Both support the war in iraq. Both have spending plans that are in the red and both say they'll cut their deficit spending in half within four years. Both support the patriot act. Both support curtailing the 2nd amendment. Both have increased the size and scope of the federal government.
The differences are Kerry wants to tax and spend while Bush wants to borrow and spend. Kerry - Pro choice, Bush - Pro Life
So in conclusion I'd say yes they are both asshats.
It is true that Fortress America is safe from invasion. No country has anywhere near the naval fleet needed. The logistical demands alone are astounding.
However, I forsee an economic war brewing, and in that realm we are in a world of hurt. We finance our deficit spending by printing money, which the rest of the world buys. We are now beginning to see this change. I expect to see a switch to the Euro as the default currency for trade over the next couple of years regardless of who wins the election. This will mean a drastic drop in the dollar versus other currencies, and possilby hyper inflation. We may be able to invade countries, but short of nuclear blackmail we will not be able to force the world to buy dollars.
Here is an article about it from the last decent (IMO) congressman in DC:
http://thomas.loc.gov/r108/r108.html click senate, on sept 30th. Choose text of amendments. Look for pages s10154-s10155 Here are some interesting excerpts:
SEC. __01. AMENDMENTS TO THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT RELATING TO IDENTIFICATION OF INDIVIDUALS.
(a) ANTIFRAUD MEASURES FOR SOCIAL SECURITY CARDS.--Section 205(c)(2)(G) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 405(c)(2)(G)) is amended--
(1) by inserting ``(i)'' after ``(G)'';
(2) by striking ``banknote paper'' and inserting ``durable plastic or similar material''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following new clauses:
``(ii) Each Social security card issued under this subparagraph shall include an encrypted electronic identification strip which shall be unique to the individual to whom the card is issued and such biometric information as is determined by the Commissioner and the Secretary of Homeland Security to be necessary for identifying the person to whom to the card is issued. The Commissioner shall develop such electronic identification strip in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, so as to enable employers to use such strip in accordance with section __03(b) of the National Intelligence Reform Act of 2004 to obtain access to the Employment Eligibility Database established by such Secretary pursuant to section __02 of such Act with respect to the individual to whom the card is issued.
SEC. __02. EMPLOYMENT ELIGIBILITY DATABASE.
(a) IN GENERAL.--The Secretary of Homeland Security (hereinafter in this title referred to as ``the Secretary'') shall establish and maintain an Employment Eligibility Database. The Database shall include data comprised of the citizenship status of individuals and the work and residency eligibility information (including expiration dates) with respect to individuals who are not citizens or nationals of the United States but are authorized to work in the United States. Such data shall include all such data maintained by the Department of Homeland Security as of the date of the establishment of such database and information obtained from the Commissioner of Social Security pursuant to section 205(c)(2)(I) of the Social Security Act. The Secretary shall maintain ongoing consultations with the Commissioner to ensure efficient and effective operation of the Database.
(1) IN GENERAL.--No employer may employ an individual in the United States in any capacity if, as soon as practical after such individual has been hired, such individual has not been verified by the employer to have a social security card issued to such individual pursuant to section 205(c)(2)(G) of the Social Security Act and to be authorized to work in the United States in such capacity. Such verification shall be made in accordance with procedures prescribed by the Secretary for the purposes of ensuring against fraudulent use of the card and accurate and prompt verification of the authorization of such individual to work in the United States in such capacity.
(c) CRIMINAL PENALTY.--Any person who--
(1) continues to employ an individual in the United States in any capacity who such person knows not to be authorized to work in the United States in such capacity, or
(2) hires for employment any individual in the United States and fails to comply with the procedures prescribed by the Secretary pursuant to section __03(b) in connection with the hiring of such individual,
[Page: S10156] GPO's PDF
shall upon conviction be fined in accordance with title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both
SEC. __07. USE OF CARD; RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.
Nothing in this title or the amendments made by this title shall be construed to establish a national identification card, and it is the policy of the United States that the social security card shall not be used as a national identification
suggestions for improvement?
My point with this: "I hereby demand unbiased and equal coverage of all candidates for political office who "
is any candidate on your state ballot should be covered by your local media.
This: "interests of the citizen, above that of the government" , could be changed to "citizenry" i.e. the people before the government.
I think you understand the idea i am trying to get across. I think most of us would agree that a balanced budget is one of the highest priorities right now .
I am trying to find a rough minimum that we as voters (or a large portion of voters) can agree on.
Feel free to edit change etc.
No the Libertarian party is NOT pro corporate. Pro small business yes.
You know we've tried it your way for the last 100 years. Both your parties AUTOMATIC response is now: "Problem? Add more government!" What I find most revolting about both parties is they treat you like children. They believe they own you, and frankly, they have ()wn3d this republic.
Well, I'm not built that way. I prefer to make my own decisions, help who I WANT to help, donate where I WANT to donate, etc. and refuse to do so when I do not agree! As for the Libertarian idea not working, perhaps it won't. I do know we STARTED out that way, so I say why not try it again?
Call me back when Kerry has stopped treading on the constitution, or Bush gets replaced by an orangutan.
Our country is founded upon the principles of Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. These goals are achievable only if we the people desire them to be so.
I hereby swear that I will vote for those people who promise to approve a balanced budget only. I hereby swear that I will place the interests of the citizen, above that of the government. I hereby demand unbiased and equal coverage of all candidates for political office who: A) Support a balanced budget B) Support Civil Liberties C) Are on my state Ballot
I will not support, nor vote for, any candidate regardless of party affiliation, if they do not agree to abide by the terms set forth above.
I will not support, nor vote for, any candidate regardless of party affiliation, if they do not agree to debate all eligible candidates which meet the requirements above.
I recognize it is my duty as a citizen to find and vote for a candidate who will adhere to preceding principles.
I also agree that any officeholder who violates these terms should be recalled from office.
I will promote this idea to my fellow citizens in order to form a more perfect union.
I know Badnarik won't win. I'll vote for him anyway. Why? Because I am sick and tired of seeing corporate shill #1 versus corporate shill #2
Neither guy has the balls to balance the budget. Neither guy delivers on his promises. The government grows ever larger, civil liberties are being removed, ignored and trodden upon.
Our government IMO is like a crack addict on a binge. They'll keep taxing and spending or borrowing and spending just to keep their 'high'. No one seems to care we are in debt up to our eyeballs.... Yet we keep voting for these guys. Wake up people, someone is going to pay for the bread and circuses. It will either be you or your kids!
The only way this is going to change is if people start saying "Screw This!" and vote for ANYONE else, Nader, Badnarik,Peroultka, Cobb etc.
I emailed the guy in question, here is his verbatim response:
I am the Muslim Outreach Coordinator for the campaign of the Libertarian U.S. presidential candidate Michael Badnarik. On August 20, a staffer for the O'Reilly Factor television show pre-interviewed me for an appearance to
give an opposing point of view to O'Reilly's guest Muhammad Ali Hasan, founder of "Muslims for Bush." On the way to the studio to tape the program on August 26, however, I received a call from O'Reilly's staffer informing me that although I would be identified as a Muslim supporter of Badnarik, I must not mention the Libertarian Party or Badnarik's name on the air.
I assured the staffer that I would not turn the segment into a Badnarik campaign ad, but objected that preventing me from mentioning Badnarik's name
even once would muzzle my main point that one need not support Kerry to oppose Bush. The staffer insisted that I make the point without mentioning either Badnarik's name or that of the Libertarian Party. When I declined to accept these terms, the staffer had the driver they hired take me home.
Another local Muslim with no connection to the Badnarik campaign, Khalid Turaani, was hurried to the studio to take my place. On the air, O'Reilly sought to rebut Turanni's criticism of Bush with
criticism of Kerry. Turaani spontaneously replied that, as a conservative, he would never vote for Kerry and intended to vote for the Libertarian
candidate Michael Badnarik. Watching this turn of events at home, I was reminded of a verse in the Qur'an: "They plotted their plans and God made
His plans, and God is the best of planners."
Even if you disagree with the 3rd party platforms, shouldn't the public be offered the information so they can choose for themselves?
If you think this is unfair I urge you to call James Walton, CNN President: ph 404-827-1500 And let them know you would like to see someone other than Corporate backed candidates.
While you're at it, call these CNN advertisers. Tell them you will boycott their products unless CNN provides fair coverage. Also Mention that the BBC has covered us while CNN has not. Here is the phone list:
The BBC is the only major news outlet to cover the fact that:
A) two presidential candidates were arrested in St Louis.
B) there was a lawsuit which could have stopped the final "debate".
Isn't it strange that CNN has ZERO information on a presidential candidate on the ballot in 48 states and D.C.?
If this happened in anothercountry wouldn't we have heardaboutit?
When added to reports that FOX is censoring guests, it leads one to ask:
Is this a democracy or a puppet show?
IMO this is something that Libertarians do not communicate well. While many Libs may disagree with me on this, I would like to point it out. There is nothing in most STATE constitutions which say you cannot make a state social security system, state owned roads, state taxes etc.
If the Libs were ever elected on a federal level, I forsee each state and/or local communities making their own laws reagarding those local issues which the local populace is more concerned and informed about. Thus, you would have some "Green" cities and states, some "Libertarian" cities and states, etc. Big government for the sake of Homogeniety is not IMO a good thing.
I could see maybe 5 or 10 mentions on CNN but ZERO? zilch, nada. Yet 523 seperate items on nader. Then compare the alexa links, put in votenader.org on the compare sites.(Wouldn't let me do it via a link)
At least FOX is censoring its guests. They cannot mention Badnarik on the air.
I emailed one person in question directly here is his reply:
I am the Muslim Outreach Coordinator for the campaign of the Libertarian
U.S. presidential candidate Michael Badnarik. On August 20, a staffer for
the O'Reilly Factor television show pre-interviewed me for an appearance to
give an opposing point of view to O'Reilly's guest Muhammad Ali Hasan,
founder of "Muslims for Bush." On the way to the studio to tape the program
on August 26, however, I received a call from O'Reilly's staffer informing
me that although I would be identified as a Muslim supporter of Badnarik, I
must not mention the Libertarian Party or Badnarik's name on the air.
I assured the staffer that I would not turn the segment into a Badnarik
campaign ad, but objected that preventing me from mentioning Badnarik's name
even once would muzzle my main point that one need not support Kerry to
oppose Bush. The staffer insisted that I make the point without mentioning
either Badnarik's name or that of the Libertarian Party. When I declined to
accept these terms, the staffer had the driver they hired take me home.
Another local Muslim with no connection to the Badnarik campaign, Khalid
Turaani, was hurried to the studio to take my place.
On the air, O'Reilly sought to rebut Turanni's criticism of Bush with
criticism of Kerry. Turaani spontaneously replied that, as a conservative,
he would never vote for Kerry and intended to vote for the Libertarian
candidate Michael Badnarik. Watching this turn of events at home, I was
reminded of a verse in the Qur'an: "They plotted their plans and God made
His plans, and God is the best of planners."
2004-10-05 17:44:39 National ID and backend database is on its way (Your Rights Online,Politics) (rejected)
Dont you love it when/. rejects your stories only to have them appear a week later?
I had a great doublespeak quote from the congressional record by john mccain on this. Of course i didnt bookmark it DOH.
but he said something like this 1.st sentence "with this bill we are not making a national id" next sentence "but we recognize that drivers licenses have become a defacto national id."
here is another part of the congressional record on this from Joe lieberman:
"Our lenient border policies with our neighbors to the north and south today constitute a vulnerability. Travelers may now cross these borders with no other proof of U.S. citizenship than a verbal statement. Individuals claiming to be Canadians enter our country from Canada without showing a passport. The policies are evidence of our good relations with our neighbors, but in the age of terrorism, that friendship must allow for better security for the benefit of both.
Our amendment would require biometric passports, or an identification document just as secure, for everyone crossing into the United States, even U.S. citizens and our closest neighbors "
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r108:1:./t em p/~r108wRaE7b:e176936:
Perhaps I should have said intrusive moralism,
and big corporate support.
I do not like the constitution party because
I think they want to force their version of morality on everyone. That being said I do respect their right to their beliefs.
I come down on the side of Jefferson who said
"all religions are good which teach man to be good"
I posted this earlier, but I think it is important enought to do it again.
The Republican party is showing signs of splitting. IMO it has gone too far to the
Social Conservative side...
Republican Bob Barr (of all people) just wrote this article here is the last couple of paragraphs:
"Bush's problem is that true conservatives remember their history. They recall that in recent years when the nation enjoyed the fruits of actual conservative fiscal and security policies, a Democrat occupied the White House and Congress was controlled by a Republican majority that actually fought for a substantive conservative agenda.
History's a troublesome thing for presidents. Even though most voters don't take much of a historical perspective into the voting booth with them, true conservatives do.
Hmmm. Who's the Libertarian candidate again?"
If someone like bob barr endorses Badnarik,
this could get REALLY interesting.
If the LP is sucessfull, there will come a point of critical mass when a large group of people suddenly join the party. Unfortunately, they will share SOME but not ALL of the LP views.
I think the question is, can we accomodate the growth without sacrificing our principles?
I agree with you on Bob Barr. His record is deplorable.
However you realize this is politics right?
I know there are a number of Libertarian leaning
people in congress, Ron Paul comes to mind.
If we could get one person to endorse MB,
then others may be willing to bolt en masse.
With all the free press etc. That would go along with it.
The question is and always has been how will the LP do when it gets to that painful growth spurt.
I think we could do rather well as we will probably draw from both parties once the word
"gets out". Time will tell.
Republican Bob Barr (of all people) just wrote this article here is the last couple of paragraphs:
Bush's problem is that true conservatives remember their history. They recall that in recent years when the nation enjoyed the fruits of actual conservative fiscal and security policies, a Democrat occupied the White House and Congress was controlled by a Republican majority that actually fought for a substantive conservative agenda.
History's a troublesome thing for presidents. Even though most voters don't take much of a historical perspective into the voting booth with them, true conservatives do.
Hmmm. Who's the Libertarian candidate again?
If someone like bob barr endorses Badnarik,
this could get REALLY interesting.
Slashdot Mirror
Both support the war in iraq.
Both have spending plans that are in the red and both say they'll cut their deficit spending in half within four years.
Both support the patriot act.
Both support curtailing the 2nd amendment.
Both have increased the size and scope of the federal government.
The differences are Kerry wants to tax and spend while Bush wants to borrow and spend.
Kerry - Pro choice, Bush - Pro Life
So in conclusion I'd say yes they are both asshats.
It is true that Fortress America is safe from invasion. No country has anywhere near the naval fleet needed. The logistical demands alone are astounding.
:
However, I forsee an economic war brewing, and in that realm we are in a world of hurt. We finance our deficit spending by printing money, which the rest of the world buys. We are now beginning to see this change. I expect to see a switch to the Euro as the default currency for trade over the next couple of years regardless of who wins the election. This will mean a drastic drop in the dollar versus other currencies, and possilby hyper inflation. We may be able to invade countries, but short of nuclear blackmail we will not be able to force the world to buy dollars.
Here is an article about it from the last decent (IMO) congressman in DC
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul213.html
http://thomas.loc.gov/r108/r108.html click senate, on sept 30th. Choose text of amendments. Look for pages s10154-s10155
Here are some interesting excerpts:
SEC. __01. AMENDMENTS TO THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT RELATING TO IDENTIFICATION OF INDIVIDUALS.
(a) ANTIFRAUD MEASURES FOR SOCIAL SECURITY CARDS.--Section 205(c)(2)(G) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 405(c)(2)(G)) is amended--
(1) by inserting ``(i)'' after ``(G)'';
(2) by striking ``banknote paper'' and inserting ``durable plastic or similar material''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following new clauses:
``(ii) Each Social security card issued under this subparagraph shall include an encrypted electronic identification strip which
shall be unique to the individual to whom the card is issued and such biometric information as is determined by the Commissioner and
the Secretary of Homeland Security to be necessary for identifying the person to whom to the card is issued. The Commissioner shall
develop such electronic identification strip in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, so as to enable employers to
use such strip in accordance with section __03(b) of the National Intelligence Reform Act of 2004 to obtain access to the Employment
Eligibility Database established by such Secretary pursuant to section __02 of such Act with respect to the individual to whom the card
is issued.
SEC. __02. EMPLOYMENT ELIGIBILITY DATABASE.
(a) IN GENERAL.--The Secretary of Homeland Security (hereinafter in this title referred to as ``the Secretary'') shall establish
and maintain an Employment Eligibility Database. The Database shall include data comprised of the citizenship status of individuals
and the work and residency eligibility information (including expiration dates) with respect to individuals who are not citizens or
nationals of the United States but are authorized to work in the United States. Such data shall include all such data maintained by
the Department of Homeland Security as of the date of the establishment of such database and information obtained from the Commissioner
of Social Security pursuant to section 205(c)(2)(I) of the Social Security Act. The Secretary shall maintain ongoing consultations with
the Commissioner to ensure efficient and effective operation of the Database.
(1) IN GENERAL.--No employer may employ an individual in the United States in any capacity if, as soon as practical after such
individual has been hired, such individual has not been verified by the employer to have a social security card issued to such individual
pursuant to section 205(c)(2)(G) of the Social Security Act and to be authorized to work in the United States in such capacity. Such
verification shall be made in accordance with procedures prescribed by the Secretary for the purposes of ensuring against fraudulent use
of the card and accurate and prompt verification of the authorization of such individual to work in the United States in such capacity.
(c) CRIMINAL PENALTY.--Any person who--
(1) continues to employ an individual in the United States in any capacity who such person knows not to be authorized to work in
the United States in such capacity, or
(2) hires for employment any individual in the United States and fails to comply with the procedures prescribed by the Secretary
pursuant to section __03(b) in connection with the hiring of such individual,
[Page: S10156] GPO's PDF
shall upon conviction be fined in accordance with title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both
SEC. __07. USE OF CARD; RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.
Nothing in this title or the amendments made by this title shall be construed to establish a national identification card, and it
is the policy of the United States that the social security card shall not be used as a national identification
Search the congressional record for Sept 30th. Choose the senate, and then text of amendments. You are looking for pages s10082-s10087.
http://thomas.loc.gov/r108/r108.html
and this is what you get.
not on in New Hampshire and Oklahoma.
The republican party is IMO really showing signs of strain, and looks like it may split.
I do not know if it will be this election, but it may be the next (if dubya gets in again)
Bob Barr
LANCE LAMBERTON
Vin Suprynowicz
suggestions for improvement? My point with this: "I hereby demand unbiased and equal coverage of all candidates for political office who " is any candidate on your state ballot should be covered by your local media. This: "interests of the citizen, above that of the government" , could be changed to "citizenry" i.e. the people before the government. I think you understand the idea i am trying to get across. I think most of us would agree that a balanced budget is one of the highest priorities right now . I am trying to find a rough minimum that we as voters (or a large portion of voters) can agree on. Feel free to edit change etc.
No the Libertarian party is NOT pro corporate. Pro small business yes.
You know we've tried it your way for the last 100 years. Both your parties AUTOMATIC response is now: "Problem? Add more government!" What I find most revolting about both parties is they treat you like children. They believe they own you, and frankly, they have ()wn3d this republic.
Well, I'm not built that way. I prefer to make my own decisions, help who I WANT to help, donate where I WANT to donate, etc. and refuse to do so
when I do not agree! As for the Libertarian idea not working, perhaps it won't. I do know we STARTED out that way, so I say why not try it again?
Call me back when Kerry has stopped treading on the constitution, or Bush gets replaced by an orangutan.
Voter's Contract With America
Our country is founded upon the principles of Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.
These goals are achievable only if we the people desire them to be so.
I hereby swear that I will vote for those people who promise to approve a balanced budget only.
I hereby swear that I will place the interests of the citizen, above that of the government.
I hereby demand unbiased and equal coverage of all candidates for political office who:
A) Support a balanced budget
B) Support Civil Liberties
C) Are on my state Ballot
I will not support, nor vote for, any candidate regardless of party affiliation, if they do not
agree to abide by the terms set forth above.
I will not support, nor vote for, any candidate regardless of party affiliation, if they do not
agree to debate all eligible candidates which meet the requirements above.
I recognize it is my duty as a citizen to find and vote for a candidate who will adhere to
preceding principles.
I also agree that any officeholder who violates these terms should be recalled from office.
I will promote this idea to my fellow citizens in order to form a more perfect union.
Any suggestions for improvement?
I know Badnarik won't win. I'll vote for him anyway. Why? Because I am sick and tired of seeing corporate shill #1 versus corporate shill #2
Neither guy has the balls to balance the budget. Neither guy delivers on his promises. The government grows ever larger, civil liberties are being removed, ignored and trodden upon.
Our government IMO is like a crack addict on a binge. They'll keep taxing and spending or borrowing and spending just to keep their 'high'. No one seems to care we are in debt up to our eyeballs.... Yet we keep voting for these guys. Wake up people, someone is going to pay for the bread and circuses. It will either be you or your kids!
The only way this is going to change is if people start saying "Screw This!" and vote for ANYONE else, Nader, Badnarik,Peroultka, Cobb etc.
I emailed the guy in question, here is his verbatim response :
I am the Muslim Outreach Coordinator for the campaign of the Libertarian U.S. presidential candidate Michael Badnarik. On August 20, a staffer for the O'Reilly Factor television show pre-interviewed me for an appearance to give an opposing point of view to O'Reilly's guest Muhammad Ali Hasan, founder of "Muslims for Bush." On the way to the studio to tape the program on August 26, however, I received a call from O'Reilly's staffer informing me that although I would be identified as a Muslim supporter of Badnarik, I must not mention the Libertarian Party or Badnarik's name on the air. I assured the staffer that I would not turn the segment into a Badnarik campaign ad, but objected that preventing me from mentioning Badnarik's name even once would muzzle my main point that one need not support Kerry to oppose Bush. The staffer insisted that I make the point without mentioning either Badnarik's name or that of the Libertarian Party. When I declined to accept these terms, the staffer had the driver they hired take me home.
Another local Muslim with no connection to the Badnarik campaign, Khalid Turaani, was hurried to the studio to take my place. On the air, O'Reilly sought to rebut Turanni's criticism of Bush with criticism of Kerry. Turaani spontaneously replied that, as a conservative, he would never vote for Kerry and intended to vote for the Libertarian candidate Michael Badnarik. Watching this turn of events at home, I was reminded of a verse in the Qur'an: "They plotted their plans and God made His plans, and God is the best of planners."
Yours truly,
I. Dean Ahmad, Ph.D.
Bethesda, MD
Even if you disagree with the 3rd party platforms, shouldn't the public be offered the information so they can choose for themselves?
:
/
If you think this is unfair I urge you to call James Walton, CNN President: ph 404-827-1500
And let them know you would like to see someone other than Corporate backed candidates.
While you're at it, call these CNN advertisers. Tell them you will boycott their products unless CNN provides fair coverage. Also Mention that the BBC has covered us while CNN has not. Here is the phone list
The Citigroup Bank (1-212) 559-9124
Exxon 713 656 4376
Jaguar 1-800-4-JAGUAR
Staples 1-800-3STAPLE
AT&T 1 (908) 234-8754
Walmart 1-800-WAL-MART
suzuki 800-934-0934
OxiClean 1-800-781-7529
GlaxoSmithKline 1 888 825 5249
Cadillac 1-800-333-4CAD
ameritrade 800-454-9272
ups 1-800-PICK-UPS
quick-step +32(0)56 67.52.11
Principal Financial 1.800.986.3343
Jeep/chrysler 1-800-992-1997
administaff 800-465-3800
Visa 1(800) 847-2911
The electors can vote for someone else, so the third parties would have leverage to get appointments, policy changes etc by bartering their votes
A) two presidential candidates were arrested in St Louis.
B) there was a lawsuit which could have stopped the final "debate".
Isn't it strange that CNN has ZERO information on a presidential candidate on the ballot in 48 states and D.C.? If this happened in another country wouldn't we have heard about it? When added to reports that FOX is censoring guests, it leads one to ask: Is this a democracy or a puppet show?
IMO this is something that Libertarians do not communicate well. While many Libs may disagree with me on this, I would like to point it out.
There is nothing in most STATE constitutions which say you cannot make a state social security system, state owned roads, state taxes etc.
If the Libs were ever elected on a federal level, I forsee each state and/or local communities making their own laws reagarding those local issues which the local populace is more concerned and informed about. Thus, you would have some "Green" cities and states, some "Libertarian" cities and states, etc. Big government for the sake of Homogeniety is not IMO a good thing.
"All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others."
George Orwell - Animal Farm
BTW look at the media blackout,
cnn1 cnn2
nader
alexabadnarik alexanader
I could see maybe 5 or 10 mentions on CNN but ZERO? zilch, nada. Yet 523 seperate items on nader. Then compare the alexa links, put in votenader.org on the compare sites.(Wouldn't let me do it via a link)
"Al animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others."
George Orwell - Animal Farm
If you want to learn more,
get mirc (free chat prog)mirc.org
The channels are #libertarian and #badnarik on EFNET
bad link, here is is register
At least FOX is censoring its guests. They cannot mention Badnarik on the air.
I emailed one person in question directly here is his reply:
I am the Muslim Outreach Coordinator for the campaign of the Libertarian U.S. presidential candidate Michael Badnarik. On August 20, a staffer for the O'Reilly Factor television show pre-interviewed me for an appearance to give an opposing point of view to O'Reilly's guest Muhammad Ali Hasan, founder of "Muslims for Bush." On the way to the studio to tape the program on August 26, however, I received a call from O'Reilly's staffer informing me that although I would be identified as a Muslim supporter of Badnarik, I must not mention the Libertarian Party or Badnarik's name on the air. I assured the staffer that I would not turn the segment into a Badnarik campaign ad, but objected that preventing me from mentioning Badnarik's name even once would muzzle my main point that one need not support Kerry to oppose Bush. The staffer insisted that I make the point without mentioning either Badnarik's name or that of the Libertarian Party. When I declined to accept these terms, the staffer had the driver they hired take me home.
Another local Muslim with no connection to the Badnarik campaign, Khalid Turaani, was hurried to the studio to take my place. On the air, O'Reilly sought to rebut Turanni's criticism of Bush with criticism of Kerry. Turaani spontaneously replied that, as a conservative, he would never vote for Kerry and intended to vote for the Libertarian candidate Michael Badnarik. Watching this turn of events at home, I was reminded of a verse in the Qur'an: "They plotted their plans and God made His plans, and God is the best of planners."
Yours truly, I. Dean Ahmad, Ph.D. Bethesda, MD
below is the link where i first found the story.
http://www.registerguard.com/news/2004/09/26/ed.co l.nathan.0926.html
2004-10-05 17:44:39 National ID and backend database is on its way (Your Rights Online,Politics) (rejected)
/. rejects your stories only to have them appear a week later?
:
t em p/~r108wRaE7b:e176936:
Dont you love it when
I had a great doublespeak quote from the congressional record by john mccain on this.
Of course i didnt bookmark it DOH.
but he said something like this
1.st sentence "with this bill we are not making a national id"
next sentence "but we recognize that drivers licenses have become a defacto national id."
here is another part of the congressional record on this from Joe lieberman
"Our lenient border policies with our neighbors to the north and south today constitute a vulnerability. Travelers may now cross these borders with no other proof of U.S. citizenship than a verbal statement. Individuals claiming to be Canadians enter our country from Canada without showing a passport. The policies are evidence of our good relations with our neighbors, but in the age of terrorism, that friendship must allow for better security for the benefit of both.
Our amendment would require biometric passports, or an identification document just as secure, for everyone crossing into the United States, even U.S. citizens and our closest neighbors
"
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r108:1:./
Perhaps I should have said intrusive moralism, and big corporate support. I do not like the constitution party because I think they want to force their version of morality on everyone. That being said I do respect their right to their beliefs. I come down on the side of Jefferson who said "all religions are good which teach man to be good"
Republican Bob Barr (of all people) just wrote this article here is the last couple of paragraphs :
"Bush's problem is that true conservatives remember their history. They recall that in recent years when the nation enjoyed the fruits of actual conservative fiscal and security policies, a Democrat occupied the White House and Congress was controlled by a Republican majority that actually fought for a substantive conservative agenda.
History's a troublesome thing for presidents. Even though most voters don't take much of a historical perspective into the voting booth with them, true conservatives do. Hmmm. Who's the Libertarian candidate again?"
If someone like bob barr endorses Badnarik, this could get REALLY interesting.
If the LP is sucessfull, there will come a point of critical mass when a large group of people suddenly join the party. Unfortunately, they will share SOME but not ALL of the LP views. I think the question is, can we accomodate the growth without sacrificing our principles? I agree with you on Bob Barr. His record is deplorable. However you realize this is politics right? I know there are a number of Libertarian leaning people in congress, Ron Paul comes to mind. If we could get one person to endorse MB, then others may be willing to bolt en masse. With all the free press etc. That would go along with it. The question is and always has been how will the LP do when it gets to that painful growth spurt. I think we could do rather well as we will probably draw from both parties once the word "gets out". Time will tell.
Bush's problem is that true conservatives remember their history. They recall that in recent years when the nation enjoyed the fruits of actual conservative fiscal and security policies, a Democrat occupied the White House and Congress was controlled by a Republican majority that actually fought for a substantive conservative agenda.
History's a troublesome thing for presidents. Even though most voters don't take much of a historical perspective into the voting booth with them, true conservatives do. Hmmm. Who's the Libertarian candidate again?
If someone like bob barr endorses Badnarik, this could get REALLY interesting.