One Small Step Against the Duopoly

[Ivytalk]

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]

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]

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!

Yowzah!

At the last monthly meeting, I did ask an LP vet why they put so much emphasis on cannabis, as opposed to more traditional libertarian tropes like open borders, free trade, and small guvmint. He mumbled something that sounded like "Millennials" and passed out.

[SeattleGriz]

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.

Welcome to the club!

[Grizalltheway]

Time to bring in JSO as a guest lecturer.

[Ivytalk]

Time to bring in JSO as a guest lecturer.

Time for you to shut the Fvck up!

[Grizalltheway]

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Time to bring in JSO as a guest lecturer.

Time for you to shut the Fvck up!

That's something everyone can get behind!

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[JohnStOnge]

Welcome to the party I'm in. Only potential problem for you that I see is if you're pro life like I am as the Libertarian Party is officially pro choice. I've thought about leaving because of that and also because I've had e mail exchanges with Libertarian Party officials and they're pretty dogmatic and intolerant about it.

I agreed with Ron Paul's position on the abortion issue. He said it should be left to the States. But the Party itself affirmatively includes a pro choice position in its platform.

A few years ago I found a website of something called the Constitutionalist Party and it was great in terms of philosophy and positions on issues. That's not the Constitution Party. It was a different thing. But when I Google it nowadays I only get hits on the Constitution Party so I guess it's defunct.

[JohnStOnge]

BTW I did go to some Libertarian Party meetings a few years back but I have to admit I quit going because there were a whole lot of flakes there. To me a lot of them weren't even really libertarian in their views. It was just like they were pissed off ex Republicans who supported Ron Paul during the 2012 election cycle.

[Ivytalk]

Welcome to the party I'm in.

NOOOOOOOO!!!!!

[CID1990]

Welcome to the party I'm in.

NOOOOOOOO!!!!!

He's not a fvcking Libertarian

Neither are half the people in the LP, for that matter

JSO calling dudes in the LP "flakes" is like Baptist calling Muslins "religious"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ivytalk]

Austin Petersen, who finished second to Johnson at the LP convention, has now migrated to the GOP. He wants to take on McCaskill in the 2018 MO Senate race. Problem is, the current MO AG (Josh
Hawley) will be the consensus Republican favorite if he gets in.

[Chizzang]

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

[Grizalltheway]

Time for you to shut the Fvck up!

That's something everyone can get behind!

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

That and your sister

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

That's something everyone can get behind!

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

That and your sister

And your mom

[Ivytalk]

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]

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.

[Ivytalk]

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.

FIFY. You're extreme, all right.

[Chizzang]

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.

Without question she is bingo-bongo
But she's so crazy it's a perfect vote for me these days

Also Note:
There are about a dozen Libertarians in the Washington State mix...
None of them seem to move the populace

[UNI88]

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.

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.

The Libertarian Party's dogmatism is one of the things that is holding them back. I appreciate their sticking to their values but their inflexibility is a major roadblock to them becoming a force in local, state and national politics. I can also understand the fear that if they start to compromise that they could become another political party devoid of character and with a thirst for power.

[JohnStOnge]

.
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.

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]

.
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.

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

[Ivytalk]

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.

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.

[kalm]

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.

I thought about the free association angle. Still, isn't party affiliation not a part of some state's voter registration process? If so why can't the parties police their own membership rather than codifying it into law and involving the state?

This only promulgates the duopoly.

States with open primaries seem to be more free. Just an observation.