The great thing about a libertarian president is that he could be in favor of such a wacky thing and decide not to do it because it's not government's role. The government would already have its hands full with cleaning pig crap off of government cars.

This is why I go hot and cold on LP politics.

They will actually need to think about this rather than just kick his ass out for advocating violence. So many in the LP seem to be so divorced from human society that they just do not get it.

NJLP would not allow radio guy Bob Grant to run as an LP candidate, and NYLP would not let Anne Coulter run. Yet these Poindexters actually need to consider this?

Sigh. I have been supporting the LP Reform Caucus since I heard about it shortly after it formed. They can not work fast enough it seems.

staplermofo: The great thing about a libertarian president is that he could be in favor of such a wacky thing and decide not to do it because it's not government's role. The government would already have its hands full with cleaning pig crap off of government cars.

TFA's about the senate, but Bob Barr is on the ticket for Prez IIRC. The libertarians won't show up in November.

Why would it even be a question for a single moment to jettison this guy?

Landham, who is an actor, appeared in adult films early in his career before acting in several action movies, including "48 Hours" and "Predator."

Dude did porn? HAHAHAHAHAHA

They should just go to the course and play a few rounds of golf. No sense wasting the summer kissing hands and shaking babies. There's no place for democracy in a bipartisan election.

Just claim you didn't know the microphone was on, and that you meant "cut off their balls" in the best possible way.

What if we elected a man who said (in politispeak, of course) "Guys, just chill for a minute. Look at what's going on. This is wrong."?

This statement applies to just about everything the government, and many other governments in the world, does.

We need to elect a very strong leader with good morals. And by morals I mean the thinking that governments are supposed to ensure our freedoms, and very little else. To always err on the side of personal freedom. Go back to responsibility, community and the golden rule.

I can dream, can't I?

Not by a long shot. Everyone in the LP is disgusted by what this guy said. The only reason they're waiting is because they're not sure yet how kicking him off the ticket would affect ballot access. It's bureaucratic technicalities, and nothing more.

This guy will not be on the ballot as a Libertarian.
tomWright: Sigh. I have been supporting the LP Reform Caucus since I heard about it shortly after it formed. They can not work fast enough it seems.

We've already got control of the LNC, for all intents and purposes, and a majority of the state parties. There are still some radical hold-outs, though.

In any event, this isn't really part of the reform v. radical fight. Both sides agree this guy has to go.

what_now: Dude did porn? HAHAHAHAHAHA

Not the first time Libertarians have nominated a porn star. This one is actually a pretty good activist. She's the one that organized the drive to mail sex toys to the Alabama Attorney General.

tomWright: NJLP would not allow radio guy Bob Grant to run as an LP candidate, and NYLP would not let Anne Coulter run. Yet these Poindexters actually need to consider this?

They've announced they're holding a meeting of the necessary people to sort it out. No one person has the authority to kick this guy out, and people holding positions in the LP voicing their personal opinion of candidates is usually frowned upon. There was a huge ruckus before the convention because some one at the LNC did that. He was forced to resign.

Ah, Libertarianism, the philosophy of "if you're a vicitm of genocide, its your fault for not fighting back".

DamnYankees: Ah, Libertarianism, the philosophy of "if you're a vicitm of genocide, its your fault for not fighting back".

When you can't come up with anything intelligent to say, burn a straw man.

Churchill2004: DamnYankees: Ah, Libertarianism, the philosophy of "if you're a vicitm of genocide, its your fault for not fighting back".

When you can't come up with anything intelligent to say, burn a straw man.

That's what I was literally told by one of Fark's most well known libertarians a few days ago. Sorry, but I don't respect that guy anymore.

I admit I shouldnt have painted you all with that brush. I'm still a little skeeved from that conversation.

DamnYankees: That's what I was literally told by one of Fark's most well known libertarians a few days ago. Sorry, but I don't respect that guy anymore.

If he actually said that, fell free to disrespect him all you want.

DamnYankees: I admit I shouldnt have painted you all with that brush. I'm still a little skeeved from that conversation

Fair enough.

Churchill2004: Not by a long shot. Everyone in the LP is disgusted by what this guy said. The only reason they're waiting is because they're not sure yet how kicking him off the ticket would affect ballot access. It's bureaucratic technicalities, and nothing more.

Churchill, how active are you in the party? No need to give specifics if you don't want to, but are you just a follower, or do you have some official standing in the party?

DamnYankees: Churchill2004: Not by a long shot. Everyone in the LP is disgusted by what this guy said. The only reason they're waiting is because they're not sure yet how kicking him off the ticket would affect ballot access. It's bureaucratic technicalities, and nothing more.

Churchill, how active are you in the party? No need to give specifics if you don't want to, but are you just a follower, or do you have some official standing in the party?

Just a follower. The ARLP consists of little more than a few dozen rude, abrasive assholes with no ballot access and no candidates. I've given some thought to trying to gather up enough people to change that at the 2010 state convention, but it's an open question whether or not I'll still be living in-state by then.

Churchill2004: Just a follower. The ARLP consists of little more than a few dozen rude, abrasive assholes with no ballot access and no candidates. I've given some thought to trying to gather up enough people to change that at the 2010 state convention, but it's an open question whether or not I'll still be living in-state by then.

I gots to admit, I'd love to see a serious Libertarian party rather than the bunch of fringe nutbags they are now.

Ace Frehley's Ghost: I gots to admit, I'd love to see a serious Libertarian party rather than the bunch of fringe nutbags they are now

We're working on it.

Wow. Are they trying to out-crazy the Green Party this year? Sonny Landham has a checkered past for a porn star. I seem to recall something about him answering hotel doors in the nude, and freaking out the maids.

By the way, Sonny Landham is the Native American guy from Predator. He would be the 3rd actor from that movie to hold an elected office, if there was actually a chance of him winning.

Shvetz: By the way, Sonny Landham is the Native American guy from Predator. He would be the 3rd actor from that movie to hold an elected office, if there was actually a chance of him winning.

[www.mentalscars.com image 175x259]

Carl Weathers held political office?

Churchill2004: Ace Frehley's Ghost: I gots to admit, I'd love to see a serious Libertarian party rather than the bunch of fringe nutbags they are now

We're working on it.

Yeah, I hope it works out. I voted Libertarian for a few election cycles, now I feel like I have to go Dem just to get some kicks in at the Republicans over civil liberties. Jebus, what a choice... commies or fascists.

Churchill2004: Ace Frehley's Ghost: I gots to admit, I'd love to see a serious Libertarian party rather than the bunch of fringe nutbags they are now

We're working on it.

Not fast enough. Too many Libertarians come off as Anarchists.

Ace Frehley's Ghost: Yeah, I hope it works out. I voted Libertarian for a few election cycles, now I feel like I have to go Dem just to get some kicks in at the Republicans over civil liberties. Jebus, what a choice... commies or fascists.

I LOL at your comparison. The Republicans aren't quite fascists, or at least the majority of leaders haven't called for the annihilation of a people yet.

Calling the Democratic party Commies is just as ridiculous. Democratic politicians (most of them anyway) wouldn't qualify for Socialist in Europe! People on the right were calling Hillary a Socialist when she's to the right of Szarkozy. Kinda hilarious.

/LOL

inglixthemad: I LOL at your comparison. The Republicans aren't quite fascists, or at least the majority of leaders haven't called for the annihilation of a people yet.

Calling the Democratic party Commies is just as ridiculous. Democratic politicians (most of them anyway) wouldn't qualify for Socialist in Europe! People on the right were calling Hillary a Socialist when she's to the right of Szarkozy. Kinda hilarious.

/LOL

Welcome to Fark.

inglixthemad: Not fast enough. Too many Libertarians come off as Anarchists.

Plenty are. And we can't really move much faster. This is the first election cycle there's been much of a concerted effort along these lines, and we've already taken the national party, the Presidential nomination, and most of the state parties. It's not really possible to kick members of the party out (nor is that what we want), so how successful we are mostly depends on how successful we are at brining like-minded people into the party.

This isn't really moderates vs. radicals, either. I'm a radical myself. It's about those who are willing to work to build a broad libertarian coalition and a serious local, state, and national party structure and those who want to keep shooting their wad every four years on some obscure Presidential candidate preaching about legalizing nukes and child molestation while nothing gets done.

Sometimes I feel like I'm on crazy pills....

the libertarian party makes a host of assumptions that would get you tossed out of an Economics 102 class in college.

I swear, I want to cram a copy of Upton Sinclair's the Jungle down the throat of anyone who wants to get rid of the FDA

It's just not a reasonable stance in our modern world. I'd rather back that canadian party that wants to levitate stuff...

/the Libertarian Party needs a real platform.
//one thats realistic.

Luckily for the Libertarians, it doesn't really matter which way they decide.

Researcher: I swear, I want to cram a copy of Upton Sinclair's the Jungle down the throat of anyone who wants to get rid of the FDA

For someone so worried about being realistic, you should be able to come up with something better than a fictional book that had about as much basis in reality as Batman.

Here are some transcripts:

Link (new window)

Link (new window)

Researcher: Sometimes I feel like I'm on crazy pills....

the libertarian party makes a host of assumptions that would get you tossed out of an Economics 102 class in college.

I swear, I want to cram a copy of Upton Sinclair's the Jungle down the throat of anyone who wants to get rid of the FDA

It's just not a reasonable stance in our modern world. I'd rather back that canadian party that wants to levitate stuff...

/the Libertarian Party needs a real platform.
//one thats realistic.

I just bought that book yestdery so I'm getting a kick, ect. Partially becuase I just want to read it, and partially becuase I found a copy of Ayn Rand for the New Intellectual lying around and I don't want to read it without something to wash the crazy out afterwards.

There's nothing like being able to insult someone's deeply held beliefs in an informed context. It's what Fark is all about.

Falcc: I just bought that book yestdery so I'm getting a kick, ect. Partially becuase I just want to read it, and partially becuase I found a copy of Ayn Rand for the New Intellectual lying around and I don't want to read it without something to wash the crazy out afterwards.

There's nothing like being able to insult someone's deeply held beliefs in an informed context. It's what Fark is all about.

The Jungle might be a fine book, but it no more makes you informed about early 20th Century meat packing conditions than watching the Blair Witch Project makes you an expert on camping.

Churchill2004: The Jungle might be a fine book, but it no more makes you informed about early 20th Century meat packing conditions than watching the Blair Witch Project makes you an expert on camping.

Gasp, next you'll be telling me that I won't learn about husbandry by reading Animal Farm! I'm sorry but I just can't accept that. Everyone knows books can't possibly be metaphorical in any aspect.

Seriously Churchill, I'm aware that it falls firmly under the category of historical fiction, but the point it makes is the important thing. Also, I find your lack of faith disturbing.

Falcc: Gasp, next you'll be telling me that I won't learn about husbandry by reading Animal Farm! I'm sorry but I just can't accept that. Everyone knows books can't possibly be metaphorical in any aspect.

Seriously Churchill, I'm aware that it falls firmly under the category of historical fiction, but the point it makes is the important thing. Also, I find your lack of faith disturbing

The problem is it makes that point by presenting totally unrealistic scenarios as commonplace in the industry it was attacking.

Churchill2004: DamnYankees: Ah, Libertarianism, the philosophy of "if you're a vicitm of genocide, its your fault for not fighting back".

When you can't come up with anything intelligent to say, burn a straw man.

Well, it makes perfect sense. In a warped, twisted sort of way. It's your own damn fault if Leatherface slams your ass up on a meathook and chainsaws off both your legs; you should have picked up that meat cleaver and hacked off his arms.

Churchill2004: The problem is it makes that point by presenting totally unrealistic scenarios as commonplace in the industry it was attacking.

So you agree that it would be a pretty apt way to counter Ayn Rand?

/ba dum kssh

Falcc: o you agree that it would be a pretty apt way to counter Ayn Rand?

/ba dum kssh

I imagine The Jungle is a much more enjoyable read than Atlas Shrugs, at any rate.

Hey the guy may be a racist but he plays a mean slide guitar...oh wait I was thinking of Sonny Landreth, never mind.

DamnYankees: That's what I was literally told by one of Fark's most well known libertarians a few days ago. Sorry, but I don't respect that guy anymore.

Hope it wasn't me! I say some stupid shiat sometimes when drinking (which is often), but that doesn't sound like something I'd say. I don't think I'm well known anyway though.

/it wasn't me was it?

sarcastrophe: /it wasn't me was it?

It was.

DamnYankees: It was.

Seriously? When?

DamnYankees: It was.

Wait, this sounds somewhat familiar. This was me on an anti-war kick. This was about the US getting involved in the matters of foreign nations and you're taking something to the extreme.

The question is, "should the US get involved in matters of genocide in foreign nations?"

My answer is, "No."

sarcastrophe: Wait, this sounds somewhat familiar. This was me on an anti-war kick. This was about the US getting involved in the matters of foreign nations and you're taking something to the extreme.

The question is, "should the US get involved in matters of genocide in foreign nations?"

My answer is, "No."

Not quite:

DamnYankees: So you think its the North Koreans' fault they are being subjected to genocide? It's the Jews fault for not fighting back in WWII? This is an insane argument.

Sarcastrophe: Why is that insane? They are allowing it to happen. The power of government is derived from the will of the people. By your own admission, this makes it acceptable.

DamnYankees: sarcastrophe: Wait, this sounds somewhat familiar. This was me on an anti-war kick. This was about the US getting involved in the matters of foreign nations and you're taking something to the extreme.

The question is, "should the US get involved in matters of genocide in foreign nations?"

My answer is, "No."

Not quite:

DamnYankees: So you think its the North Koreans' fault they are being subjected to genocide? It's the Jews fault for not fighting back in WWII? This is an insane argument.

Sarcastrophe: Why is that insane? They are allowing it to happen. The power of government is derived from the will of the people. By your own admission, this makes it acceptable.

This is where this conversation is headed. The people have the power to rise up against their government. Is it their FAULT, no, but if they refuse to take a stand against their government, it falls on the world to rescue them.

The better question is, should foreign governments get involved in the internal affairs of a sovereign nation?

sarcastrophe: This is where this conversation is headed. The people have the power to rise up against their government. Is it their FAULT, no, but if they refuse to take a stand against their government, it falls on the world to rescue them.

You then said people should have committed sure suicide by standing up for liberty, and that those were the true patriots. In other words, people who were being raped and murdered were too weak and stupid to live up to your ideals.

I'm done with you.

sarcastrophe

That is precisely the style of 'blame the victim' thinking that polarizes people against libertarian ideals.

In fact, lets frame this another way. Let's say the old communist China wanted to liberate the US from our capitalistic leaders and the majority vote in the UN is that the United States should be liberated from its government. Do they have the authority to do such a thing? How do they derive that authority? How is a soverign government supposed to function if they don't have soveriegnty?

Or better yet, since this is really a moral question, who has the moral authority in this situation? The United States? The UN? Who gave us this authority to tell another country what they are doing is wrong? Good and evil depend on the side you're on.

sarcastrophe: In fact, lets frame this another way. Let's say the old communist China wanted to liberate the US from our capitalistic leaders and the majority vote in the UN is that the United States should be liberated from its government. Do they have the authority to do such a thing? How do they derive that authority? How is a soverign government supposed to function if they don't have soveriegnty?

You don't get it, at all. I hope you're drunk, because otherwise your humanity is sorely lacking.

sarcastrophe: In fact, lets frame this another way. Let's say the old communist China wanted to liberate the US from our capitalistic leaders and the majority vote in the UN is that the United States should be liberated from its government. Do they have the authority to do such a thing? How do they derive that authority? How is a soverign government supposed to function if they don't have soveriegnty?

Or better yet, since this is really a moral question, who has the moral authority in this situation? The United States? The UN? Who gave us this authority to tell another country what they are doing is wrong? Good and evil depend on the side you're on.

Well, sarcastrophe, let's just let genocide occur...moral authority? Even the perpetrators know it is wrong.