Chucktshoes

6.8, while there may be some evidence he was placed to spoil, there is equal evidence he wasn't as that specific bundler has a history of supporting libertarian candidates as well in the past. I think it may have been mentioned on here previously, but there are left libertarians who prioritize social issues above fiscal ones. In fact they were there first with regards to the Libertarian Party. The main point I would find difference with your response to Erik is that it is still operating from a left/right Republican/Democrat paradigm and it assumes votes not cast for a third party would have automatically belonged to one of the major parties. That is still an incorrect frame of reference.

Hydrocodone runs about 10-15¢ a pill.

All of them. Eliminate the FDA while we are at it.

I just ran across this story from ABC that contains some exit polling data that should put the "Sarvis caused Cuccinelli to lose" argument to rest. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/11/early-exit-poll-results-tell-a-tale-of-two-republicans/  

http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/06/read-this-if-you-believe-your-candidate   Another good article hitting at the core red vs blue mindset that without a third party, the vote would have belonged to a Republican or a Democrat. I especially like this part.  

  It certainly was! :lol: Next thing we know Yeager will go all Gabe Suarez again and Dolomite will get challenged to a duel. :lol: :rofl:

I no longer have any faith whatsoever that the ending we both see can be avoided or that even if it could the Republicans are the way to do it. So here I am and my principled vote is the only thing I got left. Well...almost the only thing I got left. :whistle:

Here is a very good article that breaks down some of the takeaways that should be learned from the VA race.   http://thefederalist.com/2013/11/05/10-lessons-republicans-virginia/

<Total hijack> Was the documentary "Beyond the Myth"? I watched it the week before last and I was alternately very sad and very pissed off while watching it.

I have a sister. She is as liberal as it gets and I would classify her as a full fledged member of the grievance industry with all her whining about "the patriarchy". Not long after the birth of my daughter I realized that she could possibly be a dangerous negative influence on my daughter. I made the decision to excise her from my family's life. We are better off for it. If a person does not bring anything positive to the table, if they only bring harm, why should they get a pass just because you had the misfortune to lose the genetic lottery and be related to them? 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Blaming the Libertarian for taking votes from Republicans is like blaming the attorney for your divorce: there were serious problems with your marriage, the attorney just made it official.   Caroline K. Gorman  

Let's not forget the jury as well. Whether it was a lack of evidence, poor prosecution or jury nullification, they did the right thing as well.

The story on Reason.com states that the hospital billed he victim and is threatening to turn it over to collections. Add a few more zeroes to that check...

I don't think anyone is saying that they are harmless. What I do think is being said is that they aren't as universally, horrendously destructive as they are made out to be. I remember growing up the ads, news stories and after schools specials that said crack would addict you with "just one hit". That's just not true. They say the same thing about meth now. Also not true. Hell, I tried it years ago and couldn't stand it. Way too twitchy, cocaine is much smoother and more pleasant of a high.

I can think of something! They wouldn't stink up the public square anymore with the smell of patchouli and BO when they go picketing.  :hyper:

The number is mostly immaterial. Once is just as bad as 8. All the repeated rapes affect is increase the number of zeros on the check they will have to cut.

This man was figuratively and literally anally raped by the police, the judge who signed the warrant and the doctors who performed the searches. Every single person involved should be held personally, and physically accountable. I do have to give credit where due and commend the doctors at the first hospital who refused to assist due to its obviously being an unethical action.

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.