libertarian candidates

[varwoche]

Re: Re: Re: Re: libertarian candidates

Why would you NOT want a highly respected Constitutional Law instructor in the White House? Bush has trouble even SAYING "Constitution"!

Badnarik's own web site has zero biographical info. (I could swear it did just yesterday.)

Here's what I can find:
Self-employed computer consultant, 2001-present.
Nuclear power industry computer programmer, 1977-2001.
Skydiving instructor, 1998-present.
Indiana University, attended 1972-77.
http://www.politics1.com/libt04.htm

 

[Rouser2]

Re: Re: libertarian candidates

The Libertarian Party is very disjointed. In general, they'd like to have the government off people's back. This attracts people of Ken Lay's type to people of Lyndon LaRouche's type and everywhere in between. You can't really make a stance out of that.

That's why I'm a closet Libertarian and won't touch the party with a ten-AU pole. If I can't find a candidate from the Big Two, I actually tend to go Green or Independant (which sounds like another party that could never have a consistance stance to me).

Larouche is as authoritarian as you can get. Ken Lay, merely a high-priced corporate criminal. Libertarians like you should remain in the closet. You haven't a clue.


-- Rouser

 

[Kerberos]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: libertarian candidates

Badnarik's own web site has zero biographical info. (I could swear it did just yesterday.)

Here's what I can find:
Self-employed computer consultant, 2001-present.
Nuclear power industry computer programmer, 1977-2001.
Skydiving instructor, 1998-present.
Indiana University, attended 1972-77.
http://www.politics1.com/libt04.htm

If you look under analyses on the webpage it states that he is a >>>proclaimed "constitutional scholar"<<<. Of course it doesn't say who has proclaimed him a constitutional scholar, and the fact that they themselves put "constitutional scholar" in quotation marks makes me suspicious. Also they call him a proclaimed "constitutional scholar", rather than acclaimed or something like that, which all together makes it a rather unimpressive, even disregarding the fact that the source is hardly objective.

 

[shanek]

The big 2 can tilt the table in their favor, but the ultimate decision is in the hands of the American people. If people really wanted to have a different system, they could get it.

Even if they don't know about it?

You could arrange things anyway you want, the fact is people don't want to vote for someone who wants to blow up the UN.

Not only is that a strawman and an ad hominem, it just isn't true. People respond very well to Libertarian arguments, when they're allowed to hear them (and when they haven't already decided 100% that their party is right no matter what).

 

[varwoche]

Don't get me wrong. Seeing as I think the liberatarian party probably draws more from Bush, more power to it. It's only too bad the A team consists of clowns.

To steal a line from talking head Mark Shields (referring to someone else), to call Badnarik an empty suit is an insult to clothiers.

Wait a sec, I take it back, Badnarik is blazing a path, showing us software developers that anything is possible. Power to the programmer! Maybe I'll seek the nomination of the ERA party (ego run amok).

Sorry to delight in the comical aspects of these candidates. Some of us have to hold our noses while we vote for a major candidate, all the while hearing it from the 3rd party types. Hence a brief turn of the table, and a chance to marvel at how deep the libertarian zeal runs.

 

[shanek]

Don't get me wrong. Seeing as I think the liberatarian party probably draws more from Bush, more power to it.

Ordinarily, I would disagree. From all indications, we draw pretty much equally from the two major parties, and even moreso from the pool of otherwise non-voters.

However, THIS year it is a different animal. In the past, Republicans could easily live in denial of their politicians' spendtrifty ways. But now that there's a Republican President and BOTH Houses are Republican controlled, and government spending has increast at FOUR TIMES the rate it did under Clinton (even looking at general budget items that have nothing to do with the war), a LOT of conservatives are p'o'ed ad Bush and the Republicans and are liking the looks of us much more fiscally conservative Libertarians.

So now Republican voters see more of a divide with their politicians than Democrat voters do with theirs. So this year, I'm going to agree: We're probably going to pull more votes from Bush than Kerry.

 

[LostAngeles]

Re: Re: Re: libertarian candidates

Larouche is as authoritarian as you can get. Ken Lay, merely a high-priced corporate criminal. Libertarians like you should remain in the closet. You haven't a clue.


-- Rouser

LaRouche = crazy
Ken Lay = evil

I can't say I've met any normal Libertarians. How about helping me to get a clue? I'd appreciate it.

 

[Rouser2]

Re: Re: Re: Re: libertarian candidates

LaRouche = crazy
Ken Lay = evil

I can't say I've met any normal Libertarians. How about helping me to get a clue? I'd appreciate it.

Anyone who could remotely consider Larouche or Lay as "libertarian" is beyond hope. Another victim of media brainwash and the government school. Like I said, you haven't a clue.


-- Rouser

 

[LostAngeles]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: libertarian candidates

Anyone who could remotely consider Larouche or Lay as "libertarian" is beyond hope. Another victim of media brainwash and the government school. Like I said, you haven't a clue.


-- Rouser

I don't consider them Libertarians.

*sigh*

The libertarians I've met are as crazy as LaRouche or supportive of actions like Ken Lay's.

Are we clear?

 

[crimresearch]

http://michaelbadnarik.blogspot.com

badnarik.org or .net seem to be under revision at the moment, so I can't verify whether or not he talks about refusing to buy license plates and pay taxes there as claimed on some searrch results....I'm sure someone can run the Wayback site and find out what used to be there.

I did find that the Constitutional scholarship claim seems to revolve around a book entitled "It's Good to Be King" which Amazon lists as due out next year.
Apparently a self distributed edition has been available through LP affiliated channels.

Other than a claim to have discovered that the US is really a constitutional republic, and not a democracy, there was precious little found citing the actual contents of Badnarik's scholarship.

 

[varwoche]

Amusing picture+caption from badnarik.org...

Michael fires up the attendees with his acceptance speech

 

[varwoche]

Badnarik arrives at the convention broke. Thrift pays off though. Maybe he can land an ad spot with Days Inn.

After the debate, Badnarik tells me, an impressed supporter offered up his room Saturday night as an impromptu Badnarik hospitality suite. Badnarik himself was too tapped out even to afford a room at the upscale convention hotel, driving in instead from a Days Inn across town. This gave him a chance to talk to more delegates face to face, and it won the nomination for him.

http://www.reason.com/links/links060304.shtml

 

[billydkid]

Re: Re: Re: Re: libertarian candidates

LaRouche = crazy
Ken Lay = evil

I can't say I've met any normal Libertarians. How about helping me to get a clue? I'd appreciate it.

Never mind that neither of these have ever been or will ever be either Libertarians or libertarians. One might just as well say:

Hitler = evil mass murderer
Stalin = evil mass murderer

I can't say I've met any normal Democrats. How about helping me get a clue?

 

[Art Vandelay]

Even if they don't know about it?

I would have to say that anyone so clueless as to not realize that we have a two party system really doesn't deserve to be involved in the political process anyway.

Not only is that a strawman and an ad hominem, it just isn't true.

Do you even know what those words mean? An ad hominem attack is when someone attacks the person making the argument rather than the argument. But in this case, the person IS the issue. If you honestly think that, when discussing whether Badnarik should be elected, it is a fallacy to discuss Badnarik's suitability for office, then I don't think there's much hope for you. As for "strawman", that's when one attacks a position the opposition does not hold. But Badnarik DOES hold that position. It's right there on the website. He wants to blow up the UN building. As Dave Barry would say, I Am Not Making This Up. Finally, you say it isn't true. Hmm. I don't know of any polls on the issue, but I really do think that it's safe to say that most people don't want the next president to blow up the UN.

 

[LostAngeles]

Re: Re: libertarian candidates

The Libertarian Party is very disjointed. In general, they'd like to have the government off people's back. This attracts people of Ken Lay's type to people of Lyndon LaRouche's type and everywhere in between. You can't really make a stance out of that.

I said "type", I then clarified what types I meant.

I love how you're driving home my concept of the common Libertarian, thank you.

 

[varwoche]

Do you even know what those words mean? An ad hominem attack is when someone attacks the person making the argument rather than the argument. But in this case, the person IS the issue. If you honestly think that, when discussing whether Badnarik should be elected, it is a fallacy to discuss Badnarik's suitability for office, then I don't think there's much hope for you. As for "strawman", that's when one attacks a position the opposition does not hold. But Badnarik DOES hold that position. It's right there on the website. He wants to blow up the UN building.

Art speaks the truth:

Quoting Badnarik: The day I enter the Oval Office, I will give notice to the United Nations. Member nations would have one week to evacuate their offices in the UN building in New York. They would have seven days to box up their computers, their paper work, and family photos. At noon on the eighth day, after ensuring that the building was empty, I would personally detonate the explosive charges that would reduce the building to rubble. The same type of rubble we had to clean up after September 11th.

This was purged from Badnarik's site yesterday, but it is still in google cache.

 

[varwoche]

no degree?

I interpret Badnarik's wording here to mean that he didn't get his degree. Everything I read of a biographical nature says "attended", not "graduated".

I went to Indiana University in Bloomington, and majored in Chemistry. I started my computer career in 1977...

This was removed from his site yesterday, but is still in google cache.

Running scorecard...
- No government experience
- No foriegn policy experience
- No college degree (apparently)
- Self-proclaimed constitutional authority
(created his own course)
- Says he wants to blow-up UN building

Too rich.

 

[dretceterini]

Larouche is even nuttier than Ross Perot...and that's difficult to do

 

[varwoche]

high school grad

project vote smart

Education:
Attended, Indiana University, 1972-1977
Diploma, George Rogers Clark, 1972.

Though this isn't Badnarek's page, the wording synchs with his page; reasonable to infer this text is Badnarek provided.

That he attended but (apparently) didn't graduate Indiana is already on record.

To clarify other ambiguity, the diploma from George Rogers Clark is a high school diploma.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Quoting Badnarik: The day I enter the Oval Office, I will give notice to the United Nations. Member nations would have one week to evacuate their offices in the UN building in New York. They would have seven days to box up their computers, their paper work, and family photos. At noon on the eighth day, after ensuring that the building was empty, I would personally detonate the explosive charges that would reduce the building to rubble. The same type of rubble we had to clean up after September 11th.

Like I said earlier - all you get with most of these third party candidates are clowns and loonies. Looks like we have another winner!!!