Libertarian National Convention

[alaric]

I am sorry I can't read this whole thread. I am sure it would be entertaining.

I would just like to say from the little I did read. There is way too much hype on this thread over a "party" that has no chance in hell of winning the White House. If a year ago a person told me that Ron Paul had no chance in hell of winning the White House I would be angry because the GOP and DNC are large powerful vote getting groups and Dr. Paul shouldn't have been labeled a dead weight by the media and such. I personally have no problem saying the Libertarian party candidate has no chance in hell because it's true. They won't be invited to any debates. They won't have the money to compete. It's just flat out impossible.

Same goes for the Constitution party.

This is the core of the '3rd party movement problem'! Just look at who the media/CFR/Bilderbergs are pushing: hillaryobamamccain. Same ole shit in a different colored bag. Now, aren't Balwin, Barr or Ron Paul All better choices than that? If you can't agree on that, just go beat your head against the 'lesser of 2 evils wall' and leave me alone. WE MUST ALL UNITE AROUND ONE CANDIDATE! Get it? Even lump Nader in there. Isn't he, with all his flaws, better than the shit the media serves us? If we all unite around one 3rd party candidate, there goes the 'wasted vote' phenomenon. Folks, they have been splitting up the 'patriot vote' for years like this. WAKE UP!

 

[JS4Pat]

Bob Barr is nothing but a neo-con. He cannot spread liberty and freedom when he does not believe in it! He believes in throwing people in prison for putting substances into their own body!

He SHOULD stand strongly against the Federal War on Drugs, but I don't think this should be a deal breaker for a Libertarian Candidate. For one thing the public isn't there yet and for another there are plenty of other more important Libertarian policies that could be advanced first. Drug legalization is not the hill I want to die on.

Now his vote for the Iraq War and The Patriot Act are a different story...

 

[AlexMerced]

To be fair people had a very limited time to vote on the patriot act, a vote for the iraq war is more telling.

Barr seems like our best option for the general election, he's no Ron Paul, but who is?

If we become to idealistic... we'll really become a joke

 

[Peace&Freedom]

This is the core of the '3rd party movement problem'! Just look at who the media/CFR/Bilderbergs are pushing: hillaryobamamccain. Same ole shit in a different colored bag. Now, aren't Balwin, Barr or Ron Paul All better choices than that? If you can't agree on that, just go beat your head against the 'lesser of 2 evils wall' and leave me alone. WE MUST ALL UNITE AROUND ONE CANDIDATE! Get it? Even lump Nader in there. Isn't he, with all his flaws, better than the shit the media serves us? If we all unite around one 3rd party candidate, there goes the 'wasted vote' phenomenon. Folks, they have been splitting up the 'patriot vote' for years like this. WAKE UP!

The core of the 3rd party or alternate political movement problem is the establishment treats both as having no chance, which turns into a self-fulfilling prophecy. They deliberately marginalize them, then point to the lack of coverage or mainstream treatment as evidence that the candidate/party has no chance. We all saw how the MSM did the 2 party variation of this to Paul---exclude him from almost all polls, so he stays at 1-2%, then black him out entirely 'because he isn't viable.' This despite his having record fundraising days, solid experience as an elected official, and massive grassroots backing.

MEANWHILE, McCain had NO money, NO grassroots support, and NO momentum in the polls, UNTIL the media grabbed him and dragged his hide across the finish line. This is the problem, not 3rd party internal issues or divisions. The Paul example shows the elite will do this to 'our candidate' whether inside or outside the two party system.

 

[Bradley in DC]

How did the LP Platform changes turn out today?

The "Restore 04" purists were soundly rejected by the Reform caucus. All of the early "purist" amendments were voted down so decisively that they requested to suspend the rules and withdraw the rest of their amendments to ameliorate their embarrassment.

There were some minor platform changes that didn't create any significant fights.

 

[JS4Pat]

To be fair people had a very limited time to vote on the patriot act, a vote for the iraq war is more telling.

Barr seems like our best option for the general election, he's no Ron Paul, but who is?

If we become to idealistic... we'll really become a joke

True - but these two issues are HUGE!! (Fundamental)

This separates those who understand and respect the US Constitution from those who don't.

I believe people can "come around" - but Bob Barr's explanation for his vote on the Iraq War resolutionn tells me he still doesn't quite "get it".

 

[WRellim]

To be fair people had a very limited time to vote on the patriot act, a vote for the iraq war is more telling.

Let me paraphrase that line of illogic and see if it makes sense:

"I got the death penalty, but to be fair, my lawyer said he really didn't have time to read through the whole plea agreement before he signed it on my behalf. Oops."

Would YOU hire a lawyer that did that?

Seriously. If you do not have the time to read a contract, you do NOT sign it.

If a legislator does not have even the opportunity to LOOK at (much less read through and analyse) a piece of legislation... then they should a priori vote AGAINST it. If they vote FOR "hidden" legislation, they are guilty of gross negligence, and dereliction of duty, PERIOD.

In other words, their character should forever be tainted and questioned. Tarring and Feathering are too good. (What is the point of the "Representation" if it is nothing but a rubber stamp... may as well stuck with the old "mad" King George III).

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose...