THIS IS A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC FOR FUCK'S SAKE!!!

[AllenScott]

THIS IS A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC FOR FUCK'S SAKE!!! LOOK UP THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY!! READ THE CONSTITUTION!! THE SILENT MAJORITY ARE HEREBY CALLED UPON TO AWAKE AND TO VOTE AND TO BE HEARD AND TO CHANGE THIS WORLD!!

Why don't you 60% of eligible voters that never show up to vote get off your asses and speak up with your single vote and change this world?? It really is that easy.

Why continue to get pushed around by the VOCAL MINORITIES yet another day/year/lifetime??

I have grown so tired of toiling at the grasses' roots it is killing me (Seriously, my back is shredded 'Yall). If the ONE MILLION AIDS PATIENTS and FIVE MILLION DISABLED VETERANS and the other COUNTLESS beneficiaries of this natural herbs' properties' we all we understand and use, in the U.S.A alone, showed up with our supporters, and our supporters' supporters, and those so many other beneficiaries of this business and the business of medicine and this soul-soothing herb gifted us from God/Nature, at one time at one place (VOTING BOOTH) is it not obvious we could REPLACE the status quo NOW!(actually we need to wait for voting day).

Damn It! Let's Show THEM Who Is The True VOICE in this Country! Let us be HEARD! RESPECTED! HEALED!

Allen

[HighPopalorum]

The LP isn't the solution to our problems. Take it from me: I was on staff during the Badnarik presidential campaign, a volunteer for many more LP candidates, and I worked at a large and well-known libertarian public policy shop. That was eleven years ago. Since then, the party and movement have degenerated so far that you have only to scratch the surface of a modern "libertarian" to find a right-wing Republican. The LP platform has been gutted, and my old think tank is increasingly beholden to conservative Republican board members and donors like Rupert Murdoch and the Koch brothers. LP = a joke. I don't even identify as a libertarian any more because I don't want to be associated with them.

[CanGroIt]

Those 60% probably think their vote doesn't count anyway.... I mean, the electoral college can still vote in whoever THEY want even though YOU voted for someone else.... The popular vote doesn't always win the election.... The elite however have done a beautiful job with Obama so far.... They used the media to paint a pretty picture of him, to get that popular vote, and look at his administration almost 3yrs into it, it's still all bad.... Super filthy cant even begin to imagine rich and powerful mofo's are running this country behind closed doors.... They don't care what "the people" want, they only care about adding money to their name.... And we pay the price for it....

I totally agree with you though.... Our voices should be heard and if that 60% did come out and vote, that voice would be strong....But would it be enough to get someone who truly cares for this nation to get into office???.... We can only hope so....

CGI::::::

[senorx12562]

One need not be a Capital-L libertarian in order to be a libertarian in belief and action. Eventually, (I don't know how old you are, but it may not even be in my lifetime) small-l libertarians will be the core of the republican party. Even some Tea-Party social conservatives have been making some libertarian noises with respect to social issues vis-a-vis the proper role of government, so we will see. The Bush/Obama big government spend-o-rama may serve as the best cautionary example of what not to do we could've hoped for.

[HighPopalorum]

Small l libertarians were the core of the party before Reagan, but that part of the party died in the 1980 primary. The deficit spenders won the argument, won the election, rule the party, and the rest is history. Thirty years later, here we are. I was a young man when I joined the fight, attracted by the uncompromising principles of the platform. Since then, the party has crumpled on just about every issue I care about. Last summer, I attended an anti-immigration rally (I'm strongly in favor of unrestricted movement of goods, services and people over our borders) and there was a LP booth there signing up nativists, xenophobes and racists as fast as they could. There's still a lot the small-l movement can teach us, and the libertarian criticisms of the federal government's role are as strong as ever, but the Libertarian Party is a joke.

[AllenScott]

The LP isn't the solution to our problems. Take it from me: I was on staff during the Badnarik presidential campaign, a volunteer for many more LP candidates, and I worked at a large and well-known libertarian public policy shop. That was eleven years ago. Since then, the party and movement have degenerated so far that you have only to scratch the surface of a modern "libertarian" to find a right-wing Republican. The LP platform has been gutted, and my old think tank is increasingly beholden to conservative Republican board members and donors like Rupert Murdoch and the Koch brothers. LP = a joke. I don't even identify as a libertarian any more because I don't want to be associated with them.

From the Platform of the Libertarian Party:

1.2 Personal Privacy

Libertarians support the rights recognized by the Fourth Amendment to be secure in our persons,
homes, and property. Protection from unreasonable search and seizure should include records held
by third parties, such as email, medical, and library records. Only actions that infringe on the rights
of others can properly be termed crimes. We favor the repeal of all laws creating â??crimesâ?� without
victims, such as the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes.

1.3 Personal Relationships

Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the
government's treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption,
immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or
restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices
and personal relationships.

1.4 Abortion

Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration.



This sure does not sound like anything i hear coming from the Repulican Party let alone the right-wing.

The entire Platform is at Platform | Libertarian Party (http://www.lp.org/platform)

Allen

[HighPopalorum]

Drug policy is actually a good example of the rightward drift of the party. What was once a central plank in the platform doesn't even rate a full sentence today. You need to prepare yourself for the likelihood that drugs will not even be mentioned in the 2012 platform. See for yourself:

1996:
Before there were drug laws in America, there were no drug problems. And prior to the federal government's declaration of War on Drugs in the 1960s, there were no muggers on the street trying to support a $100-a-day habit, no pushers on high school campuses trying to hook children on drugs, no gangs fighting over monopoly drug territories, no drive-by shootings, no crack babies, no overdose problems. Outside of the 14 years during alcohol Prohibition, nothing like this had ever been seen in America. It took the War on Drugs to make it happen. Democratic politicians like the War on Drugs just as it is -- because they love the power it gives the federal government.Republican politicians want to accelerate the War on Drugs -- by taking away more of your Constitutional liberties, by taking away more of your privacy, by turning America into more of a police state.Harry Browne, the Libertarian candidate, says the War on Drugs is a total failure. Government can't keep drugs out of the country; it can't even keep drugs out of its own prisons. He wants to end the insane War on Drugs -- which will take the criminal profit out of the illicit drug trade and bring peace to our cities once again. On his first day in office, he will pardon everyone who has been convicted of a non-violent federal drug offense -- to empty the federal prisons of the marijuana smokers and others who are no threat to society, and make room for the truly violent criminals and other thugs who escape prison through early releases and plea bargains to return to the streets and terrorize our citizens.

2000:
The so-called "War on Drugs" is in reality a war on the American people, our Constitution, and the Bill of Rights. We deplore the suffering that drug misuse has brought about; however, drug prohibition is more dangerous than drugs themselves. The War on Drugs is a grave threat to individual liberty, to domestic order and to peace in the world; furthermore, it has provided a rationale by which the power of the state has been expanded to restrict greatly our right to privacy and to be secure in our homes. We specifically condemn the use of "profiles" as sufficient to satisfy the probable cause requirement of the Fourth Amendment, the use of "civil asset forfeiture" to reduce the standard of proof historically borne by government in prosecutions, and the use of military forces for civilian law enforcement as an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act which forbids this practice. We call for the repeal of all laws establishing criminal or civil penalties for the use of drugs and of "anti-crime" measures restricting individual rights to be secure in our persons, homes, and property; limiting our rights to keep and bear arms; or vote.

2010:
We favor the repeal of all laws creating â??crimesâ?� without victims, such as the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes.




To my eye, the earlier statements are much more strongly-worded. Substantively, there's a huge difference between repealing laws that create victimless crimes and ending the war on drugs and pardoning every prisoner convicted for using them, as the party once advocated. Just my .02.