Is this the year of the Libertarian Party?

[The Derp]

I am coming around on that whole Electoral College being outdated. I think we should go to a one state, one vote format. Each state legislature pass a bill on its vote for a president, and the governor of that state must sign that bill into law for one vote.

Stupid fucking idea there.

 

[g5000]

can see where a lot of republicans would take issue with the libertarian stance on abortion and the death penalty.

On death penalty hes

BUT abortion?

The policy is "it is not the government's business

That really means federal government

Libertarians are not opposed to all government, but rather prefer that most decisions are best made at the state a decision local level...

For those that believe that a fetus is a person that deserves the same protection of life as any other person, abortion is the government’s business. For those that don’t believe a fetus is a person, then it’s not the government’s business.
Now if you are saying abortion should be a state issue, I agree.

I don't understand why abortion should be a state issue as opposed to a national law. There will continue to be those who oppose abortion and those who believe it is a woman's right to choose, regardless of what their own choice might be. What does bringing it down to the state level, which would result in a confusing hodgepodge of restrictions and legislative initiatives that would benefit no one. People would be traveling from state to state to find services, outside their own local communities.

Which would make it no different than other issues which are decided on the state level.

Why in the HELL do you fools want a central government thousands of miles away, completely owned by special interests, running your lives!?!

Why would you voluntarily cede your rights and liberties like that?

You people are insane.

 

[The Derp]

Do people get a different kind of pregnant in TN than they do in OR? No, but that question shows you don’t have an understanding of the 10th amendment. Or as least you are pretending not to!

You seem to think the 10th Amendment is the catch-all for every bullshit argument you make.

Just wondering, do you apply 18th century thinking to other aspects of your life? Do you treat cancer with leeches? Do you have an outhouse instead of indoor plumbing? Do you travel by horse-and-buggy across dirt roads? Do you use smoke signals and carrier pigeons to communicate? Is quartering British soldiers something that is a threat to your daily way of life? Are you under constant threat of bear or Mohawk attacks? Do you use oxen to plow and sow your fields? Do you wear the same clothes every day for months? Do you bathe once every couple weeks?

So why do you apply 18th century thinking to government and not any other aspect of your life?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

FUCKING IDIOT, CONGRESS HAS TO VOTE ON ALL THAT SHIT.

You stupid fucking nobody.

You are an embarrassment to this board.

So, why do we even need a president, genius? Don't get mad at me because you failed to consider the other duties of POTUS.

How much of the vote in CA did Trump get? 33%. How much of the electoral votes in CA did Trump get? 0%.

So which is more?

The same thing happened in every other state, but Hillary won the popular vote by about 3 million. Hillary won the popular vote in California by 4.3 million votes.

Do you get the point, or do I need to draw you a picture?

 

[g5000]

Do people get a different kind of pregnant in TN than they do in OR? No, but that question shows you don’t have an understanding of the 10th amendment. Or as least you are pretending not to!

You seem to think the 10th Amendment is the catch-all for every bullshit argument you make.

Just wondering, do you apply 18th century thinking to other aspects of your life? Do you treat cancer with leeches? Do you have an outhouse instead of indoor plumbing? Do you travel by horse-and-buggy across dirt roads? Do you use smoke signals and carrier pigeons to communicate? Is quartering British soldiers something that is a threat to your daily way of life? Are you under constant threat of bear or Mohawk attacks? Do you use oxen to plow and sow your fields? Do you wear the same clothes every day for months? Do you bathe once every couple weeks?

So why do you apply 18th century thinking to government and not any other aspect of your life?

We apply the Constitution and our Founders' thinking to our daily lives BECAUSE IT WORKS.

Not only that, I also apply thinking that is thousands of years old to my daily life as well.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

No...and that's exactly my point. What makes you think that CA would put restrictions on the 2A when it's Congress who writes laws, not the President.

You don't seem to know how our system of government actually works.

Okay, you are deliberately missing the point.

California has an "assault weapons" ban in place. It's illegal to possess a motherfucking BB gun in New Jersey without a permit.

How is that any different than restrictions in individual states on abortions?

Or, are you going to continue to miss the point?

 

[JoeMoma]

Do people get a different kind of pregnant in TN than they do in OR? No, but that question shows you don’t have an understanding of the 10th amendment. Or as least you are pretending not to!

You seem to think the 10th Amendment is the catch-all for every bullshit argument you make.

Just wondering, do you apply 18th century thinking to other aspects of your life? Do you treat cancer with leeches? Do you have an outhouse instead of indoor plumbing? Do you travel by horse-and-buggy across dirt roads? Do you use smoke signals and carrier pigeons to communicate? Is quartering British soldiers something that is a threat to your daily way of life? Are you under constant threat of bear or Mohawk attacks? Do you use oxen to plow and sow your fields? Do you wear the same clothes every day for months? Do you bathe once every couple weeks?

So why do you apply 18th century thinking to government and not any other aspect of your life?

There is an amendment process to update the constitution.
You seem to be confused. I’m not using the 10th amendment to defend multiple arguments.

 

[The Derp]

So you think every issue is a federal one?

I can't think of a state-only issue in the 21st century that doesn't impact other states. Even health care, which impacts every state the same way. People in MA don't get a different kind of heart disease than people in AZ.

"States Rights" is just code for "I want to discriminate but lack the authority to do so".

Fuck those people.

This is exactly what I meant when I said no one can point to where the line separating state and federal powers is any more.

Because as we're finding in today's modern age, the idea of state boundaries is utterly antiquated and meaningless. What may have made sense back when people rode horses everywhere and interstate commerce was rare, doesn't make sense today in the era of fast travel and commerce routinely happening across state borders. Your credit cards in your wallet, where are they based? Delaware. FedEx, where is it based? Tennessee. Amazon, where is that based? Washington state. So your typical Amazon transaction crosses at least three state boundaries in order to deliver you a product to a fourth location that very well may be another different state.

You just loooooooooove your central government, don't you.

Some problems are just too big for a single state or individual to solve.

 

[g5000]

In a planned society, we shall all know that we are better or worse off than others, not because of circumstances which nobody controls, and which it is impossible to foresee with certainty, but because some authority wills it. And all our efforts directed towards improving our position will have to aim, not at foreseeing and preparing as well as we can for the circumstances over which we have no control, but at influencing in our favour theauthority which has all the power.

Who plans whom, who directs and dominates whom, who assigns to other people their station in life, and who is to have his due allotted by others? These become necessarily the central issues to be decided solely by the supreme power.

Once you admit that the individual is merely a means to serve the ends of the higher entity called society or the nation, most of those features of totalitarian regimes which horrify us follow of necessity. From the collectivist standpoint intolerance and brutal suppression of dissent, the complete disregard of the life and happiness of the individual, are essential and unavoidable consequences of this basic premise, and the collectivist can admit this and at the same time claim that his system is superior to one in which the "selfish" interests of the individual are allowed to obstruct the full realisation of the ends the community pursues.

And while the planning authority will constantly have to decide issues on merits about which there exist no definite moral rules, it will have to justify its decisions to the people-or, at least, have somehow to make the people believe that they are the right decisions. Although those responsible for a decision may have been guided by no more than prejudice, some guiding principle will have to be stated publicly if the community is not merely passively to submit but actively to support the measure. The need to rationalise the likes and dislikes which, for lack of anything else, must guide the planner in many of his decisions, and the necessity of stating his reasons in a form in which they will appeal to as many people as possible, will force him to construct theories, i.e. assertions about the connections between facts, which then become an integral part of the governing doctrine. This process of creating a "myth" to justify his action need not be conscious.

Excerpts from The Road to Serfdom by Friedrich Hayek.

 

[The Derp]

[California has an "assault weapons" ban in place. It's illegal to possess a motherfucking BB gun in New Jersey without a permit.

Again, CONGRESS writes laws, not the President.

You simply don't understand how our government works.

 

[g5000]

So you think every issue is a federal one?

I can't think of a state-only issue in the 21st century that doesn't impact other states.

Lovers of strong central government never can. You lack the education.

 

[The Derp]

There is an amendment process to update the constitution.
You seem to be confused. I’m not using the 10th amendment to defend multiple arguments.

Yes, you are. You lazily fall back on the 10th Amendment because you think it makes you look clever. It doesn't. It makes you look lazy.

 

[JoeMoma]

So you think every issue is a federal one?

I can't think of a state-only issue in the 21st century that doesn't impact other states. Even health care, which impacts every state the same way. People in MA don't get a different kind of heart disease than people in AZ.

"States Rights" is just code for "I want to discriminate but lack the authority to do so".

Fuck those people.

This is exactly what I meant when I said no one can point to where the line separating state and federal powers is any more.

Because as we're finding in today's modern age, the idea of state boundaries is utterly antiquated and meaningless. What may have made sense back when people rode horses everywhere and interstate commerce was rare, doesn't make sense today in the era of fast travel and commerce routinely happening across state borders. Your credit cards in your wallet, where are they based? Delaware. FedEx, where is it based? Tennessee. Amazon, where is that based? Washington state. So your typical Amazon transaction crosses at least three state boundaries in order to deliver you a product to a fourth location that very well may be another different state.

You just loooooooooove your central government, don't you.

Some problems are just too big for a single state or individual to solve.

So are you for eliminating state government and handling everything at the federal level?

 

[g5000]

"States Rights" is just code for "I want to discriminate but lack the authority to do so".

Wrong.

States rights mean we know on the local level what is better for us than a central government thousands of miles away which is owned by special interests.

So fuck you.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

You seem to think the 10th Amendment is the catch-all for every bullshit argument you make.

Just wondering, do you apply 18th century thinking to other aspects of your life? Do you treat cancer with leeches? Do you have an outhouse instead of indoor plumbing? Do you travel by horse-and-buggy across dirt roads? Do you use smoke signals and carrier pigeons to communicate? Is quartering British soldiers something that is a threat to your daily way of life? Are you under constant threat of bear or Mohawk attacks? Do you use oxen to plow and sow your fields? Do you wear the same clothes every day for months? Do you bathe once every couple weeks?

So why do you apply 18th century thinking to government and not any other aspect of your life?

Look, if you hate the constitution, just say so. Don't beat around the bush.

 

[JoeMoma]

There is an amendment process to update the constitution.
You seem to be confused. I’m not using the 10th amendment to defend multiple arguments.

Yes, you are. You lazily fall back on the 10th Amendment because you think it makes you look clever. It doesn't. It makes you look lazy.

OMG!

 

[g5000]

This is from Section 117 of the Commodities Futures Modernization Act

This Act shall supersede and preempt the application of any State or local law that prohibits or regulates gaming or the operation of bucket shops

This is what is called a "federal pre-emption". The federal government seized power from the states and nulled state laws which prohibit bucket shops and which regulate casinos.

This federal pre-emption is a direct cause of the economic crash which followed.

THAT is why we need to take power back from the federal government.


Ask yourself, The Derp. Why does a bank need exemptions from state gaming laws for casinos? Why does a bank need to be exempted from laws prohibiting bucket shops?

This type of legislation led to the outright fraud we saw leading up to the crash.

Where were all the States Rights advocates screaming about this blatant federal pre-emption of state laws? Why was Fox News not ranting about this?

Might it have something to do with the fact it was put in there by a Republican at the behest of Wall Street?

Things that make you go hmmmmm...

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Some problems are just too big for a single state or individual to solve.

Yes. That's why we formed a Union to provide for the common defense and to promote commerce among the states. The founders are way ahead of you on that. What you are saying is that ALL problems are too big, which is bullshit to 'nth degree.

 

[NYcarbineer]

lol, the above is exactly where the Libertarians end up every time this sort of conversation occurs, and it's occurred on this forum before.

Stop trying to pin us down on the issues!!!! The issues don't matter!!! The Libertarian Party is not a political party!!!!

Goddam funny

The Republican party does not support a republican form of government in its platform. Neither does the Democratic party always support democracy in its platform.

LP is a POLITICAL PARTY first and foremost.

Libertarianism is an ideal.

Why is that such a hard concept?

When people advocating for the Libertarian Party repeatedly tell me to effectively ignore their party platform, I don't need much more than that to reach the conclusion that the Libertarian Party is where it is for some very good reasons.

 

[g5000]

You just loooooooooove your central government, don't you.

Some problems are just too big for a single state or individual to solve.

You mentioned health care as one of those issues.

Health care is better solved at the state level.

Just look at what a colossal fuckup the federal government has made of health care. How's that been working out for you?