NIGHTWATCH
Member
The Art of Deception
Its all a front. The AWB will die.
Its all a front. The AWB will die.
I think you are way over-estimating the number of libertarians out there. Even if you were to add every single republican that would vote libertarian if he didn’t otherwise think his vote would be “wastedâ€, I would be very shocked if you were even able to come close to winning a national level election. It is perhaps unfortunate, but the fact of the matter is that libertarians are too small a minority to matter even if several tens of thousands of republicans suddenly voted for them. This is why I say that for better or worse, a libertarian candidate will never be a part of the solution to our problems. Its just the way things are.All those folks pulling the republican lever because they want to protect their rights keep the libertarians from mattering.
I beg to differ. And I could point you to quite a few things that he has done that agree with me.Bush is anti-gun. Don't kid yourself.
Regardless of what kind of ingenious three-levels deep politicking he thinks he's doing, I don't appreciate his telling mainstream America that the AWB is a good thing. I think that makes it more acceptable to the mainstream, where previously they might have regarded it as just a left-wing wet dream, not something that America really needed.
On the ballot in your Congressional race you find a gun-grabbing Republican, a Democrat, a Green, and a Libertarian (no such thing as a gun-grabbing one of those).
What do you do?
Another excellent idea. I like it. In fact, I think that's the way the socialists have gained so much influence in the Democrat Party, the NEA, AARP, and some of the green groups.if all those declared small "L" libertarians out there were to infiltrate their local Republican parties, and try to influence things from within, they might be more successful
"Don't vote libertarian; they don't have a chance of winning!"
From Webster's: Circular Logic: See "Logic, Circular"
I'm quite aware of how much the Repubs outnumber the Dems in the current congress. What you fail to understand is that it doesn't matter because there is essentially no difference between the two. Whether it's gun control or social security, the two parties sit around and quibble about how much of it we need, rather than if we actually need it at all. Yes, I realize that's an idealistic statement, and one that's not likely to fly in the current political atmosphere. However, maybe I'd be willing to vote for Republicans if they actually stood up for liberty instead of just giving it lip service. You want me to come back to your party? Make some changes and I'll consider it.uh, Justin, I didn't say the Republicans never did anything stupid, but you are very confused if you think that the Republican majorities in both houses of Congress are now anywhere near as queasy as they were in the early '90's.
I have no delusions about actually regaining a full-blown version of my rights. But I'd like to actually see some Republicans propose things that at least look like they're thinking about maybe taking a baby-step or two in that direction. If the AW ban didn't have a sunset clause in it, do you think that the Republican party would actually even lift a finger to repeal it?The only way a claim could be made to the contrary is if one was expecting to have them repeal everything right now, and that sort of an expectation could only come from either blinding ignorance of how the system works...
Why is it that every time there's a thread that touches on people voting for libertarians you go off on this strange tangent where you assume that the libertarians are going to try to foment some form of armed rebellion? The real kicker is that you then always make some sort of statement about how you'd relish shooting liberty-minded folks in such a situation. Typical of a Republican, don't like what somebody else believes in, so that makes it ok to become nothing more than a two-dollar tyrant....or a total misunderstanding of the fact that short of armed revolution (which I and a lot of other gun owning Republicans would be more than happy to help put down) there will be no sudden abolition of the system.
I find it amusing that you think an anarchist would run for political office. I mean, if you're going to fantasize about gunning down people who disagree with you, you should at least have the common courtesy to get their ideologies straight, otherwise you just look kinda silly.Gun owners who claim to support the 2A but then throw their votes on minority party candidates such as the anarcho-libertarians who have no chance of winning at the federal level (or even state level around here)...
What, you mean like the Republicans? Sorry, but I don't buy it. The Republicans are a party who support some of the most hideous experiments in statist oppression. Hmmm...PATRIOT ACT, Total Information Awareness, Bueler, Bueler...are only supporting the socialist gun grabbers.
If everyone with a Libertarian bent would have voted for a Libertarian candidate in the last presidential election, the ONLY effect it would have had would have been to put Al Gore in office.
Right now Dubya is so popular, he could say anything and get elcted again.
If everyone with a Libertarian bent would have voted for a Libertarian candidate in the last presidential election, the ONLY effect it would have had would have been to put Al Gore in office.
Another excellent idea. I like it. In fact, I think that's the way the socialists have gained so much influence in the Democrat Party, the NEA, AARP, and some of the green groups.
UnknownSailor is right with his 'Ron Paul' scenario. That's the way to go.