Posted on 07/24/2004 11:44:46 PM PDT by Commie Basher
I wish Bush was a stronger on illegal immigration, I must admit. He's personally a little too close to Vincente Fox for my tastes.
However, you didn't answer my question.
How would a Libertarian government responded to 9/11?
You skipped post 58.
*sigh* good point.
Are you done with your Scar;ett O"Hara like screed?
BTW, Pat Toomey has endorsed both President Bush and Specter.
Whatever our differences, the owner of this forum is big enough to tolerate some diversity of opinion and, like me, doesn't believe in "Jihads."
I listened to him because he was quoted in that instance by Objectivist Peter Schwartz. I read about Vann de haag's quote in Peter Schwartz's critique of Libertarianism.
It should be okay to do this as Peter Schwartz is one of the Ayn Rand sanctioned Objectivists. What about your screen name? Are you going to criticize what I said that much?
I'm glad you're voting for Pres. Bush; however, the Libertarian party needs a thorough revamping. When Hospers ran it wasn't so bad but it went steadily downward since then.
I suppose Kerry's record, as the most liberal Senator impresses you and you prefer him to Bush? Because that's whom you are going to get, if Bush doesn't win.
And if you think Kerry would fight the War on Terror the same way Bush does it, you are no living in the real world.
Wrong.
There are not that many people who are voting for Bush because they are scared of him.
.
Good and quick analysis of how 3rd party voting can be effective... and how I, and many, utilize it.
.
It's amazing how so few otherwise intelligent people can grasp such an obvious and simple concept.
The truth is, there is no right or left. There is only right and wrong.
The party bosses and ardent followers would have you believe otherwise. They would have you believe that right is whatever particular party they belong to, and wrong is the political opposition.
This might be true if the “sides” of today were genuine. Instead, both parties and most mainstream organizations funnel into the same end result: total control.
While the left and right bicker publicly on “hot topics," the end result is the same, regardless of who is President, or who is in control of Congress.
Less freedoms for individuals, less sovereignty for nations, losses of jobs through insane international agreements like NAFTA, the dilution of American culture, and the over extension of our military.
It’s been said that if you don’t like what the Republicans are doing, vote for the Democrats, and if you don’t like what Democrats are doing, vote Republican. It’s set up like a game. I have my favorite team, and you have yours. I’ll back my team no matter what, just as long as your team doesn’t win.
The problem is, both teams are full of scandalous figures who are so busy selling you and I out for their own personal gain, they have no time or desire to help our country in this time of need.
While we Americans are busy cheering our favorite politicos and jeering our least favorites, both sides are pursuing the policy of the destruction of America.
Ni, I can never sway your decision. Only you can abondon what may or may not be convictions.
So why is that? IF he/she is the superior candidate, then why do they not stand a chance?
I live in a congressional district where (again) I don't think that a conservative has ever been elected to any office, let alone representative.
And that's truly sad for a couple of reasons. First, it's crazy the way some districts are gerrymandered. Secondly, I've always read on this forum if you advance the truly conservative candidate, they will win. I know you're right, it doesn't always happen. So why time and time again do I read it on this forum.
As God is my witness, sir, no. I shall go on rubbing W's neocon socialist nose in his you-know-what between now and election day. Obviously, I can't vote for Kerry and will hope that Kerry loses. But I see no reason to hope for a Bush victory at this point.
I make up my own mind about how to vote. Who Toomey endorses and why is of little consequence to me. Obviously, Toomey wants a future in the party and I don't blame him for that. I hope he runs against Rendell in two years. If he does I will certainly support him both financially and as an activist (as I did this year).
But When W's people come a calling for support, they can talk to my wife. She's from Texas and loves the guy.
There's NO WAY that it will happen in Kansas City, MO (have a conservative win elected office). The simple fact is that the members of the Black community are indentured servants of the democratic party. The simple fact is that they take anything that the dems say as gospel, and liberalism is just the way things are.
Never mind that liberal policies are what screwed things up in the first place.
Mark
Badnarik was a full-time candidate, so he held no full-time job. He is a freelance Constitutional teacher, and continued selling his tapes and holding classes. I don't know about his marital status.
Actually, for better or worse, the borders are already so far open that opening them any further would make no noticable difference.
Then you know very little of libertarians. Check out Lew Rockwell and Libertarian Party and Liberty to learn more.
Dittos! Although I'm voting for Badnarik, but I'm hoping for Republican gains in the House and Senate -- and a Kerry win. Things were better during Slick Willie's last six years, when he contended with a GOP Congress, than with Bush now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.