Bible-beater pilots

Where do I sign up for the new party?

WWW.LP.ORG

ah, I knew that was coming... :-)


But have you followed the link and read what the LP stands for?

I suspect there are few pilots who are not libertarians at heart. The two
mindsets mesh far too well for me to be the only one here.

--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

"Wdtabor" wrote in message
...
Where do I sign up for the new party?

WWW.LP.ORG

ah, I knew that was coming... :-)


But have you followed the link and read what the LP stands for?

I suspect there are few pilots who are not libertarians at heart. The two
mindsets mesh far too well for me to be the only one here.

--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

You are not alone.

I suspect there are few pilots who are not libertarians at heart. The two
mindsets mesh far too well for me to be the only one here.

Count me in as well.

"Wdtabor" wrote in message
...
I suspect there are few pilots who are not libertarians at heart. The two
mindsets mesh far too well for me to be the only one here.

Yeah, but so what? In the present system one needs to vote against rather
than vote for, and to effectively vote against, you have to "side with" the
strongest alternative. The LP may very well have some good principles, but
I don't see them getting anywhere serious for a very long time, if ever.

In article , "Peter Gottlieb"
writes:


"Wdtabor" wrote in message
...
I suspect there are few pilots who are not libertarians at heart. The two
mindsets mesh far too well for me to be the only one here.

Yeah, but so what? In the present system one needs to vote against rather
than vote for, and to effectively vote against, you have to "side with" the
strongest alternative. The LP may very well have some good principles, but
I don't see them getting anywhere serious for a very long time, if ever.



This is a fight I have with my fellow LP members often. TO me, it is more
important that libertarian ideas prevail, not Libertarian candidates. If that
means gently persuading Republicans and even some Democrats to become more
libertarian, then so be it.


--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

Wdtabor wrote:

This is a fight I have with my fellow LP members often. TO me, it is more
important that libertarian ideas prevail, not Libertarian candidates. If that
means gently persuading Republicans and even some Democrats to become more
libertarian, then so be it.

Let's see if I understand you correctly. Your theory is that, if enough people
vote Libertarian, the other candidates will start to adopt some of the LP views
in an attempt to siphon off some of those votes?

I would like to be able to agree, but I think that Dems and Reps would simply
be afraid of losing votes they already have and afraid of losing the support of
the main party.

In any case, a vote is never "wasted" if you vote for the candidate you prefer.

George Patterson
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something that can be learned
no other way.

In article , "G.R. Patterson III"
writes:

Wdtabor wrote:

This is a fight I have with my fellow LP members often. TO me, it is more
important that libertarian ideas prevail, not Libertarian candidates. If
that
means gently persuading Republicans and even some Democrats to become more
libertarian, then so be it.

Let's see if I understand you correctly. Your theory is that, if enough
people
vote Libertarian, the other candidates will start to adopt some of the LP
views
in an attempt to siphon off some of those votes?


Not exactly. I want to further libertarian ideas within the Republican Party.
There are more libertarians in the GOP than in the LP as it is, they just don't
realize it themselves.

There are many more who have a basic libertarian viewpoint in economic issues,
but they are big government advocates when it comes to controling morality.
They need to be made to understand that you cannot pick an choose your
freedoms. You cannot have economic freedom and property rights without also
having sexual and lifestyle freedom. Once they learn to trust their fellow
citizens to make their own personal choices, they can then better persuade them
to embrace economic freedom.

With Dems, it is another matter. Most of them are simply socialists and
collectivists and are beyond redemption. But some are in the Dem party based on
some single issue where they feel the GOP threatens them. I have had great
success in recruiting Libertarians from the Gay and Lesbian business community
in the artsy Ghent section of Norfolk. They were economic libertarians all
along, they just fled to the Dem party because it was seen as more permissive
of their lifestyle than the GOP. Once they understand that they don't need
permission if they have freedom, they are converted.



I would like to be able to agree, but I think that Dems and Reps would simply
be afraid of losing votes they already have and afraid of losing the support
of
the main party.

In any case, a vote is never "wasted" if you vote for the candidate you
prefer.


Well, would you vote LP if it meant that someone like Ron Paul would be
replaced by someone like Chuck Schummer?

What is important to me is that libertarian IDEAS prevail, and I really don't
care if they are put forth by someone who calls himself a Republican instead of
a Libertarian. (Of course, they cannot be put forward by a Dem, or his fellow
party members will stone him.)


--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

"Wdtabor" wrote in message
...
There are many more who have a basic libertarian viewpoint in economic
issues,
but they are big government advocates when it comes to controling
morality.
They need to be made to understand that you cannot pick an choose your
freedoms. You cannot have economic freedom and property rights without
also
having sexual and lifestyle freedom. Once they learn to trust their fellow
citizens to make their own personal choices, they can then better persuade
them
to embrace economic freedom.

The problem may also be related to their ties to the Church. Since this
relationship brings them votes - in many cases enough to decide elections -
it will be hard to wean them from this.

Then there is the matter of fiscal responsibility, which everyone in
Washington seems to have abandoned.

With Dems, it is another matter. Most of them are simply socialists and
collectivists and are beyond redemption. But some are in the Dem party
based on
some single issue where they feel the GOP threatens them. I have had great
success in recruiting Libertarians from the Gay and Lesbian business
community
in the artsy Ghent section of Norfolk. They were economic libertarians all
along, they just fled to the Dem party because it was seen as more
permissive
of their lifestyle than the GOP. Once they understand that they don't need
permission if they have freedom, they are converted.

I believe many more than you suspect fall into this category. And, in this
area, there are a good many "Republicans" who got fed up with a single issue
in the Democratic camp. What I am saying is that there are a lot of people
close to the fence in both parties.

Peter Gottlieb wrote:

I believe many more than you suspect fall into this category. And, in this
area, there are a good many "Republicans" who got fed up with a single issue
in the Democratic camp. What I am saying is that there are a lot of people
close to the fence in both parties.

I think you're right, and the problem is the fact that they now have to toe
the party line to get funding because of the contribution reform laws passed
around 1980. Either these laws should be repealed or the national parties
should be placed under the same restrictions as major corporations. Before they
were passed, it was possible for someone to buy a congresscritter or two, and
there were some that couldn't be bought. Now, you can buy an entire party and
get half of Congress in one whack.

George Patterson
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something that can
be learned no other way.

Wdtabor wrote:

Well, would you vote LP if it meant that someone like Ron Paul would be
replaced by someone like Chuck Schummer?

Well, personally, I will vote for *anyone* running against Schumer that has a
chance of winning. With the possible exception of Clinton (either one). Since
I don't live in New York, however, I don't presently have that opportunity.
That also means that I don't have to call him "my" senator.

George Patterson
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something that can be learned
no other way.