Subject:
|
Re: Vote against/for...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 7 Nov 2002 15:01:33 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
689 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
> > > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
>
> > > > Like I said elsewhere, I fear for the country. Having the House, Senate and
> > > > White House all controlled by the same party (either one of the current
> > > two, take your pick) is bad bad bad news.
>
> > > As far as you know, which isn't far.
> >
> > None of us is blessed with omniescence, of course, as far as I can tell.
>
> That was my point.
>
> > And we're all limited by our horizons, and our companions.
>
> > But I'm on a mountaintop with Thomas Jefferson, while you're down in a hog
> > wallow with John Ashcroft, so I'm pretty comfortable that I can see a lot
> > farther ahead than you can. And what I see scares the jeepers out of me.
> >
> > If it's any comfort to you, though, you're in the majority.
>
> *You* could be in the majority too if you'd pull your head out and join the
> Republican party to work for getting liberatarian agendas implemented, rather
> than support the go-nowhere, impotent Losertarian party.
Slinging names is not the way to keep this debate where it needs to be.
Because when you use even a mild one like "Losertarian" you enable ill
mannered rabble rousers to do the same (in kind, but far worse in degree). I
find the use of the term "dingus" particularly offensive and out of place in
this group, but you've (at least in part) enabled it.
That's regrettable.
Now, to the suggestion that I should work within the GOP, perhaps join the
Republican Libertarian Caucus, or whatever, yes I've considered it briefly
in the past. But it has several problems:
- I am no more sympathetic to the Republicans than I am to the Democrats.
For every detestable thing the Dems do I can find one in the GOP
- The RLC seems to have had little to no effect, if anything the GOP has
gotten worse rather than better in the last 20 years.
- I prefer to stick with the "Party of Principle", even if it means losing,
rather than compromising my principles. I never changed who I was to be more
popular in the past and I see no reason to start now.
- the charge that the LP is impotent is false. We(1) took Bob Barr down in
the primary with a relatively small expenditure, for example. Since he was
one of the biggest Drug Warriors out there (and a relatively powerful person
in the GOP hierarchy) I think that's rather significant. It sends a message
that we can and will engineer defeats. It's not the first time we did it
either, ask Coverdale.
So, frustrated as I might be at times with the LP and our leadership, I'll
remain.
1 - meaning that it was the LP ads for our candidate that were credited with
turning enough voters against Barr that he was defeated in the R primary,
where he was easier to beat than in the general. I expect that isn't the
last you'll see of that tactic either. The LP will continue picking off more
of the worst of the anti civil liberties gang in the GOP, just you watch.
Expect some action in the Louisiana runoff if I don't miss my bet.
++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Vote against/for...
|
| (...) See also this analysis... (URL) an admittedly partisan source) My favorite excerpt: "It marks the third consecutive election in which a Libertarian has cost the Republican Party a Senate seat," wrote Miller. "If there had been no Libertarian (...) (22 years ago, 23-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
| (...) That was my point. (...) *You* could be in the majority too if you'd pull your head out and join the Republican party to work for getting liberatarian agendas implemented, rather than support the go-nowhere, impotent Losertarian party. You are (...) (22 years ago, 7-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
161 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- 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
|
|
|
|
