Subject:
|
Re: LP statement on terrorist attacks
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sun, 16 Sep 2001 05:16:35 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
871 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> Well, how about the fact that Ron Paul, former LP candidate for president,
> is once again in the GOP and is once again a representative from Texas?
> If you ask him I suspect he'll tell you he is just as Libertarian as ever and
> gives just as much credence as ever to the LP's views. He's just flying the
> GOP flag for convenience. You can argue whether that's legitimate or not.
> I'm not sure myself.
I'm not sure either, but I don't think he has any credibility in claiming
that he's just as Libertarian (capital L) as ever; if he were, he surely
wouldn't have joined the GOP. It's analogous to a certain former GOP member
who's now Independent but still claims to adhere to many/most of the GOP's
views. Sounds like fence straddling, in a way, but at the very least Paul must
be acknowledged to lack the courage of his convictions, if he either a) turns
his back on his true party, or b) runs for another party under false pretenses.
Those are, I freely admit, caricatures of the situation rather than factual
descriptions...
> How about the fact that LP drives have had significant impact on the passage
> or non passage of legislation via callin campaigns to congress?
Again, though--can you give a cite? I'm not just dogging you--I'd really
like to read more about this. Lots of people claim to influence Congress. I
used to work with a guy who wrote weekly letters of foreign policy advice to
Lynn Herman, and some of my coworker's suggestions came to be, but that doesn't
mean Herman et al were influenced by them.
> Those all seem like direct influence to me. Maybe not of foreign policy in
> this specific instance but that wasn't the charge, the charge was that the
> LP influences nothing.
I was actually addressing this statement:
> The LP must know that their opinion in this crises (sic) is moot.
rather than a blanket "LP has no bearing" sort of notion, though I agree that
this debate has had a broader range than that.
> ++Lar (I said I was done, and I am, but I did want to answer a direct
> question from one of our more thoughtful members)
Oops. I didn't read this part until just now (so much for "thoughtful")--if
you'd rather not answer, since you stated that you were done, that's cool. No
harm, no foul!
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: LP statement on terrorist attacks
|
| (...) It sounds like you are assuming that politial party membership is by nature mutually exclusive of other party membership. It might be that way by law (I really have no idea) but it shouldn't be. I agree with some of the stances that each of (...) (23 years ago, 16-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: LP statement on terrorist attacks
|
| (...) Well, how about the fact that Ron Paul, former LP candidate for president, is once again in the GOP and is once again a representative from Texas? If you ask him I suspect he'll tell you he is just as Libertarian as ever and gives just as much (...) (23 years ago, 15-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
49 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
