Chucktshoes

It is a shame we don't allow folks to be drawn and quartered anymore...

Ahh, I believe I misread your intent in the other thread as being a criticism of third party candidates in general in addition to that one in specific.

Watch out there TankerHC, that's Julie Borowski, the "Token Libertarian Girl". Listen to too much of what she's got to say and you'll find yourself defending the "spoiler" candidate. :lol:

I used more than a few drugs back in my younger years, I'm no worse for the wear from the experience. I know plenty of folks who can say the same. I also know quite a few who managed to completely screw up their lives (almost exclusively due to legal troubles) and some who ended up dying from drug use. Most folks who try drugs, including the big bad scary "hard" drugs don't become addicts and fiends. They use them recreationally and then move on to different things as they mature and have different priorities. Ultimately, the amount of harm drugs do or do not do to the individual has never been the root of my argument for legalization. It is a liberty and property rights issue for me. The article was posted as more of a food for thought and conversation starter. As Doug Stanhope puts it so well, if you don't own anything else, you own your own meat. If I truly do own my own meat, my body, then I should be at liberty to treat it however I want. If I want to treat my body excellently and never ingest anything harmful, eat well and exercise that is my right to make that choice. If I want to treat my body like a rental car and eat fast food, sit on my ass, drink to excess, smoke and even take drugs, that too should my right to take my choice.    As a society we didn't learn anything from alcohol prohibition apparently. We still seem to think that it is ok to trample on civil liberties, spend insane amounts of money on law enforcement and prisons and create a large black market that will guarantee the involvement of some of the most unsavory and violent people all just to tell a small minority of the population that they can't put something into their own body. It is just downright dumb. 

Bingo!

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobsullum/2013/11/04/everything-youve-heard-about-crack-and-meth-is-wrong/   This is a really great article that attacks the fear mongering and propaganda pushed by prohibitionists. The vast majority of the personal and societal ills related to drugs are directly caused by prohibition and the black markets created by it.

If he is truly for a mileage based tax, he needs some damn sense knocked into him. I couldn't vote for him. That crosses some big lines there.

That pandering piece of garbage unfortunately will be reelected as long as he runs. 

What's that saying that is so common around these parts? Oh yeah, "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes."

That is a manly beard.

Bracken has decided to throw his "Bracken Anthology" up in the free store as well. It is a collection of short fiction and nonfiction that covers multiple topics.    http://www.amazon.com/The-Bracken-Anthology-ebook/dp/B00A4SCLKK/ref=sr_1_5?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1383565461&sr=1-5&keywords=matthew+bracken

I thought the response was wholly appropriate. A ridiculous action deserves a ridiculous response. When people act or say something that is just plain stupid (like this motion by the ADA) it should be treated with the amount of contempt and dismissiveness that it deserves. To treat ridiculousness as reasonable and valid only makes it appear as if it really is reasonable and valid. I think that's how we have allowed the PC police to gain the power they have when we should have been treating them as the idiots they really are.

I always thought "screw" was a derogatory term for y'all. My stepdad retired after 34 years with TDOC. If you asked him what he did, he'd tell you that he was a prison guard at Fort Pillow. That's what they were called back when he started. His coworkers and his "boys" (the prisoners) all respected him for the way he treated all with respect and kindness. I think the term "Correctional Officer" was invented by some insecure jackass with a misplaced case of badge envy. Next time you get your PC panties in a bunch when someone calls you a prison guard, remember they are calling you that because that's what you do. You guard society from the inmates at the prison. We appreciate the job you do. It is different than that of a cop. Not easier, not less nor more valuable, so you don't have to try and compare yourself to one. It may not be the same job but it is appreciated just as much.

No third party will ever have a chance of winning if they never get your vote in the first place. Voting for a Republican or a Democrat at this point only reinforces the status quo and helps ensure that we do not change course. If you like the direction this country is moving, keep voting for the two major parties cause they are both leading is down the tubes.

I understood all of his points, and I can grasp the reality is that a D or an R is going to win the election barring some major shift in the thinking of the public at large. It still doesn't mean I can bring myself to vote for a shitbag like Romney just because he isn't Obama. I didn't see much of a difference between them then and I don't now. I mentioned that there are a few libertarian Republicans I could actually see myself voting for, but just a very few. You stand more libertarian, but can settle with and accept some of the Republicans, I get that. For me, the Libertarian Party is the group I can settle with and accept. Even they are more authoritarian statist than I would like.

I think the real disconnect occurs with the fact that we bring different presuppositional worldviews to the table. You, and most folks in general, view American politics through a Democrat vs Republican lens. I and others like me view it through a libertarian vs authoritarian lens with both the Republican and Democrats firmly in the authoritarian camp. I look at the choice between a Democrat and a Republican as a choice between feeding the republic hemlock and ricin. It is dead either way.

Dave, I don't vote to get to claim I was on the winning side, I vote FOR someone because I support enough of their positions and have at least a little faith that they will actually work to achieve them. I will no longer cast a vote for a candidate I don't like or believe in because "at least he isn't the other guy". That's a losing proposition no matter how you look at it.

Sorry but in this case, the enemy of my enemy is also my enemy. There are only a handful of Republicans I could in good conscience vote for and they all come from the wacko bird conference. If the Republicans stick with the establishment types, they will lose the folks like me again next time and every time. I won't speak for anyone else but I think most Republicans really don't understand how little credibility they have on the position of shrinking the government. Every election cycle they talk about it, but every budget or spending bill rapes the taxpayers or the taxes payers' children even more than the last one. My dislike and distrust of the Republican Party is to the point where sometimes it would seem that a Democrat would be a better choice under the premise that "it is better to have an honest enemy than a false friend". I dislike knives in my back and the Republican Party hasn't done anything other than stab the taxpayers in the back for many decades Edited to add: I thought a vote WAS a political statement? Plus, if the job is shrinking the government, the Republicans have more than 5 decades of track record showing they are not up to getting that particular job done, or even started.

I am seeing a lot of the mindset the article references displayed here. The thought that the libertarian vote would belong to Republicans or conservatives if not for a third party candidate is just plain wrong. As a general rule libertarians and republicans don't agree on social issues. Where we do agree is on the stated fiscal positions of the Republicans like shrinking the size of government. The big problem is that the Republicans don't have any credibility when it comes to shrinking the size of government. Y'all talk a good game then expand it every chance you get, yes that includes Saint Ronnie Raygun. So why should we vote for a Republican if we have any other option at all?

If you ever find yourself in need of a professional hooker disposal service, I have some folks I can refer you to. ;)

http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/02/virginia-governors-race-can-cuccinelli-b   Great article about the VA governor's race in general but it also does a very good job at explaining how the idea that the "libertarian/green party candidate cost the republican/democrat candidate the election" is total crap.   I especially like this bit where he makes the point that for all their talk about small government, the Republicans never deliver on that promise.    

Touching upon an earlier discussion about minor party candidates only being listed as "independent" on TN ballots, the TNLP won a federal case and the election commission's rules were tossed out as a violation of the candidates' and voters' 1A rights. http://benswann.com/exclusive-libertarians-win-historical-lawsuit-against-election-committee/

If some innocent bystanders got shot that would be a terrible thing but all I am seeing that some TSA agents got shot so I am having an extremely hard time giving a damn.

Send me a PM with your kindle email and I will happily loan you the kindle version.