I'm not the one who said the LP was 'hopeless'; the neocon troll
did. Fixing the existing party is another good course; but we have to
accsept the fact that all these 'compromises' with people who don't
share our desire for liberty will accomplish nothing. They either
have to control the party, or we have to start another one.
--- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, "Amarcy D. Berry" <amarcyb@...>
wrote:
Dear Glenn and Eric:
Since the Libertarian Party is not a disembodied entity existing by
miracle on its own, I am assuming that the "hopeless" label belongs
to
all of us that make up this organization?
Which brings me to the comment regarding the GOP and Ron Paul. As I
have stated before, from what I observed while working on the Ron
Paul
campaign, supporters where largely Libertarians or ex-Libertarians
who
decided that the wasted vote syndrome had merit. I saw no
groundswell
among GOP'rs for a libertarian approach to politics; and I saw a lot
of smart Libertarians working for a cause they believed in.
Regarding another third party, what would be the point of that? Just
fix how and how much we do things in this one!!
Regards,
Marcy
>
> Eric has a bad case of neocon on the brain.
>
> One of the reasons that the SF Libertarian party is regarded as
hopeless
>
> Eric wants small government, freedom for violent drug dealers to
rule over
> crappy neighborhoods, and anarchy
>
> What exactly does neocon mean anyway............he uses it like
the word
> fuck in a sexy conversation
>
>
> > Please list for me the major papers that the neocons
control. They
> > certainly are not in control at the S.F. Chronicle, the L.A.
Times, The New
> > York Times, and The Washington Post.
> > Marge Parkhurst
> >
> >
> >
> > *From:* ERIC <lincolnproducts@>
> > *To:* lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> > *Sent:* Sunday, February 01, 2009 12:22 PM
> > *Subject:* [lpsf-discuss] Fwd: The 3rd Party Option
> >
> > --- In libertarianrepublicans@yahoogroups.com, "ERIC"
> > <lincolnproducts@> wrote:
> >
> > The RNC's decision to nominate Michael Steele proves again that
> > neocon arrogance is an obstacle to meaningful reform within the
GOP.
> > Unfortuneately, the Libertarian Party suffers from much the same
> > hubris. It's time for a viable 3rd party to emerge from the
wreckage
> > and bring the political process back to some semblance of
sanity.
> >
> > Despite neocon media control, the American people are ready for
a
> > change towards responsible, limited government. The 2008
campaign was
> > proof positive of this. McCain won the nomination---against
better
> > funded establishment candidates---by running against the neocon/
> > social con 'base'. He was actually leading Obama in the polls
during
> > the summer. When he caved into media and internal political
pressure
> > by nominating Palin and embracing the Far Right, his numbers
dropped
> > and never recovered.
> >
> > Likewise, the Ron Paul campaign demonstrated the desire for a
> > counter- insurgency in the GOP. Against outright media
blackouts and
> > choruses of sneers from neocon appartachiks, Paul managed to
run a
> > relatively competative campaign.
> >
> > If a viable 3rd party is to emerge; it must absorb disaffected
> > elements within the GOP and LP. But not the same perpetually
> > disaffected who make up the contemporary neocon/social
con 'base'.
> > Rather, it must galvanize around core principles of individual
> > rights, a GENUINE free market, and social tolerance. There are
those
> > in both parties who could make this happen; and we have to face
the
> > reality of its necessity. There is no longer any illusion of the
> > Reaganesque 'Big Tent'. A party dominated by corporatists and
> > theocrats will never restore our country's founding principles.
It's