Search Tags:

Categories:

John Stossel Talks about Being a Libertarian



Uploaded by: UWLCRS
Video Description:
He address a bunch of conservatives


Tags for this video: conservative john libertarian stossel yaf

Find more videos in the "News" category
See more videos uploaded by UWLCRS

Related Videos
John Stossel on Global Warming! Libertarian 2008!Greed With John Stossel (1/6) Bob Barr Libertarian 2008!Greed With John Stossel (2/6) Bob Barr Libertarian 2008!
john-stossel-on-global-warming-libertarian-2008.htmljohn-stossel-on-global-warming-libertarian-2008.htmljohn-stossel-on-global-warming-libertarian-2008.html
John Stossel-Sick in America 1/6 Libertarian 2008!John Stossel-Sick in America 2/6 Libertarian 2008!John Stossel-Sick in America 3/6 Libertarian 2008!
john-stossel-on-global-warming-libertarian-2008.htmljohn-stossel-on-global-warming-libertarian-2008.htmljohn-stossel-on-global-warming-libertarian-2008.html


Share This Video:       StumbleUpon       del.icio.us       Reddit       digg       Furl       Spurl       Simpy       YahooMyWeb


Comments for this video: Show || Hide
Comments for this video on YouTube
Array ( 9 months ago by LoonyRonPaul)
Shiro1027
"Yes, I can choose not to serve black people, but why would I?"
Perhaps you should read about pre-1964 Civil Rights America. There were plenty of stores that were happy to turn away all black people's money.
And, of course, you ignored the other two points.
Libertarians also believe in the right to have land mines on your property, the right to torture puppies (so long as they're your puppies).
Ignoring this won't make it go away.
and a neocon ... ( 8 months ago by braunsan)
and a neocon demands that you give (half of?) it to the CIA so he can secretly give it to an arab dictator, who we will then shoot 20 years later...
lol. recent history ... ( 8 months ago by braunsan)
lol. recent history prooves you correct... until enough people learn the empowerment that comes from taking responsibility for your own safety improves your sex life and makes drugs irrelevent :) The republicans will get the message. Fiscal/Monetary/2nd Amendment issues win them elections. People don't show up to vote against gay marriage and pot...
Unfortunately, ... ( 8 months ago by tattypatty)
Unfortunately, people DO show up to vote against gay marriage, as witnessed by the 2004 election. On a (somewhat) related topic, can you explain 'states rights' to this Canadian;some keep saying 'let the stated decide', but if that decision violates a person's rights...?
uh, heard of Reagan ... ( 8 months ago by braunsan)
uh, heard of Reagan?, or the 2006 elections - conservatives win on promising sound fiscal/monetary policy, they loose when they don't deliver. They win in landslides when they do deliver. The 2004 presidential election wasn't about gay marriage, it was about the Democrats picking the guy they thought could win instead of a principled candidate, which is (only slightly) more difficult form them to do based on available choices.
States don't have ... ( 8 months ago by braunsan)
States don't have rights, people do. The term 'states rights' is a confusion of the federated, republican nature of U.S. government. The U.S. federal government is prohibited by our constitution from exercising control over anything not expressly granted it to control. This has not stopped the federales from doing this, because people are convinced that centralized power structures can solve their problems (real or percieved).
No state, or the ... ( 8 months ago by braunsan)
No state, or the federal government, has the authority to violate anyone's rights... This gets problematic when the anti-concept "positive rights" (right TO something produced by others - food, housing, healthcare, etc.) is introduced. The states only have the "right" ie, authority, to regulate those issues NOT granted to the federal government.
So if the feds say ... ( 8 months ago by tattypatty)
So if the feds say porn or gay marriage is legal, then oh I dunno Arkansas says they ain't, what happens?
In principle this ... ( 8 months ago by braunsan)
In principle this could mean just about anything that falls under the legitimate purvey of government (which is still a strictly limited set),
however, wise state ... ( 8 months ago by braunsan)
however, wise state government policy is typically to follow the federated republic model and do only those things local governments and individuals cannot effectively do (state courts/police for certain crimes that can be more effectively dealt with at the state level, for example, a crime that involves someone crossing county or city lines, or a large number of people from different counties/city)
Do you mean ... ( 8 months ago by braunsan)
Do you mean theoretically, according to how our government was designed (using sound philosophical principles) to work, or what would actually happen under this scenario today?
Based on recent ... ( 8 months ago by braunsan)
Based on recent history I would agree with you, but you have to go to the primaries to vote for the most freedom oriented republicans. If a good candidate wins, vote for them in the general election. If a neocon wins, vote libertarian in the general election.
Woodrow Wilson was ... ( 8 months ago by braunsan)
Woodrow Wilson was the first neocon. JFK's actions, if not always his rhetoric, would make him a modern neocon. Although this: "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country." is pretty neocon.
Theoretically, porn ... ( 8 months ago by braunsan)
Theoretically, porn and gay marriage aren't under the purvey of any government, because they are all examples of free association. What is often overlooked in a discussion like this is that likeminded people who live in the same area can enforce "standards of decency" by cooperative action.
So if a community ... ( 8 months ago by tattypatty)
So if a community found that interracial marriage offended the 'standards of decency" they could ban it?
No, ... ( 8 months ago by braunsan)
No, non-governmental cooperative action, not a ban. I know the idea seems foreign, since everyone in the world has apparently been convinced that the Nanny state is the only way to do anything. Think of it as a more advanced, grown up version of the silent treatment.
Your example is ... ( 8 months ago by braunsan)
Your example is actually a good one, because it is the sort of thing that only a very few localities would have significant numbers of people to oppose. Another example -
my Pa is a farmer - ... ( 8 months ago by braunsan)
my Pa is a farmer - he changed where he bought a lot of his specialty cattle feed and supplements (thousands of dollars worth of business) because he found out that his old supplier was affiliated with a french pharmacuetical company lobbying to get their "day-after" abortion pill sold in the U.S. He told them that's why quit doing business with them.
YAF is still around ... ( 6 months ago by allixpeeke)
YAF is still around? I recently finished the chapter of Radicals for Capitalism on the rads (libertarians) purge by the YAF trads (conservatives). It's a great book, I highly recommend it. :)
Glad to hear ... ( 4 months ago by stealthswimmer)
Glad to hear another libertarian! It's the only thing that makes sense to me, not just politically, but before I even started listening to politics. It just makes sense to me as a free human being.
Stossel is ... ( 1 month ago by DCUPtoejuice)
Stossel is seriously, the only news broadcaster that I can look up to.
Watch every video ... ( 1 month ago by radicalsam)
Watch every video on the net with john stossel. Almost every opinion he has is exactly in line with rightwing neocon corperate fascists.
How do you figure? ... ( 1 month ago by gilbretto1)
How do you figure? Corporate fascism requires legislated interaction between government and business. John Stossel's proposals of minimal, limited government and promotion of free market principals prohibit such interaction.
he never did answer ... ( 3 weeks ago by gilbretto1)
he never did answer my question.



Tell a friend:


URL 
Embed Code