In my post about the idiotic over-reaction to a New Jersey 10-year-old posing with his new squirrel rifle , Dana Garrett left me this response: One waits, apparently in vain, for you to post the annual rates of children who either shoot themselves or someone else with a gun. But then you Libertarians are notoriously ambivalent to and silent about data and facts and would rather talk abstract principles and fear monger (like the government will confiscate your guns). It doesn't require any degree of subtlety to see why you are data and fact adverse. The facts indicate we have a crisis with gun violence and accidents in the USA, and Libertarians offer nothing credible to address it. Lives, even the lives of children, get sacrificed to the fetishism of liberty. That's intellectual cowardice. OK, Dana, let's talk facts. According to the Children's Defense Fund , which is itself only querying the CDCP data base, fewer than 10 children/teens were killed per year in Delaw
Comments
This speaks to the thread on Delaware's (uppercase)democrat / fake liberal blog.
http://www.delawareliberal.net/2012/09/13/reconnecting-de-voters-to-the-democratic-brand/#comment-299809
Other than their obsession with protecting abortion under any circumstance and a very brief flirtation with criminal defendant protections around the 1970's the Democrats have never known a civil liberty they wouldn't toss overboard in a heartbeat to advance government power and their control.
Now that they have finally just come out as full-blown national socialists the absurd pretense that they ever gave a shit about civil liberties has actually become counterproductive to their lying, scheming and propagandizing.
Ironically this admission (or omission really) is probably the only honest thing their party platform has ever revealed about what their true value are.
Good catch, Steve. Vote Green Party this year. Gary Johnson is just another sore-loser republican, as have been all of the Libertarian Presidential Candidates.
I would consider voting for several different Greens around the country, including Andy Groff, but not based on their platform.
Platforms are generally useless, but I thought it was interesting that Democrats would find it necessary to strike out their support for civil liberties.
Platforms are useless except as running statements of what the party wants the world to believe they're about, i.e. their bullshit.
They can be very very instructive however insofar as how they change, particularly when it involves a significant departure from or reversal of what was long a standing plank, and even more particularly when it concerns a broad, consequential question or issue.
If the GOP, for example, omitted national security from its platform it would be a damn significant statement revealing far more about them than anything you'd learn from any party platform claptrap.
And with the Democrats, their lack of giving a shit about civil liberties is now so pervasive that even their most shallow pro forma propaganda has finally caught up with the reality of who and what they really are.