I'll defer to Hilton on this one. I have to go waste 25% of my wages on Uncle Sam and another 40% of my day stuck in traffic on governemnt-engineered parking lots called freeways to go do so. Hence the call of a waste.
Of course, Purdue is a far call from Los Angeles, as was my past native Hoosierness. Maybe you ought to go to Chicago once during rush hour and see the wonderful results of government-engineered parking lots. Try the eastbound Eisenhower at rush hour, for starters. I-65 in West Lafayette doesn't count.
You may have been studying them the neo-left, but I've been CAMPAIGNING against them. Far cry of on the trail vs. in the classroom...but then again, I was that naive in college once too.
Badnarik's ability to express himself coherently? Have you been been paying attention to ANYTHING other than Bush or Kerry, or are you so mired in statism that the means to do so escapes you? There's plenty of evidence as to his coherence, even eloquence. Check C-Span's video archives for starters.
As for the "don't tax, don't spend," THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT! When people have the cash in their pocket and it doesn't go to the IRS, then THEY have economic control. What sane person doesn't want that?
The ideoloigical left is not as you think. In 2000 their issues were environmentalism and anti-globalism. In 2004 their issues are anti-war and anti-globalism, both of which put them into the ABB camp, but also makes them mistakenly support Kerry instead when he is no better, and most of them haven't figured that out yet. Badnaik is what they want on both counts, and he wants to make sure the sovereignty of the US is not compromised militarily nor economically. Neither Bush not Kerry can truthfully make that claim. But since they are both liars I expect them to.
Your synopsis on the final winner of the election might be true, but how you arrive at that conclusion is wrong. Look at the poll numbers and you find that Badnarik is bridign the gap in a lot of states and is pulling as much as 3-5% in some. As for the so-called debates, any monkeywrench in the scripted dog-an-pony show will expose the Bush/Kerry alliance for what they are--useless puppets. Remember the Ventura factor, lest you forget, that he got in and he won, becasue he resonated with voters once he was heard.
Experience in running things? What is Bush's pre-2000 resume on that? What is Kerry's? Not very good, to be clear. That all cancels out.
Of course Badnarik would disrupt the scripted show--that's the purpose--but in doing so he also scores a victory for the silent majority of disenchanfranchised voters and undecided voters who are sick and tired of the certified BS that the major party (and apparently you) promotes.
The system needs a shakeup. What are you afraid of if that happens? It matters more now than ever. It is overdue, before the mjaor party clowns take us all over the cliff...
Sorry, you lose. Time to feed the troll heartburn-causing food again.
If this debate was being held on a private university, the suit would have been tossed. That's one of the reasons why this suit wasn't filed on the first two debates. However, the argument is that since the AZ Constitution prohibits the use of public facilities for partisan political activities, and since prohibition of one of the three parites on the ballot makes it partisan by being against one of the three, it's a problem. Furher, as I have pointed out in other posts, the CPD is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, which under IRS rules cannot endorse candidates OR be partisan in any form. The only way to be non-partisan is to include them all, as a DC court has recently ruled. IF the AZ court finds that the CPD is being partisan, then the status of the CPD is thrown into doubt and the whole house of cards comes crashing down at the federal level.
You also fall into the trap that the CPD put forward, that only candidates with enough "public support" can get in, and that support is gauged by polls that are rigged to only mention their candidates anyway, which isn't accurate, so the requirement becoems self-fulfilling. Then you complain about why a lot of the public has not heard of the LP? Where do you think the D/R party would be if the media blacked them out? Why does Nader get so much press, especially in states where he isn't on the ballot!, when he is on less ballots than Badnarik and enjoys less support? It makes no sense UNLESS there is something deliberate going on.
So the problem is that nobody hears of the LP, nobody covers them because nobody has heard of them, and nobody has heard of them becasue nobody covers them, and the cycle continues unabated, simply becasue most people don't have the time to do their own research to fidn out simply because they are too busy busting their a$$es to make ends meet to satisify the ridiculous tax burden imposed by the D/R party. Then they compound the insanity by voting for the schmucks who tax them so much in the first place!
This is the uphill battle we have to deal with, and people like you don't help any and actually contribute to the problem (and your own bankruptcy!).
You're just very uninformed on how the DNC and RNC operate.
Here in CA there are real Congressional candidates on each of their tickets looking to unseat incumbents, all on the basis of their stances on illegal immigration. The electorate in those districts are mightily PO'ed at the incumbents. Their parties have disowned them in the process, simply becasue they don't want to mess with the other guy's "safe" seats. They have gerrymandered things so that they each have their own "safe" seats and then rig the rules so they stay that way--98.5% worth. There is one D incumbent and one R incumbent in this situation.
If you think that can be changed within, just look at the (lack of) success of the Rebuplican Liberty Caucus and the Democratic Liberty Caucus, both of which are trying exactly what you suggest, and failing completely.
Think it out. Why did the LP and the GP form in the first place? BECAUSE THE REFORMS YOU SUGGEST DIDN'T WORK THEN, AND THEY DON'T WORK NOW! So why go back to what doesn't work? Isn't that the definition of insanity?
That whole line of thinking makes absolutley no sense. Here's why:
Kerry is tax-and-spender trying to portray himself as a fiscal moderate in the lines of Clinton, who actually had the debt rise while claiming to balance the budget because he raided SSA funds to cover the gap. He would spend like a drunken sailor.
Bush is a borrow-and-spender trying to portray the spending as jusitifed as necessary for the WOT when most of it was pure pork. He is spending like the drunken aviator he is.
Badnarik, OTOH, favors a balanced budget, reduced spending, and lower taxes. He is fiscally conservative and stands for the limited government that the Rs USED to stand for. There a lot of fiscal conservatives that are royally PO'ed at Bush for his spending habits. There are also a lot of social liberals that are royally PO'ed at Kerry for his stances on gay marriage and civil liberties in light of the PATRIOT Act. Bringing that to the table would score points against BOTH of them and make them both look foolish, and give the disenfranchised from both sides the candidate they are looking for.
That scares Bush and Kerry to death, since they have been taking those bases for granted when they really should not be. If those bases go Badnarik, then Kerry is left with a neo-lib faction split between him and Nader/Cobb, and Bush is left with the neo-con/religious right faction with a minor split with Peroutka. Either way, it throws the election into chaos, which is a good thing.
It would also expose their hollow positions for what they really are.
This is why this whole thing is so important. It can not only kick in the door, but burn down the house, and it's long overdue.
If you really care about the freedom behind the politics and the same freedom that makes it possible, yea, even to make such a ridiculous post, then you would abandon the two-headed hydra in favor of the LP.
If you think that any D/R candidate that has anything resembling those positions can get elected, think again. They won't make it past the central committee filters.
As for the lesser of two evils, think of it this way:
Vote for what you really don't want == a vote for evil; Vote for what you don't want as much == a vote for lesser evil; Vote for what you want == a true vote.
Why vote for what you don't want? Is your integrity that low that you would change principles into a wasted vote on a horse race principle when the so-called horses that can win are what you don't want? Why not make your vote work towards the horse you want to win instead?
The only true wasted vote is the vote not cast for what you truly want. Me, I truly want freedom, which is why I vote LP.
Man, what a statist apologist you are! Maybe you're part of the problem with our government, to hear you put it...
Since you obviously can't read, I will reiterate: the hearing is for TUESDAY THE 12TH at 9 AM local for the ARIZONA debate, not the STL debate, and that debate is not going to happen until WEDNESDAY THE 13TH at 7PM local, AFTER the hearing. So you arguments about the whole thing are not only wrong, but downright false.
I do not admit that they were there to grandstand, that is your term. They were there as part of a joint effort to serve court papers on the CPD. The CPD knew they were coming as they were required to be notified per the order (if you had ever bothered to read it!), and the sent out the riot police to prevent them from performing a DUE PROCESS as allowed and required by the law! The riot police were not calle din until Cobb and Badnarik got there. If there really was ariot threat and they weren't there to lock them out, the riot squad would have been there sooner, and they weren't. CPD tried to prevent the papers from being served in DC as well with some rent-a-cop. You cannot excuse that no matter how much you try, unless you really have that much contempt for the legal process and the political process in this nation. THOSE ARE THE FACTS. Or are you in favor suppression of freedom and limiting real choices?
Furthermore, Badnarik and Cobb were there to serve the order and AT THAT TIME DID NOT KNOW that they had bern served succcessfully elsewhere. You cannot appply knowledge they didn't have to them, so that whole premise is FALSE!
And you cannot call them pseudo-candiates, as they are legitimately and legally on the ballot, so there is no psuedo about it except to you, and you've already shown yourself to be quite wrong, so that would be according to pattern.
And if you call due process "garbage" then you obviously are a disgrace to this nation, but I can guarantee you that if it were whichever statist you support being shut out and doing this you wouldn't call it that. Put the shoe on the other foot and walk a mile!
And if you have worked with the SS for many years then that only proves the point: once was too much for me, and if I could have tossed them out of my restaruant without getting fired, I would have. They weren't worth the PITA over a man I wouldn't elect dog poop collector. The same holds true for W, his daddy, and Kerry.
Neither are you worth that PITA. You're part of the problem. Your comments just prove it. All you've shown is that your mind and heart are closed to real change and real freeodm and real leadership, of which the D/R hydra is incapable.
Either that or you are just as scared as the rest of the statist quo that your house of cards will be destroyed by having fresh and better voices included. Perot proved that in '92, when he was included, and that wipes out your so-called non-entity argument. It's no coincidence that since then the CPD has doen everything in their power to prevent it from happening again. They're running scared, and so are you. If you weren't then you'd see no problem with Bandarik being let in becasue you'd see him as a non-factor. But he IS a factor, and that's why you all are scared, so you hide behind the non-factor rhetoric, not out of confidence, but out of fear. It's the same thing with the D's and Nader. It's nice to see that, actually, after all the crap you all have foisted on us for the past 92+ years. Don't be surprised if Badnarik causes some states to go one way or another. In fact, I'm counting on it, expecting it, and will be enjoying every minute of it.
A Bush, A Dick, and two Johns, no wonder this election is obscene! I'm a voter behaving BADly by voting BADNARIK and voting for freedom!
Now excuse me, I must go and laugh hysterically at you, after which I will consign you to the ash pile of wasted electrons.
Having had to deal with the SS directly on Presidential security (and I don't care if they don't appreciate the term, it's a First Amendment right I'm exercising here, and the shoe fits!) when I ran a restaurant and Clinton stopped by, I can tell you point blank that's wrong. Federal statute places protection and security of the President and Presdiential candidates under SS coverage and SUPERCEDES any local jurisdiction. If it didn't then the illegal acts the SS does while in town would get them thrown in jail, like searching me without a warrant or probable cause, for example. --- As for suits vs teens, you're naive. On a college campus a person who is a threat will blend in by looking like a student, not a political candidate. In TX terrorists are coming across the border looking like illegal Mexican aliens, not Arabs. The 19 hijackers who did 9/11 blended into the woodwork. Need I say more? Come to LA and see how many terrorists are blended in with the illegal aliens, and then see how many are dressed like Arabs. You won't be able to count the former because you can't tell, and the count of the latter is exactly ZERO. --- Cobb and Badnarik had no knowledge of how the other service efforts went as they were on teh campaign trail and had not heard. So much for that line of misthought. --- 4 PM MDT, and the judge said afterwards that a fax was perfectly fine, and that is in accordacne with most state laws anyway. In case you hadn't heard, and you probalby haven't, since you seem to selectivley filter things to fit your flawed microcosm, the hearing is on, and scheduled for 9 AM Tuesday, in Judge Gaines' court in Phoenix. If CPD doesn't show then summary judgement will most likely be granted and either the debate will be canceled or Badnarik allowed in. (The others may not be allowed in as they aren't on the ballot in AZ). If they do show, arguments will be heard and the judge will decide. If he decides for the CPD the appeal will be immediate to the AZ Supreme Court, and if he rules for the LP the CPD will either stonewall the issue and generate a huge ton of media coverage or they will roll over and still generate a huge ton of media coverage. --- Last minute arguments is apologista-speak. Whether there is a case or nor is for the judge to decide, and he has decided that there is one, which is why the hearing is happening. --- Now, what other pathetic fallacious arguments of yours may I shoot down?
I mopped the floor with a conservative on the radio on the PATRIOT Act when it was still in Congress, because I got a copy of it long before most of them did, and unlike those idiots, I actually read it. Scary stuff, especially the sneak-and-peek, no due process, and the worst is that they can declare any crime they want to be a terrorist crime, from bombing to jaywalking. Patriot II and the Medical Emergency Acts are even worse. Yeah, I'm plenty aware of it, been batting 1.250 on airline searches when flying (two legs had me searched twice!); mouse mazes to get into work at an AFB in search of nail clippers and pocketknives, as if someone was going to hijack the building; and the gummint pukes following me around periodically until I lose them at yellow lights. Not to mention being at the one of two riots instigated by police at peace rallies in Feb 2003. Old news there. The only redeeming quality is that the assault weapons ban died, so at least we can better defend ourselves a little when things get out of hand. Not if, when. The national ID card is coming again, and the rice chips as well, and that will be the straws that break.
Shows you just how uninformed and shallow this guy's thinking is.
Fact is, when applied, libertarianism is no utopia. Putting the onus of accountablity on the individual makes it hard, as each decision must be weighed out. If the libertarian message deosn't resonate with people for that, then it's because they are lazy and don't want put forth the effort to do the right thing. The current socialist state, whether it is run by the socialist Democrats or the socialist-lite Republicans (or fascist Republicans or fascist-lite Democrats, take your pick, they're botht the same anyway), removes the incentive to make your own decisions as all will be provided for you--how to think, how much money you make, who to vote for, all under the guise of free choice only it's the choices they want you to ahve, not the ones you want to have. That's the gist of the whole thing here: who controls the choices. The D/R hydra wants to control them, and the Ls want the people to make their own choices. It's really that simple, all denigrating by the previous moron aside.
As a person with a math degree, I can attest very simply that most polls are mainly a load of crap. Heck, I got Mason-Dixon's head on record admitting that they rig them, after he tried to goad me into a felony by betting on the election. I didn't bite because I knew better. Anyway, the outcome on polls can be manipulated in many ways. Most of the time the margin of error is predetermined and then the sample space is manipulated to match the error margin. Another way is to manipulate the demographics of the sample space to reflect the political specturm, or not. Recently Newsweek got razzed for oversampling Republican voters in their post-elephant show poll. The most common way to manipualte the polls is the questions. We see it in every poll here in CA that mentions Nader (especially that wonderful crayon sheet, the LA Times!) when he isn't even on the ballot here! Omissions, weighted wordings, and bad context all play a factor to skew the results to whatever the payee wants to portray.
So relying on polls is ridiculous, both in politics and college football.
Your "stakes so high" question is disingenuous at best. The stakes are not as high as the D/R propaganda machine would have you believe. The fact is that with either of them we're all screwed, and the only stakes involved are the ones they use to crucify us on the cross of revoked rights and curshing taxation. And the idea of "extremist" agendas is also not entirely true and is subjective in nature, and the best way to do it is to put it out there and let people draw their own conclusions. But the CPD won't even let that happen, they're so scared of a view that starkly contrasts with their pre-ordained world view that they want the sheeple to see. To call their agendas "extremist" makes no sense, as the L viewpoint is actually socially liberal and fiscally conservative, even Goldwaterian in nature, which is where the LP claims its roots politically. We are directly in the political middle, but the problem is that nobody seems to realize it.
Sounds to me more like you're shilling for the status quo and being an apologist for the statists.
Not at all. Protection of the President lies with the SS, not the local goon squad. They were there because of the perceived threat of the pacifist protest/march of some 400 people. They were there to protect the dog-and-pony show. That's if you beleive the "official" reason. And they were there because they were too stupid or meek to ask why.
It is interesting that even though several students had been detained beforehand, the riot police only came out when Badnarik and Cobb, dressed in business suits, breached the line. At the risk of sounding like a profiler, who's the bigger threat based on their appearance: kids with bags, or guys in suits and political buttons?
So, if the President and Kerry were inside, and their SS detials were in there, and the building was secure, then why the stormtroopers outside? Think it out. Before any such appearance, especially one so scripted as this one, the SS figures out the security arrangements in advance, including door blockages and escape routes. That was all set up and things were ready in case thing got bad. If the SS had it figured out, then the goon squad only had one purpose, which was to keep protestors away and in their "free-speech zone." It was never about security, only censorship, and Cobb and Badnarik simply chose to defy the rules and do what's right.
See previous postings on the subject of tax dollars, Washington U-STL and private property. The fact of the matter is that they were on a PUBLIC CITY STREET and were arested by CITY POLICE, not by campus rent-a-cops. A public street is by definition a public forum.
You know, I see a few people who understand it here, but far too many idiots. To put it bluntly, your lack of real schooling is showing. what it comes down to is this: who can do things better, you or the government?, who is responsible for your actions, you or the government, and who can best make decisions for your own life, you or the government? The answer for libertarians all 3 times is YOU. The answer for everyone else is government. Answer the first one government and you are communist. Answer the second one government and you are a neo-con fascist. Answer the third one government and you are a neo-lib socialist. I got news for all of you--those don't work. So why do you insist on them anyway?
yada yada yada. You didn't check your facts.
ASU was served before 4 PM MT and the CPD DC office was served before 4PM MT and that was caught on tape. The service was also done via fax and email to CPD , so they were definitely served. The Badnarik thing was a formality. Since the order required advance notice they knew it was coming which is why they had the riot police in place. It's a sad day when a political organization hides behind the police to obstruct due process. It's even sadder that some people support those antics.
Wrong again.
In a libertarian system, there is equal access to the political system for all, not to the highest bidder as it is now. The problem here is that you make the classic and common mistake of intertwining government and economics in ways they aren't suppsoed to be , and in ways that destroy both. It's what we have now. The original idea here was minimalist mixing through coining of money and tariffs to fund operations. We have gotten so far away from that now that those original ideas are almost totally lost. Now government is as much a business as the private sector, except it can use force to get its way, AND THAT'S THE PROBLEM!
First, the suit was filed by the AZ LP, not the Badnarik Campaign.
Second, the CPD folks knew this was coming because of their blocking the service in DC, and the fact that their folks in AZ heard about the order as soon as it was written, and they got word back to MO and DC before the DC serving happened. Knowing it was coming means they can't lawfully block it.
Third, whatt does it say about the legitimacy of an organization that hides behind cops to prevent it from being served with a court order? Mike Wallace and 60 Minutes is one thing, but a court order is quite another.
FYI, those papers were also served at the CPD office in Washington and the servers were refused entry by a rent-a-cop. So they had to serve them somehow.
Now, are you upset becasue they did civil disobedience? If so I say BAAAAH!.
Remember when Nader was given a ticket to first debate in Boston back in 2000 and was refused entry even though he had a contractual right to be there? It's the same thing in principle, that those who should be there and had the right to be there were denied.
I tend to think the reason you don't like is becasue you lack the imagination and the spine to do it yourself.
What they did was cross some line that some stormtrooper cops decided would be a "free-sppech zone". Last time I checked, America was a free-speech zone. Or are you advocating otherwise?
Further, using color of law (e.g., police) to deny civil and constitutional rights is a federal felony. Are you adovcating this too?
Third, as political figures, MB's and DC's free speech is even more protected under the law than "regular" speech. Or are you advocating censorship?
Fourth, they were process servers, and interference with that duty violates Missouri state law. Or are you advocating that the police not follow the law they are supposed to make others follow?
Last, they used riot police to arrest Presidential candidates! This isn't Putin's Russia or Hitler's Germany! Or are you advocating that is become them?
Actually, many of us in the LP favor truth-in-labelling, simply because an informed consumer makes better decisions. It's a natural extension from informed political choices, which are really consumer choices after all. Right now that is sorely lacking.
The anarchist side of libertarianism doesn't like regulatory anything. They fail to realize that in the current state of relative human infancy we are stuck in that we need some sort of limits and that no limits is not something the general populace is ready for, which is why minarchy (for now) is the way to go.
Also remember that the aritifical construct of a business and even more so a government are always inferior in scope of power to that of the people, and since the power of business and the state derives from the people, the people have the final say. That means that if the people want fully open debates (68% said they do, see Rasmussen Reports), then we should have them. If the people want standardized labels for food products, they should have them. But the trap is that this is not majority rule, but rather the supremacy of the natural person over the artifical entity. Someone could try to claim a family in here as an artifical entity, but a family is a natural entity as animals of all sorts have shown continually, so that won't fly.
Slashdot Mirror
I'll defer to Hilton on this one. I have to go waste 25% of my wages on Uncle Sam and another 40% of my day stuck in traffic on governemnt-engineered parking lots called freeways to go do so. Hence the call of a waste.
Of course, Purdue is a far call from Los Angeles, as was my past native Hoosierness. Maybe you ought to go to Chicago once during rush hour and see the wonderful results of government-engineered parking lots. Try the eastbound Eisenhower at rush hour, for starters. I-65 in West Lafayette doesn't count.
You may have been studying them the neo-left, but I've been CAMPAIGNING against them. Far cry of on the trail vs. in the classroom...but then again, I was that naive in college once too.
Badnarik's ability to express himself coherently? Have you been been paying attention to ANYTHING other than Bush or Kerry, or are you so mired in statism that the means to do so escapes you? There's plenty of evidence as to his coherence, even eloquence. Check C-Span's video archives for starters.
As for the "don't tax, don't spend," THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT! When people have the cash in their pocket and it doesn't go to the IRS, then THEY have economic control. What sane person doesn't want that?
The ideoloigical left is not as you think. In 2000 their issues were environmentalism and anti-globalism. In 2004 their issues are anti-war and anti-globalism, both of which put them into the ABB camp, but also makes them mistakenly support Kerry instead when he is no better, and most of them haven't figured that out yet. Badnaik is what they want on both counts, and he wants to make sure the sovereignty of the US is not compromised militarily nor economically. Neither Bush not Kerry can truthfully make that claim. But since they are both liars I expect them to.
Your synopsis on the final winner of the election might be true, but how you arrive at that conclusion is wrong. Look at the poll numbers and you find that Badnarik is bridign the gap in a lot of states and is pulling as much as 3-5% in some. As for the so-called debates, any monkeywrench in the scripted dog-an-pony show will expose the Bush/Kerry alliance for what they are--useless puppets. Remember the Ventura factor, lest you forget, that he got in and he won, becasue he resonated with voters once he was heard.
Experience in running things? What is Bush's pre-2000 resume on that? What is Kerry's? Not very good, to be clear. That all cancels out.
Of course Badnarik would disrupt the scripted show--that's the purpose--but in doing so he also scores a victory for the silent majority of disenchanfranchised voters and undecided voters who are sick and tired of the certified BS that the major party (and apparently you) promotes.
The system needs a shakeup. What are you afraid of if that happens? It matters more now than ever. It is overdue, before the mjaor party clowns take us all over the cliff...
Parties whose candidates can win the White House:
i tution (under varous names mentioned above)
Democrat
Republican
Libertarian
Green
Const
Candidates on the AZ ballot for President:
Bush
Kerry
Badnarik
Candidates included in the publicly-funded debate at ASU who are on the ballot:
Bush
Kerry
Candidates not included:
Badnarik
It's that simple.
Any questions?
Class dismissed.
Sorry, you lose. Time to feed the troll heartburn-causing food again.
If this debate was being held on a private university, the suit would have been tossed. That's one of the reasons why this suit wasn't filed on the first two debates. However, the argument is that since the AZ Constitution prohibits the use of public facilities for partisan political activities, and since prohibition of one of the three parites on the ballot makes it partisan by being against one of the three, it's a problem. Furher, as I have pointed out in other posts, the CPD is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, which under IRS rules cannot endorse candidates OR be partisan in any form. The only way to be non-partisan is to include them all, as a DC court has recently ruled. IF the AZ court finds that the CPD is being partisan, then the status of the CPD is thrown into doubt and the whole house of cards comes crashing down at the federal level.
You also fall into the trap that the CPD put forward, that only candidates with enough "public support" can get in, and that support is gauged by polls that are rigged to only mention their candidates anyway, which isn't accurate, so the requirement becoems self-fulfilling. Then you complain about why a lot of the public has not heard of the LP? Where do you think the D/R party would be if the media blacked them out? Why does Nader get so much press, especially in states where he isn't on the ballot!, when he is on less ballots than Badnarik and enjoys less support? It makes no sense UNLESS there is something deliberate going on.
So the problem is that nobody hears of the LP, nobody covers them because nobody has heard of them, and nobody has heard of them becasue nobody covers them, and the cycle continues unabated, simply becasue most people don't have the time to do their own research to fidn out simply because they are too busy busting their a$$es to make ends meet to satisify the ridiculous tax burden imposed by the D/R party. Then they compound the insanity by voting for the schmucks who tax them so much in the first place!
This is the uphill battle we have to deal with, and people like you don't help any and actually contribute to the problem (and your own bankruptcy!).
I didn't misread it.
You're just very uninformed on how the DNC and RNC operate.
Here in CA there are real Congressional candidates on each of their tickets looking to unseat incumbents, all on the basis of their stances on illegal immigration. The electorate in those districts are mightily PO'ed at the incumbents. Their parties have disowned them in the process, simply becasue they don't want to mess with the other guy's "safe" seats. They have gerrymandered things so that they each have their own "safe" seats and then rig the rules so they stay that way--98.5% worth. There is one D incumbent and one R incumbent in this situation.
If you think that can be changed within, just look at the (lack of) success of the Rebuplican Liberty Caucus and the Democratic Liberty Caucus, both of which are trying exactly what you suggest, and failing completely.
Think it out. Why did the LP and the GP form in the first place? BECAUSE THE REFORMS YOU SUGGEST DIDN'T WORK THEN, AND THEY DON'T WORK NOW! So why go back to what doesn't work? Isn't that the definition of insanity?
That whole line of thinking makes absolutley no sense. Here's why:
Kerry is tax-and-spender trying to portray himself as a fiscal moderate in the lines of Clinton, who actually had the debt rise while claiming to balance the budget because he raided SSA funds to cover the gap. He would spend like a drunken sailor.
Bush is a borrow-and-spender trying to portray the spending as jusitifed as necessary for the WOT when most of it was pure pork. He is spending like the drunken aviator he is.
Badnarik, OTOH, favors a balanced budget, reduced spending, and lower taxes. He is fiscally conservative and stands for the limited government that the Rs USED to stand for. There a lot of fiscal conservatives that are royally PO'ed at Bush for his spending habits. There are also a lot of social liberals that are royally PO'ed at Kerry for his stances on gay marriage and civil liberties in light of the PATRIOT Act. Bringing that to the table would score points against BOTH of them and make them both look foolish, and give the disenfranchised from both sides the candidate they are looking for.
That scares Bush and Kerry to death, since they have been taking those bases for granted when they really should not be. If those bases go Badnarik, then Kerry is left with a neo-lib faction split between him and Nader/Cobb, and Bush is left with the neo-con/religious right faction with a minor split with Peroutka. Either way, it throws the election into chaos, which is a good thing.
It would also expose their hollow positions for what they really are.
This is why this whole thing is so important. It can not only kick in the door, but burn down the house, and it's long overdue.
If you really care about the freedom behind the politics and the same freedom that makes it possible, yea, even to make such a ridiculous post, then you would abandon the two-headed hydra in favor of the LP.
If you think that any D/R candidate that has anything resembling those positions can get elected, think again. They won't make it past the central committee filters.
As for the lesser of two evils, think of it this way:
Vote for what you really don't want == a vote for evil; Vote for what you don't want as much == a vote for lesser evil; Vote for what you want == a true vote.
Why vote for what you don't want? Is your integrity that low that you would change principles into a wasted vote on a horse race principle when the so-called horses that can win are what you don't want? Why not make your vote work towards the horse you want to win instead?
The only true wasted vote is the vote not cast for what you truly want. Me, I truly want freedom, which is why I vote LP.
Man, what a statist apologist you are! Maybe you're part of the problem with our government, to hear you put it...
Since you obviously can't read, I will reiterate: the hearing is for TUESDAY THE 12TH at 9 AM local for the ARIZONA debate, not the STL debate, and that debate is not going to happen until WEDNESDAY THE 13TH at 7PM local, AFTER the hearing. So you arguments about the whole thing are not only wrong, but downright false.
I do not admit that they were there to grandstand, that is your term. They were there as part of a joint effort to serve court papers on the CPD. The CPD knew they were coming as they were required to be notified per the order (if you had ever bothered to read it!), and the sent out the riot police to prevent them from performing a DUE PROCESS as allowed and required by the law! The riot police were not calle din until Cobb and Badnarik got there. If there really was ariot threat and they weren't there to lock them out, the riot squad would have been there sooner, and they weren't. CPD tried to prevent the papers from being served in DC as well with some rent-a-cop. You cannot excuse that no matter how much you try, unless you really have that much contempt for the legal process and the political process in this nation. THOSE ARE THE FACTS. Or are you in favor suppression of freedom and limiting real choices?
Furthermore, Badnarik and Cobb were there to serve the order and AT THAT TIME DID NOT KNOW that they had bern served succcessfully elsewhere. You cannot appply knowledge they didn't have to them, so that whole premise is FALSE!
And you cannot call them pseudo-candiates, as they are legitimately and legally on the ballot, so there is no psuedo about it except to you, and you've already shown yourself to be quite wrong, so that would be according to pattern.
And if you call due process "garbage" then you obviously are a disgrace to this nation, but I can guarantee you that if it were whichever statist you support being shut out and doing this you wouldn't call it that. Put the shoe on the other foot and walk a mile!
And if you have worked with the SS for many years then that only proves the point: once was too much for me, and if I could have tossed them out of my restaruant without getting fired, I would have. They weren't worth the PITA over a man I wouldn't elect dog poop collector. The same holds true for W, his daddy, and Kerry.
Neither are you worth that PITA. You're part of the problem. Your comments just prove it. All you've shown is that your mind and heart are closed to real change and real freeodm and real leadership, of which the D/R hydra is incapable.
Either that or you are just as scared as the rest of the statist quo that your house of cards will be destroyed by having fresh and better voices included. Perot proved that in '92, when he was included, and that wipes out your so-called non-entity argument. It's no coincidence that since then the CPD has doen everything in their power to prevent it from happening again. They're running scared, and so are you. If you weren't then you'd see no problem with Bandarik being let in becasue you'd see him as a non-factor. But he IS a factor, and that's why you all are scared, so you hide behind the non-factor rhetoric, not out of confidence, but out of fear. It's the same thing with the D's and Nader. It's nice to see that, actually, after all the crap you all have foisted on us for the past 92+ years. Don't be surprised if Badnarik causes some states to go one way or another. In fact, I'm counting on it, expecting it, and will be enjoying every minute of it.
A Bush, A Dick, and two Johns, no wonder this election is obscene! I'm a voter behaving BADly by voting BADNARIK and voting for freedom!
Now excuse me, I must go and laugh hysterically at you, after which I will consign you to the ash pile of wasted electrons.
Having had to deal with the SS directly on Presidential security (and I don't care if they don't appreciate the term, it's a First Amendment right I'm exercising here, and the shoe fits!) when I ran a restaurant and Clinton stopped by, I can tell you point blank that's wrong. Federal statute places protection and security of the President and Presdiential candidates under SS coverage and SUPERCEDES any local jurisdiction. If it didn't then the illegal acts the SS does while in town would get them thrown in jail, like searching me without a warrant or probable cause, for example.
---
As for suits vs teens, you're naive. On a college campus a person who is a threat will blend in by looking like a student, not a political candidate. In TX terrorists are coming across the border looking like illegal Mexican aliens, not Arabs. The 19 hijackers who did 9/11 blended into the woodwork. Need I say more? Come to LA and see how many terrorists are blended in with the illegal aliens, and then see how many are dressed like Arabs. You won't be able to count the former because you can't tell, and the count of the latter is exactly ZERO.
---
Cobb and Badnarik had no knowledge of how the other service efforts went as they were on teh campaign trail and had not heard. So much for that line of misthought.
---
4 PM MDT, and the judge said afterwards that a fax was perfectly fine, and that is in accordacne with most state laws anyway. In case you hadn't heard, and you probalby haven't, since you seem to selectivley filter things to fit your flawed microcosm, the hearing is on, and scheduled for 9 AM Tuesday, in Judge Gaines' court in Phoenix. If CPD doesn't show then summary judgement will most likely be granted and either the debate will be canceled or Badnarik allowed in. (The others may not be allowed in as they aren't on the ballot in AZ). If they do show, arguments will be heard and the judge will decide. If he decides for the CPD the appeal will be immediate to the AZ Supreme Court, and if he rules for the LP the CPD will either stonewall the issue and generate a huge ton of media coverage or they will roll over and still generate a huge ton of media coverage.
---
Last minute arguments is apologista-speak. Whether there is a case or nor is for the judge to decide, and he has decided that there is one, which is why the hearing is happening.
---
Now, what other pathetic fallacious arguments of yours may I shoot down?
I mopped the floor with a conservative on the radio on the PATRIOT Act when it was still in Congress, because I got a copy of it long before most of them did, and unlike those idiots, I actually read it. Scary stuff, especially the sneak-and-peek, no due process, and the worst is that they can declare any crime they want to be a terrorist crime, from bombing to jaywalking. Patriot II and the Medical Emergency Acts are even worse. Yeah, I'm plenty aware of it, been batting 1.250 on airline searches when flying (two legs had me searched twice!); mouse mazes to get into work at an AFB in search of nail clippers and pocketknives, as if someone was going to hijack the building; and the gummint pukes following me around periodically until I lose them at yellow lights. Not to mention being at the one of two riots instigated by police at peace rallies in Feb 2003. Old news there. The only redeeming quality is that the assault weapons ban died, so at least we can better defend ourselves a little when things get out of hand. Not if, when. The national ID card is coming again, and the rice chips as well, and that will be the straws that break.
Shows you just how uninformed and shallow this guy's thinking is.
Fact is, when applied, libertarianism is no utopia. Putting the onus of accountablity on the individual makes it hard, as each decision must be weighed out. If the libertarian message deosn't resonate with people for that, then it's because they are lazy and don't want put forth the effort to do the right thing. The current socialist state, whether it is run by the socialist Democrats or the socialist-lite Republicans (or fascist Republicans or fascist-lite Democrats, take your pick, they're botht the same anyway), removes the incentive to make your own decisions as all will be provided for you--how to think, how much money you make, who to vote for, all under the guise of free choice only it's the choices they want you to ahve, not the ones you want to have.
That's the gist of the whole thing here: who controls the choices. The D/R hydra wants to control them, and the Ls want the people to make their own choices. It's really that simple, all denigrating by the previous moron aside.
As a person with a math degree, I can attest very simply that most polls are mainly a load of crap. Heck, I got Mason-Dixon's head on record admitting that they rig them, after he tried to goad me into a felony by betting on the election. I didn't bite because I knew better. Anyway, the outcome on polls can be manipulated in many ways. Most of the time the margin of error is predetermined and then the sample space is manipulated to match the error margin. Another way is to manipulate the demographics of the sample space to reflect the political specturm, or not. Recently Newsweek got razzed for oversampling Republican voters in their post-elephant show poll. The most common way to manipualte the polls is the questions. We see it in every poll here in CA that mentions Nader (especially that wonderful crayon sheet, the LA Times!) when he isn't even on the ballot here! Omissions, weighted wordings, and bad context all play a factor to skew the results to whatever the payee wants to portray. So relying on polls is ridiculous, both in politics and college football. Your "stakes so high" question is disingenuous at best. The stakes are not as high as the D/R propaganda machine would have you believe. The fact is that with either of them we're all screwed, and the only stakes involved are the ones they use to crucify us on the cross of revoked rights and curshing taxation. And the idea of "extremist" agendas is also not entirely true and is subjective in nature, and the best way to do it is to put it out there and let people draw their own conclusions. But the CPD won't even let that happen, they're so scared of a view that starkly contrasts with their pre-ordained world view that they want the sheeple to see. To call their agendas "extremist" makes no sense, as the L viewpoint is actually socially liberal and fiscally conservative, even Goldwaterian in nature, which is where the LP claims its roots politically. We are directly in the political middle, but the problem is that nobody seems to realize it. Sounds to me more like you're shilling for the status quo and being an apologist for the statists.
Not at all. Protection of the President lies with the SS, not the local goon squad. They were there because of the perceived threat of the pacifist protest/march of some 400 people. They were there to protect the dog-and-pony show. That's if you beleive the "official" reason. And they were there because they were too stupid or meek to ask why. It is interesting that even though several students had been detained beforehand, the riot police only came out when Badnarik and Cobb, dressed in business suits, breached the line. At the risk of sounding like a profiler, who's the bigger threat based on their appearance: kids with bags, or guys in suits and political buttons? So, if the President and Kerry were inside, and their SS detials were in there, and the building was secure, then why the stormtroopers outside? Think it out. Before any such appearance, especially one so scripted as this one, the SS figures out the security arrangements in advance, including door blockages and escape routes. That was all set up and things were ready in case thing got bad. If the SS had it figured out, then the goon squad only had one purpose, which was to keep protestors away and in their "free-speech zone." It was never about security, only censorship, and Cobb and Badnarik simply chose to defy the rules and do what's right.
See previous postings on the subject of tax dollars, Washington U-STL and private property. The fact of the matter is that they were on a PUBLIC CITY STREET and were arested by CITY POLICE, not by campus rent-a-cops. A public street is by definition a public forum. You know, I see a few people who understand it here, but far too many idiots. To put it bluntly, your lack of real schooling is showing. what it comes down to is this: who can do things better, you or the government?, who is responsible for your actions, you or the government, and who can best make decisions for your own life, you or the government? The answer for libertarians all 3 times is YOU. The answer for everyone else is government. Answer the first one government and you are communist. Answer the second one government and you are a neo-con fascist. Answer the third one government and you are a neo-lib socialist. I got news for all of you--those don't work. So why do you insist on them anyway?
yada yada yada. You didn't check your facts. ASU was served before 4 PM MT and the CPD DC office was served before 4PM MT and that was caught on tape. The service was also done via fax and email to CPD , so they were definitely served. The Badnarik thing was a formality. Since the order required advance notice they knew it was coming which is why they had the riot police in place. It's a sad day when a political organization hides behind the police to obstruct due process. It's even sadder that some people support those antics.
Wrong again. In a libertarian system, there is equal access to the political system for all, not to the highest bidder as it is now. The problem here is that you make the classic and common mistake of intertwining government and economics in ways they aren't suppsoed to be , and in ways that destroy both. It's what we have now. The original idea here was minimalist mixing through coining of money and tariffs to fund operations. We have gotten so far away from that now that those original ideas are almost totally lost. Now government is as much a business as the private sector, except it can use force to get its way, AND THAT'S THE PROBLEM!
First, the suit was filed by the AZ LP, not the Badnarik Campaign. Second, the CPD folks knew this was coming because of their blocking the service in DC, and the fact that their folks in AZ heard about the order as soon as it was written, and they got word back to MO and DC before the DC serving happened. Knowing it was coming means they can't lawfully block it. Third, whatt does it say about the legitimacy of an organization that hides behind cops to prevent it from being served with a court order? Mike Wallace and 60 Minutes is one thing, but a court order is quite another.
FYI, those papers were also served at the CPD office in Washington and the servers were refused entry by a rent-a-cop. So they had to serve them somehow. Now, are you upset becasue they did civil disobedience? If so I say BAAAAH!. Remember when Nader was given a ticket to first debate in Boston back in 2000 and was refused entry even though he had a contractual right to be there? It's the same thing in principle, that those who should be there and had the right to be there were denied. I tend to think the reason you don't like is becasue you lack the imagination and the spine to do it yourself.
What they did was cross some line that some stormtrooper cops decided would be a "free-sppech zone". Last time I checked, America was a free-speech zone. Or are you advocating otherwise? Further, using color of law (e.g., police) to deny civil and constitutional rights is a federal felony. Are you adovcating this too? Third, as political figures, MB's and DC's free speech is even more protected under the law than "regular" speech. Or are you advocating censorship? Fourth, they were process servers, and interference with that duty violates Missouri state law. Or are you advocating that the police not follow the law they are supposed to make others follow? Last, they used riot police to arrest Presidential candidates! This isn't Putin's Russia or Hitler's Germany! Or are you advocating that is become them?
Actually, many of us in the LP favor truth-in-labelling, simply because an informed consumer makes better decisions. It's a natural extension from informed political choices, which are really consumer choices after all. Right now that is sorely lacking. The anarchist side of libertarianism doesn't like regulatory anything. They fail to realize that in the current state of relative human infancy we are stuck in that we need some sort of limits and that no limits is not something the general populace is ready for, which is why minarchy (for now) is the way to go. Also remember that the aritifical construct of a business and even more so a government are always inferior in scope of power to that of the people, and since the power of business and the state derives from the people, the people have the final say. That means that if the people want fully open debates (68% said they do, see Rasmussen Reports), then we should have them. If the people want standardized labels for food products, they should have them. But the trap is that this is not majority rule, but rather the supremacy of the natural person over the artifical entity. Someone could try to claim a family in here as an artifical entity, but a family is a natural entity as animals of all sorts have shown continually, so that won't fly.