Why you shouldn’t…

This is a good post. As a Libertarian candidate for state representative, I feel I should address your objections to voting for me and those like me.

1. Duverger’s Law explains why it is difficult for any third party to succeed, regardless of ideology. But as public dissatisfaction with the two major parties grows, we will get a chance to prove our ability to govern.

2. First of all, our local party chairman does believe in strong border security and is not afraid to say so. I have publicly advocated allowing more immigrants in and reducing the bureaucratic loopholes that legal immigrants have to jump through. Frederick the Great said that “He who defends everything, defends nothing.” The United States has thousands of miles of border and coastline. We can only patrol a small fraction of it at any given time. We instead need to focus on protecting high value targets.

3. Drug legalization has little traction among the World War II generation. Bless their hearts for saving the world from facism, but they are not going to be around much longer. A lot of baby boomers “tried it and didn’t inhale” and are now worried that their kids in college are going to try it as well. We need to make it plain to these parents that as bad as their kids on drugs would be, their kids in prison would be worse. Drug addiction can be called a sickness, but no state or federal pen can be called a hospital.

4. Locally in Fort Wayne, we have jumped on emminent domain abuse. The city tried to seize part of a woman’s property to put in a sewer pipe, then denied her payment while insisting that having sewer hookup was compensation enough.

5. I was not at the national convention, but I can pretty much imagine what you are talking about. I feel that one should vote based on the strength of a candidate’s ideas, not based the manner of how they dress. And besides, eccentricity is a sign of genius.

Robert,

First let me say that this post was mainly in jest, while many points mentioned in the post ARE true, most were tounge in cheek (a la the Libertarian Clothing comment).

I have publicly advocated allowing more immigrants in and reducing the bureaucratic loopholes that legal immigrants have to jump through.

I refer you to my Immigration Gumballs post as to why “allowing more immigrants in” is NOT really a good idea.

I’m with you on the drug issue, we have TONS of people in lockup who did nothing any more illegal than those who choose to have a beer with dinner or smoke a cigarette.

Again, a lot of these comments WERE tongue in cheek but there was no intent to ‘offend’ anyone.

My party is the party of Trey Parker and Howard Stern. I cannot be offended. ;p

Here’s a couple more reasons we shouldn’t vote libertarian.

1. Libertarians advocate greed over the natural world. Oh yeah sure, just let the free economy regulate pollution! These corporations will surely do what’s best for people!

2. They have absolutely no clue as to the harm that a widening gap between the rich and poor will cause both economically and morally.

3. I’ve also noticed that many are sheeple who worship the ground Bush walks on, and fully support the Iraq war while taking black and white looks at foreign issues such as Hezbollah or Iran.

In the end, Libertarianism is just as flawed as either of the partys, specifically because of dogmatic adherence to some unrealistic central cause of Laissez Faire for everything that increases one’s own wealth, even at the expense of others. The legalization of drugs is something I cannot argue with though…

Glad to see you’re back to your old self Joel

Pretty good lists. But I guess you don’t vote at all? Or vote green? A couple of items confused me:

Republican list: “Democrats think that it’s odd that the jails are so full while our crime rate is going down.”

Shouldn’t this be under Democrats?

Democratic list: “They have almost single-handedly destroyed black culture in America.”

They have?

“Have you seen the way some of the people at their convention dress?”

In all seriousness, that’s what turns me off from the Libertarian group — they seem like they’ve got a reasonable platform nationally. But whenver I meet them, they’re always anti-social people who live in cabins and stockpile toilet paper, beer, and cigarettes. They’re also obsessed with rural issues, and offer no answers to urban questions. I have yet to hear a libertarian idea for dealing with urban transportation congestion, or how to reduce smog.

In all seriousness, that’s what turns me off from the Libertarian group — they seem like they’ve got a reasonable platform nationally. But whenver I meet them, they’re always anti-social people who live in cabins and stockpile toilet paper, beer, and cigarettes.

That seriously made me laugh out loud!
I can assure you though that I don’t live in a cabin, nor do I stockpile anything other than Sharpie Markers.

…and I’m quite sociable if you met me in person.

I think telecommuting is the way to reduce traffic congestion and smog.

Joel, you should understand that lassiez faire capitalism means no corporate welfare. I think that cutting out corporate welfare is the first step to improving the economy.