Consistent with my oath to support and defend the Constitution, I must oppose this nuclear deal. https://www.facebook.com/repjustinamash/posts/948120658560674 …
-
-
@justinamash No, there isn't. But avoiding war is libertarian. I the neocons are screeching about the deal, that bodes well for it. -
@LucyStag I don't support war, but libertarian representatives must operate within our constitutional system, too. Ends don't justify means. -
@justinamash Can I ask why you support sanctions? What's the constitutional justification for that? -
@LucyStag Constitution grants the legislative & executive branches of the fed govt broad powers in foreign affairs, including trade & war. -
@justinamash I suppose it does. This exchange is reminding me that I am not a constitutionalist, and why.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@justinamash@LucyStag Nothing inherently libertarian about making a deal, so support sanctions? I don't see the logic. -
@screwthestate@justinamash Because the deal is diplomacy instead of war, the deal is not necessarily libertarian, I think. - End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@justinamash@LucyStag And there's nothing libertarian about putting the Constitution above peace and liberty.#tlotThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@justinamash so are you against the deal because the US govt shouldn't be meddling in another countries affairs or other reasons?@LucyStagThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.