Active Users:396 Time:17/06/2025 09:26:25 PM
Qualifiers are clarifying by nature. Joel Send a noteboard - 04/02/2010 10:49:06 AM
But still, libertarians aren't anarchists. That's why Ron Paul wants to 'Audit the Fed', not 'Abolish Washington'.

Anyways, I don't pretend to understand too much about the legal aspects of the ideology. i.e. juries and such. If you care to enlighten me I'd appreciate it :)

I used that as a tantalizing example; I honestly don't know, but I suspect it would be fun to confront most libertarians with a choice between supporting "government interference" or opposing "tort reform. " The latter is a textbook case of government trying to tell the public "we know better" with the added bonus of flying in the face of the spirit if not the letter of the US Constitution, which, for SOME reason, states in its Seventh Amendment that, "In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. "

The ultimate government of the United States (i.e. the Constitution, not any elected official or body) very clearly places nearly all authority in civil trials with juries. Yet because juries often award victims of malpractice and/or negligence (or their surviving dependents) millions in damages, a host of politicians and their industry patrons who routinely castigate "big government" argue that should be overruled, usually on the grounds juries are too easily manipulated (i.e. stupid) or vindictive (i.e. greedy) to be trusted. It didn't originate with malpractice and isn't confined to it, but when those in the healthcare debate say the solution to rising costs is tort reform that's invariably what they mean, because the same private insurers raising medical insurance premiums are just as happily raising malpractice premiums passed along to consumers (which, of course, means they have to raise medical premiums again. ;))

That aside, qualifiers exist for a reason: The make inherently inaccurate generalities a lot less erroneous, because they allow for exceptions. I don't mind speaking of God in absolutes, but I won't be comfortable doing it with temporal human matters until you show me a perfect human and/or world. My posts are often long for this reason, but I still get the most grief for painting with too broad a brush (I did once catch hell for verbosity, but I still say if I have to pick I'll choose the latter every time. )
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.

Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!

LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Reply to message
Why bipartisanship can't work: the expert view - 01/02/2010 11:34:58 PM 865 Views
And a personal comment - 01/02/2010 11:39:28 PM 600 Views
Re: And a personal comment - 02/02/2010 01:16:53 AM 555 Views
Who's to say YOU really know what's happening in Washington, though? - 02/02/2010 01:41:20 AM 632 Views
*thumbs up* *NM* - 02/02/2010 01:50:45 AM 222 Views
Or should I say... ? *NM* - 02/02/2010 01:51:03 AM 246 Views
I Don't watch tv - 02/02/2010 02:29:53 AM 593 Views
not to mention those who mistake knowledge for understanding - 02/02/2010 10:41:14 PM 445 Views
Even so. - 05/02/2010 05:45:54 AM 469 Views
Like the NYT? - 05/02/2010 02:12:36 PM 503 Views
I don't believe the Times has ever conceded bias. - 05/02/2010 06:03:02 PM 525 Views
and neither does Fox so I am not sure that matters - 05/02/2010 06:40:15 PM 566 Views
Note that I didn't mention Fox (or anyone, for that matter. ) - 05/02/2010 07:13:31 PM 499 Views
PBS is biased - 05/02/2010 07:21:14 PM 471 Views
You're entitled to believe that. - 05/02/2010 07:31:07 PM 600 Views
PBS has an obvious yet undeclared bias so does NPR - 09/02/2010 04:47:53 AM 434 Views
We have been for some time. - 02/02/2010 03:31:10 AM 497 Views
I don't think that's the case - 03/02/2010 02:59:50 PM 477 Views
Universal healthcare was the primary plank in Clintons '92 platform. - 04/02/2010 10:02:18 AM 461 Views
That does not mean his bare plurality was an endorsement of National Healthcare - 04/02/2010 02:09:32 PM 590 Views
I don't think he won by default, and that was his primary issue. - 05/02/2010 08:09:50 AM 602 Views
Re: I don't think he won by default, and that was his primary issue. - 05/02/2010 03:52:23 PM 558 Views
[insert witty subject line here] - 06/02/2010 02:15:21 AM 588 Views
Let me break this into multiple replies here - 06/02/2010 07:45:36 PM 569 Views
'K - 08/02/2010 01:22:12 PM 552 Views
Probably time to go into 'summary mode' - 08/02/2010 07:34:55 PM 581 Views
Again, we're back to "how would you prefer to do it?" - 09/02/2010 09:42:51 AM 606 Views
Any way that works, which currently probably is none - 09/02/2010 06:12:41 PM 544 Views
I think HDI is more accurate than nothing, though it certainly needs some fine tuning. - 10/02/2010 11:03:08 AM 595 Views
Sorry for the delay... - 12/02/2010 11:40:21 PM 686 Views
NP, life happens. - 15/02/2010 02:06:55 PM 680 Views
I'll play a bigger age card since it was my third election to vote in and he won because of Perot - 05/02/2010 05:57:04 PM 483 Views
Let's put it another way: Why did Dems nominate him instead of, say, Gephardt? - 06/02/2010 02:22:04 AM 554 Views
you don't get mandates from primaries - 08/02/2010 02:12:29 PM 453 Views
No, but end of the day more people wanted healthcare than didn't. - 08/02/2010 03:09:31 PM 465 Views
everyone want health care they just don't want congress runnig it - 09/02/2010 04:56:44 AM 502 Views
Whom do you prefer? - 09/02/2010 10:07:39 AM 524 Views
Sorry not a big fan of socialism I hear it big over in Europe though - 09/02/2010 02:23:55 PM 425 Views
I prefer Thomas Woods Jr's description of bipartisanship - 02/02/2010 02:49:06 AM 486 Views
If only someone had stood up on 8 December, 1941 and said, "hey, you're not supposed to do stuff!" - 02/02/2010 03:28:38 AM 634 Views
you're making a good job taking things out of context, Joel - 03/02/2010 12:47:57 PM 453 Views
Don't speak in absolutes and I won't read absolutes. - 04/02/2010 10:08:43 AM 471 Views
Some qualifiers can be left unsaid for a clearer message. Or better delivery - 04/02/2010 10:26:56 AM 454 Views
Qualifiers are clarifying by nature. - 04/02/2010 10:49:06 AM 587 Views
Pearl Harbor would never have happened to a classically liberal nation - 05/02/2010 01:33:56 AM 478 Views
Maybe; Billy Mitchell might debate that were he alive. - 05/02/2010 05:34:54 AM 590 Views
Wow - that was a dumb statement even for you! - 05/02/2010 04:22:59 PM 658 Views
Some information and a question - 02/03/2010 05:49:20 AM 994 Views
Or the democratic party has shifted so far to to the left they can't even get all of the dems - 02/02/2010 02:39:14 PM 456 Views
You didn't hear all the whining when Bush was in charge with a Republican Congress? - 02/02/2010 08:50:05 PM 473 Views
I there was plenty of whining going on - 02/02/2010 10:36:56 PM 399 Views
Is this you conceding that the GOP is being obstructionist? - 08/02/2010 01:43:04 PM 431 Views
I agree they are obstructing the libs from doing whatever they want - 08/02/2010 02:19:13 PM 359 Views
They've tried including Republicans in drafting bills. - 08/02/2010 03:08:17 PM 517 Views
tyring to pcik off one republican is not including republicans - 09/02/2010 05:03:44 AM 465 Views
Um... sorry, man.... - 10/02/2010 11:06:22 AM 638 Views

Reply to Message