All people should be treated equally. I am pro-environment. I believe that protecting the environment is protecting the lives of the people who live on it. I have no issues with unions, I see their benefit in some industries. I do have some issues with some union leadership that take union dues but do not do anything for their members. I do not believe that taxpayers should foot the bill for anyone’s abortion. I don’t think that taxpayers should pay for anyone’s wedding. I don’t think that people should be forced to join a union (but as there is a federal law around how businesses deal with unions this one has to be addressed at the federal level).
Like · Reply · 7 · Nov 3, 2017 5:39pm

Loren Scott
Dan, you don’t speak for anyone but yourself…
Like · Reply · Nov 6, 2017 11:17am

Loren Scott
Jilletta Jarvis Dan hasn’t spoken to any Libertarians…
Like · Reply · 1 · Nov 6, 2017 11:18am

Edward Smith
Yes, yes, yes, you being able to be a candidate is one of the reasons I moved to NH as part of the Free State Project. You make so many good points, one of my favorites is that an elected official may change in the future and act differently under a law that was passed today. This is something the Left is learning about allowing Executive Orders to thrive..
Like · Reply · 13 · Nov 2, 2017 4:25am

Sandra Morrison
Sorry, I do not support the Free State Project. More radical than the left is. Geez, can we get some structure and balance in the picture!! No, I absolutely will not join you. N.H. is backwards enough already and sure does not need to slide further.
Like · Reply · 3 · Nov 2, 2017 5:39am · Edited

Jilletta Jarvis · Candidate for NH Governor 2018 at New Hampshire
I am not a member of the Free State Project.
Like · Reply · 8 · Nov 3, 2017 9:57am

Sandra Morrison
Jilletta Jarvis If you are a Libertarian you are a supporter of the free state movement because most of them are Libertarians.
Like · Reply · Nov 3, 2017 10:10am

Leslee Ann Bagdonas · Barista at Starbucks
That’s not how that works. Jilletta is a Libertarian, not a member of the Free State Project, you don’t have to support the FSP to be a Libertarian, they are far from inclusive to each other.
Like · Reply · 10 · Nov 3, 2017 10:29am

Jilletta Jarvis · Candidate for NH Governor 2018 at New Hampshire
Sandra Morrison Actually many FSP members are Republicans and Democrats. There are currently around 40(?) sitting representatives in both of these parties taht are FSP members. Of the 3 sitting Libertarians, 0 are FSP members.
Like · Reply · 5 · Nov 3, 2017 10:31am

Spencer Dias
Sandra Morrison that’s not how it works. Free Staters are independent of the party and have different values. I know the state party and Jilletta, they are both for the people.
Like · Reply · 5 · Nov 3, 2017 10:42am

Jennifer Duquette · Works at Younique Independent Representative
Being a Libertarian doesn’t automatically mean you’re involved with the Free State Project. There are many Libertarians who aren’t a part of it.
Like · Reply · 7 · Nov 3, 2017 11:39am

Bruce Currie
Leslee Ann Bagdonas It’s a distinction without a difference.
Like · Reply · 1 · Nov 3, 2017 2:04pm

Sandra Morrison
Bruce Currie Exactly!!!
Like · Reply · Nov 3, 2017 2:09pm

Bruce Currie
Leslee Ann Bagdonas It’s a distinction without a difference. Libertarianism is a kind of permanent adolescence, which this quote speaks to: “There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs”.
Like · Reply · Nov 3, 2017 2:10pm

Jilletta Jarvis · Candidate for NH Governor 2018 at New Hampshire
Bruce Currie I do believe there is a distinction. I believe in the Libertarian Party because their platform states that all people are equal. It states that government should be here to protect life, property, and your equal opportunity to pursue happiness. It states that people have the right to have a voice in their government. I don’t judge every person by another other person in their party. I judge every candidate based on their own platform as no person is exact to their party’s platform. Even I have some differences from my own party platform. If you don’t like my stances on issue…See More
Like · Reply · 6 · Nov 3, 2017 5:48pm

Bruce Currie
Jilletta Jarvis For those in the FSP, affiliation with one of the major parties is strictly a “flag of convenience” issue, and frankly, an act of subterfuge.
Like · Reply · Nov 3, 2017 8:11pm

Linda Mongan
Bruce Currie
Disagree Bruce. Take Religion for example. Many do not practice all the tenets. Plenty of Christians are pro choice just as plenty of Muslims do not practice Sharia. Same with politics. Not all Dems are pro Big Government, are fiscally responsible and anti gun. Not all Reps are pro lifers or being the world police.
We had 8 years of both parties accusing groups of folks for the actions of a few. People are ususally in the center in my opinion, all want the same thing and are not as dumb as the pols who preach their BS to them think.
Like · Reply · 3 · Nov 4, 2017 7:40am

Loren Scott
Bruce Currie false.
Like · Reply · Nov 6, 2017 11:20am

William Politt
Just a small reminder, folks: Everybody lives downstream (downwind) from a libertarian. Extreme ‘property rights’ are an article of their faith, superseding our right to be free of the runoff or other emissions from their property.

If one really looks into what libertarians believe, it can be summed up as: “I’ve got mine. I want more. Taxes are slavery. Screw the rest of you.” Hell of a way to organize a civilization, I say.
Like · Reply · 3 · Nov 2, 2017 5:48am

William Politt
WM Bunker, again peering into the wrong end of the telescope. I understand that under a government that reflects our best, most humane values I will end up paying more in taxes. Well entrenched in the 99%, I still consider myself well-off. I’ll only remind you that during the Eisenhower (no socialist, he) administration the top marginal tax rate was 90%, and the country did just fine. Our parents built the Interstate Highway system and had a sense of common values and common goals that continued pretty much until LBJ cracked the consensus with his Viet Nam policies, Nixon shatteered it wit…See More
Like · Reply · 2 · Nov 3, 2017 2:29pm · Edited

William Politt
WM Bunker, it’s time for you to go back to school. Seriously! NOBODY paid 90% of their total income – nobody! A reader who actually reads would have seen ‘marginal tax rate’. A reader who comprehends would know what it means.
Like · Reply · Nov 2, 2017 1:06pm

William Politt
WM Bunker, Yup, I read that entire article; and nowhere does it state that anybody will ever pay 90% of their income in tax. Quick, without looking in a dictionary or economics text: what does ‘marginal’ mean? Clearly you have no idea, even though marginalism has been a cornerstone of economics since 1890. Not a new concept, is it?
Like · Reply · Nov 2, 2017 4:39pm
Show 10 more replies in this thread

Linda Mongan
I actually thought this letter was pretty good in regards to choice, responsibility and the role govt should play in our lives be it state or federal.
When success is deemed as evil, when responsibility is deemed as being hateful or bigoted, we pretty much have lost the ability to fix anything. The left have made it very clear that they want Socialism. Never discuss what that will result in, by looking at countries that have gone that route. They also believe that the Dem Party looks out for them and will provide, is not corrupt and is honest with them. They ignore reality. The more power govt gains, the less freedoms you have. One by one that powerful govt will in fact dictate what rights you are allowed.
Dan, this letter was not greedy, selfish or ignorant because you disagree with her views. You disputed nothing she stated.
Like · Reply · 5 · Nov 2, 2017 5:55am

William Politt
Linda, one point will suffice, if you care to think about it. President Eisenhower was no liberal, and only the craziest of the crazies (John Birch Society) would ever claim that he thought success to be evil. Yet during his presidency the top marginal income tax rate was 90%. Successful people continued to be successful, and the country had the resources for such things as the Interstate Highway system. And the nation finally came face to face and began to deal with the ugliest aspects of its past – Brown v Board of Ed.
Like · Reply · 2 · Nov 2, 2017 6:31am

Loren Scott
William Politt and no where in that blather do you make a point on why the Government deserves more of the peoples pay than the people themselves…
Like · Reply · Nov 6, 2017 11:24am

William Politt
Loren Scott, nowhere in my finely crafted prose do I claim that “the Government deserves more of the peoples pay than the people themselves…” If you see it anywhere, you’re looking in the wrong place.
Like · Reply · 1 · Nov 6, 2017 1:58pm

Walter Carlson · Concord, New Hampshire
Jilletta-did you know that th FSP is a Jason Sorens concept, funded by KOCH brothers??
Like · Reply · 1 · Nov 2, 2017 2:12pm

Walter Carlson · Concord, New Hampshire
WM Bunker So what?? Last time I looked SPLC wasn’t in New Hampshire.

SO, if you are happy that the Kochs want their type of libertarianism practiced in NH, maybe you should find out more about it.
Like · Reply · Nov 2, 2017 6:46pm

Jilletta Jarvis · Candidate for NH Governor 2018 at New Hampshire
I do know that Jason Sorens started the Free State Project. I do not know where they get their funding. I am not a member of the Free State Project. I have lived in New Hampshire since I was 6 years old.
Like · Reply · 1 · Nov 3, 2017 10:01am

Loren Scott
So you admit the Koch’s are your boogeymen…
Like · Reply · Nov 6, 2017 11:26am

Patricia Snyder
Ah, selfishness. Must start in kindergarten, where they start early and teach the little ones not to share.
Like · Reply · 1 · Nov 2, 2017 5:06pm

Walter Carlson · Concord, New Hampshire
Good possibility. So don’t tell the Kochs about it.
Like · Reply · Nov 2, 2017 6:50pm

William Politt
Patricia, it starts earlier than that. When mom pulls the nipple out of Junior’s mouth and he screams, “Mine!” That’s the beginning.
Like · Reply · Nov 3, 2017 3:39am

Jilletta Jarvis · Candidate for NH Governor 2018 at New Hampshire
Selfishness? Where in my article are you reading selfishness? I’d love to respond, but I’m just not sure.
Like · Reply · Nov 3, 2017 10:07am
Show 10 more replies in this thread

Leslee Ann Bagdonas · Barista at Starbucks
“You may trust the current administration to protect a right when they pass a law, but will you trust the next administration to uphold the same way?”

Too true Jilletta!
Like · Reply · 4 · Nov 3, 2017 10:35am

Jennifer Duquette · Works at Younique Independent Representative
Great article! It saddens me to see how much misinformation about libertarianism is in these comments-I’d encourage people to do some research before they comment.
Like · Reply · 5 · Nov 3, 2017 11:41am

Sandra Morrison
We know exactly what libertarianism is about. ME, MYSELF AND I. WILL DO WHAT I WANT WHEN I WANT AND TO HELL WITH ANYONE ELSE. NO THANKS!!
Like · Reply · Nov 3, 2017 2:13pm

Jilletta Jarvis · Candidate for NH Governor 2018 at New Hampshire
Sandra Morrison The basics behind Libertarianism is “Voluntaryism” which means that we should be out helping our communities and neighbors for no reason other than because we should. I hate that any libertarian you have met has called themselves a libertarian but has not acted out of kindness for anyone. I would never be this person. I would not be able to live with myself knowing that I COULD help someone and did not. There are selfish people in every party. I have met them. But I don’t ascribe it to the party. I ascribe it to the person. I hope that you would learn more about me before you pass judgement like this, but it’s your choice and I respect you for giving me the opportunity to comment.
Like · Reply · 1 · Nov 3, 2017 6:12pm

Walter Carlson · Concord, New Hampshire
Jilletta Jarvis You seem to ignore the basic tenets of ‘libertarianism’ as set forth by their party’s platform. For instance (I quote): “Libertarians advocate freedom in economic matters, so we’re in favor of lowering and eliminating taxes, slashing bureaucratic regulation of business…” So, lower and eliminating taxes? What pays for our infrastructure, police, schools and education? Slash regulation of business-so eliminate OSHA? Allow any product for sale? NO-our society has progressed far beyond accommodating these philosophies. Except to the Koch brothers, who spent millions funding colleges which taught their ideas, until they found Jason Sorens.
Like · Reply · Nov 3, 2017 6:41pm
Show 5 more replies in this thread

Robb Goodell · Sales & Leasing Consultant at Lee Dodge Chrysler Jeep Ram Westbrook
That someone runs for public office on the premise that the government should leave you alone should comfort you. That Jilletta believes you should be able to keep what you earn to do with as you please ought to be a breath of fresh air. That you would have less money forcibly taken from you so you can choose to give generously out of your good will ought to be a welcomed thought. I don’t see how libertarian thought should evoke such vitriol unless you benefit from force imposed upon your neighbors, your family members, and yourself – and if you do, do you really think that is a civilized society?
Like · Reply · 3 · Nov 3, 2017 3:25pm

Bruce Currie
This is a fine example of the word salad that libertarians specialize in: “forcibly taken”, and “imposed upon” are typical libertarian argle-bargle philosophy. About all that was missing was the word “slavery”. Poor libertarians are oppressed by the fact that taxes are the price to be paid for civilized society, when they refuse to acknowledge the existence of such an entity. For libertarians, there is no such thing as ‘society” or the “common good” even though such notions are deeply rooted in the American experience. Society is merely a collection of “individuals”, each “self-owned” and therefore “responsible” for everything good (or bad) that happens to them. Whatever social safety net exists is voluntary, since charity is thought to encourage dependence and rewards “losers”.
Like · Reply · Nov 3, 2017 4:45pm

Robb Goodell · Sales & Leasing Consultant at Lee Dodge Chrysler Jeep Ram Westbrook
Bruce Currie I find it interesting that you believe that libertarians don’t believe in “society” or the “common good,” for it is the very libertarian idea that what is good should be held in common, more appropriately, that all people ought to share inherently their own rights equally (in common) – that what a person produces, he or she has the right to do with as he or she pleases, that he or she may be able to trade freely for things of equal or greater value, and most importantly of all, he or she should be able to keep and defend what he or she owns, either as a product of labor, of trade,…See More
Like · Reply · Nov 3, 2017 5:00pm

Bruce Currie
Robb Goodell Thanks for proving my point, by managing to link “what is good is held in common” with its exact opposite: that “what a person ‘produces’, he or she has a right to do with as he or she pleases”. Except that no man (or woman) is an island, and very little, if anything, that one produces is done without assistance–via parenting, education, mentoring, birth status, inheritance. The “self-made man” is a double oxymoron–in both biology and lived existence.

From there, your post descends into sophomoric argle-bargle about “self-ownership”. Which the nether regions of libertarianism …See More
Like · Reply · Nov 3, 2017 8:40pm · Edited

Loren Scott
Bruce Currie the only point Robb proves, is that you are baselessy attacking anyone who believes people should have personal Liberty and Freedom – founding tennets of this Nation.
Like · Reply · Nov 6, 2017 11:35am

William Politt
Loren Scott, “…anyone who believes people should have personal Liberty and Freedom” Solipsists one and all.
Like · Reply · 1 · Nov 6, 2017 2:03pm

Linda Mongan
William Politt
More like Realists who do not ignore reality.
Like · Reply · Nov 6, 2017 2:58pm

Robb Goodell · Sales & Leasing Consultant at Lee Dodge Chrysler Jeep Ram Westbrook
Bruce Currie No libertarian argues that slavery is justifiable, as it would be the complete denial of self ownership. If one owns himself he cannot be owned by anyone else – this is the only logical and moral basis for the rejection of slavery as an institution and a practice. On the other hand, you yourself have proven a logical hole from which you cannot return. If the State owns a portion of our labor for what you call the common good, then the State can own people, their time, and what they produce – it is by that logic you enable the ownership of a man or woman by any outside force or entity. If a man owns himself he is beholden to nobody else than what he voluntary cedes of himself through payment or contract. Besides that, you will find libertarians give more out of a desire to benefit mankind than statists do out of their obligation at gunpoint to pay their taxes. If you don’t believe that you don’t know libertarians.
Like · Reply · Nov 6, 2017 3:17pm

Bruce Currie
Robb Goodell You put yourself into the “logical hole” with the claim of “self-ownership”. From whom did you purchase yourself? And when? Do you have a document showing purchase price and date? Treating yourself as a commodity to be “owned” implies the existence of such things, and also implies that, like any commodity, it can be “sold”. And your claim that libertarians are more charitable than others flies in the face of their oft-stated disgust for those who need “handouts”–the “takers” and not the “makers”. Libertarianism is simply Social Darwinism with a thin new coat of paint on it.
Like · Reply · Nov 8, 2017 5:02am

Chip Spangler
I find it amusing that some folks are blasting Jilletta’s statements for ostensibly being “selfish.”

You want to know what’s selfish?

Believing that you have a right to other people’s money. The idea that you have the right to use an intermediary – a government – to take the money of other people and use it for your own purposes.

Libertarianism is not about selfishness. In fact, it REQUIRES that one respect the rights and property of others. Libertarianism is about is recognizing that a society functions best when people are not attempting to coerce each other to obtain things (either directly through actions taken personally, or indirectly through government action). It recognizes that voluntary actions produce the best results for everyone.

As for taxes, a society can have successful people DESPITE having high taxes, but it certainly does not do so because of them.
Like · Reply · 6 · Nov 3, 2017 5:37pm · Edited

Nicholas Boyle · Route Delivery Manager at General Linen Service, LLC
Here here!
Like · Reply · Nov 3, 2017 5:44pm

Walter Carlson · Concord, New Hampshire
Chip-‘Believing that you have a right to other people’s money’?? The only politicians I know that have that mindset would be Trump and his fellow billionaires.
Like · Reply · Nov 3, 2017 6:45pm

Chip Spangler
Walter – Plenty of people appear to think that they have a right to other people’s money. They demand that government take money from others (via taxation) and provide subsidies for education, or for health care, or housing, or food, or retirement, or unemployment benefits, or research, or numerous other things. Money raised by taxes is not taken voluntarily; it is taken under a threat that persons who do not pay their taxes will be punished, perhaps with the loss of liberty. This is in stark contrast to, for example, the money that is voluntarily donated by millions of people to the Red Cross…See More
Like · Reply · 1 · Nov 3, 2017 7:31pm
Show 6 more replies in this thread

Jilletta Jarvis · Candidate for NH Governor 2018 at New Hampshire
I would like to thank everyone for giving me the opportunity to respond to your comments on this article. I value the willingness of you all to provide your feedback. It does seem that many people still fear parties outside of the establishment parties and that is completely understandable. Each candidate for each party needs to run on their own merits instead of their party’s as we all differ, regardless of the candidate and the party. If anyone would like to know more about myself, my platform, or my goals as governor please head out to my website https://jillettajarvis4nh.com or send me…See More
Like · Reply · 4 · Nov 4, 2017 9:04am

Jerry Kapetanakis · Works at FINANCIAL
I thought your article was fine. If anything, I think we think we need to be wary of those who took umbrage with your article. These folks seem to be engaged in divisive tactics & the politics of personal destruction. Putting yourself out there in the public is tough, kuddo’s to you. Don’t let the bully left posting on here intimidate you.
Like · Reply · 4 · Nov 5, 2017 11:24am

Loren Scott
^bingo.
Like · Reply · Nov 6, 2017 11:47am

Edward Smith
I love how Jillietta Jarvis is handling the response to her opinion piece. When you look at the negative responses to the piece, it is hard to find any logic or reason to them, as the responses generally violate all of the rules of debate and are filled with misinformation, smears, etc. Yet Jilletta treats these as opportunities to further explain Libertarian positions while showing she does not pretend to represent all people that claim to be Libertarians and also works to show she is working for GRADUAL change, she is not a revolutionary. She demonstrates her ability to be a real leader in NH and I am thrilled to see her at work for us.
Like · Reply · 3 · Nov 6, 2017 5:13am

Dan Williams
Today’s brand of libertarianism in a nutshell: “I wanna smoke dope and not go to jail for it.”
Like · Reply · 1 · Nov 6, 2017 1:47pm

William Politt
Sorry, Dan, you missed the biggest, most important part, the one thing that binds all libertarians: “I don’t want to pay taxes.” But they are perfectly happy to take a free ride on what the rest of us poor ‘slaves’ are ‘coerced’ to pay for.
Like · Reply · Nov 6, 2017 2:08pm

Dan Williams
William Politt You’re right. I should’ve said, “I got mine – screw everyone else. Oh and by the way, I wanna smoke dope and not go to jail for it.”
Like · Reply · Nov 6, 2017 2:14pm

Linda Mongan
Most folks political beliefs like Religion pretty much are a mixed bag on what they adhere to. I am. Pro Choice and a Rep. But I also believe in safety nets that work and do not create lifestyles. Especially when dependence is handed down to generations. But I do believe that Govt is a very poor manager of taxes. And one of the things I think that Liberals fail to acknowledge is that some programs just do not work, and need to be reformed. The Reps have their issues also with social issues and allowing Big Business to get away with too many tax loopholes. The Dems believe for the most part tha…See More
Like · Reply · Nov 6, 2017 2:43pm

Leave a Comment

  • Tom Ford

    Some of those comments are truly amazing – but it might be worse here in California….

    • Bob_Robert

      It is worse, I’ve lived there.

      What you see is the ravings of a dozen or so hate-filled people who post repeatedly and never accept correction. They are loud, relentless, showing their real inspiration is Goebbels and his Big Lie.

  • sb

    Wow. Those comments are something else. For me, they prove that there can not be any such thing as bipartisan compromise anymore. It is now all or nothing because they want nothing short of hard socialism and will stop at nothing to get it. Not only that, but they aren’t willing to live their own way while leaving the rest of us alone. They are h*** bent on forcing the rest of us to live their way as well – because they know they 1) can’t afford it without us, and 2) can’t let a better way of life tempt people away from what they demand. They have been taught that Independents, Libertarians, and Republicans are selfish and greedy. They have been taught that government control is good (because it has the ability to coerce everyone into doing “the right thing”). They have been taught that freedom and independence are bad (selfish). They have been taught that self defense is bad (no matter who we are defending ourselves against). They have been taught our Constitution is bad and our Founding Fathers were bad. They are now being taught the Revolutionary War was nothing short of terrorism.

    We are definitely living in “interesting times”. I don’t see this ending well. I just hope and pray there are enough of us because I don’t think the ballot box method is going to work.

    • Radical Moderate

      I guarantee you that those comments are being made by the same Leftist trolls that have been doing hit and runs on this website. There is a professional hardcore Leftist element that has taken root in New Hampshire which has to be flushed out. The best thing that can happen is that they expose their IP’s.

      • sb

        I am quite sure you are right. It’s the flushing that is going to be the problem because as we know, not only are they firmly entrenched in our schools and colleges indoctrinating our young, but we now know they lie when they run and cheat (and have been doing for quite some time) at the ballot box. Time for a Plan B.

        I like this Jilletta but seems pretty impossible she could ever win. And even if some miracle happened and she did, the same thing would happen to her that is happening to Trump: the NH swamp would band together and try to destroy her.

    • granitegrok

      Notice that Bruce Currie hasn’t weighed in to defend his comments…

      • Bruce Currie

        Because I just came across this post. But I don’t think I need to “defend” anything. I think I made my points clear, and I’m also sure that the great unhinged on here will take exception, and the pummeling will commence. I will say that the comment above : “Leftist trolls” is ironic–given that commenters on the CM site use their own names. The same cannot be said for most of the commenters at GG, which is entirely understandable, given the extreme views they’re so often expressing. I’d probably hide my identity too.

        • Radical Moderate

          “The same cannot be said for most of the commenters at GG, which is entirely understandable, given the extreme views they’re so often expressing. I’d probably hide my identity too.”
          – Or…
          Conservatives are worried about the lives of their loved ones because of the extreme and growing violence exhibited by the unhinged Left.
          – Or…
          Most coherent individuals understand that “debate” is about defending ones “political position” and not ones “identity”. The Radical Leftists like the ones that have taken to this website do not intend to fight “fair”, they intend to “win” by any means possible. In my opinion even to the point of eventual re-education and/or extermination of traditional American Conservatives.

          • Bruce Currie

            Odd that the only references I see to “up against the wall” and shooting one’s opponents appear on this website.

          • 175jfs

            That was Lenin’s tactic. Now you can defend him.

        • mrwonderful

          Thanks Bruce!

        • Bob_Robert

          “But I don’t think I need to “defend” anything.”

          And yet, here you are.

          • mrwonderful

            You may have to defend the threats you made to Jon Evans in the Monitor forum however.

        • Navy Nuke

          don’t project onto people… You’re deflecting from your comments.

    • Bob_Robert

      NH has a Soros-backed professional hate-group called “Granite State Progress”, a corporate subsidiary of “Progress Now”, the national political action group pushing Democratic Party agenda as if it’s somehow “grass roots”. They’re trying to turn NH into NJ-North.

      I agree with you. The Progressives have created an environment of total hate, where compromise or even living together is impossible, where their violent riots against anything they can label as “Nazi” are somehow justified, and anyone who would dare to defend themselves from that violence is automatically a target of well-coordinated propaganda.

      What I find astonishing is that they don’t realize that they are the Fascists this time around.

      • sb

        I wonder if they don’t realize it. They strike me as understanding it quite well but truly believe the end justifies the means.

        • Bob_Robert

          “but truly believe the end justifies the means.”

          That is absolutely correct. When TJBedford was still talking to me, he repeatedly declared “You don’t care about outcomes!”

          Yet what are the actual outcomes of Progressive/liberal/Socialist policies everywhere they’ve been tried since the French Revolution? Corpses.

          Hundreds of millions of corpses, yet the Useful Idiots keep pushing. They seem to have no clue what so ever that the first people Lenin put up against the wall and shot once he was in power were his Useful Idiots!

  • mrwonderful

    Thanks for quoting me guys! Gee . . . I’m flattered, really. And now I see that Skip has stooped so low as to actually click on the “Concord Fishwrap’s” own page and (GASP!!!!) post a comment in one of the discussion threads!!!!

    • granitegrok

      “NH doesn’t need or want your ignorant, greedy, selfish ideas and your cherry-picking from our founding documents to suit your personal agenda.”

      Well, you knew ALL that just from her Letter? Ignorant, greedy, selfish? I would say a perfect example of a closed mind. Not a great attribute for a public school teacher….oh wait!

      • mrwonderful

        I always challenge my students to stand up for their beliefs by playing devil’s advocate, taking the opposite side of an argument. I think it’s important for students to practice defending themselves in the face of differing opinions. Not that political discussion comes up a lot in my discipline . . . but let that go. My initial comment was a knee-jerk reaction to yet another adherent of a political philosophy that I find abhorrent – mostly because it’s not a philosophy that has ever worked, or will ever work, in the real world. You may as well be a member of the unicorns and rainbows party.

        • Bob_Robert

          And yet when someone challenges you, and points out your own illogic, you say they’re “not worth [your] time.”

          • mrwonderful

            I’d spend my time making sure you don’t get banned from the Monitor forum (or worse) for the threats you made agains Jon Evans if I were you . . . take it from someone who had to have someone else banned because of similar threats.

  • KAMGlosta

    What is greedy? Wanting to keep more of the money I EARN or the person who doesn’t earn it but wants to TAKE MORE OF IT? FFS

    • sb

      Notice they don’t (can’t) RATIONALLY address this point. The “You didn’t build that, no man is an island” nonsense is just that. They ignore that everyone that “helped you on your way” also got paid for the job they did. They ignore that your job will help others along their way as well. Of course, well… slavery. *rolls eyes* Like no other nations had it. Like the Africans didn’t sell their own people off. Like we didn’t see the error of it and abolish it over 150 years ago, violently!. Like EVERYONE in this country had slaves. Like cotton was the ONLY reason we are successful as a nation today and we’ve done nothing since 1865. What a bunch of hogwash they spew.

    • Bob_Robert

      Indeed, if the “left” didn’t have hypocrisy, they would have no policy at all.

  • Keith

    Jillietta isn’t a member of the Free State Project because the Free State Project doesn’t have members. Neither is Dan, nor Linda, nor am I a member of the FSP. Please try to stick with the facts.

    • mrwonderful

      If FSP has no “members” – then how did thousands of you manage to wind up in the same state at the same time? If you guys were really proud of yourselves, wouldn’t you wish to identify yourselves?

      • Ed Naile

        A lot of small government advocates have learned firsthand about how vicious the Left is.
        It has now become common knowledge that an IRS Commissioner can target groups she is opposed to and get away with it.
        Some of the people my taxpayer group helps have been through the same thing here in NH.
        When we caught Windsor Selectmen letting 22 friends and relatives NOT pay property taxes for ten years one of our people had a summer home burned down, there were verbal threats we have on tape, anonymous fake tips to the DES about wetlands violations, etc. The usual.
        You have to understand that progressives use the word “entitlement” to convince their supporters that anyone who disagrees with them about government spending is actually taking away something everyone else owes them. Naturally, you get an angry response from leftists and the people they use to gain political power.
        Conservatives protect their rights – progressives protect their entitlements – as defined by themselves, selectively.
        Pretty simple.

      • Bob_Robert

        “If you guys were really proud of yourselves, wouldn’t you wish to identify yourselves?”

        Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Communist Party? If you have nothing to hide, why don’t you identify yourself?

        • sb

          They would deny it because it’s all about redefining the words and labels and playing word games. Of course they have not ever been a member of the Communist party but that in no way means they don’t espouse those views.

          • Bob_Robert

            Yet they’ll gladly tell a NH native that they’re FSP, merely because they like the liberty that NH people have always prided themselves on.

          • Bruce Currie

            Re: …it’s all about redefining the words and labels and playing word games.” That’s exactly what several commenters here do all the time. “Marxist” is practically the first word out of “Bob Robert’s” mouth.

        • mrwonderful

          OK dude, here goes: I’m registered as unenrolled – always have been, always will be. I’m 50 and have voted in every election since Bush/Dukakis. Here’s my Presidential voting record: 1988 – Bush, 1992 – Clinton, 1996 – Clinton, 2000 – Nader, 2004, Nader, 2008, McCain, 2012 – Obama, 2016 – Stein. And in the last NH election I voted for Sununu for Governor and Ayotte for Senate. That should be sufficient evidence for even you to concede that I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of the Communist party. I only wish the FSP folks were as honest and forthcoming.

          • Bruce Currie

            We’re not in Kansas anymore, when posting here. Oh, wait,that’s where the Koch Brothers are headquartered, so maybe…. When the default epithet immediately applied to those with whom the poster disagrees is “Marxist”, and the Amen Chorus chimes in on cue, you know the sign should say: “Abandon all hope of rational thought here.”

          • Radical Moderate

            Wow..just wow! Not for nothing, but you have unmitigated gall to call out an organized effort by libertarians to relocate to one geographic area in order to maximize their political clout when the international Globalists and open borders US Leftists have been flooding areas with Refugees and illegals since 1965 in order to cancel out the vote of traditional Americans.
            Truly amazing!

          • sb

            Same line, different day: if it wasn’t for double standards, the left would have no standards at all.

          • Bruce Currie

            I think your anger is misplaced. We know your definition of “Leftists” is overly broad–and that’s a serious understatement–but try looking at the corporate elite and Chamber of Commerce types, including that tool of the SoCal oligarchs, St Ronnie, before you blame “leftists” for outsourcing jobs, reducing wages, and wiping out the blue collar middle class.

          • Radical Moderate

            If you have been reading my posts for a while Bruce you would know I lay the majority of the blame on the exact groups you mentioned. My issue with “US Leftists” is that they are the playing their traditional role of “useful dupes” for the Globalists.
            My definition of “US Leftist” is clear and precise. I have clarified it several times in the forum. Stick to the topic.

          • Bruce Currie

            To the contrary–I believe you and the other Groksters are the “useful dupes”. You are blinded by ideology so can’t see the forest for the trees.

          • Navy Nuke

            How is he blinded by ideology when he agreed with you to a point… but he also blames the other party, where you do not…

            “Blinded by ideology” would imply him not blaming both…Sorry, your statement doesn’t pass basic logic and reasoning.

          • Bruce Currie

            Re: “Basic logic and reasoning.” Right. I’ve been critical of the Clinton/Obama wing of the Democrat party for a long time, on this site and at the CM. RM has been the only commenter here who’s ever acknowledged some common ground with my posts on occasion, and we’ve had some spirited discussions; while Skip has always been unfailingly polite. As for the rest of the regulars here–“when there’s nothing good to say, say nothing”. But as for being blinded by ideology:

            Libertarianism is philosophy–not economics. It cherry-picks facts from history, economics, and government, but fails to look at the whole picture. Its imagined ideal of a “nightwatchman” state or corporate entity benevolently policing unfettered “free markets” is a philosophical conceit. It doesn’t describe reality–it ignores the fundamental role government played and continues to play in establishing and controlling labor and financial markets. Economic historian Karl Polanyi described how even the freest market requires coercive power from the state: to enforce contracts, to establish labor rights and the formation of unions, to define the rights and obligations of corporations, to define who has standing in legal actions, to determine conflict of interest limits.

            The story we like to tell ourselves about how rugged individualism conquered the wilderness of N. America couldn’t be more wrong. The frontier was settled because government issued land grants, killed off or rounded up the indigenous population,and allowed private monopolies to build a national transportation and industrial base. In the Gilded Age, government gave laissez-faire capitalism a freer hand. When it all came crashing down after 1929, the government reinvented capitalism, leading ultimately to the mixed economy and the technological innovations that still drive the US economy. To cite just one well-known example: nearly all the technology in the cell phone is the result of government-funded research.

            To think of the market as able to exist in some pure state of nature is farcical. Politicians were there from the start to shape the market’s risks and rewards. And since the 1970’s they’ve been shaping the market and rewriting the rules so more of the rewards accrue to the top. Libertarianism is a flag of convenience the rich and powerful use to justify their position to the rest of us.

          • Radical Moderate

            Not surprisingly I agree with your summation, but while your post is accurate, you leave out several mitigating factors.The scenario you describe above has been played out by every other culture throughout history and we are no more “malevolent” than any other, although it has become fashionable of late to bash “Western Civilization” which you engage in quite often. However what you fail to acknowledge is that out of all of those cultures, it is our own particular Western based Constitutional Republic which utilizes Capitalism as its economic engine that has allowed (and allows, at least for now) the “common man” to go from pauper to millionaire. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/how-a-vietnamese-refugee-built-the-multi-million-dollar-sriracha-hot-sauce-empire-25106345/
            Despite the warts and blemishes you describe in your analysis of the American legacy I can’t see were it has dissuaded the rest of the world population from stampeding to get into America.
            Though I am not a Libertarian I acknowledge that I have great admiration for Ayn Rand and have read all of her books. You are incorrect when you call “Libertarianism” a philosophy, it is actually the Political manifestation of their philosophy. Ayn Rand created the philosophy termed “Objectivism”. It is a form of naked and unbridled Capitalism that is the economic system attached to Libertrianism, which by the way, is my main bone of contention with Libertarians. If I was to hold up a Libertarian closest to my economic position it would be Hans-Hermann Hoppe due to his belief in controlled borders which is necessary to protect the national labor pool and forces fair negotiations between the Employer and Employee without the need for government intervention or unions.
            “Politicians were there from the start to shape the market’s risks and rewards.”
            -You are 110% correct, but yet you give the impression that you want MORE of government intervention in our lives.
            Very confusing.

          • Bruce Currie

            Re: “…that has allowed the common man to go from pauper to millionaire.” And yet there are any number of studies showing that social mobility is now greater in most European countries that in the US.

          • Navy Nuke

            Just make up more blather why don’tcha…

            Libertarianism really scares you doesn’t it?

            Government funded, does not negate Capitalism… #DERP It also does not mean it could not of been done without the Government…

          • Bruce Currie

            To the contrary– the facts of history show that “it could not have been done without the Government.” That was precisely the point of my post, and a major thrust of Polanyi’s work. Your claim–and that of the other libertarians here–exists in a neverland of wishful thinking.
            http://www.tzr.io/yarn-clip/e5b18216-d5c9-4990-8282-893f4334a32e

          • Navy Nuke

            Bruce, stop projecting your “neverland of wishful thinking” onto others… Your argument rests on the belief that everything has only been created based on Government help. This is, your fallacy… You choose to blindly believe such things when evidence countering such beliefs is self evident. As though we don’t have scientists creating and testing new theories.

            Do you drive a car with a gas engine?

          • Bruce Currie

            Not true at all. But thanks for psychobabble– “projecting”–did you get a degree in Psychiatry from Misers’ U also, like BobR?

            What I see here is a complete refusal to acknowledge the important, nay vital role, that government had in creating markets. That is historical fact. Going further: How could any private entity have developed the space program, from which so much that we take for granted has spun off? And the iPhone stands as Exhibit A for the importance of public sector investment in technology (as well as being a prime example of the private sector ripping off the reward after having done little of the risk-taking).

            VC doesn’t have the long range focus required to undertake pure research. Especially in today’s climate of short-timerism obsessed with stock prices and stock buy-backs rather than long-term investment that once characterized our industries. So by short-changing the importance of such investment by government (that by definition will lead to unknown future technologies), the center and right is systematically using up “seed corn” on behalf of ideological expediency. That short-sightedness is given justification with pseudo-economic rationalizations about “free market$$’ from the Neo-libs/ Glibertarians who are the 1%.

          • Navy Nuke

            Bruce, you’re an open book… You are absolutely projecting. One doesn’t need to be a psychologist or a Nuclear Engineer to figure it out…

          • Bruce Currie

            To answer your last question: Yes, I drive a car, and I drive it on roads built and maintained by public entities for the public good.

          • Ed Naile

            Governments start wars and a lot of scientific advancement occurs there – as well as a random highway projects.
            Some of your wonderful market producing highways are more than an excuse for handing our lives over to government.
            The Eisenhower Highway System was created for our national defense – not exactly to link a bakery with an icing factory.
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System#Planning
            “As the landmark 1916 law expired, new legislation was passed—the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1921 (Phipps Act). This new road construction initiative once again provided for federal matching funds for road construction and improvement, $75 million allocated annually.[9] Moreover, this new legislation for the first time sought to target these funds to the construction of a national road grid of interconnected “primary highways,” setting up cooperation among the various state highway planning boards.[9]
            The Bureau of Public Roads asked the Army to provide a list of roads that it considered necessary for national defense.[10] In 1922, General John J. Pershing, former head of the American Expeditionary Force in Europe during the war, complied by submitting a detailed network of 20,000 miles (32,000 km) of interconnected primary highways—the so-called Pershing Map.[11]”
            Bruce forgets to mention that the interstate highway system was begun long before everyone had a car. It was for national defense. But his market analysis = road construction theory melds well with a socialist spin on everything.
            The General John Pershing Capitalist Highway System – sounds market based.
            I have known this since I was a little kid Bruce. Where did you get educated?

          • Bruce Currie

            Nice to see Ed actually using the Internet goggly tubes for some reality-based posting. But it doesn’t alter my point one whit: regardless of motivation (and it’s always mixed) the roadway infrastructure was developed as a public good, and conveniently(!) helped the nascent auto industry.

          • Navy Nuke

            you’re too obtuse to realize cars weren’t designed by the government…. LOL

          • Navy Nuke
          • Navy Nuke

            LOL… As though FSP people are not honest and forthcoming? Where are they not – Only when you employ a tin foil hat.

      • Keith Thomas

        Neither mrwonderful nor myself are members or even part of the FSP. I’m not sure how you ended up in NH, but I suspect it is how most people ended up here. You likely moved here, or as is less common, you were born here.

        Anyway, the FSP does have participants. This is FSP 101. Did you just learn about the organization this week or something?

      • Keith Thomas

        Neither mrwonderful nor myself are members or even part of the FSP. The FSP does have participants. This is FSP 101. Did you just learn about the organization this week or something?

  • Bob_Robert

    It is a complete waste of time trying to remind Democrats (and big government Republicans) that they’re the ones who want government to take more.

    The “mine mine mine” accusation is pure projection of their own motivations.

    • Bruce Currie

      I didn’t know Misers’ University offered on-line degrees in psychiatry as well as glibertarian-speak.

      • Bob_Robert

        Present your evidence of such degrees, Mr. Currie. You are making an assertion, so back it up.

Previous post:

Next post: