Active Users:1885 Time:20/10/2025 02:41:23 AM
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 913 Views
And a personal comment - 01/02/2010 11:39:28 PM 651 Views
Re: And a personal comment - 02/02/2010 01:16:53 AM 608 Views
Who's to say YOU really know what's happening in Washington, though? - 02/02/2010 01:41:20 AM 682 Views
*thumbs up* *NM* - 02/02/2010 01:50:45 AM 249 Views
Or should I say... ? *NM* - 02/02/2010 01:51:03 AM 262 Views
I Don't watch tv - 02/02/2010 02:29:53 AM 641 Views
not to mention those who mistake knowledge for understanding - 02/02/2010 10:41:14 PM 491 Views
Even so. - 05/02/2010 05:45:54 AM 523 Views
Like the NYT? - 05/02/2010 02:12:36 PM 550 Views
I don't believe the Times has ever conceded bias. - 05/02/2010 06:03:02 PM 584 Views
and neither does Fox so I am not sure that matters - 05/02/2010 06:40:15 PM 613 Views
Note that I didn't mention Fox (or anyone, for that matter. ) - 05/02/2010 07:13:31 PM 543 Views
PBS is biased - 05/02/2010 07:21:14 PM 523 Views
You're entitled to believe that. - 05/02/2010 07:31:07 PM 663 Views
PBS has an obvious yet undeclared bias so does NPR - 09/02/2010 04:47:53 AM 481 Views
We have been for some time. - 02/02/2010 03:31:10 AM 555 Views
I don't think that's the case - 03/02/2010 02:59:50 PM 527 Views
Universal healthcare was the primary plank in Clintons '92 platform. - 04/02/2010 10:02:18 AM 515 Views
That does not mean his bare plurality was an endorsement of National Healthcare - 04/02/2010 02:09:32 PM 640 Views
I don't think he won by default, and that was his primary issue. - 05/02/2010 08:09:50 AM 659 Views
Re: I don't think he won by default, and that was his primary issue. - 05/02/2010 03:52:23 PM 606 Views
[insert witty subject line here] - 06/02/2010 02:15:21 AM 639 Views
Let me break this into multiple replies here - 06/02/2010 07:45:36 PM 620 Views
'K - 08/02/2010 01:22:12 PM 611 Views
Probably time to go into 'summary mode' - 08/02/2010 07:34:55 PM 641 Views
Again, we're back to "how would you prefer to do it?" - 09/02/2010 09:42:51 AM 663 Views
Any way that works, which currently probably is none - 09/02/2010 06:12:41 PM 598 Views
I think HDI is more accurate than nothing, though it certainly needs some fine tuning. - 10/02/2010 11:03:08 AM 660 Views
Sorry for the delay... - 12/02/2010 11:40:21 PM 744 Views
NP, life happens. - 15/02/2010 02:06:55 PM 746 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 534 Views
Let's put it another way: Why did Dems nominate him instead of, say, Gephardt? - 06/02/2010 02:22:04 AM 601 Views
you don't get mandates from primaries - 08/02/2010 02:12:29 PM 503 Views
No, but end of the day more people wanted healthcare than didn't. - 08/02/2010 03:09:31 PM 515 Views
everyone want health care they just don't want congress runnig it - 09/02/2010 04:56:44 AM 551 Views
Whom do you prefer? - 09/02/2010 10:07:39 AM 585 Views
Sorry not a big fan of socialism I hear it big over in Europe though - 09/02/2010 02:23:55 PM 482 Views
I prefer Thomas Woods Jr's description of bipartisanship - 02/02/2010 02:49:06 AM 538 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 684 Views
you're making a good job taking things out of context, Joel - 03/02/2010 12:47:57 PM 501 Views
Don't speak in absolutes and I won't read absolutes. - 04/02/2010 10:08:43 AM 516 Views
Some qualifiers can be left unsaid for a clearer message. Or better delivery - 04/02/2010 10:26:56 AM 504 Views
Qualifiers are clarifying by nature. - 04/02/2010 10:49:06 AM 639 Views
Pearl Harbor would never have happened to a classically liberal nation - 05/02/2010 01:33:56 AM 527 Views
Maybe; Billy Mitchell might debate that were he alive. - 05/02/2010 05:34:54 AM 648 Views
Wow - that was a dumb statement even for you! - 05/02/2010 04:22:59 PM 704 Views
Some information and a question - 02/03/2010 05:49:20 AM 1064 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 504 Views
You didn't hear all the whining when Bush was in charge with a Republican Congress? - 02/02/2010 08:50:05 PM 519 Views
I there was plenty of whining going on - 02/02/2010 10:36:56 PM 448 Views
Is this you conceding that the GOP is being obstructionist? - 08/02/2010 01:43:04 PM 493 Views
I agree they are obstructing the libs from doing whatever they want - 08/02/2010 02:19:13 PM 415 Views
They've tried including Republicans in drafting bills. - 08/02/2010 03:08:17 PM 578 Views
tyring to pcik off one republican is not including republicans - 09/02/2010 05:03:44 AM 518 Views
Um... sorry, man.... - 10/02/2010 11:06:22 AM 690 Views

Reply to Message