Previous 21 - 30 Next
In response to:

Electing Liberty

Anonymous908 Wrote: Nov 05, 2014 3:10 PM
Perhaps some libertarians. However, this is an issue in which many libertarians are divided. Myself, including most I have talked to, support a strong border.
In response to:

Against Obama, But for What?

Anonymous908 Wrote: Nov 04, 2014 6:44 PM
Republicans only deserve being voted for if they truly represent us. Me, I believe strongly in the Constitution, privacy, small limited role for government, a border that keeps people from jumping it, and a wise foreign policy that does not stick its nose in civil wars around the world. So if a Republican represents this Constitutional platform, I will gladly support him. However, if the Republican does not stand for these things, I will gladly skip his name and support a third party who does stand for this platform. Principle before party, because without principle, parties lose their purpose.
Thank you! WJF had some extremely weak arguments. I've glad I wasn't alone in thinking that.
No, I don't think Obama is doing well. "A Libertarian or Third Party Vote will Signal Democrat Barack Obama that 'YOU' agree with the Job he is doing as President." You are so confused. Did the GOP telemarketer tell you that?
"What possible difference could it make what anyone says to you?" If you have a well reasoned response I will listen to it and consider your point. "Apparently your first loyalty is not to the United States." I am not sure how you figure this. You don't know me from Adam. "When you swear allegiance to the United States come back and we will talk." I pledged allegiance to the United States when I was a kid in grade school. Is that good enough for you? I am here, talking now. So if you have a good reason, please share.
IF I only had two choices, I would vote republican. But we do not just have two choices, so why should I pretend such a thing. Why would I settle and vote for somebody who I do not believe in and do not support? Are you saying we should have more limited choices for leaders in this country? I think we should have more variety of choice.
I am a self identified libertarian. I have voted both republican and third party in my life depending on the election (never voted democrat). I served as a delegate for my precinct at the Colorado state Republican convention in 2012 so I am not new to the political game even though I am somewhat young (28). I have cut my allegiance to the republican party because, in my eyes, the GOP (particularly at the federal level) does not stand for small government, generally does not respect the Constitution, and is too often eager to start new wars. This does not mean I will not vote Republican, just that I am going to need good reason to cast my vote for them. So instead of insulting me, like TownHall commenters usually do, how about somebody offer me good reason to vote R instead of Libertarian this election cycle. But don't try the old 'a vote for third party = a vote for democrats' line, that Bull$hit doesn't work with me. I vote for who I believe in.
Not surprised. Perhaps we should not have held prisoners from another country for a decade without so much as a trial, due process, or an element of proof/evidence of wrong doing. If they weren't terrorists before, they certainly are now. And if they were terrorists before then we should have demonstrated their guilt a long time ago so as to have the justification to deprive them of their freedom. We would expect the same from any other country. I am not talking about granting American rights to non-citizens. I am talking about doing what is lawful, right, and justified as the leaders of the free world. But if we want to continue imprisoning people, and holding them indefinitely without proof, and without any kind of a trial process, then we are, quite frankly, asking for more anti-American terrorism.
Why mess with pesky things like international law, due process, and the justice system, right? Why should the leader of the free world be subject to its own laws, right?
Are you saying our CIA (which is all over the world) ought to be killed?
Which will be never? Permanent imprisonment without a trial, proof of wrong doing, nothing? We would go to war in a second if another country did that to us. Just another example of United States holding double standards 'do as we say, not as we do'. If we are going to be the leader of the world we cannot be involved in things like this. We are giving other countries reason to hate us.
Previous 21 - 30 Next