question for libertarians.

outgirl
Moderator

Lesbian Goddess

If I offended you...good. Cause I still don't give a Fuck

Posts: 1,994

question for libertarians. Nov 1, 2004 10:17:55 GMT -5

Quote

Post by outgirl on Nov 1, 2004 10:17:55 GMT -5

What will a vote for Badnarik accomplish and do you really believe that he is the best candidate? Do you really believe that Kerry would be worse than Bush? We know, not for me. But for everyone else? I don't want to piss on anyones principles but there is so much at stake in this election for so many. I know that the current 2 party system will never change if people don't take a stand but for me the price of that statement is just to high this yr. I mean no disrespect.

Freedom of Speech, that's some motherfuckin' bullshit
Ice T

outgirl Moderator Lesbian Goddess If I offended you...good. Cause I still don't give a Fuck Posts: 1,994	question for libertarians. Nov 1, 2004 22:52:54 GMT -5 Quote Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top Post by outgirl on Nov 1, 2004 22:52:54 GMT -5 I guess no one wants to play with me on this election eve. Feeling dejected....leaving now to go watch Daily show.
	Freedom of Speech, that's some motherfuckin' bullshit Ice T

n2nsites
Senior Member

MILF

The truth is not always beautiful.

Posts: 486

question for libertarians. Nov 1, 2004 23:33:09 GMT -5

Quote

Post by n2nsites on Nov 1, 2004 23:33:09 GMT -5

For Outgirl:

I don't necessarily think he is one hundred percent right, but I like some of the things he says.

The War in Iraq is a failure, and the U.S. government should never have waged it. As your president, one of my first tasks will be to begin the orderly process of bringing our troops home as quickly as can safely be accomplished.

More and more Americans are coming to oppose the war, the war hawks and high government officials are beginning to distance themselves from the president, and the U.S. seems more willing than ever to pull out of Iraq.

But this is not enough. We need to learn how this disaster happened, so we can prevent future disasters from happening.

First, allow me to dispel a myth. People in the Middle East do not hate us for our freedom. They do not hate us for our lifestyle. They hate us because we have spent many years attempting to force them to emulate our lifestyle.

The U.S. government has meddled in the affairs of the Middle East far too long, always with horrendous results. It overthrew the democratically elected leader of Iran and replaced him with the Shah. After making Iranians the enemies of Americans, the U.S. government gave weapons, intelligence and money to Iran's mortal adversary, Saddam Hussein. The U.S. government also helped Libyan Col. Qaddafi come to power, propped up the Saudi monarchy and the Egyptian regime, and gave assistance to Osama bin Laden.

Most Americans have forgotten these events. But the people of the Middle East will always remember.

It was because of American troops in Saudi Arabia, lethal sanctions on Iraq, support for states in serious violation of International Law, and siding with Israel in its dispute with the Palestinians to the tune of more than $3 billion per year in taxpayers' funds that terrorist leaders were able to recruit those individuals who caused 3,000 Americans to pay the ultimate price on September 11, 2001.

The proper response would have been to present the evidence as to who committed the heinous act both to Congress and to the people, and have Congress authorize the president to track down the individuals actually responsible, doing everything possible to avoid inflicting harm on innocents.

A Libertarian president would not have sent the military trampling about the world, racking up a death count in the thousands, wasting tax money on destroying and re-building infrastructure, creating more enemies, and doing the kinds of things that led to 9/11 in the first place.

We cannot undo history, unfortunately.

The U.S. government has never succeeded in establishing freedom and democracy in any of its foreign adventures in the last fifty years. Freedom and democracy are blessings any people must establish for themselves.

Here at home, war leads to a decline in civil liberties, higher taxes, and wartime economic measures that blur the line between business and state, allowing politically favored corporations to profit at the expense of taxpayers.

Libertarians understand the importance of adhering to the Constitution, because it is designed to limit the power of the state here and abroad. And we especially understand the danger of war, which expands the power of the government far beyond its constitutional limits.

The founders of this country knew that war should not be initiated at the president's whim, and so the constitutional authority to wage war rests with Congress.

James Madison, father of the Constitution, said, "If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." He also said, "No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare..."

In short, a libertarian foreign policy is one of national defense, and not international offense. It would protect our country, not police the world.

Coerced military conscription also known as the draft is perhaps the single most anti-freedom action governments regularly take against their own citizens. The draft, represses indiscriminately by directly stealing not only the "treasure" of our citizens, but also by taking years of their precious time and in many cases their lives. The draft has been justifiably resisted throughout American history because it is inherently unfair, unjustifiable, and un-republican.

If a free America were ever subjected to attack, most Americans would be more than willing to defend themselves, their homes, and their families against the foreign aggressors. The very fact that too few Americans are volunteering to fight the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan illustrates that too few Americans view the actions being taken by our government as integral to the preservation of our freedoms. This is simply the free market working.

Of course, some draft advocates would claim that the only reason America needs a draft is because we don't pay our military personnel adequately. Regardless of what the market rate would be in a "free market" for military personnel probably closer to what the private security forces in Iraq are making than what America's military men and women are making the draft would only lead to more military adventurism abroad. After all, the draft is nothing more than the government stealing services from its citizens because it does not want to pay a market rate for them.

Even more disturbing than the draft is the fact that some in Congress would like to expand the draft beyond military service to also include "national service." You see, for many of our leaders, bringing back the draft has less to do with providing needed soldiers for combat—America has hundreds of thousands of troops stationed in peaceful nations from Japan to Germany—than it does expanding the size and power of government.

As Congressman Ron Paul has said, "To many politicians the American government is America and patriotism means working for the benefit of the state." Thus, on a crude level, the draft appeals to patriotic fervor. This, according to Congressman Paul, is why the idea of compulsory national service, whether in the form of military conscription or make-work programs like AmeriCorps, still sells on Capitol Hill. Conscription is wrongly associated with patriotism, when it really represents collectivism and involuntary servitude.

Ronald Reagan said it best: "The most fundamental objection to draft registration is moral." He understood that conscription assumes our nation's young people belong to the state. Yet America was founded on the opposite principle; that the state exists to serve the individual. The notion of involuntary servitude, in whatever form, is simply incompatible with a free society.

Last Edit: Nov 1, 2004 23:36:33 GMT -5 by n2nsites

Both knowledge and experience are real, but reality has many forms, which seem to cause complexity.
Great good is said to be like water, sustaining life with no conscious striving, flowing naturally, providing nourishment, found even in places which desiring man rejects.

n2nsites
Senior Member

MILF

The truth is not always beautiful.

Posts: 486

question for libertarians. Nov 1, 2004 23:35:38 GMT -5

Quote

Post by n2nsites on Nov 1, 2004 23:35:38 GMT -5

Marriage partners, not government, should define the terms and spiritual orientation of their union in accordance with our nation's guarantee of religious freedom.

Should gay marriage be permitted? Is such marriage a basic human right or an abomination that should never be sanctioned?

Establishment politicians are divided, much as their constituents are. No matter what laws they enact or fail to enact, the division will remain and the fighting will continue. Are we doomed to be a house divided?

Establishment politicians can't solve this real world problem because they aren't asking the tough question: "Should lovers jointly decide what their marriage will be or should government dictate the terms of their most intimate union?"

Today, of course, government decides if a couple is even permitted to marry through a licensing process. In other times and places, marriage licenses were denied to interracial or other politically incorrect couples, just as it can be denied to gay couples today.

When government permission is granted, the marriage constitutes a legal, binding contract, with terms that vary over time and with the location of residence. Since these terms are not written down, but are simply a matter of case law and creative legal tactics, a couple rarely finds out what they are until faced with a divorce. Men discover that their claim to custody can be prejudiced simply by their sex. Women find that that their worth as a homemaker varies from state to state. Prenuptial agreements are honored by some courts and heavily discounted by others. The couples find themselves bound, not by what they themselves have agreed upon, but by what government officials dictate.

Like every partnership, marriage should fit the individuals it unites, rather than be a "one-size-fits-all" proposition defined by those outside the relationship. Each marriage should be what the partners want it to be no more, no less. Ideally, the terms of marriage should be defined ahead of time with procedures to modify them as necessary.

Just as anyone can engage in a business relationship, any individuals should be able to enter into a marriage. Government's role in a business partnership is to simply enforce, not dictate, its terms. Government's role in marriage should be the same.

When marriage is taken out of the legal realm, it is seen for what it has always been: a matter of heart and soul. Just as the Catholic Church has historically disdained divorce among its congregation, so too will some religious groups refuse to bless gay unions. Both those who support and those who condemn gay marriage will be free to practice their beliefs and persuade others to their way of thinking. Each individual will be free to choose. Isn't that what America's all about?

We know how to live and let live. Our nation was founded and prospered on that principle. Religious tolerance, the real issue in gay marriage, allows us to live peacefully even though our beliefs may radically differ.

Freedom is the one thing we cannot have unless we give it to others. The blessings our nation enjoys today is built upon that expression of free will. If you elect me as your president, marriage will no longer be a political football, but a matter for hearts and souls.

Both knowledge and experience are real, but reality has many forms, which seem to cause complexity.
Great good is said to be like water, sustaining life with no conscious striving, flowing naturally, providing nourishment, found even in places which desiring man rejects.

n2nsites
Senior Member

MILF

The truth is not always beautiful.

Posts: 486

question for libertarians. Nov 1, 2004 23:43:53 GMT -5

Quote

Post by n2nsites on Nov 1, 2004 23:43:53 GMT -5

badnarik.org/plans.php Here's more. I disagree with some of it but over all that's where I land. I think if the majority of Americans realized the true aspect of the party, you would find more people are libertarian than either dem or rep.

That said, I don't know how I will really vote. It won't be Bush, true.

But I am torn. Just as many are. I don't really have confidence in any of these guys and I think that the person who would make a great President isn't running because of how absurb it has become. Personally I think the whole process sucks saggy witch's titties.

Both knowledge and experience are real, but reality has many forms, which seem to cause complexity.
Great good is said to be like water, sustaining life with no conscious striving, flowing naturally, providing nourishment, found even in places which desiring man rejects.

zombiekiller Full Member Undead Defense Minister Posts: 130	question for libertarians. Nov 1, 2004 23:52:14 GMT -5 Quote Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top Post by zombiekiller on Nov 1, 2004 23:52:14 GMT -5 This election is a lot like going to a proctologist. You know, no matter what, you're going to get a colonoscopy, it's just a matter of how thick the camera will be.
	Zombie Squad "We Make Dead Things Deader" www.zombiehunters.org

outgirl
Moderator

Lesbian Goddess

If I offended you...good. Cause I still don't give a Fuck

Posts: 1,994

question for libertarians. Nov 2, 2004 4:37:29 GMT -5

Quote

Post by outgirl on Nov 2, 2004 4:37:29 GMT -5

There are some things in the lib party that I agree with and a lot that I don't. However, he isn't going to win so who cares. It's still Bush or Kerry. Like it or not. So the question remains, who does that 3rd party vote really help? Anyway this is my last chance to ask for your vote. I'm sure you will all vote your conscience. Good luck tomorrow. If I was a believer, I'd pray. But instead, I'll wear my black hoodie cuz I do believe in Slim Shady. Peace.

Mosh
Eminem

And as we proceed,
To Mosh through this desert storm,
In these closing statements, if they should argue
Let us beg to differ
As we set aside our differences
And assemble our own army
To disarm this Weapon of Mass Destruction
That we call our President, for the present
And Mosh for the future of our next generation
To speak and be heard
Mr. President, Mr. Senator
Do you guy's hear us...hear us...

Freedom of Speech, that's some motherfuckin' bullshit
Ice T

n2nsites
Senior Member

MILF

The truth is not always beautiful.

Posts: 486

question for libertarians. Nov 2, 2004 15:23:01 GMT -5

Quote

Post by n2nsites on Nov 2, 2004 15:23:01 GMT -5

Well, I am donning the black hoodie. Off I go. Outgirl, I am leaning toward Kerry because I do agree the USA isn't ready for Badnarik and the Libertarians. However, some of my other votes are decidedly Libertarian. I think some third party influence is needed and it needs to grow from the bottom up.

But I will admit a feeling of uneasiness. My #1 fear is the Supreme Court. I don't want four more conservatives. I know it should be Iraq but in the spirit of honesty it isn't.

BTW - for everyone.....I read a lot of info on the Republicans running in my area and I have to say I was appalled. Really. Some of the positions they stated really irritated my bowels.

Both knowledge and experience are real, but reality has many forms, which seem to cause complexity.
Great good is said to be like water, sustaining life with no conscious striving, flowing naturally, providing nourishment, found even in places which desiring man rejects.

outgirl
Moderator

Lesbian Goddess

If I offended you...good. Cause I still don't give a Fuck

Posts: 1,994

question for libertarians. Nov 2, 2004 16:34:26 GMT -5

Quote

Post by outgirl on Nov 2, 2004 16:34:26 GMT -5

n2nsites said:

Well, I am donning the black hoodie. Off I go. Outgirl, I am leaning toward Kerry because I do agree the USA isn't ready for Badnarik and the Libertarians. However, some of my other votes are decidedly Libertarian. I think some third party influence is needed and it needs to grow from the bottom up.

But I will admit a feeling of uneasiness. My #1 fear is the Supreme Court. I don't want four more conservatives. I know it should be Iraq but in the spirit of honesty it isn't.

BTW - for everyone.....I read a lot of info on the Republicans running in my area and I have to say I was appalled. Really. Some of the positions they stated really irritated my bowels.

I am so happy to hear this news. And I agree with you about building support for 3rd party candidates from the ground up. This is prolly going to be the last time I give my support to the dems so unconditionally. Still though, the dems prolly do best rep my views...so we'll see. I guess I should be worried yet I'm strangely optimistic and calm. Haven't even turned on the tv yet. Too late to worry now. It is done. I just hope it goes smoothly and there is no widespread fraud...though it sounds like it may already be too late for that. I do believe that Kerry is the better man. I don't know if he'll do a better job but I know he can't do worse. We have to let our elected officials know that they can't fuck with us and expect a second term.

Freedom of Speech, that's some motherfuckin' bullshit
Ice T

Post by outgirl on Nov 1, 2004 10:17:55 GMT -5

Post by outgirl on Nov 1, 2004 22:52:54 GMT -5

Post by n2nsites on Nov 1, 2004 23:33:09 GMT -5

Post by n2nsites on Nov 1, 2004 23:35:38 GMT -5

Post by n2nsites on Nov 1, 2004 23:43:53 GMT -5

Post by zombiekiller on Nov 1, 2004 23:52:14 GMT -5

Post by outgirl on Nov 2, 2004 4:37:29 GMT -5

Post by n2nsites on Nov 2, 2004 15:23:01 GMT -5

Post by outgirl on Nov 2, 2004 16:34:26 GMT -5