The GOP has the elephant, The Democrats the donkey. I nominate the gray squirrel
as the official symbol of the Libertarian Party USA.

Okay look....yes, the prisons are bursting with blacks convicted on 'drug related charges'. Legalizing drugs won't change that. Why?

Think about it. Why were these folks trafficking in drugs in the first place? To make FAST and EASY money. And LOTS of it. That's all they care about. If they can't do it selling drugs, then they'll turn to stealing cars, computers, TVs, and whatever else they can get their hands on. Or they'll just stick a gun in your face and steal your money, maybe leaving you dead in the process.

Legalizing drugs won't solve that problem, but it will add a HOST of new ones. With drugs legal and readily available, half the population in this country will be getting high all the time. And while high they'll be driving cars, trucks and motorcycles on our roads. They'll be running equipment and machinery. They'll be repairing your car, fixing your furnace, and performing your Lasik surgery. The world will become a MUCH more dangerous place, just as it did when alcohol was decriminalized.

You'll also see the destruction of homes and families, and people ground down to utter ruin on a scale never seen before.

God help us if drugs ever become legalized!

"fiscally conservative and socially liberal"

I am tired of this. how about politically conservative.

The definition I have always used is :cautious;avoiding excess

So if a rule/law/regulation allows government to use its power to increase government or its own power Socially or fiscally then that to me is liberal ideology.

If the rule/law/regulation or lack thereof maintains a cautious approach to the increase of or limits power then that to me is conservative. It matters not if it is social or fiscal policy.


Unfortunately many I know think that when you limit government to "peer into the bedroom" that that is socially liberal. So it is hard to fight trends in accepted definitions sometimes.
But it burns me people use that phrase!

Great logic you employ there. Let me try...

CONstitutionalist
CONvict...

not so nice huh?

Thank you, thank you very much.

Send your campaign donations to ....

Forgive me if I offend you, but frankly I don’t give a rat’s butt, including you Neal. I don’t believe being against abortion means you can’t be a Libertarian. That said; my personal outlook is that first of all it should be a state decision to legalize or not, which is very in keeping with the Libertarian platform I believe. Second, I think the option should be the woman’s decision, because it is her body, not mine and not yours being affected. Third, unless it is a case of rape or she (and therefore probably the fetus) is going to die, then tax money shouldn’t pay for it.

"Infact, the term "liberal" is such a misnomer I wish we could change it forever. The only thing they are liberal with is other peoples money."

Ha ha ha so true Joyce :)

Grrr... yet another loon that thinks it is somehow selfish or morally wrong to want to keep what you earn.

These idiots are so smug on their moral high horses-- but only so long as they are being "moral" with someone else's money. Just not their own.

RED LEADED..............osamabama WILL be #45......there is nothing to stop him......unless........

is that cordite?????

Runoff elections would break the two-party system.

Make the parties responsible for their own damn primary elections and let the government focus on the general election and an official runoff if no candidate tops 50%.

Just wanna knitpick here. While I agree that many (maybe all) drug laws should be abandoned or at least decriminalized, I take issue with your argument:

"No laws will ever stop people from using drugs. People do not abstain from drug use because drugs are illegal."

First of all, no law will ever stop all people from doing anything. That's why laws exist in the first place. If we expect 100% compliance on a law in order to justify its existence, then we might as well abolish laws on murder, rape, theft, and j-walking. We might as well dismantle our framework of courts and prisons because they won't be needed since we will no longer have laws that people can't break.

In reality, we expect that laws will be broken and that's why laws are passed because it allows us to punish those who perform a specific action, and the threat of that punishment is what really prevents people from doing crimes.

Second, you said "People do no abstain from drug use because drugs are illegal" That's interesting because I've personally known people who would like to use pot, but don't find the risk worth the reward. A big reason I haven't tried pot is because I don't want to end up in jail for some pointless short-term fun that violates a pointless law. Many don't do drugs because these drug laws have forced drugs underground which makes them too expensive to be worth it.


Overall, I do find Federal drug laws unconstitutional, and that making many drugs illegal is a violation of a person's right to abuse their own body. I have never used pot, but I think it should at least be decriminalized (if not made flat-out legal). But I find your arguments in that post to be so weak that it actually hurts the cause.

LIBertarian
LIBeral
They both are still LIBS!

After I got into the real world, I have voted Republican. However, after much more education and thought, I have joined the Libertarian Party. I have lost hope in transforming the Republican Party. They are NO different than the Democrats. Both want to tell me how to live and want my money to fund this nanny state. The Democrats are not interested in expanding personal freedoms and the Republicans haven't been fiscally conservative since "read my lips, no new taxes." Recall that Bush said "I've abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system." What!?! How many Republicans voted for the bailout? For Cash for Clunkers (my rep did)?

Government "safety nets" have become hammocks for the "moochers."

I don't do drugs, have never had an abortion, and will teach any kids of mine the same morals that I was taught.

Parents have gotten lazy and complacent: it's YOUR job to teach your kids to be moral and responsible. Churches have gotten lazy and complacent: it's YOUR job to spread the teachings of Jesus (or whatever you believe), to promote moral actions, to help the needy in your communities, to provide fellowship.

Here is a good read from a liberty and religion think tank:
http://www.acton.org/publications/mandm/mandm_article_65.php

Also, RINO = Centrist or Statist, not Libertarian. They take your money AND tell you how to live.

Instead of insulting those of us who have lost faith or who are not 100% pure in our libertarian beliefs, why not try to find the common ground and rally behind that? If not, we will be too busy fighting each other as we see the "progressives" take over this great nation.

BTW, the whole abortion debate is a scam. Both major parties love this issue because it gives them the appearance of being different from each other while they both steer the country deeper into socialism. The bickering from both sides gives them the cover to do other things.

Looking back to the 1970s, don't you think it would have been a more productive use of our time to fight against the CRA or the creation of the EPA? What about in the early 90s when Clinton and Gore imposed taxes on Social Security benefits, or any of the number of small babysteps towards socialism?

The Libertarian party is in greater dissaray than the GOP; they cannot agree much on anything. Until then, how can anyone take them seriously?

We are doing our part in Texas. If some of you don't think we are organized, you might want to take a look. In the next couple weeks we will be in Hillsboro, Abilene, San Angelo, Brownwood, Dallas, Ft Worth, Denton, and Frisco. See for yourself.

Pat Dixon
Chair, Libertarian Party of Texas
www.LPTexas.org

I would have written that and given all those excellent examples but....

Okay, I'll admit it, I was TOO LAZY to do so.....

Mind if I 'borrow' your list sometime?

Neal says its not possible to be both antiabortion & libertarian, but I disagree. If the voters in a particular State want abortion then it should be legal there and vice versa. If I don't like it I can move, and probably would.
My problem with Roe vs Wade is that it trumps the will of the people in States that are strongly antiabortion. Its all about the 10th ammendment.

The same applies to drugs. The federal government has no business trumping a State's decision to allow or criminalize any substance unless its a direct threat to national security.
Blayne, its the illegality of drugs that have wrecked many Black families. That's why they use it and sell it. And its the War on Drugs that have filled our prisons to the bursting point with young blacks caught selling them.

I don't agree with everything about the Libertarian party. However, they score the most hits with me on how they govern.

The big things with Libertarians are, individual liberty, small government, low taxes. Unfortunately the Repubs or Dems can't or wont govern that way.
So I'll keep voting Libertarian.

Bravo. You just easily summarized why I am not a Libertarian. Add to that- won't close the boarder, refuse to fight against terrorists, and arrogant selfishness (Libertarians hide selfishness behind being overtaxed, but how many would actually donate to charity with the money they saved? My guess is little to none. Reference the episode earlier this week with the out of work construction worker).

Did you miss the whole point? Those are matters of CHOICE. Individual CHOICE. So how can you say "they" will be responsible for anything at all? To me, libertarianism is not about politics. It's a simple philosophy wherein my life belongs to me, and I'm free to do whatever the hell I want with it...good or bad... so long as I don't violate anyone else. How in god's name did we get so far off track in America, where so many people have a problem with such a simple thing as LIBERTY?

You said "if you tell people that "libertarian" means "fiscally conservative and socially liberal," the number jumps up to 44 percent"

Well sure. And if you say "being libertarian means ending all foreign aid to other countries, ending all social welfare including social security, and legalizing all drugs" I'm gonna guess that number drops a bit.

And then throw in this bit "We should replace harmful government agencies like the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) with more agile, free-market alternatives."

and I'm gonna guess the number drops even more...

Problem with surveys like this is people consider themselves "conservative" but it is very difficult to translate that into a vote for one party or another.

But, one thing is clear - statistically speaking - the number of those votes that translate into Libertarian have been scant few.

The phrase "socially liberal" really means nothing today. In fact, the word "liberal" means nothing today. The word should mean someone who believes in liberty, yet in actuality it means someone who:

1) Wants to dictate what foods you can buy at the grocery store.

2) Wants to dictate how you carry your groceries from the store.

3) Wants to dictate how you will transport your groceries home.

4) Wants to dictate the temperature you keep your home.

5) Wants to dictate what doctor you can see, when you can see that doctor, and what medical services you are allocated.

6) Wants to dictate what political speech you are allowed to hear.

7) Wants to dictate what property you are allowed to keep.

8) Wants to dictate what your kids are allowed to learn in school.

9) Wants to dictate how large your home is allowed to be.

10) Wants to dictate whether or not you are allowed to cut down a earth-loving tree growing on your property.

11) Wants to ban your ability to own a gun.

12) Wants to take away your home or land if the government can give it to someone else who can utilize it in a way that will increase the tax base.

13) Wants to ban your right to smoke a cigarette...as long as the leaves being burnt aren't from the marijuana plant. Then it's OK.

14) Wants to ban the certain colors from vehicles to reduce air conditioning needs in that car.



Even when modern liberals seem to profess freedom they do it in by being a big bully:

1) They support homosexuals having the freedom to bang each other, but they want the right to force everyone to redefine the word marriage and legislate that everyone respects them.

2) They support a woman being able to abort her unborn baby, but demand public funds to pay for it.

3) They believe a member of a so-called oppressed group should be entitled to opportunities, but they also believe the laws should be written for force people to give them those opportunities.


In other words, if someone says they are "socially liberal" I do not find it to be a positive. Perhaps "classical liberal" would make sense.

As for "Libertarian", call me when they decide to be more than a little group of hecklers that like to sit outside and complain about what's going on.

Legalization of drugs and the right to murder the unborn. They'll do as much to destroy the Black family as liberals have. So, I'll pass.

you're a libertarian? HAHAHAHA

next joke please.

You're not a libertarian. You're a republican. And for you Boortz myrmidons, go read the libertarian platform/beliefs at www.lp.org and you will see for yourself that Neal quit being a libertarian when he fell in love George W. Bush.