Posted on 10/08/2004 8:36:12 PM PDT by diabolicNYC
8:38PM CST
The first report from St. Louis is in - and presidential candidates Michael Badnarik (Libertarian) and David Cobb (Green Party) were just arrested. Badnarik was carrying an Order to Show Cause, which he intended to serve the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD). Earlier today, Libertarians attempted to serve these same papers at the Washington, D.C. headquarters of the CPD - but were stopped from approaching the CPD office by security guards.
Fred Collins reported to me from the ground that Badnarik and Cobb are in great physical condition and great spirit.
As soon as more details are available, they will be posted here immediately.
Then the law should be changed. Or do you think the distinction makes for less crime? Which view would be the greater deterrent to crime?
Give me viable candidates with a libertarian philosophy, and I'll vote that way, as I did for McClintock in CA. Two-percenters are not remotely viable; they are merely protest votes.
I will not vote a protest ballot when it could well jeopardize the Federal judicial appointments for the next four years. The Congress is finally moving to split the 9th Circus. Can you imagine the new Circuits filled with Kerry appointments? It would be the Massachusetts Supreme court writ large.
As I've already stated ad nauseum, I'm voting Bush this next election for Prez. LP straight ticket otherwise. Where candidates are running un-opposed, I'm writing myself in. Especially if they are a Democrat.
NO kidding, I made the mistake of voting my conscience on Bush I's re-election; thought no way Clinton could win!
I voted for Harry Brown, a self-made millionaire and fiscal conservative. If you had heard his acceptance speech at the Libertarian convention, you would have liked to vote for him too..... But the libertarian party platform is right on target. You don't commit a crime unless you hurt someone else, (yes Enron qualifies). No illegal drugs (if your over 21). And a LOT LESS GOVERNMENT.
But it's important to HEAR other IDEAS in the mainstream media! Some of them are very good, and can be incorporated.
Thinking the much abused "Smurf", the disowned Druid spitter, and "I only refer to myself in the 3rd person" Rick Stanley. Granted, it is exactly like judging all Republicans by the antics of John McCain and Olympia Snowe... but that point is lost on most people.
The heck with all the good points in a philosophy, just bash it. De riguerre around here.
Fine. Elect some representatives willing to do so. All you need to do is break the hold that the Bar has over the legislatures, convince enough voters to kick out all the incumbents, throw out our current code, and rewrite it from scratch, elect a governor willing to sign it in each State and then implement it, against the inertia of tradition and years of common usage.
Piece of cake. How's next Thursday look for you?
Which view would be the greater deterrent to crime?
What kind of crime? I'm sure that summary executions by property owners would deter lots of crimes, but I'm not sure I trust the judgment (or the honesty) of all property owners. Which do you consider better for society; a certain level of undeterred burglary, or a certain level of summary manslaughter?
Well, I would surely vote for a Dead Corpse over Barbra Boxer. In fact, I think that that is my choice for RP Senate candidate here in CA.
Third party candidates in a debate with Bush/Kerry would turn the whole system upside down. The last thing we need is President Bush in that kind of a debate, because we know he'd lose if the questions became more free-form, or another Conservative candidate started going after him or the GOP. He stumbles or searches for words way to often (even just a few times is too often).
I do think enough Republicans are upset with the GOP to vote third party, and while in the past I wanted to see the GOP forced to return to some of the areas that it has strayed from, I've accepted that it won't and more important, that a President Kerry would put us in a bad way, and it would take years to recover.
Yes, I'm bashing Bush, but I've voted for him three times now, and have supported him both with my time and money and so Lord knows I've earned the right. I know he is not the best Republican we could run, but he's the best we got. We've got to support him and the GOP, no matter that certain issues may rub us raw.
Gee, that's funny, I got the definition of "burglary" from the Georgia Code, Annotated.
Please don't make me move back to that liberalized hell hole. The months I lived in El Toro were quite enough...
That cuts no ice in my locality.
Nice hipster lingo, but you're wrong in principle as well. Physical or deadly force is just one kind, or would you disagree with the statement that the burglar, in your dwelling against your will, has forced his presence there upon you?
I'm not arguing the principle. I'm saying that the law, as it exists, isn't written to libertarian principles. If I shoot a unarmed burglar in my bedroom, I may feel morally justified, but John Law is gonna put me in jail.
Well, I am. Wild Turkey said that burglary doesn't involve force, with respect to the libertarian notion of laws against force or fraud. I said it does. Obviously, it doesn't not involve physical force, but saying it doesn't involve force of any kind is, well, stupid.
Which one is more credible.
1. A candidate on 50 states polling less than 0.4 percent, or
2. A candidate on 49 states polling 10 percent?
Not according to LP principles. I believe, if you ask him, that Libertarians are in favor of privatizing the judicial system. Then the judges and the courts would be overseen by a panel of judges and could not be held accountable by the citizenry.
Also, note that Nader is currently getting most of the liberal press on his side, even though both Badnarik and Peroutka are on twice as many ballots. Getting your name out there is half the battle. With the MSM against you, not many are going to hear about you.
Unless of course you have access to a venue... like a Presidential Candidate Debate. Makes sense doesn't it?
The LP platform is NO illegal drugs, period. No age criteria is mentioned. It is fundamentally against LP principles to set an arbitrary GOVERNMENT SANTIONED age limit on activities that do not harm others.
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.