Free Republic
Browse · Search
RLC Liberty Caucus
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Good, the Badnarik, and the (guess who) Ugly
Libertarian Party ^ | 10/13/04 | Libertarian Party

Posted on 10/13/2004 4:57:36 PM PDT by HalleysFifth

Arizona judge rules against Libertarians in debate lawsuit

An Arizona Superior Court judge refused Tuesday to allow Libertarian presidential candidate Michael Badnarik into the third Bush-Kerry presidential debate -- and he rejected arguments that the debate to be held tonight at Arizona State University is being illegally financed with public funds.

David Euchner, the attorney representing the Libertarian Party of Arizona, argued that the university is violating the state constitution by giving public funds to only two of the three presidential candidates on the ballot -- President George W. Bush and Sen. John Kerry -- while excluding the third, Badnarik....

(Excerpt) Read more at lp.org ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: arizona; badnarik; debate; libertarian
Anyone have appropriate pictures?
1 posted on 10/13/2004 4:57:36 PM PDT by HalleysFifth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: HalleysFifth
it is safe to assume that you may expect more actions from us over the next few days," Gordon said.

The business model copied from the SCO company: sue your customers...

2 posted on 10/13/2004 5:08:37 PM PDT by Izzy Dunne (Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HalleysFifth

how about this....but it isnt graphical...

WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH


3 posted on 10/13/2004 5:09:37 PM PDT by MikefromOhio (Rudi Bahktiar is hot!!!! Too bad she works for CNN.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq
So you don't think we need to have real debates in this country?

We need to make a lot of noise on this issue before the next round. I have a friend who is interested in politics but not interested . You know the type, he votes but but counts on the mainstream media for his info, like most Americans. He is a good gauge of "the average voter", he had no clue. He told me when this came up "I guess I knew there were other parties, just never thought much about them"

The ruling statist party , yes I think there is only one really with 2 wings, is determined that the American people will never hear a different perspective, so we merrily follow the yellow brick road to totalitarianism

If the ideas of the ruling party are so much better why are they so afraid to have them challanged?

4 posted on 10/14/2004 4:44:52 AM PDT by kjvail (Judica me Deus, et discerne causam meam de gente non sancta)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: kjvail

"The ruling statist party , yes I think there is only one really with 2 wings, is determined that the American people will never hear a different perspective, so we merrily follow the yellow brick road to totalitarianism "

and of course totalistarianism to a Constitutionalist is a change in which day the trash is to be picked up....

That might be your friend. Certainly 3rd and 4th parties most years need more exposure. however this year is not that year. In a highly polarized electorate, a 3rd or 4th party candidate stand no chance.

But its all one party. Sure thing....whatever....

whats the color of the sky over there? Purple?


5 posted on 10/14/2004 12:53:30 PM PDT by MikefromOhio (Rudi Bahktiar is hot!!!! Too bad she works for CNN.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: kjvail
The problem being, of course, that when you fill up the debates with parties who will combine to receive less than 1% of the vote, the whole thing becomes about as useful as the Democrat primary debates -- which is to say: not at all.

Not that the debates all that meaningful in the first place, but to add in a bunch of folks who have NO serious role in the election would be a disservice to people who are trying to judge the serious candidates.

6 posted on 10/14/2004 1:01:02 PM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

Getting hit on the head lessons?


7 posted on 10/14/2004 1:01:52 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (Please quote me. I am an Unimpeachable Source.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Possibly...


I dont know what they expect really. Neither candidate, Peroutka or Badnarik, are going to garner 1% of the general election combined and maybe 1% in each Home State. That is about it. Why debate those with such a small following?


8 posted on 10/14/2004 1:07:42 PM PDT by MikefromOhio (Rudi Bahktiar is hot!!!! Too bad she works for CNN.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: kjvail
If the ideas of the ruling party are so much better why are they so afraid to have them challanged?

Because Bednarik is not a serious challenger. He will get less than a million votes, likely less than a half-million votes.

9 posted on 10/14/2004 7:08:49 PM PDT by sinkspur ("If you disagree with me, you are a heretic. " Cardinal Fanfani)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Because Bednarik is not a serious challenger. He will get less than a million votes, likely less than a half-million votes.

Chicken and the egg argument, perhaps he will not gather more than 1% because he is not allowed to participate fully in the campaign? Who knows.

What I do know is that he (and Pertrouka, Nader and whoever the Green party is running) are on enough state ballots to make it mathematically possible to win the electrol college. That should be the only test.

10 posted on 10/15/2004 4:46:22 AM PDT by kjvail (Judica me Deus, et discerne causam meam de gente non sancta)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq
and of course totalistarianism to a Constitutionalist is a change in which day the trash is to be picked up....

I'm not a Constitutionalist, read my about page.

The Constitution died in the 1860s. The state slipped it's bonds again, not terribly suprising since history proves that is its nature.

Personally I would throw out the whole system as a real bad idea. A publically owned state is no more practical than a publically owned anything else.

"The political economy of monarchy and democracy, and the idea of a natural order"

http://www.mises.org/journals/jls/11_2/11_2_3.pdf

11 posted on 10/15/2004 6:27:10 AM PDT by kjvail (Judica me Deus, et discerne causam meam de gente non sancta)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: kjvail

"The Constitution died in the 1860s."


Great. Another person on here who thinks that Lincoln had no business keeping the country together. That ends our conversation. Good day Sir.


12 posted on 10/15/2004 9:57:16 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (Rudi Bahktiar is hot!!!! Too bad she works for CNN.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
RLC Liberty Caucus
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson