Monday, May 9, 2016

Riveting Interview and My Position on Hillary

doublek321 emails:

Riveting interview.  Note I'm 21 mins in so I still have around 9 mins left.

Just wanted to say you did an excellent job as the interviewer.   When you interrupted to bring up questions they were the ones I would want asked.  Though I would have been okay w letting him go on with the Chelsea Webb Hubbell thing I can understand you wanting to protect someone who the circumstances were forced upon.

Side note (assuming you didn't cover it in the interview): are you still supporting Hillary for Prez?  (I know you don't really support her btw just that you think she would get the least done and thus would be the best).

http://www.targetliberty.com/2016/05/the-incredible-dirt-donald-trump-has-on.html

--

RW response:

I am not supporting Hillary in the sense that I would vote for her or even urge anyone else to vote for her. And I certainly wouldn't start a "Libertarians for Hillary" movement.

I consider both Hillary and Donald Trump extremely dangerous and I think it is a mistake for libertarians to support either.

Trump is absolutely terrible on trade. He wants to boost military spending and spending on infrastructure. He will send US troops into the Middle East. And I don't trust him on taxes.

And if he is serious about throwing out 11 million illegals, can you imagine the police state that would require?

What is there to like about him?

Hillary isn't much better. The only difference is that she would never be able to rally a good portion of the masses the way Trump would. I always fear a politician who has the ability to rally the masses, if it isn't in the direction of liberty.

I believe it will backfire on libertarians who support either one of these megalomaniacs.

 That said, I silently hope Hillary wins. I don't want to be associated with supporting her because a Clinton presidency will bring a lot of evil, but my bigger fear is the unpredictable Donald Trump who appears to have a very authoritarian streak.

-RW

7 comments:

  1. ─ That said, I silently hope Hillary wins. I don't want to be associated with supporting her because a Clinton presidency will bring a lot of evil, but my bigger fear is the unpredictable Donald Trump who appears to have a very authoritarian streak. ─

    Capitalist Pig's Jonathan Hoenig made the point in writing and during the Saturday broadcast of Fox News' 'Cashin' In' that a Hillary win would be better for the country because people would blame her and her socialist policies when the disaster unfolds, but a Trump presidency would be ruinous because an economic collapse would be blamed on capitalism since Trump, presumably, is the pro-Capitalist businessman, when he is clearly not.

    I am very concerned that Lew Rockwell and other Paleo-libertarians regard libertarians who cannot bring themselves to support El Trumpo as 'Neo-Cons', because this is not an either-or decision. I don't support HillRod and would never support her but I am more scared of a Trumpista presidency precisely because of El Trumpo's authoritarianism.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Governor Johnson might be a better choice than either.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I concur with that. Granted he doesn't pass the purity test but he talks the talk and walks the walk when it comes to the pro-liberty policies he supports.

      Delete
  3. Bob. Whats going on here at TL? "Secretly hopes she wins". I can understand not supporting Trump but to "hope" Clinton wins? Do you not see a much worse authoritarian streak in Clinton than Trump? Particularly in the realm of foreign policy where the prez has free rein? Might you be going over to the other side? Say it aint so, Bob!

    ReplyDelete
  4. I would not assume Hillary would be ineffective.

    Most experts are predicting that if Trump loses, the Congress would also be flipped to the Democrats and Elizabeth Warren would take over the Senate. If Hillary is president with a Democratic Congress, most likely you're going to see irreversible laws on guns and global warming unless there's enough Republicans to filibuster.

    While Hillary might not have the charisma of Obama, she will have the media and all the cultural Marxists on television shows - especially late night comedy - making a mockery of Christians, libertarians, gun owners, climate change deniers, etc to help further implement a paradigm shift so that the United States resembles socialist Europe.

    Plus, you'll get the neocon wars that she's starting to embrace now that we're almost in the general election. Since she's a woman, war will be cool again as if it's a reflection of female empowerment. A Hillary administration with a Democratic Congress would be worse than Trump. Much, much worse.

    To paraphrase from a Puritan writer during the vicious reign of Mary, Queen of Scots: Beware of the monstrous regiment of women.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Very good observations, Jay. And by the way, whatever happened to all the libertarians who said that they'd rather live under a dictator that believed in liberty than an elected official. Given me a dictator who is authoritarian in his libertarianism every time.

      Delete
    2. @Marc,

      ─ Very good observations, Jay. And by the way, whatever happened to all the libertarians who said that they'd rather live under a dictator that believed in liberty ─

      Maybe they all realized the dictator does not believe in liberty after all and is much worse than the alternative.

      Delete