Libertarian Party ... How I Wish....

[Guest Abominable_Hillbilly]

And your small reward of self-satisfaction might come at the cost of us all losing our right to keep and bear arms if Obama/Biden win as a the result of a small margin. A margin that could have otherwise been offset if the Third Party idealists hadn't been so narrow minded in their pursuit of "sending a clear message to the GOP and DNC". What's the old addage about cutting your nose off to spite your face?

I'll bookmark this thread so that I can come back in November and thank you for this if it comes to pass.

And your inability to vote for a more constitutionally-centered candidate could likewise cause us to continue to lose our First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Tenth amendment guarantees. Imagine if the people in your camp were to come over to mine. You seem to be suggesting that the only way we could ever hope to protect our liberty is to vote for the guy with the "R" beside his name. Can you not see how a sea-change movement to the libertarian party by true conservatives could really protect our liberties?

Two more points:

1) It's pretty bold to suggest that McCain will "protect" the Second Amendment. His history suggests nothing but contempt for an adequately armed populace. With the NRA on board, it'll be the FOPA Part II.

2) My "self-satisfaction" at having voted my conscience might be small in the grander scheme of things, but, to me, it's the beginning and end of the universe. How "small" is a man's integrity to him personally? Your answer may very well illuminate the root of our current problems.

[Guest Abominable_Hillbilly]

I really think the threat to the second amendment is a little overblown in relation to the presidency. We are not going to LOSE our right to keep and bear arms just because one guy or another wins the election.

3/4 of the states are necessary to ratify any amendment to the Constitution. Neither the president nor the U.S. congress can do anything without the approval of the states.

Yes, the president does nominate members of the SC. And yes, the Heller case was close at 5-4. So I'm not saying there isn't cause for concern. I just don't think the situation is THAT grave.

Call me naive, but I'm just not too worried about it. Plus, I can guarantee you the gov't is not taking my guns, period. Interpret that statement how you may.

Consider the Hughes Amendment.

They don't have to amend the Second Amendment or "outlaw" guns. All they have to do is so heavily restrict the right that all we're left with is low velocity bolt guns and revolvers. Or, heck, just take our ammunition away with reams of cost-prohibitive hazardous materials regulation.

[Guest Verbal Kint]

Plus, I can guarantee you the gov't is not taking my guns, period. Interpret that statement how you may.

You know... as much as I'd like to say the same thing, and feel just as strongly about... I have to laugh and call BS every time I see someone claim this.

If you think back a few years in history, you'll find some equally adamant individuals who shouted "Hell no! There's no way I'm letting n1ggers into my schools! Over my dead body!" You see how well that went down, when the govt got involved and sent the troops in.

If the govt wants to take your guns... you're pretty much crap out of luck. Sorry. They'll either a) take them, kill you for being stupid and trying to stand them off, c) arrest you if they find out you are still in possession of illegal contraband. All scenarios ending with you having no guns and them doing what they set out to do.

You can of course go bury them and claim they up and disappeared... but hey, guess what... you're right back to not having your guns -- but by your own actions. And when you go and dig them up, you're right back to facing the repercussions above.

I'm just as passionate about keeping my firearms, too. But to say you're going to stop them from taking them... well... that's just not going to happen.

[TGO David]

The only way to keep the government from dicking you over is to elect the right people.

And anyone who talks about a modern day Revolution is dreaming and needs to stop watching Red Dawn so often. You might find pockets of resistance among an armed citizenry, but I seriously doubt you will find a cohesive armed rebellion against the United States government from within. It would be put down swiftly and decisively. The days of taking the government to task through force are over. The only way to take the government to task now is to do it at the election polls.

[Guest unreconstructed1]

Are you sure you aren't a relativist? Because, frankly, who cares what the reason when the outcome is still just as frustrating and futile.

and I thank god every day that the founding father's didn't just roll over and accept that securing our independence would be to frustrating regardless of teh reason... wait, let me guess, those were "different times"

And your small reward of self-satisfaction might come at the cost of us all losing our right to keep and bear arms if Obama/Biden win as a the result of a small margin. A margin that could have otherwise been offset if the Third Party idealists hadn't been so narrow minded in their pursuit of "sending a clear message to the GOP and DNC". What's the old addage about cutting your nose off to spite your face?

and McCain is so much better...

I hate to break this to you, but our second ammendment rights aren't the ONLY rights that we stand to lose. do you really believe taht McCain won't continue Bush's tyrrany?

Obama, McCain, it really makes no difference. either will run these United STates into the ground.

I'll bookmark this thread so that I can come back in November and thank you for this if it comes to pass.

why not wait for about a year, when you are cussing about McCains unconstitutional acts if he is elected? I can not in good faith vote for any candidate that wishes to destroy this country.

now that you mention thanking me for not "settling" on teh "lesser of 2 evils". I will assume that in 2000 and 04, you played it smart and voted for the lesser of 2 evils, G.W. Bush. If that is the case, let me thank YOU for:

Patriot act 1

Patriot act 2

Patriot act 3

the suspension of habeus corpus

the thousands dead in an unessaceary war against Iraq

the Thousands more that will die in an unessecary war against Iran, if Bush and McCain have their ways

4.00 a gallon gas

warrantless wiretapping

an ever growing beauracracy

ever shrinking freedom

and the list goes on...

suddenly the "lesser of 2 evils" doesn't look like such a good bet anymore, does it?

the one thing you have to remember about "the lesser of 2 evils" is that they are still evil.

[Guest jth_3s]

and I thank god every day that the founding father's didn't just roll over and accept that securing our independence would be to frustrating regardless of teh reason... wait, let me guess, those were "different times"

and McCain is so much better...

I hate to break this to you, but our second ammendment rights aren't the ONLY rights that we stand to lose. do you really believe taht McCain won't continue Bush's tyrrany?

Obama, McCain, it really makes no difference. either will run these United STates into the ground.

why not wait for about a year, when you are cussing about McCains unconstitutional acts if he is elected? I can not in good faith vote for any candidate that wishes to destroy this country.

now that you mention thanking me for not "settling" on teh "lesser of 2 evils". I will assume that in 2000 and 04, you played it smart and voted for the lesser of 2 evils, G.W. Bush. If that is the case, let me thank YOU for:

Patriot act 1

Patriot act 2

Patriot act 3

the suspension of habeus corpus

the thousands dead in an unessaceary war against Iraq

the Thousands more that will die in an unessecary war against Iran, if Bush and McCain have their ways

4.00 a gallon gas

warrantless wiretapping

an ever growing beauracracy

ever shrinking freedom

and the list goes on...

suddenly the "lesser of 2 evils" doesn't look like such a good bet anymore, does it?

the one thing you have to remember about "the lesser of 2 evils" is that they are still evil.

+1 cant get much more evil than that. Bob Barr has my vote

[G27]

+1 cant get much more evil than that. Bob Barr has my vote

Unless something radical happens, +1...

[Guest AeroEngrSoftDevMBA]

You know... as much as I'd like to say the same thing, and feel just as strongly about... I have to laugh and call BS every time I see someone claim this.

If you think back a few years in history, you'll find some equally adamant individuals who shouted "Hell no! There's no way I'm letting n1ggers into my schools! Over my dead body!" You see how well that went down, when the govt got involved and sent the troops in.

If the govt wants to take your guns... you're pretty much crap out of luck. Sorry. They'll either a) take them, kill you for being stupid and trying to stand them off, c) arrest you if they find out you are still in possession of illegal contraband. All scenarios ending with you having no guns and them doing what they set out to do.

You can of course go bury them and claim they up and disappeared... but hey, guess what... you're right back to not having your guns -- but by your own actions. And when you go and dig them up, you're right back to facing the repercussions above.

I'm just as passionate about keeping my firearms, too. But to say you're going to stop them from taking them... well... that's just not going to happen.

If you want to disagree with me, that's fine. But please don't compare me to some ignorant racist white trash bigots from the 60's.

What I'm talking about is defending one of my rights under the constitution. What those idiots were talking about was violating the rights of others under the same document.

Edited August 26, 2008 by AeroEngrSoftDevMBA

[Guest Verbal Kint]

If you want to disagree with me, that's fine. But please don't compare me to some ignorant racist white trash bigots from the 60's.

What I'm talking about is defending one of my rights under the constitution. What those idiots were talking about was violating the rights of others under the same document.

Okay, seriously, hold up... I didn't mean any such comparison other than both scenarios felt so adamantly about it that they often gave the ultimatum "over my dead body". I don't know you from Adam, so I would never accuse you of such a thing.

People have been taking a lot of things out of context lately (not directed just at you, or about only my posts). I've seen it in several threads lately. :-\

Sorry for the confusion. Again, never meant to lump you in with the scumbags.

[strickj]

and I thank god every day that the founding father's didn't just roll over and accept that securing our independence would be to frustrating regardless of teh reason... wait, let me guess, those were "different times"

and McCain is so much better...

I hate to break this to you, but our second ammendment rights aren't the ONLY rights that we stand to lose. do you really believe taht McCain won't continue Bush's tyrrany?

Obama, McCain, it really makes no difference. either will run these United STates into the ground.

why not wait for about a year, when you are cussing about McCains unconstitutional acts if he is elected? I can not in good faith vote for any candidate that wishes to destroy this country.

now that you mention thanking me for not "settling" on teh "lesser of 2 evils". I will assume that in 2000 and 04, you played it smart and voted for the lesser of 2 evils, G.W. Bush. If that is the case, let me thank YOU for:

Patriot act 1

Patriot act 2

Patriot act 3

the suspension of habeus corpus

the thousands dead in an unessaceary war against Iraq

the Thousands more that will die in an unessecary war against Iran, if Bush and McCain have their ways

4.00 a gallon gas

warrantless wiretapping

an ever growing beauracracy

ever shrinking freedom

and the list goes on...

suddenly the "lesser of 2 evils" doesn't look like such a good bet anymore, does it?

the one thing you have to remember about "the lesser of 2 evils" is that they are still evil.

A good anolgy here is the Butterfly Effect(yes its also a good movie:))

Can you show any proof that what was done is worse that what might have been?

I will pause for answer........

And to sum up all you said he done wrong.I say he did right.I mean after all since 9/11 we have not had any terroristic attacks on our soil.If that means they have to "illegally tap" Abed Al Hamid's phone then so be it.Thats better then having him plow another plane into a building.

Edited August 26, 2008 by strickj

[Guest sling]

And to sum up all you said he done wrong.I say he did right.I mean after all since 9/11 we have not had any terroristic attacks on our soil.If that means they have to "illegally tap" Abed Al Hamid's phone then so be it.Thats better then having him plow another plane into a building.

I would say its pretty hard to do anything in this country if you are middle eastern. Not many people like you at all and you're constantly viewed with suspicion. Rightfully so. However, i'm still trying to figure out why ever since 911 there seem to be MORE popping up in this country.

[Guest AeroEngrSoftDevMBA]

If that means they have to "illegally tap" Abed Al Hamid's phone then so be it.Thats better then having him plow another plane into a building.

I'm sorry but I have to wholeheartedly disagree with this statement. If you give the government and inch they take a mile. They have proven this over and over and over throughout history.

Today they might be tapping the phone of Hamid, but tomorrow it might be your phone. They say, "well he's a Muslim extremist and anti-American". But then they come to this message board and see our complaints and say you too are anti-American.

Every bit of power granted to the government by the people can and will probably be abused. And your statement effectively condones the government breaking the law. What is the point of law if we allow the government to break it?

[G27]

If that means they have to "illegally tap" Abed Al Hamid's phone then so be it.Thats better then having him plow another plane into a building.

"They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin

[Marswolf]

This topic reinforces my conclusions about a lot of people who support the libertarian cause.

Around here, we have a lot of good people who think libertarian ideas are good, and I agree with them. Unfortunately, the people in the Libertarian party are a real mix of sensible people and some real squirrel bait that have no concept of reality.

I think that the way you get libertarian ideas back into the legislature is to start at the local level and get elected to office. Then you move up to the state and eventually - hopefully - the national level. The raling against Bush and the PA, but throwing your vote away, does no good for your cause. It isn't going to influence the major political parties. After all, you just threw your vote away. Why consider you? Now if you decide which major party to vote for depending on who you most agree with, then the parties may listen.

[G27]

This topic reinforces my conclusions about a lot of people who support the libertarian cause.

Around here, we have a lot of good people who think libertarian ideas are good, and I agree with them. Unfortunately, the people in the Libertarian party are a real mix of sensible people and some real squirrel bait that have no concept of reality.

I think that the way you get libertarian ideas back into the legislature is to start at the local level and get elected to office. Then you move up to the state and eventually - hopefully - the national level. The raling against Bush and the PA, but throwing your vote away, does no good for your cause. It isn't going to influence the major political parties. After all, you just threw your vote away. Why consider you? Now if you decide which major party to vote for depending on who you most agree with, then the parties may listen.

How do you know who is involved with their local party and who isn't by just reading this thread?

[Marswolf]

How do you know who is involved with their local party and who isn't by just reading this thread?

What difference would that make? The folks posting on here sound like the local members I have contact with.

I went to a local meeting a year or so ago. About 3/4 of the people there were quiet and pretty sensible. The other 1/4 made up the leadership and they were nut jobs. Someone should have been handing out Ritalin.

I also have a friend who started a libertarian board. I tried it for about two weeks and couldn't stand the illogic, braggadocio and hyper-emotionalism any more.

As I say, I'm essentially a libertarian, but I doubt I'll ever be a Libertarian. As a party, it's going nowhere.

[G27]

As a party, it's going nowhere.

Yah, I can see where one would consider at the current parties as 'logical'. </sarcasm>

[Guest Linoge]

Speaking as a person who likes all of his personal rights and civil liberties, I have to admit that I will be voting for McCain this time around. No, McCain is not perfect - far from it, really. However, I understand that my vote for a more ideal, but less probable, candidate is one less vote that Obama has to beat to succeed.

Maybe McCain will go farther south than the current administration has, and then you can feel free to come back and point fingers. However, personally, my conscience will be less encumbered by a vote for him than a failed vote for an unelectable candidate that probably helped put Obama into office.

[Marswolf]

+1 Linoge

[Guest AeroEngrSoftDevMBA]

... couldn't stand the illogic, braggadocio and hyper-emotionalism any more.

The DNC and GOP are parties of logic, humility, and cool heads?

[G27]

Maybe McCain will go farther south than the current administration has, and then you can feel free to come back and point fingers. However, personally, my conscience will be less encumbered by a vote for him than a failed vote for an unelectable candidate that probably helped put Obama into office.

I understand this completely and have struggled with this very issue for a while now. My main issue is this - if we don't stop voting for 'the lesser of two evils' instead of voting for who actually looks to follow the oath of the president, we'll always be stuck voting for 'the lesser of two evils'...

If we want to change the system, we all have to be involved in local elections and force change, but we also all have to vote from our hearts.

[Marswolf]

The problem is that if you don't vote for the lesser of two evils, the greater of two evils has a much better chance of being elected.

[G27]

The problem is that if you don't vote for the lesser of two evils, the greater of two evils has a much better chance of being elected.

Don't think I haven't noticed that - it's a simple equation.

In my book, voting for anyone - regardless of where one subjectively ranks them on their 'eeeevillll' scale - who plans on trampling the constitution is wrong. Both McCain and Obama have voting records and words that tell you, without question, that they intend to trample our rights in some 'minor' way in order to make some Americans feel good about their 'leadership'.

Until we stop voting for the anti-constitutional folks altogether, we'll never have a choice otherwise.

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein

Edited August 26, 2008 by crimsonaudio
added quote

[Guest GUTTERbOY]

I understand this completely and have struggled with this very issue for a while now. My main issue is this - if we don't stop voting for 'the lesser of two evils' instead of voting for who actually looks to follow the oath of the president, we'll always be stuck voting for 'the lesser of two evils'...

If we want to change the system, we all have to be involved in local elections and force change, but we also all have to vote from our hearts.

It's the same sort of struggle I have. But the way I see it is this: No matter what, the chances of finding a candidate to vote for who 100% represents your views are pretty much nil, unless you write in somebody you know maybe. So we establish right off the bat that some kind of compromise is necessary when the time comes to head off to the polling place.

From there, I think the real question becomes sort of a choice between strategic and tactical thinking. Voting Libertarian, IMO, tends toward a strategic decision- essentially no chance of short-term benefit, but the potential for improving the legitimacy of the party. The short-term downside is that you might get someone in office currently that you really dislike.

On the other hand, voting for a more viable candidate takes on more of a tactical flavor. Now, you're really aiming more to get a beneficial arrangement in the short-term- assuming, of course, that one sees a benefit of one of the Big Two over the other. But this comes at a potential strategic cost, where you continue to uphold the status quo and keep the party you really agree with in the sidelines.

I think the real determining factor here is how much difference one perceives between the two candidates. If one thinks that McCain or Obama is a fair amount better than the other, then it becomes easier to go with the status quo approach. On the other hand, lots of folks can't stand either one of them, and think that they're both equally bad. One can hardly blame them for sending their vote third party.

Me, I tend towards the tactical side of things. I'd like to believe that my vote was best suited going towards the party of my conscience, but I can't stop myself from trying to use that vote to effect the best outcome in November. That outcome is, unfortunately, not going to be Bob Barr. So with the two truly viable candidates remaining, I'll take McCain over Obama any day. Thus, I choose to hold my nose and vote for McCain.

Part of my thing here is that I'm not 100% on board with the Libertarian platform. Namely, I'm not sold on the foreign policy stuff. At this point, I'm not sure Iraq was such a great idea, but I don't view it as some terrible thing. GWB hasn't exactly blown me away, but I'm not jumping on the trendy Bash Bush bandwagon. And yes, I do think that Bush-Bashing is a bandwagon activity.

In the end, your vote is yours to do with as you please. Even though I might choose to put mine in John McCain's pocket, I harbor no ill will towards anyone who chooses to vote their conscience.

[Guest Linoge]

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein

And it is a good quote indeed. Trust me, I have thought a fair bit about this kind of situation, and have concluded that I am not quite ready yet to throw away a vote and possibly throw away the election all in the name of maybe getting something better. The problem, as I see it, at the moment, is that the probability of that "maybe" coming to pass is quite small, and I hate gambling.

Maybe I am not mature enough to consider the long-term, and am focusing far too much on the short... And maybe I am a coward for not going with the way I believe and damn the consequences. But I guess I can deal with that .