Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Problem with political parties?

Expand Messages
  • Tim Condon
    ... I think not having to worry about paying over 50% of my income at the margin, not having to worry about asking permission or being arrested for carrying
    Message 1 of 17 , Jul 31, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      > > I think the solution is actually to make parties stronger, in the sense
      > that they can control their candidates better, and to allow for the
      > maximum number of parties. This will make parties highly responsible to
      > their constituencies and will also make them more ideologically based, as
      > opposed to the fairly amorphous parties we have here in the U.S. In
      > another sense, of course, parties should be weaker. Jason Sorens.
      >I'm not sure what your getting at here Jason becos we will be faced with
      >opposing the 'big two' whichever state is chosen in the end, and they sure
      >as hell aren't gonna change their duplicitous methods of brainwashing the
      >voters with deceit and spin without a fight.Certainly for me their is more
      >to living in a free state than saving a few tax dollars, carrying hand
      >guns and smoking a joint when I please. If the majority of 'freestaters'
      >want more of the same then I don't think I would want to be a part of it.
      >Is it possible that this issue could be included in the next ballot in
      >order to save the embarassment of losing other members at a later date
      >becos I for one assumed that this was one issue we were all in accordance
      >with..... Tim. PS.. what do the rest of you think?

      I think not having to worry about paying over 50% of my income at
      the margin, not having to worry about asking permission or being arrested
      for carrying the means of self-defense, and not having to worry about kids
      having their lives destroyed for smoking a marijuana cigarette is a good
      start. The notion of restricting the rights of people to ban together to
      fight for their political beliefs (otherwise known as "political parties")
      is totally alien to me. If people want to be active in political parties,
      no matter which ones, that's their business as long as they don't infringe
      on the equal rights of others to do the same, and don't initiate or
      threaten to initiate force in the process. "Duplicitous methods,"
      "brainwash" and "deceit and spin" are perjoratives that can just as well be
      used against *any* political group. One man's duplicity, brainwashing, and
      deceit and spin are other men's libertarian, Objectivist, socialist,
      anarchist, or Constitutionalist political actions and argumentation. I for
      one intend to be active in the Republican party, just as I am now as a
      member of the Liberty Caucus and follower of Ron Paul. (The conservative
      base of the Republican party is already friendly to libertarian precepts in
      many areas such as gun control, property rights, lower taxes, smaller
      government, less regulation and bureaucracy, etc. They can be "turned" over
      time as to other issues with education and reasoned argument about "social
      freedom" issues. Democrats, on the other hand, wedded as they are to
      socialism and other collectivist ideologies, can't so easily be convinced.
      But that's just my take on the two main political parties.) Tim Condon
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.