Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Ivytalk wrote:Ivytalk officially changed his party registration to Libertarian today. The budget fiasco was the last straw.

I was a registered Republican for 44 years, so it wasn't easy to switch. Mrs. Ivy, who has a solid GOP pedigree (mother was city chair, grandfather was state chair), is dealing with it. We both hate Donkism, so it's all good.

But the Libertarians are the only small government option in town that's on the ballot in all 50 (57?) states, so I'm in. My conscience is clear.

And I enjoy the pizza and beer at the monthly county LP meetings! Better political discussion than any GOP meeting that I ever attended.

kalm wrote:

Ivytalk wrote:Ivytalk officially changed his party registration to Libertarian today. The budget fiasco was the last straw.

I was a registered Republican for 44 years, so it wasn't easy to switch. Mrs. Ivy, who has a solid GOP pedigree (mother was city chair, grandfather was state chair), is dealing with it. We both hate Donkism, so it's all good.

But the Libertarians are the only small government option in town that's on the ballot in all 50 (57?) states, so I'm in. My conscience is clear.

And I enjoy the pizza and beer at the monthly county LP meetings! Better political discussion than any GOP meeting that I ever attended.

Remember, Libertarians are Republicans who like to smoke weed and get laid.

Get to work!

Ivytalk wrote:Ivytalk officially changed his party registration to Libertarian today. The budget fiasco was the last straw.

I was a registered Republican for 44 years, so it wasn't easy to switch. Mrs. Ivy, who has a solid GOP pedigree (mother was city chair, grandfather was state chair), is dealing with it. We both hate Donkism, so it's all good.

But the Libertarians are the only small government option in town that's on the ballot in all 50 (57?) states, so I'm in. My conscience is clear.

And I enjoy the pizza and beer at the monthly county LP meetings! Better political discussion than any GOP meeting that I ever attended.

Grizalltheway wrote:Time to bring in JSO as a guest lecturer.

Ivytalk wrote:

Grizalltheway wrote:Time to bring in JSO as a guest lecturer.

Time for you to shut the Fvck up!

JohnStOnge wrote:Welcome to the party I'm in.

NOOOOOOOO!!!!!

Ivytalk wrote:

JohnStOnge wrote:Welcome to the party I'm in.

NOOOOOOOO!!!!!

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:

Ivytalk wrote:
Time for you to shut the Fvck up!

That's something everyone can get behind!

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Grizalltheway wrote:

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:That's something everyone can get behind!

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

That and your sister

Chizzang wrote:I'm all about voting "The Fringe Ticket" these last few years...
Militant Social Justice has chased me away from the lunacy that has infected the Left

CID1990 wrote: He's not a fvcking Libertarian

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JohnStOnge wrote:

CID1990 wrote: He's not a fvcking Libertarian

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The reason I'm registered Libertarian is that, years ago, I went through platforms and positions of various political parties to select the one that most closely matches my own beliefs and positions. It could be that the apparently now-defunct Constitutionalist Party was the one that did. But if so it was close. And I did also consider whether I'd ever seen the Party run candidates.

If I had my way:

Prostitution would be legal.
Recreational drug use would be legal.
No prescription to buy medical drugs would be required. They would simply be recommended by a Doctor then you'd go buy them over the counter.
There would be no income taxes.
The Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare programs would be phased out.
There would be no compulsory jury duty.
No business would be required to have a license to operate (engaging in commerce is a right).
No drivers' license would be required to drive (if you own a car, driving is a right rather than a privilege. Driving on a public road is a right just like walking on a public sidewalk is).
Civil Rights law interfering with the right of a business owner to opt not to do business with someone for whatever reason they opt not to do business with someone for whatever reason they have would be repealed.
Civil Rights law interfering with the right to refuse to hire someone for whatever reason they have would be repealed.
Nothing anyone else potentially has to give to you would be considered a right. Thus no right to food, housing, or health care.
Citizens would not be forced through taxation to pay to educate other people's children.
Hillary Clinton would be President.
The Democrats would control both houses of Congress.

I could go on, but you get the picture. I am not only a libertarian. I am an extreme libertarian.

Ivytalk wrote:

Chizzang wrote:I'm all about voting "The Fringe Ticket" these last few years...
Militant Social Justice has chased me away from the lunacy that has infected the Left

So does that mean you've developed a soft-on for Jill Stein?? She does the lunacy thing pretty well.

JohnStOnge wrote:

CID1990 wrote: He's not a fvcking Libertarian

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The reason I'm registered Libertarian is that, years ago, I went through platforms and positions of various political parties to select the one that most closely matches my own beliefs and positions. It could be that the apparently now-defunct Constitutionalist Party was the one that did. But if so it was close. And I did also consider whether I'd ever seen the Party run candidates.

If I had my way:

Prostitution would be legal.
Recreational drug use would be legal.
No prescription to buy medical drugs would be required. They would simply be recommended by a Doctor then you'd go buy them over the counter.
There would be no income taxes.
The Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare programs would be phased out.
There would be no compulsory jury duty.
No business would be required to have a license to operate (engaging in commerce is a right).
No drivers' license would be required to drive (if you own a car, driving is a right rather than a privilege. Driving on a public road is a right just like walking on a public sidewalk is).
Civil Rights law interfering with the right of a business owner to opt not to do business with someone for whatever reason they opt not to do business with someone for whatever reason they have would be repealed.
Civil Rights law interfering with the right to refuse to hire someone for whatever reason they have would be repealed.
Nothing anyone else potentially has to give to you would be considered a right. Thus no right to food, housing, or health care.
Citizens would not be forced through taxation to pay to educate other people's children.

I could go on, but you get the picture. I am not only a libertarian. I am an extreme libertarian.

Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government’s treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships.

UNI88 wrote:.
John, you have an amazing ability to selectively ignore things that don't fit your ideological narrative. Yes, you agree with many parts of the Libertarian platform but Abortion isn't the only one that you disagree with, you also likely disagree with the Libertarian position on personal relationships:

Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government’s treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships.

The reality is that if you are a libertarian then you are a small l - libertarian, you agree with much of the party's platform but not all of it. It's not a negative, I have the same feelings but the areas where we diverge from the party platform are different and I'm willing to acknowledge those differences rather than pretending that the Libertarian Party needs to change to fit my narrative.

JohnStOnge wrote:

UNI88 wrote:.
John, you have an amazing ability to selectively ignore things that don't fit your ideological narrative. Yes, you agree with many parts of the Libertarian platform but Abortion isn't the only one that you disagree with, you also likely disagree with the Libertarian position on personal relationships:

The reality is that if you are a libertarian then you are a small l - libertarian, you agree with much of the party's platform but not all of it. It's not a negative, I have the same feelings but the areas where we diverge from the party platform are different and I'm willing to acknowledge those differences rather than pretending that the Libertarian Party needs to change to fit my narrative.

I did not selectively ignore anything. I just didn't think to write about it. Of the topics you mentioned I'd say homosexual marriage is the one I've written about here. And I think my position is a libertarian one. Marriage is a recognition. It's not a right.

I am completely in favor of people being able to engage in homosexual relationships if they want to. I am NOT in favor of having government force OTHER people to recognize their relationships as having a particular status.

As far as the thing about not agreeing with every position goes: I don't think ANY person belongs to a Party such that they agree with every single position of the Party. I registered as a Libertarian because it was the Party that fit me best.

It doesn't necessarily need to change to "fit my narrative." But there is nothing wrong with me making arguments for changes. Then if at some point I feel that the differences are too great, I can always cancel my membership in the Party.

Frankly, I don't think the Libertarian Party is libertarian enough. In certain areas it wants to force people to do things they don't want to do. Like, for instance, force communities to recognize homosexual relationships as marriage. That's not really a libertarian position.

Saying that two people have a right to have a homosexual relationship if they want is a libertarian position. Saying that a community should be forced to recognize that relationship as a "marriage" is not.

kalm wrote:

JohnStOnge wrote:
I did not selectively ignore anything. I just didn't think to write about it. Of the topics you mentioned I'd say homosexual marriage is the one I've written about here. And I think my position is a libertarian one. Marriage is a recognition. It's not a right.

I am completely in favor of people being able to engage in homosexual relationships if they want to. I am NOT in favor of having government force OTHER people to recognize their relationships as having a particular status.

As far as the thing about not agreeing with every position goes: I don't think ANY person belongs to a Party such that they agree with every single position of the Party. I registered as a Libertarian because it was the Party that fit me best.

It doesn't necessarily need to change to "fit my narrative." But there is nothing wrong with me making arguments for changes. Then if at some point I feel that the differences are too great, I can always cancel my membership in the Party.

Frankly, I don't think the Libertarian Party is libertarian enough. In certain areas it wants to force people to do things they don't want to do. Like, for instance, force communities to recognize homosexual relationships as marriage. That's not really a libertarian position.

Saying that two people have a right to have a homosexual relationship if they want is a libertarian position. Saying that a community should be forced to recognize that relationship as a "marriage" is not.

On a side note, requiring primary voters to register with a party doesn't sound very libertarian.

Ivytalk wrote:

kalm wrote:
On a side note, requiring primary voters to register with a party doesn't sound very libertarian.

Shirley, you can't be serious. Why should the free-association rights of a party member (to choose a candidate supporting his party's platform) be diluted by the votes of independents who have no skin in the game?

And if I had a dollar for every homosexual-bashing post made by our favorite Cajun libertarian, I could buy a case of Trump Steaks.