Be Libertarian for just one election

[flacaltenn]

How long are you willing to use that excuse to vote for evil?

"This time we just have to get rid of the democrat, next time we'll get someone good". Its the same excuse every time.

Here's some reasoning I'd like to see Rabbi take issue with..

If it is at the point where I cannot trust 49% of my fellow citizens to go the polls and NOT VOTE for a party that will DESTROY this country --- the game is over. It's time to give them the rope to hang themselves. It's the fastest way to recovery. MORE TAXES. MORE useless Green Jobs. MORE starving SS with Payroll Tax deducitons. MORE Whiner and Beggars. VIVA la Revolution!!!!

I've GOT to be able to trust that we as a WHOLE are giving informed consent. I don't want to live in a represent.. Democracy with a bunch of morons.. That's a prescription for disaster.

I'lll wait for the INCOMING flaming or the NSA to claim sedition..

I dont' trust any of my fellow citizens. A person is a fool if he thinks it comes down to trusting other people. I dont vote to demonstrate trust. I vote to get people elected.I am not ready to throw in the towel on America. This is a very great country and while we have some problems right now (and always have) these can largely be over come, little by little.
This is the problem with the narcos: they think merely electing Ron Paul will bring the coming of the messiah. The president is not a dictators. He is among the most constrained power holders on the planet. And the Founders designed it that way. So while he can exert substantial influence on the system, he cannot change the system. Or if so only incrementally.
I'll vote for incremental good over incremental evil any day.

You've stressed that "I vote to get people elected" repeatedly.. I DON'T vote Libertarian if the candidate is a narco-Randian.. But in this case --- MY candidate is just as qualified as YOUR candidate.

Want to compare 8 yrs of governing New Mexico to 8 yrs of governing Massachusetts?

Want to analyze their "conservative" credentials based on ACTION and see which one is not a "phoney" small government fiscal Conservative? No you don't.. Gary Johnson has a clearly better record as governor than Romney.

I'm working with the LP to simply get on the ballot in all 50 states. Costs us almost all of our time and resources to jump the barriers to the ballot. Think all those $Millions and hours are NOT "to get people elected"??????

 

[Pheonixops]

GARY JOHNSON Be Libertarian With Me - YouTube!

Gary Johnson is the best of the three candidates running right now.

 

[flacaltenn]

Libertarian Party rips Rand Paul - POLITICO.com

Pretty funny, given that the LP ran Bob Barr for President in 2008 and he endorsed Newt Gingrich during the primary. Also funny given that Wayne Allyn Root told people Romney was the only choice.

Wayne Allyn Root Tells Radio Audience to Vote for Romney | Independent Political Report

You had me thinkin' there that Wayne was throwing a classic Pure Libertarian hissy-fit..

But if you scrolled down thru the blog (a page sponsored thru Wayne Roots' radio show) you'll find this...

14 Wayne Root // Apr 6, 2012 at 4:56 pm

Wow I just saw this. Seems certain LP people are as bad as the two parties in grabbing a sentence out of context. And leaving out the meat of the interview. That is not what I said. And you know thats not what I said.

I said in a perfect world I’d like to see Gary Johnson elected President, he’d be the best choice out there…I also said several times on the call that Mitt Romney is a big spending, big government Northeast liberal…that he will make very little difference because of this…

And that the difference between Obama and Romney…

Is that Romney will slow down our path off a cliff just a bit…and Obama will take us off the cliff in a matter of minutes.

But neither is good enough to save USA from long decline towards mediocrity.

And that Romney’s victory will most probably prove that neither party can change our problems enough to save the economy…so hopefully it will lead to a serious Libertarian third party threat in 2016…of which I plan to be the Presidential candidate.

That’s what I said. It’s on tape. Sorry folks but you can’t take things out of context.

And by the way I do 20 to 30 interviews per week…and write 2 to 3 commentaries per week reaching tens of millions…and they all support FISCAL CONSERVATISM…which is Libertarianism.

All of them state loudly and clearly that Obama must be stopped for the economy to survive. Obama re-election would be death of U.S. economy- including all of my businesses. My opinion has never changed in the slightest.

So first things first…I have endorsed one person – Gary Johnson.


And I state always that the best choice is LP…but if the LP candidate isn’t going to win…then picking someone who isn’t an outright Marxist is certainly better than a Marxist bent on the destruction of businessmen like me…and the redistribution of our income…is a step in the right direction until we can get a true Tea Party Libertarian elected.

And then I always state that a GOP’s victory will probably prove that the GOP- as usual- will not cut govt or spending or taxes as much as needed…leaving door open for LP in 2016.

Same story I tell everywhere. Sorry folks, no news story here.

I am a Libertarian who talks fiscal conservatism and economic freedom… and makes friends with GOP, conservatives, Tea Partiers, right center independents and blue dog Democrats (who are fiscally conservative and support lower taxes).

And this is exactly how it’s done.

And it works. Which could be why host Bill Cunningham stated on the show that he wishes I was running for President…he’d do everything in his power to support me. Well since he knows I’d be running as a Libertarian. I’d say I did a great job.

So until I see any of you convincing famous talk show hosts of either party, with huge followings, to announce on air they’d support a Libertarian…I think I’ll be very happy with what I’ve achieved…and keep doing what I’m doing.

Best,

Wayne

My respect for ALL our candidates keeps going up... I think we may have outgrown the "debate club" cultist stage..

 

[flacaltenn]

Hope I didn't scare people away.. But I think the LP could use this slogan to it's advantage this year..

Want to compare 8 yrs of governing New Mexico to 8 yrs of governing Massachusetts?

It seems to work as an effective narco-libertarian slayer repellent..

 

[The Rabbi]

Here's some reasoning I'd like to see Rabbi take issue with..

If it is at the point where I cannot trust 49% of my fellow citizens to go the polls and NOT VOTE for a party that will DESTROY this country --- the game is over. It's time to give them the rope to hang themselves. It's the fastest way to recovery. MORE TAXES. MORE useless Green Jobs. MORE starving SS with Payroll Tax deducitons. MORE Whiner and Beggars. VIVA la Revolution!!!!

I've GOT to be able to trust that we as a WHOLE are giving informed consent. I don't want to live in a represent.. Democracy with a bunch of morons.. That's a prescription for disaster.

I'lll wait for the INCOMING flaming or the NSA to claim sedition..

I dont' trust any of my fellow citizens. A person is a fool if he thinks it comes down to trusting other people. I dont vote to demonstrate trust. I vote to get people elected.I am not ready to throw in the towel on America. This is a very great country and while we have some problems right now (and always have) these can largely be over come, little by little.
This is the problem with the narcos: they think merely electing Ron Paul will bring the coming of the messiah. The president is not a dictators. He is among the most constrained power holders on the planet. And the Founders designed it that way. So while he can exert substantial influence on the system, he cannot change the system. Or if so only incrementally.
I'll vote for incremental good over incremental evil any day.

You've stressed that "I vote to get people elected" repeatedly.. I DON'T vote Libertarian if the candidate is a narco-Randian.. But in this case --- MY candidate is just as qualified as YOUR candidate.

Want to compare 8 yrs of governing New Mexico to 8 yrs of governing Massachusetts?

Want to analyze their "conservative" credentials based on ACTION and see which one is not a "phoney" small government fiscal Conservative? No you don't.. Gary Johnson has a clearly better record as governor than Romney.

I'm working with the LP to simply get on the ballot in all 50 states. Costs us almost all of our time and resources to jump the barriers to the ballot. Think all those $Millions and hours are NOT "to get people elected"??????

By that measure Romney is far the better candidate. Did New Mexico ever elect a bunch of bumblers like Ted Kennedy, Barney Frank, John Kerry, or Mike Dukakis? No. Mass did though. Which tells you what Romney had to work with.
Is ROmney a conservative? No. NEver claimed he was.
But Romney has something Gary Johnson doesn't have: The nomination of the GOP (coming) and the possibility of winning. And if the GOP is so awful why did Johnson run in their primaries?

 

[Samson]

I dont' trust any of my fellow citizens. A person is a fool if he thinks it comes down to trusting other people. I dont vote to demonstrate trust. I vote to get people elected.I am not ready to throw in the towel on America. This is a very great country and while we have some problems right now (and always have) these can largely be over come, little by little.
This is the problem with the narcos: they think merely electing Ron Paul will bring the coming of the messiah. The president is not a dictators. He is among the most constrained power holders on the planet. And the Founders designed it that way. So while he can exert substantial influence on the system, he cannot change the system. Or if so only incrementally.
I'll vote for incremental good over incremental evil any day.

You've stressed that "I vote to get people elected" repeatedly.. I DON'T vote Libertarian if the candidate is a narco-Randian.. But in this case --- MY candidate is just as qualified as YOUR candidate.

Want to compare 8 yrs of governing New Mexico to 8 yrs of governing Massachusetts?

Want to analyze their "conservative" credentials based on ACTION and see which one is not a "phoney" small government fiscal Conservative? No you don't.. Gary Johnson has a clearly better record as governor than Romney.

I'm working with the LP to simply get on the ballot in all 50 states. Costs us almost all of our time and resources to jump the barriers to the ballot. Think all those $Millions and hours are NOT "to get people elected"??????

By that measure Romney is far the better candidate. Did New Mexico ever elect a bunch of bumblers like Ted Kennedy, Barney Frank, John Kerry, or Mike Dukakis? No. Mass did though. Which tells you what Romney had to work with.
Is ROmney a conservative? No. NEver claimed he was.
But Romney has something Gary Johnson doesn't have: The nomination of the GOP (coming) and the possibility of winning. And if the GOP is so awful why did Johnson run in their primaries?

How about the GOP adopts a few libertarian policies, then asks libertarians to vote for them?

Until this happens the Dem-lite Party can go fuck themselves

 

[Paulie]

I'm a libertarian every election, and I'll continue that by not voting for Gary Johnson.

Are you writing Ron in?

 

[flacaltenn]

I dont' trust any of my fellow citizens. A person is a fool if he thinks it comes down to trusting other people. I dont vote to demonstrate trust. I vote to get people elected.I am not ready to throw in the towel on America. This is a very great country and while we have some problems right now (and always have) these can largely be over come, little by little.
This is the problem with the narcos: they think merely electing Ron Paul will bring the coming of the messiah. The president is not a dictators. He is among the most constrained power holders on the planet. And the Founders designed it that way. So while he can exert substantial influence on the system, he cannot change the system. Or if so only incrementally.
I'll vote for incremental good over incremental evil any day.

You've stressed that "I vote to get people elected" repeatedly.. I DON'T vote Libertarian if the candidate is a narco-Randian.. But in this case --- MY candidate is just as qualified as YOUR candidate.

Want to compare 8 yrs of governing New Mexico to 8 yrs of governing Massachusetts?

Want to analyze their "conservative" credentials based on ACTION and see which one is not a "phoney" small government fiscal Conservative? No you don't.. Gary Johnson has a clearly better record as governor than Romney.

I'm working with the LP to simply get on the ballot in all 50 states. Costs us almost all of our time and resources to jump the barriers to the ballot. Think all those $Millions and hours are NOT "to get people elected"??????

By that measure Romney is far the better candidate. Did New Mexico ever elect a bunch of bumblers like Ted Kennedy, Barney Frank, John Kerry, or Mike Dukakis? No. Mass did though. Which tells you what Romney had to work with.

No -- tells you that the folks in New Mexico have WAAAAY higher standards...

Is ROmney a conservative? No. NEver claimed he was.
But Romney has something Gary Johnson doesn't have: The nomination of the GOP (coming) and the possibility of winning. And if the GOP is so awful why did Johnson run in their primaries?

The GOP stabbed him in the back. Took him out of the debates before he could get momentum. They sure made allowances for THEIR KIND OF GUY -- like the drug adled bumbler from Texas. But too many Rabbis or something in the GOP. They didn't like him at all. BECAUSE he had a better record in New Mexico for the Conservative cause than Romney did in Mass??? I think so...

 

[The Rabbi]

No, because Johnson is a bumbler who failed on the national circuit and can't get over it. It would be like John Huntman, a better candidate btw, becoming the Green Party candidate.

 

[The Rabbi]

You've stressed that "I vote to get people elected" repeatedly.. I DON'T vote Libertarian if the candidate is a narco-Randian.. But in this case --- MY candidate is just as qualified as YOUR candidate.

Want to compare 8 yrs of governing New Mexico to 8 yrs of governing Massachusetts?

Want to analyze their "conservative" credentials based on ACTION and see which one is not a "phoney" small government fiscal Conservative? No you don't.. Gary Johnson has a clearly better record as governor than Romney.

I'm working with the LP to simply get on the ballot in all 50 states. Costs us almost all of our time and resources to jump the barriers to the ballot. Think all those $Millions and hours are NOT "to get people elected"??????

By that measure Romney is far the better candidate. Did New Mexico ever elect a bunch of bumblers like Ted Kennedy, Barney Frank, John Kerry, or Mike Dukakis? No. Mass did though. Which tells you what Romney had to work with.
Is ROmney a conservative? No. NEver claimed he was.
But Romney has something Gary Johnson doesn't have: The nomination of the GOP (coming) and the possibility of winning. And if the GOP is so awful why did Johnson run in their primaries?

How about the GOP adopts a few libertarian policies, then asks libertarians to vote for them?

Until this happens the Dem-lite Party can go fuck themselves

Don't let the door hit you where the Lord split you.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I'm a libertarian every election, and I'll continue that by not voting for Gary Johnson.

Are you writing Ron in?

That's an option, right now I'm leaning towards not voting at all. If there were another race or issue I was interested in voting on then I would write him in just because I'd already be there. Unfortunately the Ohio Senate race is a joke between Brown and Mandel, and my Congressional race is possibly worse. Since there's nothing else I want to vote on, however, do I want to waste my time just to go write in Ron Paul when it's not even going to count? It'll probably depend on how I feel that day, honestly.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

I dont' trust any of my fellow citizens. A person is a fool if he thinks it comes down to trusting other people. I dont vote to demonstrate trust. I vote to get people elected.I am not ready to throw in the towel on America. This is a very great country and while we have some problems right now (and always have) these can largely be over come, little by little.
This is the problem with the narcos: they think merely electing Ron Paul will bring the coming of the messiah. The president is not a dictators. He is among the most constrained power holders on the planet. And the Founders designed it that way. So while he can exert substantial influence on the system, he cannot change the system. Or if so only incrementally.
I'll vote for incremental good over incremental evil any day.

You've stressed that "I vote to get people elected" repeatedly.. I DON'T vote Libertarian if the candidate is a narco-Randian.. But in this case --- MY candidate is just as qualified as YOUR candidate.

Want to compare 8 yrs of governing New Mexico to 8 yrs of governing Massachusetts?

Want to analyze their "conservative" credentials based on ACTION and see which one is not a "phoney" small government fiscal Conservative? No you don't.. Gary Johnson has a clearly better record as governor than Romney.

I'm working with the LP to simply get on the ballot in all 50 states. Costs us almost all of our time and resources to jump the barriers to the ballot. Think all those $Millions and hours are NOT "to get people elected"??????

By that measure Romney is far the better candidate. Did New Mexico ever elect a bunch of bumblers like Ted Kennedy, Barney Frank, John Kerry, or Mike Dukakis? No. Mass did though. Which tells you what Romney had to work with.
Is ROmney a conservative? No. NEver claimed he was.
But Romney has something Gary Johnson doesn't have: The nomination of the GOP (coming) and the possibility of winning. And if the GOP is so awful why did Johnson run in their primaries?

Who cares about whether he's a Conservative...is Romney a robot? The answer is, "Yes."

And the other answer is your avatar is lame.

 

[Paulie]

I'm a libertarian every election, and I'll continue that by not voting for Gary Johnson.

Are you writing Ron in?

That's an option, right now I'm leaning towards not voting at all. If there were another race or issue I was interested in voting on then I would write him in just because I'd already be there. Unfortunately the Ohio Senate race is a joke between Brown and Mandel, and my Congressional race is possibly worse. Since there's nothing else I want to vote on, however, do I want to waste my time just to go write in Ron Paul when it's not even going to count? It'll probably depend on how I feel that day, honestly.

I hear you. We've had some Ron Paul Republicans running for congress in my district the last few elections (which is why I stay registered Republican) but I'm not exactly sure what we have this time around.

I may vote Johnson just to add to the numbers against the 2 parties. I would never have done that with Barr, but I can stomach a Johnson vote.

 

[Paulie]

By that measure Romney is far the better candidate. Did New Mexico ever elect a bunch of bumblers like Ted Kennedy, Barney Frank, John Kerry, or Mike Dukakis? No. Mass did though. Which tells you what Romney had to work with.
Is ROmney a conservative? No. NEver claimed he was.
But Romney has something Gary Johnson doesn't have: The nomination of the GOP (coming) and the possibility of winning. And if the GOP is so awful why did Johnson run in their primaries?

How about the GOP adopts a few libertarian policies, then asks libertarians to vote for them?

Until this happens the Dem-lite Party can go fuck themselves

Don't let the door hit you where the Lord split you.

Yeah because you can really afford to be losing voters these days

 

[jillian]

GARY JOHNSON Be Libertarian With Me - YouTube!

you're not a libertarian if you think it's ok for government to interfere with my right to dominion over my own body.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Are you writing Ron in?

That's an option, right now I'm leaning towards not voting at all. If there were another race or issue I was interested in voting on then I would write him in just because I'd already be there. Unfortunately the Ohio Senate race is a joke between Brown and Mandel, and my Congressional race is possibly worse. Since there's nothing else I want to vote on, however, do I want to waste my time just to go write in Ron Paul when it's not even going to count? It'll probably depend on how I feel that day, honestly.

I hear you. We've had some Ron Paul Republicans running for congress in my district the last few elections (which is why I stay registered Republican) but I'm not exactly sure what we have this time around.

I may vote Johnson just to add to the numbers against the 2 parties. I would never have done that with Barr, but I can stomach a Johnson vote.

Yeah, I think Johnson is better than Barr, but I can't bring myself to do it. Especially after that interview with Wenzel. I voted for Barr in 2008, and I regret it.

I wish some Ron Paul Republicans would run in my district.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

GARY JOHNSON Be Libertarian With Me - YouTube!

you're not a libertarian if you think it's ok for government to interfere with my right to dominion over my own body.

Well Gary Johnson is pro-choice, but I might suggest that allowing libertarians to define libertarianism for ourselves is probably the wisest course.

 

[jillian]

GARY JOHNSON Be Libertarian With Me - YouTube!

you're not a libertarian if you think it's ok for government to interfere with my right to dominion over my own body.

Well Gary Johnson is pro-choice, but I might suggest that allowing libertarians to define libertarianism for ourselves is probably the wisest course.

the POINT of libertarianism is to leave people alone to make their own moral choices.

so no.. .you don't get to "RE-define" libertarianism to suit the religious right....

I also wasn't referring to Gary Johnson... I was referring to the pretend libertarians on this board.

 

[Paulie]

you're not a libertarian if you think it's ok for government to interfere with my right to dominion over my own body.

Well Gary Johnson is pro-choice, but I might suggest that allowing libertarians to define libertarianism for ourselves is probably the wisest course.

the POINT of libertarianism is to leave people alone to make their own moral choices.

As long as it doesn't interfere with someone else's rights.

Some of us believe that a baby in a womb, with a beating heart, 10 fingers and toes, and a face no less, has a right to life like the rest of us.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

you're not a libertarian if you think it's ok for government to interfere with my right to dominion over my own body.

Well Gary Johnson is pro-choice, but I might suggest that allowing libertarians to define libertarianism for ourselves is probably the wisest course.

the POINT of libertarianism is to leave people alone to make their own moral choices.

so no.. .you don't get to "RE-define" libertarianism to suit the religious right....

I also wasn't referring to Gary Johnson... I was referring to the pretend libertarians on this board.

That's not true at all. If my moral choice is to murder somebody, then no libertarian would say there should be no consequences because they ought to be free to make that choice. The point of libertarianism is the non-aggression axiom. Some people include that to mean that you can't aggress against a baby in the womb. There's absolutely nothing contradictory about being a pro-life libertarian.