Meet the Losertarians!

The American Enterprise ^ | November 14, 2002 | Michael Medved

[monday]

"The fact is that the rate of federal spending has increased in the 2001-2002 period. "

Exactly. How can I justify voting for Republicans who promise to cut government growth, but when they get in office actually outspend the Democrats? Forget the war on drugs, I don't do drugs, so even though it is stupid, I can't get too worked up about it.

I do pay taxes though, lots of them, and the Republicans say they cut taxes, but I haven't noticed a difference. Meanwhile Federal budget growth has shifted into overdrive under the Republicans.

[VaBthang4]

"create an opening for libertarians to thrive."

Thrive?

LOL

Could someone please list for me all of the Loserdopian Party Candidates who have been elected to a national position in the Government?

Thrive?

[Petronski]

Ok, so how does someone smoking a joint in their house violate your civil rights? Exactly! It doesn't!
How does someone paying someone else for sex violate your civil rights? Exactly! It doesn't!

You would get a Tim Johnson re-elected just to make your principled stand on whores and dope?

Bwa ha ha ha ha.

[jimt]

Medved's articles are not very useful as toilet paper as the ink and/or toner can leave stains.

His intellectual abilities and level of honesty are somewhat lower than what's left on used toilet paper.

[Pahuanui]

Every Libertarian vote cast here in California HELPED THE DEMOCRAPS AND HURT THE GOP - as if we didn't already have enough problems.

So did every vote for the Constitution Party, the Natural Law Party, the Greens, the Reform Party and write-ins, for that matter.

It's quite amusing to see some people around here completely dismiss and belittle both the voting percentages attributed to Libertarians and their stated political ends on one hand, and then simultaneously whine, snivel and pout about the very same Libertarians costing the Republicans an election.

Logical consistancy is our friend.

[freeeee]

Here's a hint for you:

These people would never vote GOP, for bigger government.

We don't really care who makes it bigger. We won't empower or advocate, through our votes, no matter how few we have, anyone who makes government bigger. If there's no one on the ballot who will reduce the size, scope, cost and intrusiveness of government, many of us simply won't vote. And voting for someone who will make government even the slightest bit larger is simply out of the question.

It's really not all that hard to figure out.

[ActionNewsBill]

Michael Medved is often wrong- and I don't think much of his movie criticism, either.

Medved wrote this? Damn, I usually agree with his views, maybe 50-50 on the movies, but this time he's wrong.

[Beenliedto]

The name Liberal-tarian ?

The root word is liberty, not liberal.

[monday]

"Most of you are cultural extreme Liberals, geopolitically naive, and marginally Rightist on economic and governing matters. That makes you overall Leftists in my book."

That makes you overall clueless in my book.

[BikerNYC]

You would get a Tim Johnson re-elected just to make your principled stand on whores and dope?

Bwa ha ha ha ha.

Yes, I think he would. But until republicans start speaking to what he cares about, the joke will be on you.

[Petronski]

LOLPIMP!

[MEGoody]

"Not really...just more of the same senseless name-calling and lame jokes by the republicrats who masquerade as conservatives here."

Uh, speaking of senseless name calling and lame jokes. . .

[ThinkDifferent]

It would be nice if elections were whittled down to 2 candidates at the end (e.g., after an open primary) so that we could come up with a more pure preference system and didn't have these 3rd party dilemmas

Agreed. Louisiana's system might be worth looking into. Libertarians wouldn't have to worry about indirectly allowing a Democrat to be elected because they could vote for their first choice in the "primary", and then vote for the Republican in the runoff. (Of course, the same is true for Greens).

[Dataman]

from most of the posts I see from such ilk on FR, the Libertarian Party's main appeal (despite all the glowing rhetortic) is to people who want weed and prostitution legalized.

That about sums it up.

[Orangedog]

Why this arrogant baseline assumption that Libertarian candidates 'steal' votes from the GOP?? Presumptive idiocy.

I believe the correct reply to that kind of statement is "Hey, pal, those votes were never YOURS in the first place!" Why should people who are alienated by a party feel obliged to vote for their candidate? What is their next campaign slogan going to be ? "Vote for us, we're a little less repressive than the other guys!"

[ActionNewsBill]

Someone will invariably post a comment that voting Libertarian is simply voting one's conscience...as if one's conscience requires them to throw away their votes, which is what voting Libertarian results in.

I believe that voting for a candidate that does not have principles to be a vote that is thrown away.

When the republicans start being the party of limited government and staying true to their principles once again, maybe I will consider voting for them again.

[DWPittelli]

it's unfortunate and bone-headed stupid to have a gaggle of perpetual losers who would rather sacrifice the good in the feckless pursuit of the the weird and the marginal (e.g., dope and porn).

Legal dope, porn and prostitution aren't what tempt me to vote Libertarian. It's the fact that few Republicans actually do believe in small government (remember, e.g., more than a few promises to eliminate the Education Department?) or federalism or even the separation of powers.

That said, I live in Massachusets, and so I often have the luxury of entering a "protest" vote for a 3rd party candidate. But in an election that's close between the 2 major parties, you really owe it to yourself to vote for one of them, unless you really do have no preference between them. I just voted for Romney (R) for Governor; most people thought he would lose by a significant margin, but I felt strongly that it would at least be close.

And 2 years ago I voted for Nader!!! I knew that Gore would win Massachusetts, and I thought, "why not split the left, and maybe help the Greens hit the 5% of the vote needed to give them major-party status?"

[Beenliedto]

from most of the posts I see from such ilk on FR, the Libertarian Party's main appeal (despite all the glowing rhetortic) is to people who want weed and prostitution legalized.

Wrong. We want the war on drugs ended, and consensual sex between adults, regardless of the motivation, should not be the government's business.

[ActionNewsBill]

Most Libertarians are 1960s hippies who discovered that they still love dope and free sex, but don't like paying taxes. Or, if younger, you have been indoctrinated into these patterns by the hippies. Most of you are cultural extreme Liberals, geopolitically naive, and marginally Rightist on economic and governing matters. That makes you overall Leftists in my book.

Can I borrow that wide paint brush when you're finished? I need to finish painting my house by tomorrow.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Actually if the GOP could have only energized about .5% of their registratees, they could have won. It's easier to whine than to get out the vote.