Libertarians gaining ground

[Mitch in MI]

One advantage of the Republicrats giving us the two worst choices in recent history is that the Libertarians are starting to get media attention. Remember, a non-Republicrat was elected governor of Minnesota not too long ago.
http://www.staugustine.com/stories/080604/new_2493365.shtml

(I say the this year's picks are the worst because in 1988 Bush I was slightly better than Bush II, and Dukakis was lots better than Kerry. Even Al Gore is better than Kerry.)

[michbob]

Not to sound disrespectful, but you seriously can't believe that the Libertarians have any chance of ever winning the White House.  Don't get me wrong, I like the Libertarian stand on a lot of issues, but getting one elected in THE BIG ONE?

Even if a Lib were elected, how much would he/she get done?  Congress would feel no need to do anything pushed for by a third party candidate.  Yes, it's sad but true.

As has been said before, a vote not for W is a vote for Kerry.  Many people have said that there is no difference between W and Kerry, or that W is a "just as bad".  If Kerry is elected prez, I think they'll find out just how wrong they are.....

Imagine this:  A waaaaay left-wing Kerry is elected Prez, supported in every action by the left-wing media and Hollywood, in addition to all of his ultra-wealthy leftist money-men.  What do you think would happen to individual civil liberties then?  

Don't kid yourself:  a vote for anyone besides W is a vote FOR Kerry.

Sincerely,
Michbob

PS:  I live here in Michigan, too.  Being a straight, white, Catholic, moderate, non-convict male who works for a living and just wants to be left alone makes me an "enemy" of the wackos who've taken over the Democratic Party.  How did that happen???

I think we might be doomed....

[tuck789]

Ask yourself if this quote sounds similar to what is happening in America. It is the agenda of the American Liberals.

It might surprise you who said the following quote.

"Corrupt the young, get them away from religion. Get them interested in sex. Make them superficial, and destroy their ruggedness. Get control of all means of publicity, and thereby get the peoples' mind off their government by focusing their attention on athletics, sexy books and plays, and other trivialities. Divide the people into hostile groups by constantly harping on controversial matters of no importance."
--Vladimir Ilich Lenin





If you are not familiar with Lenin, here is a brief overview

 Vladimir Ilich Lenin founder of the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks), inspirer and leader of the Bolshevik Revolution (1917), and the architect, builder, and first head (1917–24) of the Soviet state. He was the founder of the organization known as Comintern (Communist International) and the posthumous source of “Leninism, …

[ironglow]

The biggest thing Libertarians can do politically, is to hand the White house to the Dumacrats...

    Like cutting one's own throat, but some of them insist on doing it......

[Major]

Like michbob said… “Even if a Libertarian were elected, how much would he/she get done? Congress would feel no need to do anything pushed for by a third party candidate.

We need to start cleaning up in the House and Senate first if we want anything to change.

In the mean time, as a gun owner, Kerry scares the "Stuff" out of me so I will stick with the leader we have now.

[Mitch in MI]

Will a Libertarian win the presidency this year? No.

Will one ever win? Not until we start voting for them.

If one did win, with Republicrats in full control of Congress, what would happen? Every godforsaken unconstitutional bill passed by Congress would be vetoed, and a lot of Executive Orders would be issued.

I wouldn't vote for GW Bush again if he held a gun to my head.

If the Republicrat Party selected Stalin and Hitler, are you guys telling me you'd vote for Hitler before you'd vote Libertarian?

[FWiedner]

Even if a Lib were elected, how much would he/she get done? Congress would feel no need to do anything pushed for by a third party candidate. Yes, it's sad but true.

This attitude is why nothing gets done.

We as a people, or as a constituency, cannot put a person in office and then just sit back expecting them to carry "the ball" to victory.

The tactic would be to put your hero in office and then FORCE your congress critter to be your representative and NOT the free-loading agent of the state that he/she may currently be.

MAKE your representatives represent you.  Write them letters.  Visit them.  Write them letters AND visit them.  Show them that if they don't do the job that they were hired to "The Boss" WILL VISIT.  They can be "got to".

It's time to stop blaming the condition of our country on the boobs that we ourselves put into office.

It doesn't matter what the politicians want.  It doesn't matter what their plans and agendas may be.  If they won't cooperate, RECALL them, fire their asses, and put someone in the office that will do the job that they were hired to do.

If a representative of government will not accede to the will of the people, he needs to be GONE or IN JAIL.

[ironglow]

C'mon Mitch...
   
   Can't recall having ever seen a bigger "straw man"...

  "The Republicrats elected Hitler and Stalin"....and WE would rather vote for Hitler than a libertarian....

   Let's be realistic....Hitler is too long a reach for even a Liberal...

 First...Most of us Lib and Conserv, freely admit that there is NO Hitler in American politics...
   
   Mitch...at least admit that, or there is no discussion about it..

    Sure, if there were a Hitler...that would be an easy one to knock down /....but your premise being extremely faulty, has no value...

         An old trick of the liberal , lying left...
 Set up a straw man., and then knock him down...

[FWiedner]

First...Most of us Lib and Conserv, freely admit that there is NO Hitler in American politics...

IG;

I am afraid that I must disagree.

Well..., you did say most of us.... :wink:

[michbob]

Here in Michigan, those of us up north are railroaded into being represented by whomever the large population centers downstate want.  Those urban areas want their pity and their welfare and more votes are often cast than there are registered voters.

How do we change that???  Civil war?  Not likely.  You say we have to change.  How?  I do my part.  I vote.  I recruit others to get out and vote.  I contribute money.  I contribute time.  I write letters to the editor.  There is only so much any one person can do, so don't dog me saying "attitudes like that are why nothin gets done".  Do you participate?

Michbob

PS:  If the system was full of Hitlers, you would already be in Auschwitz.

[FWiedner]

There is only so much any one person can do...

Do you participate?

PS: If the system was full of Hitlers, you would already be in Auschwitz.

If you'll note, the thrust of the suggested action is that we should not rely on "one person" to do all of the work, as that is the problem to begin with.

I'm sorry if you took my comments to be some sort of jab at you personally.  Wasn't intended.  Your comment just struck me as something upon which to hinge some relavant contribution to the conversation, even if it is just a bit of my own opinion.

Why would I suggest that others participate, and even suggest a positive course of action if I didn't do such things myself?  I assure you, Sir, I am not a hypocrite.

And again, my opinion, we don't need little getaways like Auchwitz or Buchenwald, because our government is intent upon turning the whole damned country into a "camp".

 :?

[ironglow]

Michbob;
     Wow; do I understand how you feel!!

    I live in a state called New York, that like Michigan, is ruled politically, by a bunch of liberal elites..

    If you will look at the  famous red/blue map when it is broken down to counties...you can see the reason for our frustration. Ten percent of the state *(geographically), rules over the other ninety percent!

    Still; to go so far as FW and Mitch in MI and say that someone in National office is the equivalent of Hitler or Stalin, is an utter distortion of facts. I jokingly, call our jr senator from NY "Hitlary", but I do not mean that LITERALLY.

   To Mitch in MI and FW.........

                 Hitler and Stalin both ran a complex system of death camps and had millions of their fellow citizens executed....
 
   Please name the national politician that is either in office or running for office that has done that... NAME THEM..or leave quietly, with a red face!

[Dali Llama]

I'm sorry if you took my comments to be some sort of jab at you personally.  Wasn't intended.  Your comment just struck me as something upon which to hinge some relavant contribution to the conversation, even if it is just a bit of my own opinion.

:-D Now that's a real hoot, say Dali Llama.   Dali say FWiedner not typically know for contributing merely "a bit" of his "own opinion" regarding anything.  :-D

[FWiedner]

Hitler and Stalin both ran a complex system of death camps and had millions of their fellow citizens executed....

Please name the national politician that is either in office or running for office that has done that... NAME THEM..or leave quietly, with a red face!

Give it time, IG.

Our nation is in the process of "turning the corner", and the blueprint for the paradise you describe is on the board.

We live in a nation where doors get kicked down by police in the middle of the night and innocent people get shot.  We live in a nation where innocent citizens going about their business get shot by law-enforcement agents, and there are no repecussions.  We live in a country where the government burns down churches with the congregation inside.  We live in a country where law enforcement shoots family pets for sport, shoots children in the back, and hires skilled marksmen to murder young mothers.

We live in a nation where free-speech is outlawed during the 60-days before a primary election.  We live in a nation where owning a gun and carrying it in public draws the suspicion and ire of the law.  We live in a nation where the government has open access to your medical, financial, and academic records.  We live in a nation where law enforcement can enter the premises of your home at any time without so much as a warrant.  We live in a nation where private property owners are killed by government agents, their property seized, impounded, and then reallocated to more deserving political entities.

We live in a nation where the primary federal investigative agency brands any citizen who dares claim the protection of the law of the land as a terrorist.

Why would anyone have to build a camp to kill the innocent?

It's just as easy to shoot them in the streets, defame their character in the media, and then move on to the next mark.

[Mikey]

Folks - I thought there was a major difference between the liberals and the libertarians.  I understood that the libertarians advocated for a return to the original constitutional precepts, not the current interpretations by liberals and dumbocrats.  

I have also understood that they would like to establish their own 'free-state' in the middle of the southwest.  The intent is to garnish enough local political power and votes to accomplish that, with the end result being a state constitution that reads like the US Constitution's original amendments.  

Now I believe that imparts a major difference twixt the liberals and the libertarians.  When one group says that if you have the right to won a gun there should not be any restrictions and the other groups says you don't have that right and it should be restricted to law enforcement/military, you have the cruxt of the matter in full view.  Mikey.

[Dali Llama]

We live in a nation where free-speech is outlawed during the 60-days before a primary election.  

Of what do FWiedner be speaking, inquire Dali Llama? :?  :?  :?

[FWiedner]

We live in a nation where free-speech is outlawed during the 60-days before a primary election.  

Of what do FWiedner be speaking, inquire Dali Llama? :?  :?  :?

Isn't one of the talking-points of McCain-Feingold the mandate that negative candidate specific information cannot be publicly presented or broadcast by any other than "approved" media sources for the 60-days preceding a national or primary election?

Only "authorized" media can deliver candidate specific political information?

I read where Predsident Bush just last evening called for pulling all independent television ads pertaining to the presidential campaign off the air.

[michbob]

Well, I see this whole topic is pointless.  If anyone could tell me how to get Carl Levin or Debbie Stabenow to do what I want them to do, let me know.  Otherwise, I'll be hanging out with the aliens the government has captured and is concealing at Hanger 18 in Area 51.  There's much less hot air.

See ya, Michbob. :roll:

[Dali Llama]

I'll be hanging out with the aliens the government has captured and is concealing at Hanger 18 in Area 51.  There's much less hot air.

:roll:      

[Mitch in MI]

What I'm saying is that some people think they must vote for the guy they think will win, no matter who he is. I'm trying to find out just how distasteful the two media-sponsored candidates have to be before the voters would actually refuse to vote for them. When a criminal like Bush has perjured his oath of office for four years, I can't support him for paying lip service to the 2nd Ammendment while wiping his butt with the rest of the document.

In last week's primary, the candidates for the 7th Congressional district in MI included six Rs and three Ds. The Ds stand no chance in this district, so there were six who stood a chance. The six included one socialist, and five varying degrees of moderate to conservative candidates. None of the so-called conservatives would step out of the race to improve the chances for their idealogy. The polls told us that only the incumbent's son and the socialist stood a chance, and any other vote would be a waste. The most conservative candidate was given zero chance. I voted against my conscience and for the son-of-crooked-but-mostly-conservative incumbent.
Can you imagine how I felt when I was watching the evening news and saw the socialist and my chosen (but not voted-for) candidate running neck and neck with 26% each?
In the end, Socialist beat Son-of-Smith, with Constitution-lover in a close third place. I can't help but think that Constitution-lover would have won if it weren't for fools like me who thought we were picking the winner in a horse race instead of choosing the winner in an election.

[ironglow]

Mitch;
   One problem with your communication is that you're not specific enough.
  You accuse Pres. Bush of perjuring his office for 4 years; how so?
  If you were specific, instead of throwing around words like "perjured" "lied" etc., one may pay heed and agree or disagree with you.
  I for one, see no way in which the Pres. perjured himself or his office, so you have to show me..
 
  As far as the race where there were "moderates" and "conservatives", your picture of these two terms could be , and probably is , very different from mine.
  We have folks on this forum that proclaim themselves as the "real' conservatives...while showing hostility for the faith that the founders of this great republic endorsed from the beginning.
  Some of these same folks show a special tolerance for such perversions that would have made our forefathers shudder, reveling in words and terms that those great men would not even use in "polite company".

   Ergo! There are some who proclaim themselves as the " real" conservatives; all the while they are endorsing Liberal, avant garde belief systems....and so many of us are a bit wary...

[Mitch in MI]

1. You accuse Pres. Bush of perjuring his office for 4 years; how so?

2. As far as the race where there were "moderates" and "conservatives", your picture of these two terms could be , and probably is , very different from mine.

3.  Ergo! There are some who proclaim themselves as the " real" conservatives; all the while they are endorsing Liberal, avant garde belief systems....and so many of us are a bit wary...

Iron:
1. Either you believe as I do or you don't. You must accept the fact that if I believe GWB should be tried for treason and hung by the neck in Washington Square, I should not vote for him again. I'm referring to the many violations of our privacy and free speech over the last three years, the fact that he is prosecuting 2nd ammendment cases far more vigorously than Clinton did, all the while claiming that the 2nd guarantees an individual right and no law ever passed is in violation of that supposed right. But the #1 reason why Bush and Ashcroft deserve to be tried, convicted, and publically executed for willful violation of the US Constitution is their belief that they can kidnap free citizens and hold them in gulags indefinitely, without even charging them with crimes. We've fought wars to keep that from happening in other countries, GWB did it here.

2. The players here:
John ("Joe") Schwarz-Former state senator, environmental group spent its own money printing and mailing multiple flyers to every house in the district calling him a "moderate" (if www.lcv.org thinks he's moderate, he must be left of Kerry), he is against concealed carry, for bans on guns that even look like militia weapons, for government involvement in private firearms transfers, for abortion, for socialized medicine & civil unions for homosexuals, John Mclain's Michigan campaign director, do I have your permission to call him a Socialist?

Brad Smith-never held any office, but strong verbal support for 2A and against pork barrel spending. I voted for him out of fear that Schwarz would win.

Tim Walberg-Baptist minister, former state rep, strong legislative record for 2A and against abortion & government growth. Although my vote made no difference, I wish I'd supported him.

3. John Schwarz, John Mclain, other various RINOs, is that who your are talking about?

[ironglow]

Mitch;
 Still trying to gather info from your ramblings;
  Your "violations of free speech" apparently refer to the computer taps that have put some terrorists behind bars and prevented, we don't know how many, repeats of 9/11..

   The refusal to veto "campaign reform" measures, I didn't agree with either...but of course, most of the reps in the house and senate didn't  vote to stop it either.

   Putting citizens in jail without trial...if you're referring to those Wahabist/jihadist, muslim fundamentalists that have plenty of terrorist sympathies/tendancies...I would rather they were in jail, rather that out cooking up fertalizer bombs ..or worse..

   Is it better that some terrorists lose some temporary roaming/arming  privileges or is it better that perhaps thousands or hundreds of thousands of innocent Americans lose their lives?

  As far as your point #2...when you make those accusations about in favor of gun control, abortion, civil unions and socialized medicine...lets make it clear, you apparently were referring to that minor politician near you named John Schwarz.

   I believe that it is a far reach and somehow distorted to imply that Schwarz's views are held by the President.....please explain the linkage..
 
    You can call Schwarz a socialist all you like as far as I am concerned; just don't assume that Schwarz's views match or even resemble the Presidents!
   You have delved into your local elections and somehow seem to have confused state politicians with the federal administration...?


    I think it only fair to point out that all the things you seem concerned most over...freedom of speech, freedom of religion, right to keep and bear arms and the pro-life stance...have already been completely "sold out" by the democrats.
 
   The most change you can effect by voting for a no-win Libertarian candidate...is to help put the Democrats back into the White House.

   If you insist on going your stubborn way....your vcote could be the one that puts Kerry in the oval office!

   Then again...could it be that secretly, he's the one you want there....

[Mitch in MI]

1.   Putting citizens in jail without trial...if you're referring to those Wahabist/jihadist, muslim fundamentalists that have plenty of terrorist sympathies/tendancies...I would rather they were in jail, rather that out cooking up fertalizer bombs ..or worse..
Is it better that some terrorists lose some temporary roaming/arming  privileges or is it better that perhaps thousands or hundreds of thousands of innocent Americans lose their lives?

----And what evidence has ever seen the light of day which shows that any of these people had any links to terrorism?
Would you feel the same way if they decided to drop you in a hole for a couple of years?


lets make it clear, you apparently were referring to that minor politician near you named John Schwarz.

----I though I stated that explicitly.


   I believe that it is a far reach and somehow distorted to imply that Schwarz's views are held by the President.....please explain the linkage..

----It must be only in your head. I simply mentioned that I made the mistake of voting against my conscience because I thought "my guy" was clearly out of the race when it turned out he was not.

    You can call Schwarz a socialist all you like as far as I am concerned; just don't assume that Schwarz's views match or even resemble the Presidents!

-----But they sure do match ex-Presidential candidate McLain. What are the voters in Arizona thinking, anyway?

   If you insist on going your stubborn way....your vcote could be the one that puts Kerry in the oval office!

----I'm not voting for that ass. It's the people (both dead and living) who vote for him who will put him in office.

   Then again...could it be that secretly, he's the one you want there....

----Smile when you say that, pardner. But seriously, if we keep voting for major party politicians who lie to us every chance they get, we don't have any right to complain that all elected offices are held by scum who only want to increase their power at our expense.

[ironglow]

Mitch;
   We may be on the same page...but in differing degrees...

  Lets look at it this way...neither major presidential candidate or political party is completely correct...and I am not a member of either major party.
  I am a Conservative party committeeman in my county...

   Personally, I view Geo Bush and the Reps to be perhaps 85-87% correct, while I see the Democrats as perhaps 7-8% correct..throw in the two "Johns" and that percentage drops to 3-4% correct..

  Right now we are engaged in a third world war with an implacable enemy that could conceiveably,destroy civilization as we know it..

West Europe isn't going to help, because they are afraid of the large Muslim populations they have "imported" into their homelands.

   We don't need great leadership down the road...we need it now!

  If my Conservatives ran a presidential candidate...I wouldn't vote for him/her..

  If I voted for a Conservative candidate (even though he couldn't win), I would not only be throwing my vote away...I would also be depriving W of a vote...thus giving Kerry an extra vote.

   Although I agree with the Libertarians on some things (free enterprise etc), I never could be one...for the following reasons;

  A) I don't believe in the complete free-flow of mind bending, body destroying drugs.

 B) I would like a smaller govt., but not NO govt. Govt has some tasks that noone else can do..defense, interstate hwys., FAA,  certain standards of quality and measurement.

 C) I would like a basically moral nation, not an amoral one..

 D) Perhaps I am biased, but I view true Libertarianism as being the next thing to anarchy..they both do not want morals, laws, rules, standards, the war on drugs etc, etc.

   Where am I wrong about Libertarians?

 BTW; I doubt there are many on this board that do as you say..."vote for someone just because they think that person will win"..no; not these guys...