Comments on: Libertarian Moses

By: paulie

paulie — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 18:11:24 +0000

Paulie, just because the LP candidate won’t win doesn’t mean that someone who is ineligible should be on the ticket. That’s a surefire way to give the opposition fodder for discrediting the whole thing. Of course, they’ll use whatever necessary means to do so, if they acknowledge the LP candidate at all.

I agree. Did you read to the end of my comment? I was just pointing out it isn’t as firm a barrier as generally assumed.

Where are all the women at!?

True. We need more diversity. And, uh, other good stuff.

By: Where are all the women at!?

Where are all the women at!? — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 23:44:22 +0000

Couldn’t agree more Michelle

By: michelleshinghal

michelleshinghal — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 16:29:20 +0000

From 14- I feel soooo left out. What about women who know that real feminism is about personal freedom and responsibility. That starts with doing the right things (and learning from the wrong), taking care of yourself (and your loved ones), nurturing your marriage (or recognizing if you are being abused and leaving). I think the Libertarian Party is a great political home for women and though our numbers are few, we are here.

By: Joseph Knight

Joseph Knight — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 16:24:37 +0000

“REAL POLITICAL PARTIES as opposed to the ORGANS OF GOVERNMENT masquarading as political parties…”

I agree. I think ALL elections should be non-partisan and that political parties should have no “official” standing or “official” role in any election.

By: They're on to you!

They're on to you! — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 14:02:03 +0000

Quoted from the link on 14:

The final group consists young people. These people are typically aged 16-30 and range in knowledge from being really, really well informed to having just finished reading Anthem. They typically favor a much more reasonable and completely palatable (and maybe even workable) brand of Libertarianism, but they are usually too busy arguing with each other on the internet to be bothered to vote.

By: Hey... yo... pauli(e)

Hey... yo... pauli(e) — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 13:57:47 +0000

12: Ack! Put it back in the closet! ;-)

By: Derrick

Derrick — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 06:49:34 +0000

Ha. This column cracks me up.

By: Devious David

Devious David — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 05:00:56 +0000

By: paulie

paulie — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 03:30:08 +0000

http://arnoldexposed.com/

By: Nigel Watt

Nigel Watt — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 03:23:42 +0000

#8 – I wasn’t suggesting that I would like that amendment, just saying it could happen.

By: paulie

paulie — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 02:51:16 +0000

It’s not absolutely necessary to qualify to serve as President to run.

For example, in 2004 the Peace and Freedom Party ran a lifer prison inmate, who presumably would not have been able to serve if elected. Also, I believe the Socialist Workers Party or one of the socialist parties ran a non-citizen for President or VP or both.

On the other hand, these parties were not on enough ballots to even have a mathematical chance of winning, so it would probably look better for the LP to at least run someone who is qualified to serve if elected.

By: disinter

disinter — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 01:22:10 +0000

How about a truly WINNABLE race for Mr. Maymin in ”˜08? Perhaps a state legislative office?

I will have to agree on that one…

By: I'll 'not' be back...

I'll 'not' be back... — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 00:47:58 +0000

Nigel,

Don’t even think it! It is better that a good candidate wait than to hope for that amendment.

If you want the opposite of conservative, establishing that precedent is tantamount to treason. A foreign born individual with possible allegiance to a distant land holding the office of president is against the very founding of this nation.

By: undercover_anarchist

undercover_anarchist — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 00:22:50 +0000

I think a good alternative to the term “major parties” is “government parties.”

Example: In Michigan, anyone can run as a Democrat or Republican. These parties are essentially public institutions, organs of government. You sign up, pay the fee or supply the signatures, and you’re on the primary ballot as a D or an R. And then, ANYONE can vote in the primary (just not both), or in some states, ANYONE can register as that party and then vote (sometimes with time restrictions, but never can the party itself say “we don’t want him, he’s not a member”).

Contrast that to the nomination process of the Libertarians or Greens or whoever. In all but a few states, the party itself decides who it nominates. There are no primaries. In this way, the Greens, Libertarians, etc. are LEGITIMATE, PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS – REAL POLITICAL PARTIES as opposed to the ORGANS OF GOVERNMENT masquarading as political parties known as Democrats and Republicans.

Ever think of it that way?

By: undercover_anarchist

undercover_anarchist — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 00:19:17 +0000

Excellent candidate indeed, but how about looking down instead of up? How about a truly WINNABLE race for Mr. Maymin in ’08? Perhaps a state legislative office? Plus, at that level, his authoritarian immigration position cannot offend potential libertarian donors.

By: Nigel Watt

Nigel Watt — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 00:19:12 +0000

Hey, if the Reps manage to get an amendment in so Ahnold can run, we can run Maymin.

By: Peter Borah

Peter Borah — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 23:58:19 +0000

Haha, good point. I’ll try to think before posting next time. ;)

Still, an excellent candidate, we need more like him.

By: Chuck Moulton

Chuck Moulton — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 23:56:33 +0000

And not born in America. No presidential run for him.

By: Chuck Moulton

Chuck Moulton — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 23:54:56 +0000

He’ll only be 33 in ’08. Perhaps ’12.

By: Peter Borah

Peter Borah — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 23:41:22 +0000

Maymin for President ’08!

Seriously, this is good stuff, best of luck to Mr. Maymin.