Presidential bid a 'roller coaster' for Libertarian

Houston Chonicle ^ | October 31, 2004 | KRISTEN MACK

[JohnBDay]

You assume people even know who Cobb is.

Pro-Nader people in states where he didn't make the ballot will see the word "Green."

[jmc813]

When this election is over Conservative America needs to take a good close look at some of the elements within it's own ranks once and for all.

Most analysts are predicting exactly this to happen in the GOP regardless of who wins. Here's hoping that the party moves closer to the mission statement of FR.

[jmc813]

It also ignores the fact that we aren't living in the 1700's.

While I agree with you that the LP's foreign policy is flaky as hell, that argument is a dangerous one. Al Gore and the gun-grabbers use it regularly.

[sharktrager]

Which means, most likely, he is not taking votes from Nader because Nader is essentially not an option.

[Lord Nelson]

Really? The fiscal side of Libertarianism is simply going back to conservatism's roots. Adam Smith and the Laisse Faire values that built America. Seemed to have worked for 200 years without anarchy. Rather it is the Keynsian make believe economics of the latter half of the 20th century that has brought anarchy and has weighed down every Western nation in insurmountable debt and obligations that cannot be fulfilled.

[Lord Nelson]

Of course it is a nonsense argument. Our moral values are at least 2000 years old? Does that make them irrelevant? In fact it is a case of modern elitism, as though we are so much smarter than our ancestors that we can forfeit the hard and true laws of economics. This has always been an error of the Marxists. We know more and have more information, but we are certainly not any more intelligent than those who wrote the science of economics 300 years ago.

[Lord Nelson]

Well, now the strong are agents of the Federal Government. Those that get subsidies/protection become big business that end up wiping out the smaller businessmen.

But I gather we are probably not going to agree about government intervention in the economy.

[CWOJackson]

"Most analysts are predicting exactly this to happen in the GOP regardless of who wins."

Good, lets hope they resolve the issue of the fringe elements once and for all. Running a campaign solely to be a spoiler for John Kerry pretty much sums it up...they're aren't conservative and they aren't on our side.

[CWOJackson]

"...that argument is a dangerous one."

Not at all, realizing that we don't live in the era of the founders is far from dangerous. Pretending that the world hasn't changed is dangerous...and very foolish.

[Cultural Jihad]

I feel like the Libertarians have played their hand very badly in this election.

It started on the morning of September 11th when the previous LP standard-bearer rushed to claim (even when the 3,000 bodies were still warm) that America was the aggressor and deserved to be attacked.

[Cultural Jihad]

Not at all, realizing that we don't live in the era of the founders is far from dangerous.

If there were Libertarians in the days of the Founders, they would have been known as scoundrels, scalawags, smugglers, swindlers, and swillbowls.

[CWOJackson]

"If there were Libertarians in the days of the Founders, they would have been known as scoundrels, scalawags, smugglers, swindlers, and swillbowls."

Maybe times aren't that different since the era of the founders. Your definition fits Democratic activists trying to win the election for Kerry to a "T". Yes, the pretty much sums up the LP campaign...in their own words.

I shall have to amend my words now. They aren't the willing tools of the left, they are the unsavory willing tools of the left.

[nopardons]

True,true,a rather surprising mental disorder no doubt.

[nopardons]

You really do need someone to read threads to you and then explain what each reply Actually says;including your own.

Please go to and read your post #65,on this thread. I specifically mentioned that it was your FIRST POST TO CWOJACKSON,wherein you smarmily implied that he was no better than a Dem and worse.Instead of referring to that reply of yours,you now CCP your post to faithincowboys.

You are the one who continues to post one bizarre reply after another,becoming more hysterical,schizophrenic,and mendacious as you go along. I don't know if any of those problems can be treated successfully;however,you PROJECTION COMPLEX can be treated and you really should seek help for,at the least,that mental disorder.

Oh yes,and your obsessive/compulsion complex,displayed by your spamming the same message in each reply,needs attention as well.

Good luck in finding the medical help you so need. :-)

[nopardons]

Interesting info...many thanks for posting it.

[jmc813]

Not at all, realizing that we don't live in the era of the founders is far from dangerous. Pretending that the world hasn't changed is dangerous...and very foolish.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. Going by that logic, one could make the argument that the founders could not have imagined automatic weapons and therefore we should not be able to bear them. I'm going to stick with the Clarence Thomas absolutionist view of rights.

[jmc813]

If there were Libertarians in the days of the Founders, they would have been known as scoundrels, scalawags, smugglers, swindlers, and swillbowls.

Do you agree that the Founders held small-l libertarian beliefs, similar, for example to the mission statement of Free Republic?

[CWOJackson]

"Going by that logic, one could make the argument that the founders could not have imagined automatic weapons and therefore we should not be able to bear them."

The founders had no concept of how a whole nations wealth can be tied to a couple of buildings in New York City...or how those building could be the target of enemies from the other side of the world...or that our enemies could strike at us in a matter of hours by flying tremendous flying machines into buildings taller then many eastern mountains.

No, you folks simply don't seem to grasp the fact that the world is a very different place today but fixate on single issues.

[jmc813]

No, you folks simply don't seem to grasp the fact that the world is a very different place today but fixate on single issues.

What's this "you folks" crap? I stated earlier in this thread that I think the LP's foreign policy sucks. I also noted that there was enough to criticize them about without taking an Al Gore "living constitution" argument.

As for single issues, I did notice one of your anti-libertarian friends on this thread arguing for gun-grabbing on another thread earlier today.