Votes for sale! Buy Now! Discount prices!

Oct 28, 2008 21:31

Political observation behind the cut
Read more... )

politics

Leave a comment

dakwegmo October 29 2008, 03:28:40 UTC
Bob Barr all the way baby!

Lately, in political discussions, when people say you should vote for candidate x because he will do this and this and this, I ask them to explain which part of the constitution makes those things the legitimate functions of government. I'm usually ignored, or told that the government is already doing so much that isn't in the constitution that these new/expanded programs are ok too.*shudder* I wonder if they'd feel the same way if government was encroaching on their first amendment rights.

Reply

causticlello October 29 2008, 12:11:12 UTC
Agreed! I second this notion!

Reply

lankylad October 29 2008, 12:36:07 UTC
Good point.
And speaking of first amendment rights, look into the Fairness Doctrine. Congress is looking into reinstating it, and applying it to the internet. It sounds all warm and fuzzy on paper until you realize what the actual implementation will look like.

Reply

beanfionn November 6 2008, 01:17:41 UTC
I agree whole heartedly with the second part of your post, but please make sure that you are researching the political history of Bob Barr before you endorse him with such enthusiasm. Just because he is listed as a Libertarian does not mean that he really stands for the party's beliefs. Take a close look at what he did while in office in Georgia while he was still a right-wing Republican.

Reply

dakwegmo November 6 2008, 18:28:36 UTC
It's precisely because I researched the political history of Bob Barr that I supported him with such enthusiasm. I despised him when he was a far right wing republican, and when he was announced as the Libertarian candidate I almost decided I wasn't going to vote at all. Then I started researching Bob Barr's public statements since leaving office. On some significant issues he has completely changed his opinion, in other cases he has refined his opinion to be more in line with the constitutionally mandated role of the federal government. He still holds many of the beliefs he held while in office, but has become more of a federalist, preferring to leave the bulk of issues up to the states to decide. I would never support him for a state or local office, but have no problems endorsing him for a federal office.

Reply

beanfionn November 6 2008, 20:31:03 UTC
Your vote is yours dear. My goal is not to sway someone's vote per se, just to ensure they are making an informed decision :)

Reply


Leave a comment

Up