Badnarik? Let's take a look.

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Jimmyeatworld, Aug 11, 2004.

  1. Jimmyeatworld
    Offline

    Jimmyeatworld Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    2,239
    Thanks Received:
    223
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Location:
    America
    Ratings:
    +223
    Okay, T, we're going to have to have a little fair play here. Let's take a look at your nutty dark horse Badnarik.

    I do keep an eye on some of the third parties, and in fact voted for Harry Browne in 2000. I assumed Gary Nolan was going to get the Libertarian nod and was quite surprised to hear that Badnarik got it. Apparently, so were a lot of Libertarians. He was virtually unknown within the party and, from what I've read, was nominated without most Libertarians knowing his views or his history.

    *Badnarik refused to file an income tax return for years. If someone doesn't like the IRS, fine by me, but you should still have to follow the law.

    *After moving to Texas from California, he refused to obtain a Texas drivers license because he didn't want to provide his social security number.

    *Badnarik proposed convicted felons serve the first month of their sentence in bed so their muscles would atrophy and they'd be less trouble for guards. Would he still say that if he faced felony arrest for refusing to file tax returns?

    *Badnarik said he would blow up the UN building on the eighth day of his administration. Oh, after giving the occupants a chance to evacuate. How nice.

    *He would require all 535 members of congress to sit through a one week session of his Constitution class so they would learn HIS interpretation of it. (sarcasim warning) Thank God we have Michael Badnarik to explain it to us.

    All of this was on his website, but convieniently taken off after his nomination.

    One of my big problems with the Libertarian party is the across the board drug legalization, which seems to stem from the belief that if you lift all the laws people will straighten up, fly right, and police themselves. Sorry, not going to happen.

    The Libertarian party is still interesting, but Badnarik is a little to loopy for my taste when choosing a president.
     
  2. 5stringJeff
    Offline

    5stringJeff Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    9,990
    Thanks Received:
    536
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Puyallup, WA
    Ratings:
    +540
    Blow up the UN building? Great... we've got Osama bin Laden running for the Libertarians!
     
  3. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Excellent, I went looking for some of that stuff. I heard him at the acceptance of the nomination-I heard him say he'd force congress to listen to him. This guy is not the one some of us had been hoping for.

    That's ok, there are more and more people taking a Libertarian viewpoint, with some sanity thrown in. It's a matter of time before it gets a foothold. But not with this bunch of humorless, isolationists, idealogues. :rolleyes:
     
  4. DKSuddeth
    Offline

    DKSuddeth Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,175
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Texas
    Ratings:
    +62
    How does one MAKE congress listen to you? :cuckoo:
     
  5. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Lock them in the House and drone on. I guess he hasn't heard of filabusters yet! :dev3:
     
  6. Jimmyeatworld
    Offline

    Jimmyeatworld Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    2,239
    Thanks Received:
    223
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Location:
    America
    Ratings:
    +223
    I think that's the biggest problem the Libertarian party has. They seem to seek out the person that appeals most to the extremes of their own party, then wonder why more people won't give them more consideration.

    The Libertarians have a lot of good, basic ideas that might appeal to a lot of people. My problem, and I think the problem of a lot of people, is when I look at some of the extreme views they have it makes me cringe.
     
  7. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    :beer:
     
  8. tpahl
    Offline

    tpahl Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Messages:
    662
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Cascadia
    Ratings:
    +3
    Yeah, and Rosa Parks should have moved to the back of the bus as she was told to.

    Is it not his right to not give them his SS number? According to the courts he is correct. He has been pulled over and arrested for not having a liscense a few times and gotten out of it based on his arguements reagarding not being required to give a SS number. I admire a man that stands up for what he beleives in even when it makes his own life more difficult.

    Have not heard this one. But I think his point is that right now prisons are a place where felons get stronger and learn more about crime. he might be going a little over the top in his 'solution', I agree.

    Yeah, any person that demolishs a building is equivalent to Osama. There is no difference that he would give everyone a week to evacuate the building. And besides this is obviously just hyperbole. His point was not that he is going to go around blowing up buildings but rather that he would not look to the UN for permission to do things and would in fact do everything he could to get the US out of the UN.

    You do not think that they need such a lesson? They have given up some powers that the constitution granted them (such as the power to declare war) Instead they basically gave this right to the president. They regularly pass bills that they are not authorized to do by the constitution, etc... A little lesson on the constitution would not hurt, that is for sure.

    That is not why the LP is for legalization of drugs. They are for legalization because as free individuals, the government has no right to decide what can and can not be put in our own bodies. Certainly not the federal government since it is most definitly not a power granted to them in the constitution.


    travis
     
  9. 5stringJeff
    Offline

    5stringJeff Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    9,990
    Thanks Received:
    536
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Puyallup, WA
    Ratings:
    +540
    So why didn't he say something akin to 'Get the US out of the UN and the UN out of the US'? It's a fairly well-known saying that gets the point across better than an analogy that, after 9/11, is a pretty idiotic thing to say.
     
  10. tpahl
    Offline

    tpahl Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Messages:
    662
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Cascadia
    Ratings:
    +3
    It is idiotic to suggest we tear down a building? Do you think that demolition of buildings stopped after 9/11? Just because someone is suggesting to blow up a building, why would you associate it with 9/11 when hundreds of buildings have been blown up since in a peaeful way? By stating that he is giving them a week to get out it is obvious that it should related to a demolition rather than a terrorist act.

    Travis
     

Share This Page