Where are the Libertarians?

POSTED BY: SignyM
UPDATED: Tuesday, December 2, 2025 07:10
VIEWED: 17715
PAGE 7 of 10

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE

FLETCH2

Saturday, February 4, 2006 6:36 AM

All of this is completely irrelevent.

First you have always been spied on, if you have ever expressed a serious political opinion, joined a political party been active in trade unionism, lobby groups, political action comittees or the like somewhere the government has a file on you. It's what governments do.

As to wiretaps, here's something you may not know. In the UK we have an electronic interception center called GCHQ. Back in cold war days it spied on the Soviets. As part of the "Special relationship" a member of the US NSA was assigned there as a liason. If GCHQ heard anything of interest to the US they passed the file to him and he sent it to his superiors. Reciprical to this arangement the UK had an agent at Fort Meade. However, other than keeping tabs on US IRA sympathisers he had little to do. At the NSA's request he would spy on suspect Americans using US equipment, he would then pass his findings to the NSA who would mark them "gathered from foreign intelligence sources" and use them. So Americans were being spied on in their own country by Brits using American equipment to get around domestic spying rules.

Oh and I know I have a Special Branch file -- my crime? My association with that radical group the Young Conservatives while in college. The important thing to note here is that when I was in college the Conservatives were in power meaning that the intelligence machine will actually spy on the current ruling party (well they do in the UK.)

RUE

Saturday, February 4, 2006 5:25 PM

Just a bit of historical trivia for those who like to keep track of Bush's mis-statements:

"Secondly, there are such things as roving wiretaps. Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/04/20040420-2.html

Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.

JHANCE11

Saturday, February 4, 2006 7:05 PM

Your shot missed the mark here my friend. The FISA court was modified long before Clinton took office. There are times in the inteligence business that information has to be acted on quickly. That was the reason for the modification.

If it sounds like I'm making Bush's aurgument for you not listening. The largest differance between the two processes you discuss, is oversight. By going to the FISA court no matter the method. A judge and the panel are aware of the matter and can step in if they see abuse'es.
Plus the fact the procedure can become public much easier if the court feel's like abuse's are occuring. Accountablility is the key. is the system perfect, anything but. If you have A better Idea to inprove it and still make it afective, now's the time. Bush is not lazy, he just has an ingraned arrougance that comes with the victory's the Republican's have scored.

Yes both wanted to expand the power's of the Presidency as Congress like's to do the same with their's it's the nature of the beast. There are times in society the Executive branch need broader power's and there are times Congress need's more oversight. Back to the original subjuect. Modified or not Clinton followed the law Bush did not and history will judge.

jhance11

JAYNEZTOWN

Friday, November 10, 2006 7:29 AM

Steve Kubby will run 2008

DREAMTROVE

Thursday, November 16, 2006 2:34 AM

Sure, and where are the Richard Nixons?
Nixon didn't 'try that'. Some people in the nixon govt. tried that. People like Karl Rove. They're still 'trying it' and they will be 'trying it' as democrats, just as they did in the clinton and carter administrations.

boy, the weird twisted lense of the democrats-eye-view.

Anyway, I agree, libertarians, where'd they go. Just a few raging voices, ron paul, russ feingold, john sununu, but not a lot of power.

I think that we need richard nixon right about now. Nixon '08

SERGEANTX

Thursday, November 16, 2006 5:51 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Anyway, I agree, libertarians, where'd they go. Just a few raging voices, ron paul, russ feingold, john sununu, but not a lot of power.

Libertarians just dropped the ball really. Not that making a dent in the two party system is a realistic goal, but that's where they failed. The goal should have been squarely on influencing debate and making inroads, not on quixotic runs for national office. To be fair, most party members see it that way, but the message is too extreme and not presented in a strategic fashion.

Unfortunately the party attracts ideologues who take great pleasure in shocking people with their iconoclastic and novel 'understanding' of government. The strongest feature of the Libertarian party, the purity of their political philosophy, is also their greatest flaw. It's what keeps zealots from approaching compromise and real political progress.

That said, I still think the real leverage point is the voting system. As long as we're stuck in a plurality, winner-take-all system, all challenges to the status quo will lose miserably. If we can change that, we might make some progress, but it's not really on the radar these days.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

FREMDFIRMA

Thursday, November 16, 2006 5:59 AM

Nixon was a crook, but he was our crook, more willing to share the largess with the masses to keep them happy than hoard it all and split it with his buddies like our current crop.

The only time the Vox Populi is truly heard by the ivory tower crowd is when it is expressed with violence, this is a sad, but true fact and history shows numerous examples of it.
And make no mistake, it's an ugly, ugly business (Google: Bonus Riots) that it tends to come to.

We all see it comin, it's just a matter of when, and how - not to sound nihilistic, but do you REALLY see another solution actually happening, or are you clinging to such possibilities in the hopes that history will NOT repeat itself as it always does ?

For myself I'd like to see Ron Paul/Dennis Kucinuich on a Lib ticket, but it won't happen when every aspect of the political arena is controlled by a firmly entrenched,moneyed elite we have no power over whatsoever.

It'll get.... as bad as it gets, and while that leak in the dam spreads, I am doing much what Sarge is and just ignoring the bastards, cause there's little else I can do other than feed information to folks likely to put stumbling blocks in the path of our inevitable dictatorship.

-Frem

JAYNEZTOWN

Thursday, March 29, 2007 4:03 PM

they should do good in '08

CANTTAKESKY

Saturday, March 31, 2007 3:12 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SergeantX:
That said, I still think the real leverage point is the voting system. As long as we're stuck in a plurality, winner-take-all system, all challenges to the status quo will lose miserably.

You've hit the nail on the head.

Libertarians can't make a real dent until the voting system changes to allow easier third-party access to the ballots AND run-off voting or something similar.

In my state, we had to fight draconian laws to get on the ballot. Case in point, the law required us to warn all people we solicited to sign our petition (to get on the ballot) that they would not be able to vote in their primaries if they signed--even though that was completely untrue. We had to sue the state to get that law changed--and then we only had 4 months to get 16,000 signatures we needed to get on the ballot. We busted our asses and got 18K sigs, but 3000 were invalidated, leaving us 1000 short. We tried to get the deadline extended just 3 more months, because by then we had the necessary signatures for the 2004 presidential candidate. The courts refused. It was a huge amount of work and money to fail in the end. Getting on the ballot shouldn't be this difficult.

People complain that Libertarians don't get anything done. What they don't see is that they (and all third party candidates) have to fight unreasonble obstacles placed by those in power to get them from effecting change. There is no way we (or any third party) can make a dent until those obstacles to reasonable proportions. We live in a duopoly with the power and money to keep change out, and that is the fact of life.

I have largely given up on trying to change this country. Things are going to get a lot autocratic and corrupt until the whole system collapses. Then some other country with more freedom will take over as the world superpower. And we'll deserve to be left eating their dust.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

--------------
Nullius in verba. (Take nobody's word.)

JAYNEZTOWN

Sunday, November 2, 2008 3:00 AM

another dead youtube.com watch?v=ZlEGAN2nL1Y link

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE