Slashdot Mirror

it's a pity we don't have a political party anymore

Sure we do, it's called the LP, Libertarian Party.

The Libertarian Party is the only party with a serious, ideological anti-drug war stance. It kills me that slashdotters don't even mention LP.
Could it be LP's ambivalence towards intellectual property?

then cut taxes...

There is one political party that will do both at the same tyme, the Libertarian Party.

The 80% who don't give a damn aren't going to form a WeLikeFreedom party, because they don't give a damn about that either. (And because the first thing a WeLikeFreedom party would do after getting elected would be... nothing

No. As I understand it, the WeLikeFreedom Party would privatize government services, end handouts, decriminalize victimless acts (thus letting police concentrate on violent crime), and cut income tax. So why don't 80 percent of us vote Libertarian?

We have that, it's called the Libertarian Party. If everyone who is disappointed with the Big Two would vote Libertarian, then change could actually happen. As long as you have people screaming "if you don't vote for B, you're essentially voting for A", this will never happen.

"And if we're on the topic, does anyone know where I can find a fiscally conservative and socially neutral party?"

http://www.lp.org/article_85.shtml

The part of the law creating a database of sexual offenders is a good marketing tool for PORNO DISTRIBUTERS!!! Just think, they now have a free tool to collect the names and addressess of tens or hundreds of thousand potential customers. Ahh! just think, some creep who sells kiddy pr0n now only needs to consult the database and give out samples of product. A nice way to hurt kids at taxpayer expense!!! That monster in Florida, Cooley was on the state's sex offender website, but what good did that do for nine years old Jessica Lundsford? She was raped and and murdered by being buried alive just the same!!! Rather than creating a sex offender database, it would have been better to keep that monster locked away for life for his previous crime. If this were the case, Jessica would be alive today. But NO, lawmakers prefer to pass unconstitutional, feel-good laws that do more harm than good.

Congress critters and others with power should think about the consequences of passing unconstitutional laws. This law can definity infringe on the right to pursue happiness as this not only ostricises the offender, but it also hurts people in his or her neighborhood as it can severely reduce property values. A sex offender lived near my old house, and the registry might be the reason why I could not sell the place. It also denies those who have served their time the equal protection of the law. Those wrongfully convicted are now legally slandered by their own government with no opportunity for rebuttal. If I was to go around an post signs stating that Bush is a child rapist, I could be sued for lible. However, when the government does this to a wrongfully convicted person, there is no recourse for the person slandered.

Despite what people think, most people accused of sex crimes do not get a fair trial, especially when the alleged victim is a child. Their RIGHT to confront their accuser can be suppressed at the whim of the judge. Also, in many cases, the seating arangement of the alleged victim in relation to others in the court is designed to create jury sympathy for the alleged victim as well as dislike for the alleged criminal. I know this for a fact because I had a roommate in the Nave who was accused of molesting a child. His lawyers told him that he would definitely be going to prison because the evidence against him was "overwhelming." His fate was virtually sealed, and he would have gone to prison except the child had a twinge of conscience and admitted that she lied. It turns out that forensic evidence used to prove rape resulted from the girl's voluntary intercopurse with her 14 years old boyfriend.

If a person does get a fair trial and is convicted of rape, child molesting, etc, there should be only two sentences given. One is life without parole, or death (if guilt is absolutely proven). A person convicted should have ample opportunity to appeal. Many neocons would think that I am a coddler of child molesters, etc. but I am not. I believe that punishment should be appropriate for the crime and that sex offender databases set some very insideous legal precedents. Imagine how easy it would be to have shoplifter forced to register in a shoplifter's database. What about laws that permantly restrict where a shoplifter can live, work or play (much like those convicted of sex crimes even after sentence is served)? What about same type of laws applying to speeders? The slope is indeed slippery.

http://www.fija.org/ Judge the law as well as the facts!!!

http://www.constitutionparty.org/ An alternative to "voting for the lessor of two evils."

http://www.lp.org/ Another alternative to the "lessor of two evils."

If George can take your 4th amendment to fight terrorists, Hillary can take your 2nd.

Recent polls have shown that 28-35% of US voters lean libertarian. It is essentially the party that has a firm and hard stance on issues based upon principle.

You should really study it a bit more:

http://cato.org/about/about.html
http://www.lp.org/issues/issues.shtml
http://www.theadvocates.org/ruwart/categories_list .php

Which is why you should vote libertarian. They beleive that less government is the best government.

For more info:
http://lp.org/issues/issues.shtml
http://cato.org/about/about.html
http://theadvocates.org/ruwart/categories_list.php

You know, especially with conservatives pissed off at the new big-government Republican party, you guys would normally be surging with popularity and election wins, except you disqualify yourself with certain kooky positions, like drug legalization. If you want to be a mainstream party, and you have tremendous potential, you need to boot the hippies and appeal to the mainstream. And you'll never get any portion of the Republican base with your position on abortion. Saying "government should be kept out of" the abortion issue is like saying government should stay out of the homicide issue, or the racism issue, etc. You're effectively saying, in lame pussyfooting language, that abortion should not be illegal. But abortion snuffs out a life - so much for being for "a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives." Come back when you've rid the party of the druggie fringe, and when you've rid the platform of blatant inconsistencies.

Now that the blurb actually points out it's the democrats the posts are suddenly "the problem is both parties!"

Uh. It *is* both parties. Five of the bills were D-sponsored, two R-sponsored. More are sponsored by D, but that's the way life goes.

And that's just manipulation again.

Voting for a third party is, in a system with the voting structure set up the way it is in the United States, throwing your vote away.

Finally, I don't think that there is a single party that represents all my views very well.

I don't like the Republican's social views (or their current tendency to blow massive amounts of money on military expeditures).

The Democrats are the closest, though there are things like this that are annoying. If Joe Lieberman (Mr. Videogame Censorship) had become VP, I would have been pretty unhappy.

The Libertarians have some nice ideas, but they're really, really short on actual practical implementation, which in the end is what matters. You want to slash government spending? Fine. Which departments are you going to lose? The FDA? I *like* being able to go down to the grocery store and buy anything without worrying about it harming me. The National Park Service? I *like* our national parks, and I think that if anything, we probably spend too little on environmentalism.

Take a look at their platform. They want to eliminate consentual crimes. I think that a lot of what we call "victimless crimes" *have* costs -- they're just hidden, rather than obvious. I'm not a fan of heroin legalization, because I think that there's significant impact to non-users, and because once you use the thing, you may not have the ability to back out and learn from your mistake.

They want all-volunteer juries. I disagree. This is a good way to get collections of activists on juries. The point of juries is to ensure that the judicial branch is not deviating wildly from common views, not to try to make law through the jury. The last thing I want is a minimally-educated and informed group of people who lack the ability to ask questions regarding a case to be trying to legislate things.

They oppose involuntary institutionalization. Sounds good, and there was a time when the situation in asylums was pretty dark. However, when someone's in an asylum, it's because they're posing an issue to others.

I still don't know what the hell the "American Indians should have their property rights restored" chunk of their platform means, but I can easily see myself not agreeing with it.

I strongly disagree with their views on monopolies. This is the single strongest reason why I would oppose the LP controlling the government. They favor an unregulated, free market. They do not acknowledge the existence of natural monopolies -- they think that given a completely unregulated free market, everything will work out for the best. That's simply not the case. The Econ 101 idealized free market -- agents fully informed, all resources and businesses fluid, agents rational and thus not subject to marketing pressures -- does not exist in real life.

Looking at California, I'm not sure that deregulation of utilities that are natural monopolies -- which the LPs support -- is a good thing.

Their take on pollution is not workable in the real world. It's not possible to evaluate how much damage and who pollution is affecting. You just build a taller smokestack or a more hidden pipe. Even our rough estimates are expensive to produce.

I'm not certain that halting subsidized public education is a good thing. I think that the benefits of having at least some education throughout the populace is pretty significant.

I think that their take on political secession is complete and utter nonsense, and totally unworkable in the real world. According to the LP, *I* can secede with my house and the surrounding property. That would be interesting from a tax perspective. They'd probably

"

Democrats and Republicans... Tweedledee and Tweedledum.

http://www.lp.org/"

Yes, because the Mad Hatter is a much more rational choice.

Democrats and Republicans... Tweedledee and Tweedledum.

http://www.lp.org/

In an ideal world, we'd all be voting Libertarian. You know, limited government, lower taxes, and personal freedoms. Unfortunately everybody is so afraid of "wasting" a vote than they only vote Democrat or Republican. To me, though, both partied are ruined past the point of no return. Something has to change. More information about

the Libertarian platform.

Just two corrupt parties fighting for more power. Vote Libertarian http://www.lp.org/

>There are lots of people who don't see a problem with this, maybe even a majority of Americans.

It's actually a very vocal minority of Americans who don't have a problem with this. The problem stems from the faith that our Congressfolk are operating with both good intentions and more information, and a complete lack fo faith that we could succeed at voting 90% of them out to be replaced by people almost entirely unlike lemmings.

You are the one who doesn't understand Libertarianism. Here is the party platform on monopolies. You can't just go redefining Libertarianism to mean whatever you want it to mean. That is one of my big beefs with Libertarians, whenever you call them on an issue, they waffle and say, "Oh, but that's not what we believe!" Either you are a Libertarian according to what the Libertarian party says, or you are a roll-your-own Anarcho-capitalist, and I would have a lot more respect for you if you would just call yourself that instead of co-opting a word that already has a defined meaning counter to what you profess to believe.

The solution.

(Yes, the site design is awful.)

Just keep the likes of Hillary out of office so I don't lose the freedom I have to choose which doctor I can take my family to. If she gets into office I will probably also loose the freedom I have to spend my own money for what I want since she seems to know better how to spend it than I do. For that matter most of the left would like to me to loose the freedom I have to spend my money and grow the economy. After all they vote against Tax cuts every time they can. They also vote against cutting Government programs that should have never been setup in the first place. If you want to stop "eroding civil rights" First you need to remove all government programs that are not part of the proper role of Government. I am afraid that the only way we will ever do that is by electing Independents into office, and I don't think that is going to happen any time soon.

Ooh, missed this. Hillary as president is indeed scary. As regards tax cuts, yes you can blame democrats for opposing them but you can't blame them for not cutting government programs and the cost of them, republicans share just as much blame for this. Two republican congressmen, House Transportation Committee Chairman Don Young and Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Ted Stevens, both from Alaska and republican, pushed to spend $223 million for a bridge to nowhere in Alaska. Even Rush Limbaugh lamblasted it. Now this part I really liked, "First you need to remove all government programs that are not part of the proper role of Government." That's one reason I voted for Michael Badnarik for president. We need to abolish every agency, bureau, department, and office in the federal government that is not constitutionally mandated. This, a government that stays within constitutional contraints, is why when I can I vote for Libertarian Party candidates.

Obvious: http://www.lp.org/

Of course, they would also hold you accountable (a dirty word in today's society, apparently).

OK, which party is the one wholly against censorship in any form? ...

The Libertarian Party

OK, which party is the one wholly against censorship in any form?

That'd be the Libertarian Party.

I agree. The problem is, the Democrats are equally foul, corrupt, and incompetent. So who am I supposed to vote for?

D. None of the above.

Convince enough people to vote for a third-party candidate. Third-party candidates do win elections, there are today third-party office holders (the Libertarians, for example, have been staples of local-level positions for decades) and we have even had a third-party President. It's important to note that the Republicans were, at one time, a "third party"!

You do have a party, it's called the Libertarian Party. It doesn't get more fiscally conservative than that. Hmmm, freedom for individuals, weak government, fiscally conservative... sound interesting? No wonder the other two big parties don't want you to find out about us.

The Bush regime is currently trying to suffocate any movements that are active against it's highly inhuman and dirty practices to keep holding power in America yet are trying to fool the world about their support for democracy and free speech.

Really? An American president is trying to eliminate discourse? That's totally a new concept. Surely the Bush Administration is biggest threat to the constitution in American history.

Well at least we can get rid of this problem by voting Democrat, right? After all, they call themselves The Party Of Free Speech. They wouldn't lie, would they?

Better yet, it is time to either join, form, or support independent political parties. Face the facts, the Democratic - Republican party is funded and controlled by special interests. Special interests make political campaign contributions and pay for advertising. Voters do not. Things will change ONLY when people decide to smarten up and quit being manipulated by the special interest financed advertisements (and that includes internet advertising such as blogs like this one).

'We the People' have seen what decades of power shifting between Democrats and Republicans has accomplished - more government, higher taxes, and less freedom. Out of the entire Congress, there may be one (Ron Paul) or two members that even care about such a thing as the Constitution. Just about all of Congress is made up of Republicans or Democrats. Each party accomplishes the same thing by eroding different freedoms.

Republicans may not be as hard on gun ownership as Democrats, but they are sure hard on the fourth amendment of the Constitution. Both parties support the flooding of our nation with cheap, slave-made goods. Both apparantly have a disregard for human rights. I know that I for one am tired of the years and years of broken promises and false hope that is preached by these two parties. Both of these parties have shown us what they can do for (to) us. We have seen their work. Now, let's try something else.

This election season as well as 2008, it is high time that we as a people support alternative parties such as the Libertarian Party ( http://www.lp.org/ ), Constitution Party( http://www.constitutionparty.org/ ), Green Party ( http://www.gp.org/ ), Veteran's Party, Socialist Party, and any other political party other than the two corrupt lamescream parties that have been duping the people for decades.

I for one support the Constitution Party, Libertarian Party, and Veteran's party (in that order). I will only vote for a "Republicrat" or "Demican" only if there is nobody else on the ballot and there is no write in blank. Even then, I have sometimes abstained from marking a choice. But of course, we will always have some people who insist on voting the "Lessor of Two Evils" because they believe that candidates of other political parties "don't stand a chance of winning."

Tell that to Jim Gilchrist (Founder of Minuteman Project) who ran for Congress under the American Independent Party. He won the most votes on election day and was only done in by absentee ballots (apparantly, the absentee voters never got a chance to hear his message or the election was rigged). Aagree with him or not, he showed that a candidate from an alternative party actually had a good chance of winning. Apparently, the people in that distric in California are sick and tired of the bullsh1t that spew from the Republican/Democratic Party.

I hope that people this election are not so stupid as to give up their freedoms to the sellout lamescream political party that has manipulated them for years. Each time I hear people bitch and moan that Gore should have won the election or that "Democrats" tried to appeal and recount their way to victory, I want to puke. IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE which one should have, could have or had won, the results are the same. More government, higher taxes, more rules and fewer freedoms for the people. I want limited government, so that is why I vote for candidates of the Constituion and Libertarian parties. I hope people who read this are not stupid enough to throw their vote away on a Republicrat

From the Libertarian Party FAQ:

"We're active in all 50 states, have more than 200,000 registered voters and more than 600 people in office, which is more than all other third parties combined."

I hope you feel better having ranted, but your invective is perhaps better directed elsewhere.

You forget that each individual state is essentially its own country. And now most people don't think of it like that, but crossing a state line is really like going into another country. Europeans do it all the time on a very similar but different scale.

Therefore, if someone violated NY law, then why should PA care? Even if they flee to PA? It doesn't matter because the person did not violate PA law. Now the states often have reciprocal agreements in order to assist with this type of activity, which often leads to extradition.

If it is federal law however that was broken, that is an entirely different situation because then the feds have jurisdiction.

If you break US law and go to Costa Rica, do you think the Costa Rican's will care? NO! Vice versa. It's the same with the states.

And having a government issued ID from ANY level of government isn't part of a libertarian philosophy.

Perhaps you had better study libertarianism a bit more by reading these two pages first:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism
http://www.lp.org/issues/issues.shtml

No, because if you are Democrat, you aren't going to vote for a Republican in order to vote against the blacklisted politician. And if you are a Republican, you are not going to vote for a Democrat. Either way you will make some excuse why it is OK to vote for the pro-DRM candidate ("Well, I gotta vote for Fienstien or otherwise the Republicans will win, and we can't let that!").

Could we just stop being pussies and vote Libertarian so we can end this subjugation and subterfuge once and for all?

I have finally gotten so fed up with the whole thing and am now going to vote for the Constitution Party whenever possible and after that I will probably vote Libertarian Party and lastly on my list will be those Republicans that still believe in limited government because the vast majority of them no longer care about this.

Libertarian

In all fairness, while it was signed by Granholm, it was passed by a Republican House & Republican Senate. Let's face it, Democrats & Republicans are co-conspirators in this matter. Keep voting for control-freaks, and you'll keep getting control-freak legislation. Maybe it's time gamers think about voting for Libertarians.

You actually sound fairly libertarian if you're socially liberal but want smaller government. Even if you don't support the whole platform, you still should consider voting Libertarian. Libertarians believe in individual freedom & personal responsibility, which is at the core of most issues, including this one. Our kids are now in their mid teens. Up until this past year, they were only allowed to watch PG-13 movies and Rated "T" games. Unless we had a chance to preview them first, rated "R" movies and rated "M" games were verboten. They still don't get to play most rated "M" games or see rated "R" games. I still don't understand why on Earth parents don't spend more time paying attention to what their kids are exposed to.

Eh? The libertarian party is generally referred to as being socially liberal and fiscally conservative. They are for the maximum amount of personal social freedoms, minimal government (meaning lack of bloat, not lack of functional rule), and free markets with minimal (not non-existent) regulation.

http://www.lp.org/article_85.shtml

The libertarian party is hardly "new conservatism." Rather, it's one of the more logical centrist parties out there.

Whether it's viable or not, most people still do have the option of voting for the Libertarian Party. Even if you don't agree with them 100%, you can still vote that way. Also, they don't need to win, they only need 5-10% to make the other major parties take notice and start moving the debate from how quickly to grow the government to whether the government should grow or shrink.

Those bastard French people are trying to take away our freedom by taking restrictions out of DRM!

DRM is a right of companies. If you make DRM illegal, you're taking away liberty (I use that term because "freedom" is no longer correctly associated with it).

It's laws that make breaking DRM a crime that take away liberty, NOT DRM. After you buy something, being able to do what you want with it legally is a liberty (it's called personal property). However, if it's HARD or impossible to do it, that's YOUR problem and you shouldn't have bought a product with DRM in it.

For instance, building a mote around your house on your land is a liberty. Not having the man-power to do so has nothing to do with liberty.

Similarly, breaking DRM is a liberty. Not being able to do so also has nothing to do with your liberty.

Again, I'm using the term "liberty" because it refers to a specific concept. See THIS video.

Oh, I also use it because I'm a libertarian.. but that's neither here nor there. As a libertarian, I think the DMCA and similar laws should be repealed. However, I also would strongly dissapprove of a law like the french one mentioned in TFA instituted in the US.

If I remember correctly, the French government is setup the reverse of ours: The liberty the French enjoy are considered a gift from the government, as they're technically a police state. In this country, the liberties the government takes away is usually against our constitution. Read it sometime, it doesn't say you have any liberty, it says that the government isn't allowed to TAKE your liberty.

Yes.

No political philosophy can be accurately described in a two-sentence soundbite, especially not one that describes Libertarians as the only ones who really support "freedom".

Libertarians may not be the ONLY ones that support freedom, but they are the largest party that does. Democrats and Republicans certainly do not.

I urge you to read the Libertarian Platform. You will find that the platform doesn't just use the word "freedom" alot, the entire platform is built upon the philosophy of liberty with no exceptions or asterisks or addendums. Libertarians call themselves the "party of principle" because they are unwilling to let go of a single ounce of freedom or to succumb to the fickle demands of lobbyists, corporations, or special interest groups. I respect Libertarians for their unwavering ideals, and regardless of their ability to win major elections (mostly due to suppressive, anti-free-speech campaign finance laws), I will always vote for them because I'd rather vote for something I believe in and lose the election, than vote for something I didn't believe in, and lose my self-respect.

That's because you both probably realize that freedom is the most important principle to defend in a society...because without it, you can't do anything else. Freedom, of course, is a two way street (which both parties clearly lose sight of on purpose because they can extract more money from you by claiming that other big brotherish things HAVE to be done in order to protect the fading remnants of your "freedom"). Anyway, to simplify: "Conservatives" like to have freedom over their economic lives and "librals" like to have freedom over their personal lives. Here's a good compromise: Why not allow each party to have BOTH types of freedom so that everybody is happy? Oh yeah.

Where do you come up with this BS? I'm sure you have some FACTS or some sources or even some examples to backup this nonsense?

The libertarian abolishment of welfare is stated on the partys website (http://www.lp.org/article_85.shtml) - the poor starving on the streets follows logically from this. The same page talks about "economic freedom" and "slashing bureaucratic regulation of business", and without such regulations, what is stopping cartels from forming ? And nasty employment contracts are also the natural result of lack of such regulation.

Various Slashdot posters also keep on touting abolishment of taxes (and, logically, all tax-funded functions) and any kind of government control of economy in the name of libertarianism.

The part of how and why communism was born you can check yourself from history books.

Almost no one. Libertarians are the only party that actually believes in restoring all of the rights republicans and democrats stole long ago (and continue to steal). Libertarians are the only group that believes in the philosophy of liberty and don't waver from its principles when facing difficult scenarios.

If you're sick of the bullshit, look in to the Libertarian Party. There's no hidden agenda or anything, just the idea of advancing freedom and limiting authoritarianism in America.

BUT, I'm STILL not voting Democratic because (A) they are just as bad as the Republicans, and (B) they very much want to take away the right to persue my hobbies with all the strength they can muster (ie, off-road vehicle driving).

Then vote Libertarian! Any vote for the Libertarians counts, because it gets the attention of the both of the useless parties!

For all of the other folks out there who don't agree with the Libertarian platform, please consider one of the other 3rd parties - every vote for the 3rd party is a vote to change the current system.

Note: The above is US-centric. People in other parts of the world are free to govern themselves however the hell they want to -- in their own countries.

I only vote libertarian from now on. http://www.lp.org/

Check out the libertarian party.

http://lp.org/

They are the largest third party in the US and they have people running for office in almost every state.

...and how many of you think that the first two choices are going to send this country to hell in a hand basket then click...Click here

Wrong about the Government and blinders.

Anybody who actually supports this Government has blinders on to the ongoing well established history of lies, theft, cheating, wasting money, corruption, bribery and the list goes on. The Government knows full well what it is doing and only openly denies the sinister nature and reasons...nothing blind about it.

I would rather hope the masses unite again and do away with this treachery and all other forms of it that has been allowed to fester and rot throughout our culture and now tainted system of Government. The will of the many will outweigh the will of the one, even if mighty.

http://www.lp.org/

If you want an end to this, vote accordingly and put out *ALL* encumbents in this election and send a crystal clear message that We the People are sick and fucking tired of the bullshit and getting shit on.

I am the parent of 2 children who access the Internet, supervised (Not hovering 24/7 rather follow-up about what they used the Internet for etc in addition to checking logs etc). I setup their computers in their own subnet and in their router (hard wired with no WiFi to hook into another network and circumvent my policies) I setup a blacklist to the common domains for the most common hits out of a google search for the most common keywords for undesirable subjects. I then hedge my bets using local filtering software installed on non-admin accounts so no changes/installs can be done. If they have questions and concerns, they come to see me as not only the administrator of the network but as the parent who provides guidance in using and understanding this medium and powerhouse of information. Foolproof? Hell no I am sure if I wanted I could find ways to circumvent everything I have done as anybody in the industry knows security is an illusion. But, I temper that with again being a parent and keeping my children educated and informed with comfort in an open door for their questions and concerns to be answered fully and honestly.

Someday my children will have full access to reality, and I am confident they will be ready for that day having built confidence and knowledge tempered with guidance.

Vote out *ALL* encumbents and Google: A Patriot's Letter

http://www.lp.org/

"Please stick to doing what I pay you to do for a change, namely protect me & my fellow countrymen from other people that are attempting to violate our rights and not wasting our tax dollars trying to protect us from ourselves."

Wow, you already set yourself up for some big ongoing historically repeating failures and let downs with just the request to not waste tax dollars (Domestic Welfare, Corporate Welfare, Child Support, IRS, rebuilding funds giving away unaudited money, etc, etc, etc,).

http://www.lp.org/

If you are really interested in addressing your tax concerns along with many other serious failures known as our Federal Government. Vote out *ALL* encumbents in the meantime unless you agree and support how things have been going and will be going. For a good interesting read, Google: A Patriot's Letter

You have a vote and you have *many* means to spread your word and message, you can blame but only yourself.

I blame Bush as much as I blame everyone else in charge. The only difference between the two major parties is how they talk before the election. Once in control, they both expand government power at the cost of the liberty of the citizens. After such a mediocre Republican president, as long as the Democrats don't fuck it up and send in another Al Gore, they'll have the presidency. Just watch and you'll see that they do the same stuff once they're in control. On a related note, if you want to end all of this, help the Libertarians. I do and I enjoy it.