Letting the libertarian right own anti-imperialism and civil liberties means legitimizing the right.

[redgreenandblue]

This is what it boils down to:

When people keep repeating that being opposed to warrant-less wiretapping, wars of aggression, drone strikes, the war on drugs etc. is equal to supporting Ron/Rand Paul types, then what happens is that people are driven away from the Democratic party.
It projects the idea that those who care about these issues are not welcome in the Democratic party and should seek alliances elsewhere.

In effect, those who work to associate those issues, which are important issues, with the libertarian right, are campaigning for the libertarian right.

[xchrom]

1. du rec.

[last1standing]

2. Excellent point.

But this is what happens when people put party and personality before policy. If making sure that no one slights a politician becomes more important than the policies he's promoting, you often end up working against your own beliefs and turning away potential allies.

[Recursion]

3. People keep saying it because people keep repeating Paulite lies about what's actually happening

Like that whole idiotic Rand Paul filibuster based on a complete lie about what Obama and Holder actually claimed.

Or this current broohaha based on *ahem* "misunderstandings" (I'm being generous) about what information the FBI and NSA are actually collecting.

[Douglas Carpenter]

4. that's absolutely true.

[DonCoquixote]

5. Yes

Look, just because they are right ON THIS ISSUE does not mean they will not use our support against us when it suits them. Do you think that Paul will not use those little valentines Medea Benjamin made him to say "gee, my son and I cannot be sexist if MB likes us."

Of course, MB can forget that if Paul bands abortion, she will not be affected, because, she is of the social class that would never have a problem getting an abortion. Naw, that is just for teenaged girls freezing to death on some Greyhound bus to the nearest state that provides abortions.

In short, let'snot give the libertarians any ammo. We do NOT need them.

[baldguy]

6. You've got it exactly backwards.

The people trying to legitimize the libertarian right wing are those who promote their ideas and use their talking points. Paulite "civil liberties" include paying slave wages to workers, encouraging racial & ethnic discrimination, and questioning govts basic role in maintaining civil justice. The idea that the Democratic party could support these ideas is what helps drive people away.

[redgreenandblue]

7. So you are saying anti-imperialism and civil liberties are libertarian ideas?

[uponit7771]

45. Yes, that's been the meme for about a month!!

[Scootaloo]

16. That is an utterly nonsensical argument

Tell me. Who here's been advocating slave wages, encouraging racial and ethnic discrimination, and saying the government has no role in maintaining civil justice? Who's saying these are notions the Democratic party should be selling?

What you're doing is taking a big handfull of shit out of Ron Paul's ass, and smearing it all over other people who have not said anything of the sort. End of the day? You're the one elbow-deep in Ron Paul's backside.

[Civilization2]

20. Ewww, thanks for the too vivid picture. Absolutely correct you are though.

Trying to blame the ones they smear,. for being smeared is transparently idiotic, and quite childish.

[Scootaloo]

22. Yeah, I'm bad with that

Especially after an all-nighter getting sucked into the link-within-a-link undertow that is cracked.com

[LearningCurve]

37. Been there

You keep looking for the ending, and it never comes!

[zeemike]

30. Exactly right.

And this all has a familiar pattern to it...The use of hyperbole to force you to back peddle and defend yourself.
I have seen it a million times...

[HereSince1628]

8. It's odd, we decry the lack of unity and concern for rights and then

when there is a hint of unity between usually opposing political camps we call those on our side sellouts.

The Snownado in the Colectivo cup strikes me as a clash between the dry and wet lines of critical and noncritical thinking.

It's starting to interfere with my arugula eating, and THAT is gonna piss me off.

[Omnith]

43. I agree. It is good we agree on this.

[JoeyT]

9. K&R

Those are issues that are going to primarily hurt us in the youth vote, too. I'm sure someone will be along shortly to shriek at you about how we didn't need those voters anyway.

[Autumn]

12. i agree with you on that. Young people are not too aware of the vile values

libertarians like the Pauls hold on social and economic issues . They only hear what they are saying about warrant-less wiretapping, wars of aggression, drone strikes, the war on drugs etc and base their support for them on that. I see it with some of the young people I know.

[Phillyindy]

10. It's a good thing...

We WANT libertarians to split the Republican Party and force the country to see how batshit the party is via the primaries.

In the end, libertarians will never be anything but a fringe bunch of nuts and a joke to anyone with even a minimal grasp of economics, history and common sense.

[BumRushDaShow]

11. When purported "liberals" and "progressives"

use the RW/Libertarian's hyperbolic attack language like "OBAMA IS A LIAR!!11!!1!!" and then start concocting conspiracy theory after conspiracy, descending into full FUD mode, then yes, those folks will be summarily dismissed.

The assumption that the rational folks somehow support violations of rights because of the rejection of hyperbole and hysteria, is simply ludicrous.

[JoePhilly]

21. The real goal is to get as many people as possible to hate the government.

Then you can weaken that government, and drown it in a bath tub ... well ... all of the social programs.

The over the top outrage and hyperbole are intended to foster the hate and mistrust of the government, and to block out any discussion of realistic solutions or improvements.

[BumRushDaShow]

33. Exactly

Meaning that rather than discuss and implement measured regulation and functional oversight, the entire "system" is to be removed completely, which = "less government" / "no government" (because government = "bad", "can't trust", "filled with liars&quot . And in its place, you WILL get the very literal corporate rule that is being railed against by calling for the downfall of your government ("let industry regulate itself&quot , and this is the Libertarian's wet dream come true.

It's all being masked in the sheep-like "civil liberties" snake oil proffered by Libertarians, who wear it over their wolf selves, and is not really a push for true "civil liberties", where the government is tasked to not just uphold the constitution, but to carry out its oversight function, along with a robust regulatory framework.

[JoePhilly]

35. Well said. nt

[Comrade Grumpy]

39. You talk as if ONLY right Libertarians are objecting to the surveillance state.

Civil liberties concerns are not "snake oil," and we don't need Rand Paul to tell us that.

But if you want to try to push people with those concerns out of the party, good luck with that.

[uponit7771]

46. +1

[Zoonart]

13. Divide and Conquer!

If you Democrats allow Libertarianism to destroy the party, divide it, leave it in shambles just as the Tea Party has destroyed the Republican Party - then we are playing right into the hands of the Corporatists who want nothing more than to destroy the Government as a whole. No Government. That's what they want.
Think about it. That's the goal of the Teahadists and that is the goal of the Libertarians. Divide and conquer! It worked for the Kochs on the right and now someone is playing the left to the same beat,

[HardTimes99]

17. Corporations want enough government to support and uphold the sanctity of

contracts. Without that underpinning, modern capitalism simply cannot function properly.

[raouldukelives]

42. + 1000. Thank an investor. nt

[NuclearDem]

14. Great, let's get some Democrats to own it then.

Rather than simply unquestioningly supporting politicians for simply having the (D) after their name.

[uponit7771]

47. ^^^^SEE^^^ democrats don't "own" civil liberties and rights!? REALLY!?

[Quantess]

15. The goal is to bully and shame

and trick people into thinking that this is a Libertarian, not a Democratic position.

[HardTimes99]

18. When leading Dems like Dianne Feinstein and Charles Schumer run their

mouths calling citizen Snowden a 'traitor,' is it any wonder people might start to question the Democratic commitment to civil liberties and constitutional rights?

[randr]

19. Have you concidered that those opposed to wiretapping etc

are actually agreeing with the left? I would suggest our positions on wiretapping, war, drugs, etal remain held fast and that we acknowledge that libertarian right is finally in agreement with the the Democrats.
We have always held that all wars, including the war on drugs, to be immoral and I, for one am glad those on the right are finally free to enter into the discussion. I just have to hold my nose in regards to their many other social issues.

[Zoonart]

23. BEDROCK issues

The problem is that some of the Libertarian positions that you/we are opposed to on: Female reproductive rights, civil rights for African Americans and Gay Americans, safety net programs like Medicare and Social Security, are not "Hold Your Nose" issues. They are BEDROCK issues for Democrats.

[coldmountain]

25. Libertarianism is a childish narcissistic philosphy that doesn't work, embrace that!

Of course they can take irresponsible positions, that's what their politics is built on.

[randr]

40. Good point

These are our bedrock issues and we will never compromise, nor do we need to in any foreseeable future.
And of course the current brand of libertarianism is embraced by childish narcissistic individuals.
I do not see this crowd gaining any political advantage to move any of their social issues.
I do see us taking advantage of their eye blink to move some of our issues to open discussion.

[lumberjack_jeff]

24. Exactly. n/t

[Fire Walk With Me]

26. Some very good points.

Where should people go, who care about those issues? (Ayd) Rand Paul nearly immediately contradicted himself regarding the use of drones on US citizens but it appears enough people don't care that he did to continue following him. Let's not add to the numbers.

[uponit7771]

48. Run away from the democratic party cause Obama inhaled and exhaled and Bush did too seems to be

...the hyperbolic position FUD and the liberterians are taking.

We can work with the DNC, namely getting a more progressive congress

[Harmony Blue]

27. +1 Sad that being anti-war

means you have to be lumped together with Ron/Rand Paul types now. The Democratic party is starting to leave me and I feel sad.

[zeemike]

32. But it is such a powerful tool.

If you want to get democrats to support say torture, all you need to do is get Rand Paul or better yet Alex Jones to come out against it, and then we will be obliged to be for it, or risk people thinking we are Paulbots or CTers.

[bluedigger]

28. What we need is more OP's legitimizing Paul and the libertarian philosophy.

At least two or three a day. Or we could just oppose the attack on our Fourth Amendment rights as the good Democrats we are, and ignore the fucking Pauls, who have no place on this site.

[geek tragedy]

29. Where did the majority of votes for Amash-Conyers come from? nt

[Douglas Carpenter]

34. it came from Democrats - that is absolutely true

The last thing we want is for Libertarian-right to get the credit for speaking out against the surveillance state by simply being the most outspoken. Nor do we need Democrats claiming that anti-imperialism and civil libertarianism are right-wing positions. Imagine if someone - anyone on this forum tried to argue that back in 2005.

[Tikki]

31. DU recommend

Tikki

[LWolf]

36. Compromising with Republicans

and allowing so-called "centrists" to move the party and the nation step by step to the right also legitimizes the right.

[redgreenandblue]

41. That is another thing that gets me...

It seems like everyone in mainstream politics is praising pragmatic bipartisanshipt, except when it is bipartisanship between the libertarian right and progressives.

[LWolf]

51. Funny how that works, isn't it? nt

[uponit7771]

49. I thought the word compromise was a 4 letter word to wingers?! What LBJ did and FDR did was...

...compromise and look where it got us

[LWolf]

50. There is compromise, and there is compromise.

Compromising basic principles of social and economic justice is not okay.

"Compromising" by offering up things we've already won as bargaining chips is not okay.

Good try, but that just won't fly.

It's amazing to me what some will resort to in the attempt to defend the indefensible.

[Kablooie]

38. It's idiotic to support NSA surveillance simply because Paul is against it and Snowden like him.

To discard your views and values simply because an opponent has the same views is to concede to him, as the OP states.
You are letting your opponent control the argument instead of holding firm to your own values.

This is the Tea Party mentality. Whatever your opponent likes, you dislike automatically.
Whether or not you supported it in the past doesn't affect your decision.
He likes it - I hate it. He hates it - I like it.
Typical, non thinking, sheep-like behavior.

Look into yourself, decide what YOU believe and hold onto those views unless someone presents a legitimate argument that convinces you to modify them.

Don't base your views on what the opposition thinks.

[uponit7771]

44. The amount of Low Post Count (LPC) support of the overt racist Rand Paul is gob smacking

...it's like they think we'd never find out

[tridim]

52. The libertarian right owns one thing... Crazy.

And that's all they will ever own.

Liberals are the pro civil liberties party, as demonstrated by decades of actual legislation to that effect. It's history.