|
|
 | | Re: From Harry Browne
|
| (...) Well, James, we've already had this argument. You know darn well already that all of these things above are goods, rather than rights. And as I've said before, there is no moral right to free goods. But since you're a communist: (URL) not sure (...) (24 years ago, 7-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: From Harry Browne
|
| (...) Fair enough. (and it's not only in congress that they are entrenched) There are two opposing forces here that shape the LP platform... One force being that there is a need to avoid Libertarian Macho Flash, which causes people who haven't (...) (24 years ago, 7-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: From Harry Browne
|
| (...) D'oh! It's a shame that there isn't an alternative for them, though I applaud their self-reliance. (...) Living in Pittsburgh, I don't see much advertisement locally, but "an absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence." I see countless (...) (24 years ago, 7-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: From Harry Browne
|
| (...) Easy there, big fella. My point wasn't intended to be as sharp as you're inferring. 8^) And in any case you gain great credibility by going against Perot's model--perhaps Nader has something to learn from you in that regard. What I meant was (...) (24 years ago, 7-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: From Harry Browne
|
| (...) Used to, at the general level, although the bar has been raised to 5% of the popular vote. Still does, for the primaries. (...) No. The LP is the Party of Principle. (...) I see it all the time. But then people who drive Volvos see more Volvos (...) (24 years ago, 7-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
