Libertarian VP nominee DESTROYS Comey

> Libertarian VP candidate Bill Weld slams James Comey's letter: "If you don't know, keep you mouth shut"

twitter.com/cnnpolitics/status/793073865899511808

Ready to come home yet, Sup Forums? Libertarianism will welcome you back.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=OXe5O6eL61k
mises.org/library/case-discrimination.
youtube.com/watch?v=RL3sYlxAvbk).
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Yes goy corruption is a complicated system you're better off keeping your mouth shut about the whole thing.

Dont have too much to think now :^)

>if you have to investigate something, don't investigate it goy

>libertarians
>think the federal government should prevent businesses from discriminating customers
Fuck off
youtube.com/watch?v=OXe5O6eL61k

If we exclude people of color from our economic system, we all lose.

Not to mention that it's—ya know—immoral to fucking prevent someone from achieving their hopes and dreams just because of the color of their skin.

Stay mad, Sup Forums.

If you needed any more proof that these faggots were controlled opposition then you just got it.

it's like these people never want to work in politics again

Property is the second most important value for libertarians next to self-ownership. They both tie to each other to the point where they blend and become one. If you truly believe in freedom then you not only would support the individual to associate with whomever they want, including conducting business transactions, you would also believe that an individual can do with what they want with their property, which they put their work into, their ownership of the product of their labor, including refusing others to access and use their property.

Libertarianism affirms freedom of association and private property rights. Being against anti-discrimination laws as destructive of property rights has been a mainstream libertarian position from the start. Even cucks like the ones in Reason mag used to defend it, and everyone important, and I mean everyone (Walter Block, Hoppe, Lew, every single Mises Institute writer, etc) is against anti-discrimination laws. It is immoral to force people at gunpoint to serve anyone they don't want to for any reason whatsoever. Once the government can tell people they are forced to serve/hire anyone against their will or they'll be met by armed goons from the government, they're no longer free men but slaves to the government, and their property is not theirs, they just manage it

Bill Weld has literally endorsed Hillary.

Where were you when you realized that the Johnson/Weld ticket was created in order to discredit the Libertarian movement?

Are Weld and Johnson both crypto-kikes?

I bet they have ((("German"))) heritage from some Jewish neighborhood.

>Voting for someone who hasn't even heard of the places where the US fights its proxy wars.

What is a leppo?

>pedo advocates defending pedos against law enforcement
and this is why Sup Forums abandoned libertarianism, that and open borders policies.

He's kind of right desu, but considering the person in question may be about to be the most powerful person on earth, it's kind of ok to break the normal protocol.

Imagine if she got elected and then all this shit came out afterward, the FBI would be crucified

right about the time ron pauls supporters made the plan to get trump elected to pave the way for rand

>Sup Forums abandoned libertarianism
haha thats right friend! also we should give up our guns

Obviously, property rights have limits. For example, you can't necessarily light an enormous bonfire on residential property you own, because:

1. The smoke negatively affects other people
2. The fire might spread, which would negatively affect other people

A principled libertarian has no issue acknowledging that property rights end where racial prejudice begins, because racial prejudice—get this—negatively affects other people.

Who'da thunk it?

Liberitarianism is a fucking joke

>A...Leppo?

second in command to al leppo. i'm impressed.

>property rights have limits
Statist, please.

>fire might spread, which would negatively affect other people
What I do on my property is my business. If it affects other people then they have the right to take me to court and sue me for damages. Hypothetical situations isn't enough to deprive me of my use of my own property.

>A principled libertarian has no issue acknowledging that property rights end where racial prejudice begins
Have you read ANY works by libertarian philosophers? Or are you just reading infographics from reddit?

>racial prejudice—get this—negatively affects other people
And so does so called Hate Speech yet Libertarians consistently defends it as Free Speech. Feelings does not trump property rights or self-ownership. Don't associate or conduct business with a racist if it hurts your feelings too much.

>A principled libertarian has no issue acknowledging that property rights end where racial prejudice begins, because racial prejudice—get this—negatively affects other people.
The exact opposite. Any non-meme actual libertarian defends what we are saying. If you don't have the right to discriminate you don't have property rights, period. Only edgy teens who liked to be LARP as libertarians cause dude weed don't know this, this is a basic libertarian position, if you drop it you drop libertarianism per se.

Google "anti-discrimination mises" and you'll see this is the standard position going back years, even before the internet. Walter Block even wrote a book on it mises.org/library/case-discrimination. Walter Williams wrote extensively on it (here's a vid for example youtube.com/watch?v=RL3sYlxAvbk). Check Lew Rockwell's position as well, Ron Paul's, Rand's before he flip-flopped, Tom Woods', etc. It is the mainstream consistent position among actual libertarian thinkers and has been since before I was born

These lolbertarians are just dudeweeds who like low taxes, let me tell you. Principled libertarianism only exists among the smart people now, all the fashionable "libertarians" in politics and blogs are a bunch of statist cunts

>Have you read ANY works by libertarian philosophers? Or are you just reading infographics from reddit?
This

Over six million hours in MS Paint

I'm convinced they're plants to destroy the LP. Can't have a third party ruining the "two party" system.

>Libertarianism will welcome you back.

It's a failed meme ideology.

Weld is a Clinton plant, he was the Governor of Massachusetts for fuck's sake. You can't run a democratic stronghold without Democrat collusion.

If you keep your mouth shut, who will build roads?

Man it sucks that the """" Libertarian """" party has gotten so badly subverted

It's more immoral to force you to serve someone you do not wish to serve. Most would call that slavery. You call it """equality""".
Stay hypocritical, cunt

>Weld

That mother fucker is the reason why the lolbertarian party is fucking dead in the water. A pure establishment shill

Libertarian party is a sham. Garry Johnson is hardly Libertarian himself. He's a big government Statist that wants to legalize weed, and even then Libertarians would tell you to legalize all drugs, not just weed. So he fails there too. He's just another Open Borders + Welfare State faggot.

>implying we aren't already home

Let me get this straight.

1. You have no moral issue Humana saying, "Sorry, but we won't provide health insurance to 'the blacks', so you'll have to look elsewhere."

2. You DO have a moral issue with a mayor of a small town saying "Sorry, but we won't allow 'the blacks' to live here, so you'll have to look elsewhere."

What about apartment complexes? What about subdivisions? Do you support a segregated society in which our nation's best apartments and subdivisions are off-limits to "the blacks"? Is there really a functional difference between this and a racist small-town major banning African Americans?

Yes, I have. And I know many libertarians in real life. We're not racists, and you weirdos are not going to convince me to become racist.

Any private individual or entity, including business, has the right to associate and conduct business with their private property. It's that simple. A small town that is owned by racist individuals can do as they wish. I would imagine such a town would first buy lots contiguously to like minded individuals and then make a pact to only sell their homes to people of the same race. If a person failed to do that then the racist town members would refuse service and won't associate with the new comer.

It's not about convincing you to to be, or not to be, racist. It's about upholding the right of the individual to do with what they want with their property. You have every right to not associate or conduct business with racists yourself. That's the beauty of true freedom. The rights that belong to others also belong to others.

>Yes, I have. And I know many libertarians in real life. We're not racists, and you weirdos are not going to convince me to become racist.
I am mixed-race faggot. Is Walter Williams racist? Fuck off. Focus on the argument: Property rights obviously include the right to deny property as you want to. Are you know gonna say you can be a libertarian and defend "hate-speech laws"?

If you're forced to pay for the government the government is forced to serve you, PLUS government is not a legitimate private owner of property.

Stop the BS and actually read the arguments, started with the ones I gave or just the video, eh?

You're not a libertarian, you are a statist who does not understand the free-market. If you think the US would turn into a goddam segregated society if it were not for government putting a gun on people's head and making them serve others, destroying the very concept of property rights, you are economically illiterate. If anything people like me would be the ones suffering from this, since virtue-signaling SJWs and sellouts like yourself would ban me for my political opinions (i.e. ACTUAL libertarianism).

Your argument boils down to: The government should force people to act in a way that conforms to what I think it's proper.

Every statist argument is the same, it's just the subject that changes.

Freedom means people get to do things I dislike

What's next? Are you gonna create quotas forcing people to have sex with others they might not want to so as to "avoid discrimination"? If they don't own their property, the extension and fruits of their labour, wtf do they own?

>he rights that belong to others also belong to others.
Also belong to you.

No one ever said that freedom was easy or nice.

>It's not about convincing you to to be, or not to be, racist. It's about upholding the right of the individual to do with what they want with their property. You have every right to not associate or conduct business with racists yourself. That's the beauty of true freedom. The rights that belong to others also belong to others.
He read so many libertarian authos he doesn't know basic shit like this. This is the kind of "Gary Johnson libertarians" we have nowadays.

>Let me get this straight.
Freedom Of Association.
Property Rights.
Etc.

Its not difficult. The ability to say "NO" is essential to Liberty and a Free Society. Discrimination is vital Social Norm to a healthy society. Because otherwise what you end up with is an Authoritarian State that will always Trample The Rights Of The Individual Under The Guise Of "Social Justice" and that even then it will only Selectively Enforce those laws while giving the Privileged Elite a pass.