Comments on: An interesting “Liberal Democrat”

By: David Gillies

David Gillies — Thu, 01 Mar 2012 19:27:11 +0000

As a libertarian, I am absolutely against legal restrictions on free speech (except in the case of real, demonstrable incitement to violence). As a libertarian, I am staunchly in favour of people like Tonge being condemned, ostracised and driven from public life. As the great P. J. O’Rourke (PBUH) wrote, “There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences.”

By: Sunfish

Sunfish — Thu, 01 Mar 2012 16:36:49 +0000

Karma’s a bitch. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

By: JAWolf

JAWolf — Thu, 01 Mar 2012 15:32:37 +0000

On the other hand, what better way to destroy the speech codes than victimize the lefties and their allies with them?

By: Johnathan Pearce

Johnathan Pearce — Thu, 01 Mar 2012 11:11:02 +0000

“Her comments her extremely unpleasant, and she may be crazy, but surely no libertarian can condone that she may be prosecuted simply for what she said.”

Indeed, hence why I wrote that I opposed such action against her on free speech grounds.

The difference between toleration and approval is something that needs to be hammered home, relentlessly.

I should add, as a caveat, that I tend to get a bit suspicious of people who, whenever they talk about free speech, always cite the example of Holocaust denial, rather than take a less obnoxious example. Such folk might be sincere, but I have come to wonder whether they quite pass the intellectual “smell test”, so to speak.

Guy: yes, Tonge’s elevation to the Lords speaks very badly for the judgement of the LibDems. I fear that some of them have become Chomskyite idiots.

By: guy herbert

guy herbert — Thu, 01 Mar 2012 09:24:31 +0000

The real mystery of Jenny Tonge is why she was sent to the Lords and appointed a shadow minister there by the Liberal Democrats after she had already badly embarrassed them as an MP on this very same issue.

This isn’t a case of someone with odd views ending up in parliament by the hereditary principle, or going batty in old age, or being picked for a safe seat by a weird constituency party or primary mechanism. In 2005 Charles Kennedy’s advisers looked around at the available personnel and thought Jenny Tonge was a better candidate as a Liberal Democrat peer than any thousands of lawyers, doctors, teachers, celebs and party workers they could have chosen, including all the dozens of LibDem peers created after her.

By: Julie near Chicago

Julie near Chicago — Thu, 01 Mar 2012 07:56:19 +0000

What Laird said. :>)

By: Michael Jennings

Michael Jennings — Thu, 01 Mar 2012 05:52:17 +0000

Sigivald, the moral argument which advocates Israel’s return to pre-’67 borders is based on the idea that it isn’t right to take territory from another nation by war.

Except the 1967 borders are themselves the ceasefire line of the 1948 war, so I don’t know what the argument is. “It is okay to take land by force in a war or independence, but not after that”? (If so, doesn’t say much for the United States). Who really knows. Like most other people, I think it would be great if we could have a peaceful and prosperous Palestinian state sitting next to Israel, but the goodwill to create such a thing is not there, alas.

By: Laird

Laird — Thu, 01 Mar 2012 04:47:45 +0000

Perhaps not, SD, but since “hate” crimes are a particular favorite of these loony leftists you’d have to have a heart of stone not to laugh when one of them is hoist on that particular petard. Don’t you just love the smell of schadenfreude in the morning?

By: Schrodinger's Dog

Schrodinger's Dog — Thu, 01 Mar 2012 02:58:15 +0000

Her comments her extremely unpleasant, and she may be crazy, but surely no libertarian can condone that she may be prosecuted simply for what she said.

By: Miv Tucker

Miv Tucker — Thu, 01 Mar 2012 00:34:28 +0000

More here, too:
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/944/fanatical_uk_lib_dem_jenny_tonge_joins_new_hate_fest_against_jewish_state

By: Mose Jefferson

Mose Jefferson — Wed, 29 Feb 2012 23:52:05 +0000

Sigivald, the moral argument which advocates Israel’s return to pre-’67 borders is based on the idea that it isn’t right to take territory from another nation by war. Which is the most historically ignorant moral stance ever in the history of everything. I’m thinking we’d have to redraw much more than just Israel’s borders, if such were our moral stance. Unless we only hated jews, in which case Israel’s borders are all we’d fuss about.

By: CountingCats

CountingCats — Wed, 29 Feb 2012 22:28:01 +0000

How is what she said here any different to her past behaviour?

Sounds like her historically standard approach to me.