Slashdot Mirror

immigration (and how to block it and throw everyone not "belonging" here out),

Ron Paul isn't anti-immigration. On the issues quotes him as saying "Weak economy is source of resentment against immigrants. (Dec 2007)" Then it has him going further explaining his position. He wrote The Immigration Question in 2006. So as far as immigration is concerned Ron Paul is open minded.

minority protection (or avoidance thereof)

Again from On the Issues:
"Inner-city minorities are punished unfairly in war on drugs. (Sep 2007)"
However the NCAAP rates him at 39%, "indicating a mixed record on affirmative-action".

elimination of religion as far as possible (at least every kind that doesn't "belong" here, in short, Islam)

On religion Ron Paul has the position that government and religion should be kept separated. He said "Bush's faith-based initiative is 'a neocon project'".

On the Issues has more on where Ron Paul stands on various issues. Now you say right wing means something different in Europe than it does in the US. Well Ron Paul doesn't meet Europe's definition of right winger either.

Religion is generally not a big deal in EU politics. I haven't heard a politician invoke $deity for whatever reason, actually.

Unless it's Islam. Not everyone is okay with the religion, there are some groups who oppose Muslims.

Falcon

immigration (and how to block it and throw everyone not "belonging" here out),

Ron Paul isn't anti-immigration. On the issues quotes him as saying "Weak economy is source of resentment against immigrants. (Dec 2007)" Then it has him going further explaining his position. He wrote The Immigration Question in 2006. So as far as immigration is concerned Ron Paul is open minded.

minority protection (or avoidance thereof)

Again from On the Issues:
"Inner-city minorities are punished unfairly in war on drugs. (Sep 2007)"
However the NCAAP rates him at 39%, "indicating a mixed record on affirmative-action".

elimination of religion as far as possible (at least every kind that doesn't "belong" here, in short, Islam)

On religion Ron Paul has the position that government and religion should be kept separated. He said "Bush's faith-based initiative is 'a neocon project'".

On the Issues has more on where Ron Paul stands on various issues. Now you say right wing means something different in Europe than it does in the US. Well Ron Paul doesn't meet Europe's definition of right winger either.

Religion is generally not a big deal in EU politics. I haven't heard a politician invoke $deity for whatever reason, actually.

Unless it's Islam. Not everyone is okay with the religion, there are some groups who oppose Muslims.

Falcon

We further hold that the owners of property have the full right to control, use, dispose of, or in any manner enjoy, their property without interference.

Libertarians can't be painted with a broad brush. There are many who resent what appears to be a hijacking of the word "Libertarian" by some who are trying to advance political beliefs that at their heart are really not libertarian. Unions are often the opposite of "free association". Often, you aren't given a choice about joining. Try getting a teaching job or a acting job without signing a union card. (Of course, most Libertarians wouldn't be caught dead teaching in a public school, but that's a whole other issue.)

"Liber" -> "free" -> "free software". You'd think it would be a natural fit.

http://www.ontheissues.org/2004/Dennis_Kucinich_Health_Care.htm Kucinich was pretty much the only supporter of a single payer universal coverage system.

You know, before you start slinging the party mud and calling someone's comment "idiotic", you might want to remember that actions speak louder than words. The constitution states (and the supreme court supports) that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. Period. And yet Obama is quoted as saying, "just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can't constrain the exercise of that right...." For example, you may have a right to free speech but, according to Obama's logic, perhaps the government can constrain the use of that right in, say, all public forums. Furthermore, he endorsed the Illinois handgun ban, allows for local gun bans, cosponsored a bill to severely limit handgun purchases, and wants to ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons. All of this is strictly unconstitutional.

Look, I don't know why you're worried about your children or grandchildren.

Cheney has reassured us, just as Regan proved, **deficits don't matter**.

http://www.ontheissues.org/2004/Dick_Cheney_Budget_+_Economy.htm

And surely, just as they don't matter now, they won't matter to the future Dick Cheneys that will be ruining your grandchildren's lives while they simultaneously vote for, and cheer them on.

Regan fixed this country. He showed that labor is for suckers. Producing goods is a brown man's game. Buying those goods on credit and then landfilling them next month is the White Man's Burden. So, snorting blow off hookers when you aren't shuffling zeros around in a bank's computer is the only responsible way to run an economy. Financial services requires a world full of debt and wasteful consumerism, otherwise the entire premise of never-ending growth topples the house of cards. If you want America to be great (to keep up the never-ending growth) you better be doing everything you can to protect the status quo.

Your the second green libertarian I have met this week...err...ever!

Here's the Libertarians Party's position on the environment, The Pollution Solution: Stopping the environment's worst enemy. Notice what it says are the biggest polluters, governments at all levels. This is true whether it's the Department of Defense or a local school district. Here's On The Issues section on the Libertarian Party on Environment.

"Private enterprises can be effective in cleaning up the environment."

Yep, but only if/when our economic system properly recognises pollution as a cost.

Yeap, government doesn't make polluters accountable for a lot of pollution, as that page says "we've placed the fox in charge of the hen house".

Falcon

Unless your Mayor is Rudy Guilliani. He will take your sealed record and expose it on TV, claiming the cops had a right to murder you after you refused to sell them drugs, because when you were a kid you once got is a fight over $.25. Then he will say you are "no choirboy," even though you in fact were a choirboy.

But do you want to know what the real shitkicker of it all is? Many - many - members of Congress have criminal records. And those hypocritical bastards still get glom onto power!

http://www.ontheissues.org/AskMe/spousal_abuse.htm

I suggest he is just grandstanding. If you look over his record and positions at http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Chuck_Grassley.htm your opinion might be refined. Or your hair might stand on end...

• We will never have the perfect candidate, so we all have to do some soul-searching and settle on the 'least worse' candidate according to our political & personal beliefs.
• We have to remove the social stigma of admitting one's mistakes.
  If Sen. Obama or Sen. McCain today said "I said/believed/associated with/voted [x]. I made a mistake, but I've learned since then. Here is my new viewpoint/record [y] and my reasoning is [z]," I'm sure it would have a negative impact, subjecting either to ridicule & a loss of credibility, or a political dead end had either been a lesser-known figure.
  I'm not sure who is to be blamed- the media, the American electorate, or both- but this is a major hindrance in modern American politics(/politics in general).
  Yes, now I'm pessimistic & blunt.
• One* vote in either direction in this election will not yield a difference in the final outcome.
  *(Or two, yours & mine; or a few dozen-hundred, /. readers eligible to vote

I don't get the fear about Obama, though.

Agreed. I'd like to see a list of fears that your average registered republican voter has of Obama getting into office. I'd bet that a huge portion of them are along the lines of "He's Muslim!"/"He's gonna take away our guns!"/"He pals around with terrorists!"/"He's going to raise taxes on me!" (of course, this is true for people who make over $250K/yr, but plenty of people not in that bracket who are voting against him believe this to be true). Bleh.

something like this should have been established a long time ago. instead of listening to political demagogues engaging in mudslinging and espousing empty rhetoric, it would be much more productive to actually research current issues with direct access to new bills and legislative proposals. and once you have an educated and informed public, you can conduct mass referendums and let the public make policy decisions themselves (at least on the issues that effect our everyday lives, like drug policy, government surveillance, universal health care, tax policy, gay marriage, etc.).

ideally, the media would do its job keeping the public informed and hold politicians accountable for their actions. but sadly the mainstream media seems to have lost every shred of journalistic integrity and would rather cover celebrity gossip than political corruption, and the consolidation of the media by a handful of media conglomerates means that a handful of people control how the masses perceive the world, and news reporting is often skewed to reflect the world view of our cultural hegemons.

luckily, the internet is starting to change this by decentralizing media distribution and giving individuals access to a wide variety of independent news sources. no longer are corporate media conglomerates the gatekeepers of information. before i'd heard about THOMAS, i used to visit OnTheIssues.org, which provides detailed voting records and public statements (as well as summaries of legislation) of current political leaders and presidential candidates. but a democratic government needs to directly provide this info to the public, and the web is the best way to do this.

i'm glad that this is finally achieved with the THOMAS database. however, i think they need to keep permanent online records for all government officials past and present--right now it only displays congressional records, but that gives the public no oversight of the rest of the government. even if many positions are appointed by the president, we can still hold the president accountable for the actions of his appointees. representative democracy only works if the electorate provides negative feedback when politicians fail to act in the interest of the people. that means the public needs to be ever vigilante of government corruption and incompetence. perhaps an online system can even be established so the public can give direct feedback to government officials on their present performance, and not just limit democratic feedback to public elections. for instance, if a particular cabinet member's public approval drops below 50%, then the president would be forced to appoint a new leader. and if the president's public approval drops below 30%, then that would be cause for a congressional hearing, potentially leading to impeachment.

the next step is to move beyond representative democracy and actually allow the public to participate directly in the democratic process. i know many people think that the average person isn't capable of making public policy decisions, but they can speak for themselves, not for others. i don't need some clueless politician making policy decisions for me. right now the government is run by a very particular social group most aptly described as the political aristocracy. how can a government be trusted to act in the best interest of its citizens when it is run entirely by individuals who come from a completely different socioeconomic background than most of the population. the ruling class of America are all rich old men who are completely disconnected from the reality of the average person. at the very minimum, politicians should be paid a salary equivalent to the mean annual salary of the average American. otherwise, if all legislators reside in the uppermost tax bracket, how can we expect them to make progress tax reforms that are in the interest of the average person?

in the past, logistical problems prevented regular broad-based referendums from being conducted to give the public

Well Obama's a lawyer that took the RIAA's "free money" while senator.

He's a lawyer people. The RIAA regularly gives him a couple grand "for the kids".

*sigh* I liked Obama for his "get out of Iraq" talk. He backtracked all those statements, now wants to remain there and spend even more than McCain (does he think that's a popular position ?). For every single other point I like McCain. *sigh*

I'm gonna go McCain. Yes he's Bush's successor, but at least he doesn't take "free money" from the devil.

The followings is a short list of where Barack stands on technology issues.

Ensure net neutrality: no corporate-tiered Internet. (Jan 2007)

Create online database of science & math scholarships. (Dec 2007)

Website for competitive federal awards. (Jun 2008)

Overturn FCC approval of media consolidation. (Mar 2008)

The last one -- overturning FCC approval of media consolidation -- is the most telling. To me, that "free money" $2,000 from the RIAA means practically nothing if he's voting to destroy the foundation of what makes the RIAA's influence so powerful. The RIAA couldn't throw $$ at politicians if it didn't have some serious power.

And where does the RIAA get that power? From consolidated media, of course. Most musical superstars become superstars not because of their talent, but because of the *distribution* of their work via media hype which is only aggrandized by media consolidation.

McCain's record:

Voted NO on disallowing FCC approval of larger media conglomerates. (Sep 2003)

Voted NO on telecomm deregulation. (Feb 1996)

You sure about that, OeLeWaPpErKe? I would venture it's pretty obvious that a vote for McCain is a vote for . . . well, the devil. :)

How so?

Though Bob Barr and John McCain share some positions on some issues on others they hold different positions.

Falcon

How so?

Though Bob Barr and John McCain share some positions on some issues on others they hold different positions.

Falcon

Obama will castrate our military and destroy our nuclear deterrent.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxL8NcNACBY

He will tax corporations and high income earners that employ the population of the US, which will force them to cut jobs and send the unemployment rate skyrocketing.
http://obama.3cdn.net/b7be3b7cd08e587dca_v852mv8ja.pdf

He sees dead people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=galtZF0nKYc

He wants to take the guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens, leaving us at the mercy of criminals.
http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/barack_obama_gun_control.htm

He'll cut and run from Iraq, knocking the legs out from under the Iraqi government as they are finally finding their footing.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/

He believes homosexuals are entitled to more rights than straight people.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/23/debate.transcript/index.html

He believes in mob rule concerning criminal punishment.
The Audacity of Hope, by Barack Obama, p. 58

He refuses to call terrorists "terrorists" even when presented with evidence.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15251928

He will prevent us from keeping sensitive materials confidential, which will place national security at risk.
http://www.cfr.org/publication/14356/

He would talk with terrorist countries without demanding that they cease their efforts to murder innocent people and abide by the rule of law.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3Oj7Jn9rv4

He believes we should reward people who ignore the existence of a country's sovereignty and illegally enter the country instead of forcing them to abide by the law.
http://obama.senate.gov/news/060923-sen_obama_at_to/index.php

He believes the government should regulate the internet.
http://obama.senate.gov/podcast/060608-network_neutral/index.php

He believes in making those who have money pay for the healthcare of those who do not have money.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/

He believes we should take corn, a staple food for the US, and use it for ethanol production, which will cause shortages in food supply and produce car exhaust that is more dangerous to humans than gasoline burning cars.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/01/05/new_us_congress_looks_to_boost_alternate_fuels/?p1=MEWell_Pos5

He believes that parents should have no choice but to send their children to government run schools to be indoctrinated by sub-standard teachers.
http://www-news.uchicago.edu/citations/04/041027.obama-ct.html

In short, he's an anti-American, anti-military Marxist who will destroy the US before he can be voted out of office. I don't like McCain and I have problems with many of his positions, but he will, at the very least, keep the US from crashing and burning within the next 4 years (provided the Dems don't win Congress).

And no, he's not a Muslim (as far as we know). He's not black (he's bi-racial). He's not a Christian (against everything Ch

Obama will castrate our military and destroy our nuclear deterrent.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxL8NcNACBY

He will tax corporations and high income earners that employ the population of the US, which will force them to cut jobs and send the unemployment rate skyrocketing.
http://obama.3cdn.net/b7be3b7cd08e587dca_v852mv8ja.pdf

He sees dead people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=galtZF0nKYc

He wants to take the guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens, leaving us at the mercy of criminals.
http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/barack_obama_gun_control.htm

He'll cut and run from Iraq, knocking the legs out from under the Iraqi government as they are finally finding their footing.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/

He believes homosexuals are entitled to more rights than straight people.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/23/debate.transcript/index.html

He believes in mob rule concerning criminal punishment.
The Audacity of Hope, by Barack Obama, p. 58

He refuses to call terrorists "terrorists" even when presented with evidence.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15251928

He will prevent us from keeping sensitive materials confidential, which will place national security at risk.
http://www.cfr.org/publication/14356/

He would talk with terrorist countries without demanding that they cease their efforts to murder innocent people and abide by the rule of law.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3Oj7Jn9rv4

He believes we should reward people who ignore the existence of a country's sovereignty and illegally enter the country instead of forcing them to abide by the law.
http://obama.senate.gov/news/060923-sen_obama_at_to/index.php

He believes the government should regulate the internet.
http://obama.senate.gov/podcast/060608-network_neutral/index.php

He believes in making those who have money pay for the healthcare of those who do not have money.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/

He believes we should take corn, a staple food for the US, and use it for ethanol production, which will cause shortages in food supply and produce car exhaust that is more dangerous to humans than gasoline burning cars.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/01/05/new_us_congress_looks_to_boost_alternate_fuels/?p1=MEWell_Pos5

He believes that parents should have no choice but to send their children to government run schools to be indoctrinated by sub-standard teachers.
http://www-news.uchicago.edu/citations/04/041027.obama-ct.html

In short, he's an anti-American, anti-military Marxist who will destroy the US before he can be voted out of office. I don't like McCain and I have problems with many of his positions, but he will, at the very least, keep the US from crashing and burning within the next 4 years (provided the Dems don't win Congress).

And no, he's not a Muslim (as far as we know). He's not black (he's bi-racial). He's not a Christian (against everything Ch

Obama will castrate our military and destroy our nuclear deterrent.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxL8NcNACBY

He will tax corporations and high income earners that employ the population of the US, which will force them to cut jobs and send the unemployment rate skyrocketing.
http://obama.3cdn.net/b7be3b7cd08e587dca_v852mv8ja.pdf

He sees dead people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=galtZF0nKYc

He wants to take the guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens, leaving us at the mercy of criminals.
http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/barack_obama_gun_control.htm

He'll cut and run from Iraq, knocking the legs out from under the Iraqi government as they are finally finding their footing.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/

He believes homosexuals are entitled to more rights than straight people.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/23/debate.transcript/index.html

He believes in mob rule concerning criminal punishment.
The Audacity of Hope, by Barack Obama, p. 58

He refuses to call terrorists "terrorists" even when presented with evidence.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15251928

He will prevent us from keeping sensitive materials confidential, which will place national security at risk.
http://www.cfr.org/publication/14356/

He would talk with terrorist countries without demanding that they cease their efforts to murder innocent people and abide by the rule of law.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3Oj7Jn9rv4

He believes we should reward people who ignore the existence of a country's sovereignty and illegally enter the country instead of forcing them to abide by the law.
http://obama.senate.gov/news/060923-sen_obama_at_to/index.php

He believes the government should regulate the internet.
http://obama.senate.gov/podcast/060608-network_neutral/index.php

He believes in making those who have money pay for the healthcare of those who do not have money.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/

He believes we should take corn, a staple food for the US, and use it for ethanol production, which will cause shortages in food supply and produce car exhaust that is more dangerous to humans than gasoline burning cars.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/01/05/new_us_congress_looks_to_boost_alternate_fuels/?p1=MEWell_Pos5

He believes that parents should have no choice but to send their children to government run schools to be indoctrinated by sub-standard teachers.
http://www-news.uchicago.edu/citations/04/041027.obama-ct.html

In short, he's an anti-American, anti-military Marxist who will destroy the US before he can be voted out of office. I don't like McCain and I have problems with many of his positions, but he will, at the very least, keep the US from crashing and burning within the next 4 years (provided the Dems don't win Congress).

And no, he's not a Muslim (as far as we know). He's not black (he's bi-racial). He's not a Christian (against everything Ch

Obama will castrate our military and destroy our nuclear deterrent.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxL8NcNACBY

He will tax corporations and high income earners that employ the population of the US, which will force them to cut jobs and send the unemployment rate skyrocketing.
http://obama.3cdn.net/b7be3b7cd08e587dca_v852mv8ja.pdf

He sees dead people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=galtZF0nKYc

He wants to take the guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens, leaving us at the mercy of criminals.
http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/barack_obama_gun_control.htm

He'll cut and run from Iraq, knocking the legs out from under the Iraqi government as they are finally finding their footing.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/

He believes homosexuals are entitled to more rights than straight people.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/23/debate.transcript/index.html

He believes in mob rule concerning criminal punishment.
The Audacity of Hope, by Barack Obama, p. 58

He refuses to call terrorists "terrorists" even when presented with evidence.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15251928

He will prevent us from keeping sensitive materials confidential, which will place national security at risk.
http://www.cfr.org/publication/14356/

He would talk with terrorist countries without demanding that they cease their efforts to murder innocent people and abide by the rule of law.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3Oj7Jn9rv4

He believes we should reward people who ignore the existence of a country's sovereignty and illegally enter the country instead of forcing them to abide by the law.
http://obama.senate.gov/news/060923-sen_obama_at_to/index.php

He believes the government should regulate the internet.
http://obama.senate.gov/podcast/060608-network_neutral/index.php

He believes in making those who have money pay for the healthcare of those who do not have money.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/

He believes we should take corn, a staple food for the US, and use it for ethanol production, which will cause shortages in food supply and produce car exhaust that is more dangerous to humans than gasoline burning cars.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/01/05/new_us_congress_looks_to_boost_alternate_fuels/?p1=MEWell_Pos5

He believes that parents should have no choice but to send their children to government run schools to be indoctrinated by sub-standard teachers.
http://www-news.uchicago.edu/citations/04/041027.obama-ct.html

In short, he's an anti-American, anti-military Marxist who will destroy the US before he can be voted out of office. I don't like McCain and I have problems with many of his positions, but he will, at the very least, keep the US from crashing and burning within the next 4 years (provided the Dems don't win Congress).

And no, he's not a Muslim (as far as we know). He's not black (he's bi-racial). He's not a Christian (against everything Ch

Obama will castrate our military and destroy our nuclear deterrent.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxL8NcNACBY

He will tax corporations and high income earners that employ the population of the US, which will force them to cut jobs and send the unemployment rate skyrocketing.
http://obama.3cdn.net/b7be3b7cd08e587dca_v852mv8ja.pdf

He sees dead people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=galtZF0nKYc

He wants to take the guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens, leaving us at the mercy of criminals.
http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/barack_obama_gun_control.htm

He'll cut and run from Iraq, knocking the legs out from under the Iraqi government as they are finally finding their footing.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/

He believes homosexuals are entitled to more rights than straight people.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/23/debate.transcript/index.html

He believes in mob rule concerning criminal punishment.
The Audacity of Hope, by Barack Obama, p. 58

He refuses to call terrorists "terrorists" even when presented with evidence.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15251928

He will prevent us from keeping sensitive materials confidential, which will place national security at risk.
http://www.cfr.org/publication/14356/

He would talk with terrorist countries without demanding that they cease their efforts to murder innocent people and abide by the rule of law.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3Oj7Jn9rv4

He believes we should reward people who ignore the existence of a country's sovereignty and illegally enter the country instead of forcing them to abide by the law.
http://obama.senate.gov/news/060923-sen_obama_at_to/index.php

He believes the government should regulate the internet.
http://obama.senate.gov/podcast/060608-network_neutral/index.php

He believes in making those who have money pay for the healthcare of those who do not have money.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/

He believes we should take corn, a staple food for the US, and use it for ethanol production, which will cause shortages in food supply and produce car exhaust that is more dangerous to humans than gasoline burning cars.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/01/05/new_us_congress_looks_to_boost_alternate_fuels/?p1=MEWell_Pos5

He believes that parents should have no choice but to send their children to government run schools to be indoctrinated by sub-standard teachers.
http://www-news.uchicago.edu/citations/04/041027.obama-ct.html

In short, he's an anti-American, anti-military Marxist who will destroy the US before he can be voted out of office. I don't like McCain and I have problems with many of his positions, but he will, at the very least, keep the US from crashing and burning within the next 4 years (provided the Dems don't win Congress).

And no, he's not a Muslim (as far as we know). He's not black (he's bi-racial). He's not a Christian (against everything Ch

This isn't like being fired because you beat your boss at golf, this is like being fired because you lost your temper, took out an ad in the local newspaper saying your company kills puppies, and then took a shit on your boss' desk.

...and then when your boss told you not to do that, so you told everyone at the company that she had it in for you because she was secretly a lesbian. And then you started posting photographs of members of the boss' family in the break room, and included several pages of hard core gay porn in the company's annual report.

Only to receive a stern talking to by the folks over at HR, and strong advice to seek the psychiatric help you so clearly need.

This is like doing all that and then still keeping your job, only to continue showing up to work with no pants on and pissing on the water cooler every single day for the next year, and _then_ finally being fired.

No sane person could possibly be surprised that this happened, only that it took this long.

Interesting reality you live in there.
results of a really quick google search:
http://www.reason.com/news/show/28582.html (england & gun control)
the Obama thing is a little hard to pin down, as he has been pretty good at avoiding any straight answers. But you could start here: http://www.ontheissues.org/domestic/Barack_Obama_Gun_Control.htm
note: if you are pro-gun control, you obviously won't see anything wrong with this.

Actually Obama wants to cut taxes. Here's OnTheIssue's webpage on Obama's Tax Reform.

Having said that, I still can't support Obama. This election Bob Barr will more than likely get my vote.

Falcon

Conservative: http://www.theconservativevoice.com/categories/social-security.html

Libertarian: http://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/Libertarian_Party_Social_Security.htm

Now you've gone from "I already gave you proof" to "Go find proof yourself!". This is backpedaling, and a further admission that you have no proof.

First off, the fact that Obama commonly runs against McCain by saying that McCain is to continue the "Bush" economy implicitly rejects Republican economic policies. In fact, he does this explicitly in his book. So, what are Republican policies, and who do they favor, and how would Obama reject that. So right off the wheel, based on that statement alone, Obama is against free trade, domestic manufacturing, coal mining, farming and oil drilling, because, the Bush economy has been to be pro-free trade, devalue the dollar to promote domestic manufacturing, increase coal mining and oil drilling, and other resource extraction.

Saying that Obama is a radical leftist if not downright communist is like calling the sky blue. There's not a single statement that I made that could actually dispute. Still, for the benefit of our readers, here we go:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Barack_Obama.htm

http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Barack_Obama_Budget_+_Economy.htm

Some salient points:

Rejects free market vision of government
In a 2005 commencement address, Obama described the conservative philosophy of government as "to give everyone one big refund on their government, divvy it up by individual portions, in the form of tax breaks, hand it out, and encourage everyone to use their share to go buy their own health care, their own retirement plan, their own child care, their own education, and so on. In Washington, they call this the Ownership Society. But in our past there has been another term for it, Social Darwinism, every man or woman for him or herself. It's a tempting idea, because it doesn't require much thought or ingenuity." Obama has rejected this free market vision of government, preferring to see the power of the state as something that can serve the public interest.

Just read what he says.... it's not like he's trying to hide anything. Full bore commy liberal, and all the heavy handed state stamping out of free enterprise that follows.

Now you've gone from "I already gave you proof" to "Go find proof yourself!". This is backpedaling, and a further admission that you have no proof.

First off, the fact that Obama commonly runs against McCain by saying that McCain is to continue the "Bush" economy implicitly rejects Republican economic policies. In fact, he does this explicitly in his book. So, what are Republican policies, and who do they favor, and how would Obama reject that. So right off the wheel, based on that statement alone, Obama is against free trade, domestic manufacturing, coal mining, farming and oil drilling, because, the Bush economy has been to be pro-free trade, devalue the dollar to promote domestic manufacturing, increase coal mining and oil drilling, and other resource extraction.

Saying that Obama is a radical leftist if not downright communist is like calling the sky blue. There's not a single statement that I made that could actually dispute. Still, for the benefit of our readers, here we go:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Barack_Obama.htm

http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Barack_Obama_Budget_+_Economy.htm

Some salient points:

Rejects free market vision of government
In a 2005 commencement address, Obama described the conservative philosophy of government as "to give everyone one big refund on their government, divvy it up by individual portions, in the form of tax breaks, hand it out, and encourage everyone to use their share to go buy their own health care, their own retirement plan, their own child care, their own education, and so on. In Washington, they call this the Ownership Society. But in our past there has been another term for it, Social Darwinism, every man or woman for him or herself. It's a tempting idea, because it doesn't require much thought or ingenuity." Obama has rejected this free market vision of government, preferring to see the power of the state as something that can serve the public interest.

Just read what he says.... it's not like he's trying to hide anything. Full bore commy liberal, and all the heavy handed state stamping out of free enterprise that follows.

"The only option at this point is to begin militant action against our failed government institution."

Isn't voting for Libertarian Bob Barr an option?

Well, if civil liberties are your priority, then I don't know if Bob Barr is your guy. Consider:

His support for the Patriot Act, his attacks on reproductive rights of women, his support for a constitutional ban on the rights of gay couples to marry, his support for banning adoption of children by gay parents, his restriction of freedom of speech and expression with respect to the US flag, his redefinition of habeas corpus to exclude death row appealates, his opposition to medical marijuana programs...

Bob Barr seems much more like an ideological conservative than a true libertarian to me.

Bob Barr on the Issues

Indeed. Video games seem to have taken the place of tabletop roleplaying games as THE NEXT BIG EVIL THAT WILL TURN OUR KIDS INTO PSYCHOPATHS AND AWAY FROM JESUS!!!! It's the same sort of cranks with the same kinds of junk science, badly interpreted or even completely fraudulent statistics and with the same underlying support from the enemies of freedom; the Religious Right.

Wow, I didn't know Hillary was a part of the Religious Right. All this time I thought she was a leftist who is trying to ban the sale of violent video games to children. This is one step closer towards a total ban on video games someone doesn't like. IMO, Hillary is no different than Jack Thompson. Seems to me there is little difference between the right and the left as they both have their share of those who cry "Won't somebody please think of the children?"

BTW, I am a Christian who doesn't support bans on video games.

On what you learn in science class. (See question 4.)
More detail on that.

Oh hell, just check out his voting profile here http://www.ontheissues.org/Dennis_Kucinich.htm

This guy is a touchy-feely leftist. And like all leftists, they tend to think more with the emotional part of the brain rather than the logical.

While I'm sure Dennis is a great guy to hang out with, he is simply dangerious on policies such as welfare, crime, and national security.

Here are some quotes from Ralph about technology...
http://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/Ralph_Nader_Technology.htm

TV immersion deprives children of exposure to nature. (Jan 2007)
FCC is hapless agent in media regulation. (May 2003)
The media needs more diversity and competition. (May 2003)
FCC gave away $70B in airwave licenses to large corporations. (Oct 2000)
Domain name registration needs openness to replace monopoly. (Oct 2000)
Put all Congressional voting records on Internet. (Jun 2000)
More free info from govt via computers & airwaves. (Feb 2000)
Ruling against Microsoft bodes well for competition. (Nov 1999)
Bold investment needed for public transportation. (Jul 1999)
Microsoft is anticompetitive and anticonsumer. (Nov 1998)
Microsoft must be stopped. (Nov 1998)
The public owns the airwaves; express our rights. (Apr 1996)

Check the link for more detailed quotes.

Before applauding a former House Speaker with a terrible voting record, maybe you should consider finding out why the recommendation to keep using paper was made. From the article, it had nothing to do with a fear of technology or concerns related to voting machines. It was simply because the project to use the handhelds "experienced significant schedule, performance and cost issues". In other words, it was a matter of logistics.

You said: "He hasn't kowtowed to the Jesus Crispies..."

But he doesn't have to - he's one of them.

See, for example, http://www.ontheissues.org/John_McCain.htm

"Supports repealing Roe v. Wade. (May 2007)"

"Support evangelism"

"Supports Amendment against flag-burning."

"Hollywood should voluntarily self-censor sex and violence."

"Ten Commandments would bring virtue to our schools."

Yep, he's your typical Republican: un-American, more Middle-Eastern-thinking than Western, talibanic religious nut. He's recently been vowing to only appoint antichoice judges. Sounds pretty crispy to me.

Thank you for your response. It scared me for a minute; I was nervous that I had misspoken. I was pretty sure I had read, on a number of occasions, that Ron Paul was anti-free trade. So I looked to see if I had been right. I found this page which clearly shows his voting record on the issue of free trade. You will see that he is definitely NOT a proponent of free trade. I know, it seems weird. I thought he was a libertarian as well.

http://www.ontheissues.org/TX/Ron_Paul_Free_Trade.htm

Oh geez, someone has been drinking the Gold Standard Kool-Aid. Do you know why we got away from the gold standard? Because it was one of the major causes of the Great Depression. It is also far less flexible than the monetary systems we use today such that an attempt to go back to it would cause a major deflation in the currency while skyrocketing the value of gold. Oh, and guess who has a lot of holding in gold? You guessed it, Ron Paul. The Wikipedia article alone has some rather compelling reasons why return to the Gold Standard is a bad idea.

He keeps saying he's for free trade, but whenever a vote comes up he votes protectionist.

States rights is a familiar dodge for people who rooted for the South in the Civil war but don't want to give the appearance of being pro-slavery. In here it appears to be a way to dodge for uncomfortable social issues that, while probably correct in the long term, are politically unpopular today.

Like most Libertarians, Ron Paul would much prefer getting rid of the socialized support systems we currently have, believing that people would be better off just saving on their own instead of having the government do it. In general, that is probably true, however if people were good at that we wouldn't have needed those systems in the first palace. Once he starts cutting the funds for those systems it is inevitable that more people will fall through the gaps. There is the promise that everybody currently on it will continue getting their support, but if the money is not there then there is no way to keep that promise.

For an extensive rundown of where Ron Paul stands on the issues, visit On The Issues. This is actually a good place to visit for all of the candidates.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

He did vote against net neutrality though. http://ontheissues.org/Ron_Paul.htm#Technology

No, seriously. He's worth investigating. I will probably vote for him, because I basically look for two issues to help me decide: a women's right to abortion and the right to own firearms. It's that odd mix of conservative but social policies I like in a candidate. He seems more of a likely contender than a 3rd party and Ron Paul has much less of a chance than this guy. You can check out his main site. The only thing going against him is that he's not that pretty or charming and I feel the average American needs a somewhat pretty or charming president (Obama, Edwards). And no, I do not work for Richardson's campaign.

Huh... his only section on Life & Liberty is his desire to overturn Roe vs. Wade. In other words, for FORCE a woman to have a baby she doesn't want in her.

No Ron Paul doesn't want Roe V Wade overturned to make it law a woman has to carry a fetus 'til birth, the USA Constitution says nothing about it and since it doesn't the 10th amendment leaves it to the states or the people. What Ron Paul wants is for the states to decide for themselves whether abortion is legal in each state. While I'd rather abortion be legal nationally, keep it legal but reduce the need for it, I can't fault Paul's stance. Here's his votes on abortions. Specific votes were:

• Voted NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions. (Apr 2005)
  here he voted to allow minors to be transported across state lines.
• Voted NO on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime. (Feb 2004)
  Self explanitory
• Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother's life. (Oct 2003)
  To save a woman's life he would allow abortions.
• Voted NO on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes. (Apr 2001)
  Same
• Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortions. (Apr 2000)
  Here is the only vote against partial birth abortions, not all just so called partial birth, the one above (Oct 2003) allows them if the woman's life is in danger.

The page linked to above has more of his stances. Some of them some will like and others will hate. Both Democrats and Republicans, neo cons and neo liberals. Basically that what a Libertarian is, Libertarians stand between Democrats and Republicans, neo conservatives and neo liberals, ie liberty and small government.

I wondered the same thing.. I'm not a fan (or foe) of Lantos. But his record seems to be pretty consistent on China. I don't know about the rest of the committee. Congress as a whole, yes, definite PKB.

You really should read this before making up your mind like that.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Ron_Paul.htm

Also note that while he doesn't support abortion, Dr. Paul thinks it's an issue that should be left to the states to decide, per the Constitution. His platform is based upon upholding the Constitution that all of the other candidates seem to have conveniently forgotten about, and his voting record supports what he says.

Does Thompson really believe much of anything except a couple religious positions?

In case anyone was interested, here's a good summary of his past voting record:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Chris_Dodd.htm

I agree with your point entirely. It's not black and white with Ron a saint and everyone else evil lying scum. However- of the major candidates (clinton, romney, etc.) I think all of them have taken on at least one position they do not believe in (and will not implement) or hidden on position which they do believe in (and will push once in office). So I can't trust them to do what they say.

I was able to find out more about Mike here:
http://www.ontheissues.org/Mike_Gravel.htm

It's a little thin but it is something.

Ron's here.
http://www.ontheissues.org/Ron_Paul.htm

I would say I disagree with Ron on about 40% of his positions. But I trust him to tell the truth and so the other 60% might actually happen. My primary agreement is pro-small government. My primary disagreement is that i think he is way to naive about corporations behavior when unchecked by government.

The site is a decent site.

I agree with your point entirely. It's not black and white with Ron a saint and everyone else evil lying scum. However- of the major candidates (clinton, romney, etc.) I think all of them have taken on at least one position they do not believe in (and will not implement) or hidden on position which they do believe in (and will push once in office). So I can't trust them to do what they say.

I was able to find out more about Mike here:
http://www.ontheissues.org/Mike_Gravel.htm

It's a little thin but it is something.

Ron's here.
http://www.ontheissues.org/Ron_Paul.htm

I would say I disagree with Ron on about 40% of his positions. But I trust him to tell the truth and so the other 60% might actually happen. My primary agreement is pro-small government. My primary disagreement is that i think he is way to naive about corporations behavior when unchecked by government.

The site is a decent site.

The first result for Googling "Ron Paul on the issues" is this page, a summary of his voting record. (Note the 0% rating from NARAL and the 76% rating from the Christian Coalition.) You can also see his weird ideas that children are being forbidden to pray in school and that the Ten Commandments cannot be displayed in a courtroom over here, which is pretty bog-standard Religious Right nonsense.

You could find this stuff out for yourself. The fact that this isn't common knowledge speaks more about the willing suspension of disbelief by the internet-libertarian crowd than about Ron Paul's status as magical savior.

Would you care to back that up?

His immigration policy looks entirely reasonable to me.

Ron Paul is against Net Neutrality.