Neal Boortz's reasons to Not Vote Libertarian, etc

Status
Not open for further replies.
I like the idea of legalization of drugs...

Do you have any idea what that would do for our economy?! :D

Besides... the stuff they give you at the doctors office is a hell of a lot worse for you than the crap you can buy on the street in most cases.

Drug dealing is already perfectly legal in America... It's just monopolized by the HMO's. As long as your nametag has Ph.D. on it, you can push all the drugs you want.
 
If this is the Libertarian platform on immigration/borders, what's the problem?

This (depending on who interprets it) is in line with what I see as an acceptable solution: control the borders, keep the criminals out, enforce the law and clean up the immigration process.

Personally, I'd rather suspend issuance of work visas and ship about 3 million illegals back to Mexico...but if this is the price I have to pay to have freedom lovers in charge, that's fine.

The Issue: Our borders are currently neither open, closed, nor secure. This situation restricts the labor pool, encouraging employers to hire undocumented workers, while leaving those workers neither subject to nor protected by the law. A completely open border allows foreign criminals, carriers of communicable diseases, terrorists and other potential threats to enter the country unchecked. Pandering politicians guarantee access to public services for undocumented aliens, to the detriment of those who would enter to work productively, and increasing the burden on taxpayers.

The Principle: The legitimate function and obligation of government to protect the lives, rights and property of its citizens, requires awareness of and control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a threat to security, health or property. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demands that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders.

Solutions: Borders will be secure, with free entry to those who have demonstrated compliance with certain requirements. The terms and conditions of entry into the United States must be simple and clearly spelled out. Documenting the entry of individuals must be restricted to screening for criminal background and threats to public health and national security. It is the obligation of the prospective immigrant to demonstrate compliance with these requirements. Once effective immigration policies are in place, general amnesties will no longer be necessary.

Transitional Action: Ensure immigration requirements include only appropriate documentation, screening for criminal background and threats to public health and national security. Simplifying the immigration process and redeployment of surveillance technology to focus on the borders will encourage the use of regular and monitored entry points, thus preventing trespass and saving lives. End federal requirements that benefits and services be provided to those in the country illegally. Repeal all measures that punish employers for hiring undocumented workers. Repeal all immigration quotas.
 
re is no way I could Back the LibertairanParty, I can not agree with the open border policy nor the legalisation of Drugs, but I was looking around and did find a Party that I can Back and that is the Constitution Party.

http://www.constitutionparty.com/

Go to the Web Page, select the tab Party Information and drop down to Platform, I think you will agree it is a pretty good Platform.
To each his own but I want less government, not to use the power of government to force people to live life the way I think my own should be led. Continuing to pay for a failed war on drugs is not less government. Outlawing drug use also isn't the freedom I'd like to see more of.

Honestly all their mention of god in their platform page kinda creeps me out too. I do not want a theocracy. They support the boy scouts discriminatory practices while neglecting the fact they receive public funding. They say they like free speech while advocating using "obscenity" laws against pornography. They've got a few things right, but overall I'd rather elect a Democrat I think. It sounds like you might as well just name it the extreme christians party to me. ;)
 
Kelly J said:
There is no way I could Back the LibertairanParty, I can not agree with the open border policy nor the legalisation of Drugs, but I was looking around and did find a Party that I can Back and that is the Constitution Party.

http://www.constitutionparty.com/

Go to the Web Page, select the tab Party Information and drop down to Platform, I think you will agree it is a pretty good Platform.

Sure, it's a wonderful platform. However, I think that trusting the reins of the government to the people who know so little about it that they think it has Biblical foundations is a bad idea.

Besides, since a much more accurate name for them would be "the Bible Party", I feel they are trying to mislead people. And then there is the "Education as a whole, therefore, cannot be separated from religious faith. " bit. And their support for religion-derived laws pertaining to sex and marriage. And the belief that "government plays a vital role in establishing and maintaining the highest level of decency in our community standards."

Just what we need - government-mandated decency...
 
White Horseradish: You basically said everything that I want to say. The Constitution party is a wolf in sheeps clothing and is just like having an Islamofascist leading the country. Sorry I enjoy my freedom from the crazy Christian religion saying that gays are bad, abortion is wrong, and that I should go to bible school. :barf:
 
One thing I do agree with in general: far too many people in both parties are authoritarian these days. Limited Govt seems to be becoming an antiquated idea.

People are not willing to use Persuasion (ie like the free market) to respectfully win people over.....more and more enbrace Force (via Govt) to change behavior......and this is called progressive!

www.theadvocates.org/library/pers-vs-force.html

Lets all just vote for Perot again so we can ashore Hillarys win

Perot was Perot bacause Bush 41, (like Bush 43 now) pissed off alot of republicans. Clinton was just the last guy standing.


The Constitution party is a wolf in sheeps clothing

Republicans and Democrats are each deplorably eager to use the force of the government as a tool of oppession against those with whom they disagree or disapprove of-either to steal thier wealth or restrict their personal freedom.

The Constitution party would be no diffferent.
 
I've said this next election, I just want Tancredo to get the Presidential nomination for the Republicans. Although there are plenty of things that Tancredo supports which I do not, he isn't a regular establishment Republican. In fact he was a schoolteacher before he became a politician.

As for the Dems, who? Howard Dean is the only one I could come close to stomaching, and I'd have real bad heartburn.

But what of the Libertarians? I don't know about y'all, but they need to change their platform, and that's all there is to it.

I don't know. What about a 3rd Party? A Populist Party. They would support limited immigration, and secure borders. Standing against China economically, and politically. They would encourage a return of American industry, and higher wages for American workers, and have a policy of returning most Fedgov functions to the states to decide on as to whether the states wish to have them or not. (Basically a constitutional fedgov).

Just from that little nugget of an idea, might you vote for that kind of party?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top