<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Who is a Libertarian?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://floridalibertarian.com/libertarian-philosophy/90/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://floridalibertarian.com/libertarian-philosophy/90/</link>
	<description>Freedom in the Sunshine State!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Aug 2010 03:17:24 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: seangalt</title>
		<link>http://floridalibertarian.com/libertarian-philosophy/90/comment-page-1/#comment-221</link>
		<dc:creator>seangalt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 14:45:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://floridalibertarian.com/libertarian-philosophy/90/#comment-221</guid>
		<description>Jim,

I just checked out the link you posted (his site) and let me ask you - what&#039;s libertarian about it?

He may have removed the part mentioned in the article above. I don&#039;t know what happened to it. I&#039;m not monitoring it.

But, he doesn&#039;t seem like a &quot;Libertarian&quot; to me. Maybe he&#039;s not registered as one, I do not know. But if he is, it&#039;s _another_ statist using the Libertarian label.

I am wondering when you will be as alarmed as I am.

As an example of what a libertarian might find wrong with him is this idea (from his blog) - that he &quot;can and will fix our broken government&quot;. 

What should libertarians find wrong about that statement? 

What about that statement should alarm them?

Read over his site and tell me what&#039;s libertarian about it or any of his &quot;solutions&quot;.

In addition, you might want to google this - matthew falconer “COPs” program</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jim,</p>
<p>I just checked out the link you posted (his site) and let me ask you &#8211; what&#8217;s libertarian about it?</p>
<p>He may have removed the part mentioned in the article above. I don&#8217;t know what happened to it. I&#8217;m not monitoring it.</p>
<p>But, he doesn&#8217;t seem like a &#8220;Libertarian&#8221; to me. Maybe he&#8217;s not registered as one, I do not know. But if he is, it&#8217;s _another_ statist using the Libertarian label.</p>
<p>I am wondering when you will be as alarmed as I am.</p>
<p>As an example of what a libertarian might find wrong with him is this idea (from his blog) &#8211; that he &#8220;can and will fix our broken government&#8221;. </p>
<p>What should libertarians find wrong about that statement? </p>
<p>What about that statement should alarm them?</p>
<p>Read over his site and tell me what&#8217;s libertarian about it or any of his &#8220;solutions&#8221;.</p>
<p>In addition, you might want to google this &#8211; matthew falconer “COPs” program</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jim kearney</title>
		<link>http://floridalibertarian.com/libertarian-philosophy/90/comment-page-1/#comment-220</link>
		<dc:creator>jim kearney</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 13:58:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://floridalibertarian.com/libertarian-philosophy/90/#comment-220</guid>
		<description>is this the ONLY thing wrong with this guy? 

I have not seen his website so I dont know for sure. I would venture to say that if he honestly believes what is posted here then the rest of his site is probably littered with more stuff just like it.

I went to his site and didn&#039;t find anything that so drastically pronounces what is said in the article you linked to. Maybe I just missed it. Visit his site and see for yourself, let me know where you find it. 

Go to http://www.matthewfalconer.com/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>is this the ONLY thing wrong with this guy? </p>
<p>I have not seen his website so I dont know for sure. I would venture to say that if he honestly believes what is posted here then the rest of his site is probably littered with more stuff just like it.</p>
<p>I went to his site and didn&#8217;t find anything that so drastically pronounces what is said in the article you linked to. Maybe I just missed it. Visit his site and see for yourself, let me know where you find it. </p>
<p>Go to <a href="http://www.matthewfalconer.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.matthewfalconer.com/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bruce judelson</title>
		<link>http://floridalibertarian.com/libertarian-philosophy/90/comment-page-1/#comment-188</link>
		<dc:creator>bruce judelson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2009 14:24:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://floridalibertarian.com/libertarian-philosophy/90/#comment-188</guid>
		<description>zero aggression would be a quantum improvement in life. the concepts inherent in man acting rationally (as espoused by rand) , or  following (at least some form) of the golden rule such --as do not do that which is hateful to you, to others,-- or even just basically following the 10 commandments, or for that matter our first 10 amendments would yield a society vastly improved over what we encounter these days.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>zero aggression would be a quantum improvement in life. the concepts inherent in man acting rationally (as espoused by rand) , or  following (at least some form) of the golden rule such &#8211;as do not do that which is hateful to you, to others,&#8211; or even just basically following the 10 commandments, or for that matter our first 10 amendments would yield a society vastly improved over what we encounter these days.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

