Libertarians aren’t inherently right wing–why, here’s Rand Paul defending the right of gays to marry on the Glenn Beck show:
“I think this is the conundrum and gets back to what you were saying in the opening — whether or not churches should decide this. But it is difficult because if we have no laws on this people take it to one extension further. Does it have to be humans?
Just kidding, he was using the same argument Rick Santorum made, that if gays can marry, then we might as well have man on child or man on dog. He’s just another bigot like the rest of them.
Also, too: I was joking about “states rights” in the post about Prop 8, but DOMA was pure states rights, and the gap-toothed, pin-headed majority of Rand’s state still has every right to display their bigoted ignorance by voting to outlaw gay marriage even after 5 unelected judges in robes defied the will of God.
Baud
Time for a poll:
1) Will the GOP nominee in 2016 support gay marriage?
2) If not, can he win the general election (no, it won’t be a she)?
Nice for the wedge to be on the other foot for once.
MikeJ
Once again Republicans demonstrate that they don’t understand “consent.”
BGinCHI
What do you call a libertarian who is also a liberal?
raven
@Baud: wedgie
Hal
But but but he opposes drones!!!
BGinCHI
@Baud: Hell no and just plain no.
MikeJ
@Hal: Unless you’re walking out of a liquor store. Then he’s all for them.
beltane
@MikeJ: They also don’t believe in the concept of rights at all except in the sense of “might makes right”.
FlipYrWhig
@BGinCHI: That’s one of those mythological beasts, like a hippogriff or a chimera.
Snarki, child of Loki
Right after outlawing gay marriage, they can move on to outlawing joyful marriage, then happy marriage, then contented marriage, until all that’s left is disgruntled marriage.
May they reap what they sow.
Quaker in a Basement
Same sex couples can be wed under the care of our Quaker Meeting. Where are all the “religious freedom” advocates when the state refuses to recognize these marriages?
negative 1
Because nuance in libertarianism seems to only peek out when it’s on socially conservative issues. Funny, that.
Zifnab
@Quaker in a Basement: If Quakers can allow gays to get married, what’s to keep them from letting you get married to your oatmeal? NOTHING!
beltane
@BGinCHI: Confused.
MomSense
Ok, remember all the talk about Hagel not being progressive enough for the Sec Def? I am loving Sec Def Hagel right now. Here he is on spousal benefits.
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/Secretary_Hagel_Has_Their_Backs?src=soc_fcbks
Omnes Omnibus
@Quaker in a Basement: Protesting outside?
Shakezula
The fact that he was on BeckTV is a bit of a give away.
The rest of a quote makes me wonder if Dr. R. Paul has been abusing prescription narcotics. Something about marriage prevents kids from living in poverty so we need marriage, but only male female marriage because herp. And derp.
BGinCHI
It has always struck me that Libertarians learned the “freedom from” part but either have no idea about (or choose to ignore) the “freedom to” part. One without the other is a teenage fantasy.
Sloppy reading of Isaiah Berlin among others.
BGinCHI
@Zifnab: They have been in the pocket of Big Oatmeal for a long time.
Svensker
@Zifnab:
That made me LOL.
Villago Delenda Est
Peace, love, dope.
Oh, and keeping those fucking people in wheelchairs in their place.
the Conster
@MikeJ:
Seriously – I’ve had to point this little fact out to married people who make this ridiculous comment about SSM who seem to think that the fact that both parties to their marriage had to sign their license, IN PERSON, is somehow irrelevant to the argument. The stupid does burn bright.
Baud
Paul is speaking gobbledygook on purpose. He can’t give a straight answer without pissing off some constituency he’s going to need for his presidential run.
Villago Delenda Est
@Baud:
Yes, the vile little shit learned his lesson from that Rachel Maddow appearance where he committed a classic “Kinsley gaffe”.
Shakezula
@Quaker in a Basement: Because that isn’t a real church as defined by these people. Recognizing equal marriage automatically excludes a religion from being a “real” church.
Trollhattan
In related news, I waas shocked, SHOCKED the sun shone this morning in my eastward-facing windows.
Is there one sentient being who thinks Rand Paul is anything other than a standard-issue self-serving Republican from central casting?
SatanicPanic
@BGinCHI: Lonely.
EconWatcher
OT, but ruh-roh for my own Governor McDonnell here in Virginia.
There was a series of revelations about obviously inappropriate gifts made by a political supporter who had business before the Commonwealth. But until now, the Governor has been able to hide behind the figleaf that they were gifts to his wife, not to him. (VA law apparently has a loophole you could drive a truck through about disclosures of gifts if they were to family members rather than the officeholder himself.)
No more. Now we’ve apparently got a $6,500 Rolex that went straight to the Governor, but was not disclosed.
Never mind the ethics, how dumb and classless do you have to be? I work in a job in which I can’t let a vendor buy me lunch or anything else if it costs more than $25, and I just keep it simple by paying my own way on everything, even if it’s a cup of coffee.
What kind of an adult in a position of influence thinks it’s OK to accept a $6,500 watch from an interested party–and a $10,000 shopping trip for your spouse?
I knew McDonnell was a wingnut, but I didn’t know he was such a two-bit grifter. Wow.
? Martin
Justice is not always swift:
Omnes Omnibus
@Trollhattan: Tricky of you to put sentient in there.
Trollhattan
@EconWatcher:
Bet he’s praying to Allah it’s a Russian fake.
? Martin
@EconWatcher:
You must use some alternate definition of wingnut than the rest of us.
Trollhattan
@Omnes Omnibus:
It’s my get-out-of-snark-free card.
KmCO
@Villago Delenda Est: I know you’re joking (or at least I assume you are with your first sentence), but if there is one group of people that libertarians seem to hate with the intensity of a thousand suns, it’s hippies.
Villago Delenda Est
@EconWatcher:
Oh, come on now. You had to suspect. Afterall, wingnuts have been SERIOUSLY into grifting since the days of snake oil and bible salesmen (h/t Ryan and Tatum O’Neal). All of televangelism is grift, every last bit of it. Then you have bottom feeding scum like Newt Gingrich and Failin’ Palin.
Baud
@Trollhattan:
Can’t vouch for sentience, but neocon John Bolton is apparently considering a presidential run out of fear that Rand means it when he says he wants to be less interventionist.
Baud
What if humans married drones and produced the ultimate fighting machine?
THESE ARE SERIOUS QUESTIONS, FOLKS!
Villago Delenda Est
@KmCO:
Yeah, but there’s Ron/Rand Paul, fearless opponents of the MIC (Peace), Ron/Rand Paul, of the Paul ReLOVEution, and of course Ron/Rand Paul saying the feds should get out of the weed prohibtion business (Dope).
Nevermind that providing access to buildings for those in wheelchairs might cost these two grifting asshats some money…heaven forefend they should include the rights of non-perfect humans into their calculus. I’m big on this issue because I’ve got a friend (who is a wizard mail server administrator) who is confined to a wheelchair, and we run into access issues when meeting for dinner on occasion, still, in deep blue Oregon. Imagine what it must be like in Kentucky…
Trollhattan
@Baud:
Oh. Mah. Gawd.
After the ’12 Republican primary clown parade I thought, “This will never be topped for sheer entertainment.value.” Bolton and Paul alone can prove me wrong, wrong, wrong. The special Fox “Who would Jesus bomb?” debate would be especially enlightening.
Are Cruz and Gomert doing any a-thinkin’ on a run?
? Martin
@Baud: Sweet Jesus, make it so. Nothing could make 2016 more entertaining than Rand Paul, Rick Santorum, and John Fucking Bolton all on the same primary debate stage. Can we convince Pam Gellar to jump in as well?
NonyNony
@EconWatcher:
It’s pretty obvious that there are only two kinds of wingnut – grifters and marks.
And the Venn Diagram has a strong overlap on those two categories too – many of the folks who are grifters are also marks for grifters higher up the wingnut chain.
joes527
@FlipYrWhig:
real.
? Martin
@Trollhattan: Gohmert, absolutely. But don’t underestimate Cruz. He’s dangerous. He knows just what to say to get headlines and will play the electorate as GWB did. And he’s not dumb. He can get elected.
Trollhattan
@? Martin:
So long as it’s on a trampoline.
Comrade Dread
@MikeJ: Judging from how they talk about rape, I would have thought that was a given.
Trollhattan
@? Martin:
Cruz has a certain debate-team-vice-president glibness but dear lord, on camera he projects oily car salesman even before he opens his yap.
That said, our Dubya experiment convinces me to consider anybody from Texas a threat, Goodhair’s spectacular faceplant nonwithstanding.
johnny aquitard
@EconWatcher:
I’ve noticed there’s a huge overlap between the two. I’ve decided it’s sort of symbiotic thing going on.
‘Wingnuttery to enable the grift, grift to enable the wingnuttery’, as it were. Sort of the wingnut take on the Medici family motto.
SatanicPanic
@Trollhattan: Paula Deen could bring the woman voters…
gelfling545
@MikeJ: Ah, but could he marry a corporation??? They’re people, you know.
Alex S.
Being happy is an insult to God.
MikeJ
@gelfling545:
Only with approval from ⅔rds of the stockholders.
gelfling545
@Trollhattan: Well, there’s me. I don’t think he is nearly that good. You flatter the man.
Alex S.
@Villago Delenda Est:
Interesting, yes: Conservatives choose to believe in perfect markets because if they weren’t, they would suddenly have to realize all the crap they bought through the years.
? Martin
@Trollhattan:
Yeah, I know what you mean, but Cruz is completely shameless on policy. He’ll pivot on a dime and say convincingly whatever he needs to say to win. I’m hoping he aims for TX-Gov instead.
quannlace
Nah, just a moron. Who thinks he’s oh-so-clever. Like the wags who did the ‘Garden of Eden was Adam and Eve. Not Adam and Steve. (cue snicker.)”
They seem unable to get it thru their thick heads that it’s marriage between two adults. All this ‘man on dog, man on armadillo….horse…goat” says a bit more about their fever dreams…
Eric U.
@MikeJ: I believe that nobody walks out of a liquor store after robbing it of $50 unless they are blah. Which makes it ok by Rand if they are taken out by dronze.
Chris
@Baud:
This.
Ron Paul Senior’s constituency, in my anecdotal experience, spans the spectrum from college “new left” hippies to unreconstructed Dixiecrats to “conservative but socially liberal” trust-fund babies and everything else in between. That’s only possible because the man speaks in such gibberish that everyone can project their own desires onto him.
The only thing is that Junior doesn’t seem happy to simply sit on the sidelines grifting money from fringe voters – he’s actually trying to move into an active role in one of the two parties. If he wants that, then he’s gonna have to get more specific than his old man at some point. At least, I think he is.
third of two
Robin’s explication/clarification is truly awesome…by virtue of being
rightcorrect.Chris
@KmCO:
Libertarians live by an ideology that comes down to “if it feels good, do it.”
Which is strikingly similar to the ideology of DFHs, or at least the ideology that’s ascribed to DFHs. Libertarians are terrified that that might someday occur to someone, and so, they work furiously to differentiate themselves from the DFHs by attacking them at every opportunity.
Captain C
If a non-human animal could actually demonstrate informed consent, then it may be appropriate to make the comparison.
On the other hand (or paw), if a non-human animal could actually demonstrate informed consent, then there may not be an ethical problem with human-nonhuman marriage (other than the potential squick factor).
Anoniminous
@quannlace:
And, possibly, their porn collection.
daverave
@? Martin:
you’re right about Cruz… I went slumming on RedState earlier today and the repub with the most positive mentions in the comments was definitely Cruz. Although I don’t know about post-primary chances.
Haydnseek
@Quaker in a Basement: This is wonderful, but marriage is not a religious institution. It is a civil one. You can have all the religious ceremony you desire, but unless you’ve met the requirements at city hall, you’re not legally married.
The Other Chuck
@Chris:
FTFY. Or would if wordpress weren’t such a FESTERING PILE OF EXCREMENT WHERE ARE MY GODDAM S TAGS?
Original Lee
@Haydnseek: Exactly. If a religious ceremony were all that was required, then Patricia Kenneally would be Jim Morrison’s widow.
Epicurus
“…the gap-toothed, pin-headed majority of Rand’s state still has every right to display their bigoted ignorance…” Ahem, they have already done so, twice; q.v., McConnell, Mitch and Paul, Rand.
Chris T.
Yes, because children and dogs can give informed consent and sign contracts!
Kay
I’m so glad Rand Paul.is running for President.
He’s completely full.of shit but I love the new compassionate libertarian pose.
He’d like to have NO LAWS, really, but he’ll compromise in the case of marriage because of…marrying people to animals.
Does anyone know what he thinks about ACTUAL.marriage law yet, or is he still getting away with this bullshit?
Blah, blah, blah, Rand, what’s your point?
dubyabee
We already have. Quite sometime ago. We also ammended our state constitution to prevent it, just in case some state judge got uppity
KRS Chapter 402.00
RaflW
Rand Paul has proven himself to be a shitheel, and frankly, Libertarianism as promulgated in real life is a political philosophy for shitheels who want everything for themselves and to hell with you an me.
That is all.
LosGatosCA
I don’t know about the rest of you but I’m putting all my money into the eHarmonyforDogsandHumans.com matchmaking site.
It’s going to be bigger than WebVan, I guarantee it.
Paul in KY
@EconWatcher: $16,500 is not two-bit, IMO. Over here in gap-toothville, we had a sting operation about 20 years ago where the state representatives were being bought for $600.00.
That is ‘two-bit’.
Paul in KY
@Trollhattan: With a convenient cliff right beside said trampoline.