No third party candidate is going to win, why throw away your vote on one one?

Originally posted by mako0956
They can't control it- keyword: CONTROL.

Alcohol is regulated today, we aren't in the days of prohibition anymore.

Sure, people still make stills to produce their moonshine, but more stills/labs are made to cook up methamphetamine today, not alcohol.

I'm not sure of your point in that last post, but we are a long way away from government legalizing marijuanna.



[edit on 28-8-2004 by mako0956]

My point is that it can be controlled just like alcohol is controlled today. Many thought that alcohol could not be controlled but it is for the most part today. While I'm sure you are right it would not be easy and it would take years but yes it can be controlled using the same methods that they used to control alcohol. I also realize you are correct the gov is not ready to legalize marijuana but if they did it could and would be controlled eventually. Why don't you think if the gov wanted to leagalize it that they could not control it as they do alcohol?

Originally posted by nathraq

Originally posted by goose


The poor depend on charity to survive, so I assume that this party has never been where there was no work, I have I lived through a recession and certainly would not like to depend on anyone's charity. I did manage to find work and walked 3.5 miles after work everyday no matter what the weather but depend on someones charity for survival, heck I could not even get a ride home no matter what the weather. I nearly froze to death once when the weather was 13 degrees below 0 counting the wind chill factor and being poor I did not have adequate outer clothing to wear but no one offered me a ride and no one gave a diddly. Depend on others charitable nature LOL that does not make sense. My grandson is in a preschool private school it cost nearly 5,000 a year for halfday. Where is that private school for 2,000. Get rid of the FBI and CIA, what are we going to do for security?

1.There are National Charitable Foundations. Their money is pooled, and dispensed to where it is needed.
2. If a person nearly freezes to death walking 3.5 miles uphill in the snow both ways to work, then they either need to a) move, or b) sit in their house and feel sorry for themselves.
3. The State and Local Police Forces are for our security. How many times has an FBI agent saved your life? The FBI's main task(besides the war on terror) is drug enforcement. Eliminate the prohibition of drugs, and the FBI will be facing a major budget reduction.

It's all about personal freedoms and choice. Not about the government trying to take care of you.

I agree wholeheartedly. Why do people expect the government to take care of them when they make bad choices? It may sound heartless, but it is not the government's job to hand you a check because you have 6 kids by different fathers and never finished high school. People used to be held accountable for their actions and didn't look to the government to bail them out because they screwed up. Part of the price of freedom is having to suffer the consequences if you choose to do something stupid. If you mess up your life, it should be up to you to fix it.

As far as the Libertarians not having been "in that position", this is not true. In the late 70's/early 80's when the economy went to hell my dad and mom both lost their jobs and were unable to find new ones for almost 5 years. Do you know what they did? My dad was too proud to go apply for unemployment (he thought it was a man's job to provide for his family) and my mom would have died from embarrassment if she were caught dead with Food Stamps. She planted a garden in the back yard, borrowed 50 bucks from her sister to buy a used deep freezer, and she grew a ton of veggies. That is what we ate for over 4 years. If it didn't come from the garden, we didn't have it. We all learned to appreciate lima beans (which I hated before then, lol). My dad mowed yards, raked leaves, detailed cars for the neighbors, etc. to get spare money to pay for the eletric bills. We made it without the government stepping in. We didn't have any "extras" but we didn't go hungry and had water and electricity. I just couldn't buy ice cream when the truck came by, purchase records, talk on the phone, and things like that since there was no extra money for those things.

I learned a lot from that, and it is shocking to me how so many people today are not willing to work for anything and expect someone else to take care of them. When did we all become so lazy?

You may disagree with me on this, but I think that all of the "entitlement" programs are a conspiracy to keep minorities "enslaved" by making them utterly dependent on the government for every little thing. I wish people would wake up and realize this. It really is enslavement if you are that dependent on someone else for your very survival, and thing is there is no reason to be that dependent if you are able-bodied and can contribute (which most people on welfare can but just don't want to).

Switzerland has the right idea: They do help place workers who have been laid off, but they have a "three strikes and you're out" type of rule. If they train you and find you a job, and you manage to get fired, after the 3rd job they find for you that you lose you are on your own. No assistance, no government housing, no subsidies, NOTHING. The unemployment rate there is extremely low, and most of the people work. Then again, if they want to eat they kinda have to work, hehe. Talk about an incentive to stay employed! I wish we would do something like that here.

Originally posted by Gardenia

Originally posted by nathraq

Originally posted by goose


The poor depend on charity to survive, so I assume that this party has never been where there was no work, I have I lived through a recession and certainly would not like to depend on anyone's charity. I did manage to find work and walked 3.5 miles after work everyday no matter what the weather but depend on someones charity for survival, heck I could not even get a ride home no matter what the weather. I nearly froze to death once when the weather was 13 degrees below 0 counting the wind chill factor and being poor I did not have adequate outer clothing to wear but no one offered me a ride and no one gave a diddly. Depend on others charitable nature LOL that does not make sense. My grandson is in a preschool private school it cost nearly 5,000 a year for halfday. Where is that private school for 2,000. Get rid of the FBI and CIA, what are we going to do for security?

1.There are National Charitable Foundations. Their money is pooled, and dispensed to where it is needed.
2. If a person nearly freezes to death walking 3.5 miles uphill in the snow both ways to work, then they either need to a) move, or b) sit in their house and feel sorry for themselves.
3. The State and Local Police Forces are for our security. How many times has an FBI agent saved your life? The FBI's main task(besides the war on terror) is drug enforcement. Eliminate the prohibition of drugs, and the FBI will be facing a major budget reduction.

It's all about personal freedoms and choice. Not about the government trying to take care of you.

I agree wholeheartedly. Why do people expect the government to take care of them when they make bad choices? It may sound heartless, but it is not the government's job to hand you a check because you have 6 kids by different fathers and never finished high school. People used to be held accountable for their actions and didn't look to the government to bail them out because they screwed up. Part of the price of freedom is having to suffer the consequences if you choose to do something stupid. If you mess up your life, it should be up to you to fix it.

As far as the Libertarians not having been "in that position", this is not true. In the late 70's/early 80's when the economy went to hell my dad and mom both lost their jobs and were unable to find new ones for almost 5 years. Do you know what they did? My dad was too proud to go apply for unemployment (he thought it was a man's job to provide for his family) and my mom would have died from embarrassment if she were caught dead with Food Stamps. She planted a garden in the back yard, borrowed 50 bucks from her sister to buy a used deep freezer, and she grew a ton of veggies. That is what we ate for over 4 years. If it didn't come from the garden, we didn't have it. We all learned to appreciate lima beans (which I hated before then, lol). My dad mowed yards, raked leaves, detailed cars for the neighbors, etc. to get spare money to pay for the eletric bills. We made it without the government stepping in. We didn't have any "extras" but we didn't go hungry and had water and electricity. I just couldn't buy ice cream when the truck came by, purchase records, talk on the phone, and things like that since there was no extra money for those things.

I learned a lot from that, and it is shocking to me how so many people today are not willing to work for anything and expect someone else to take care of them. When did we all become so lazy?

You may disagree with me on this, but I think that all of the "entitlement" programs are a conspiracy to keep minorities "enslaved" by making them utterly dependent on the government for every little thing. I wish people would wake up and realize this. It really is enslavement if you are that dependent on someone else for your very survival, and thing is there is no reason to be that dependent if you are able-bodied and can contribute (which most people on welfare can but just don't want to).

Switzerland has the right idea: They do help place workers who have been laid off, but they have a "three strikes and you're out" type of rule. If they train you and find you a job, and you manage to get fired, after the 3rd job they find for you that you lose you are on your own. No assistance, no government housing, no subsidies, NOTHING. The unemployment rate there is extremely low, and most of the people work. Then again, if they want to eat they kinda have to work, hehe. Talk about an incentive to stay employed! I wish we would do something like that here.

Unemployment compensation is not seen by most as charity or welfare, it is paid into by employers and the federal government to keep the worker able to continue to have buying power and to lessen further unemployment. There are very few people in this country who do not want to work, the old idea of the mother having baby after baby to get a bigger check is ludricous anymore, most states have a welfare program that one can only utilize for so long over a lifetime, I think from reports its two years, thats it. Most of us are taxpayers and most of us would prefer to see the money that we pay into the government used to feed and educate a hungry child rather than to be spent on some of the things our gov. uses our tax money on. While I understand that at one time there were people whose very way of life was to sat around and wait on the check to arrive that is not true anymore. Now about the food stamp program and the programs to help the poor, do you know that we spend much more on corporate welfare than we do the programs to help the poor. We paid for the Pillbury doughboy to advertise and appeal more to the latino market to the tune of over 2 million dollars, he now speaks spanish. Thats just one example.

Some people can make stills and make their own alcohol, it's just easier and better to go buy the good stuff at the store.

You can drink yourself to death, but you can't smoke yourself to death.

Personally, they should legalize it, but this is getting away from the topic of this thread. I don't doubt this is an important issue for some, but an issue which could be addressed in it's own thread.

Candidates which support issues which are important to us as a nation, and on a personal level (such as legalizing marijuanna), should be considered when selecting a presidential candidate.

It's our job, as a nation, to get people who provide a secure stance on these issues to be pushed to the platform begining at a local level.

Again, we can't wait two-three months before an election to open up peoples awareness of these issues.

These issues should've been on the table a long time ago with petitions to congress, elected officials who support these veiws, etc.. .

Unfortunately, we have so many other issues at hand (the war in Iraq, for instance) which over shadow these domestic issues, in order of priority.

mako

Originally posted by mako0956
Some people can make stills and make their own alcohol, it's just easier and better to go buy the good stuff at the store.

You can drink yourself to death, but you can't smoke yourself to death.

Personally, they should legalize it, but this is getting away from the topic of this thread. I don't doubt this is an important issue for some, but an issue which could be addressed in it's own thread.

Candidates which support issues which are important to us as a nation, and on a personal level (such as legalizing marijuanna), should be considered when selecting a presidential candidate.

It's our job, as a nation, to get people who provide a secure stance on these issues to be pushed to the platform begining at a local level.

Again, we can't wait two-three months before an election to open up peoples awareness of these issues.

These issues should've been on the table a long time ago with petitions to congress, elected officials who support these veiws, etc.. .

Unfortunately, we have so many other issues at hand (the war in Iraq, for instance) which over shadow these domestic issues, in order of priority.

mako

You of course are right this is way off subject but I must ask you who told you can't smoke yourself to death? Ever heard of emphysema and lung cancer but I assume you are talking about can't smoke yourself to death on marijuana.

Yes, marijuanna. I should've been a little clearer on that post.



[edit on 28-8-2004 by mako0956]

I really liked the idea about starting at the local level with 3rd party candidates. But what about the fact that kerry and bush's strings are pulled by the same people. They are both skull and bones. They have both been found to come fro the same lineage(sp) and basically have the same policies just use different rhetoric. I am still stuck between the two, becouse I also want Bush out at all cost. I just have a hard time justifing voting for kerry. He will br no different.

BECAUSE people need to stop taking part in the status quo in the political arena.

It hasn't gotten us anywhere! What we have is a government that is way bigger that the constitution allows it be, it's hideous, it's corrupt, and both parties need to retire, and the people who vote third parties know this, so they are helping to speed up the retirement..

Why are you mainstream?? Why are you wasting your vote? Why do you vote lesser of two evil's??

Why are you voting in unconstitional principles and laws?

Why are you not voting for a constitutional republic instead of a democracy?

That's not American, so what you doing??

I love the crap about people end up on welfare because they make bad choice.....I worked for twenty years. I didnt choose for my employer to go guts up in a national financial scandal, to end up sick or end up being unable to work a decent job as a result of it and I didnt choose for my wife to stand by me, and struggle to get by on what she earned (we chose not to go on welfare). We picked and chose the things we kept getting or doing (this internet was one of them, instead of cable TV, the train over a car, quiet evenings reading a book or listening to classic music on the radio, instead of going to restraunts and cinemas ).

Some people are not even that fortunate. Success is a pyramid. the higher you climb, the less space there is. For people who are well off and wondering why some of thier tax go to the welfare of the poor, remember that to get where you have, unintentionally or otherwise you have had to climb over someone else to get there, or depended on someone who didnt get or couldnt make the breaks you did to finance your climb (not your employer, but the consumer putting money in your pocket).

Welfare is an acknowledgement of the debt MOST of those people are owed. It helps people through hard times, and sometimes they can be long times, until they can get back on thier feet just to buy more from your store or company. At its very minimum its a matter of self interest and self preservation. The Russian Czar and his court lost sight of the welfare of the poor and the new poor, and look what happened to them.

Everybody has thier breaking point.....Total abandonment is one of them.

I'd rather see all that money go to helping out the lower classes rather than blowing it on nationalist wars. There is nothing good we get out of the Iraq war.. unless you like headaches. Spend it on to lower the cost of college/university... in Europe mostly everyone goes to the university because there is no real cost.. and Europeans tend to be alot more aware of what goes on in the world. Do this in the USA and you would have alot less people in poverty because they would be able to go to a college even if they were below the poverty line and do something.

[edit on 2-11-2004 by RedOctober90]

The fallacy lies in the reversal of the truth.

To waste a vote, is to cast on that will bear little to no results. Badnarik could hit the 5% mark. That is the goal we are fighting for. Stages are key to any movement, obviously.

To vote for Kerry or Bush will yield the same unhappy results in the same unhappy system. There is no real result there, even if you manage to win the modicum victory of getting Bush out of office.

Yippy. More of the same awaits you after the swearing in.

The wasted vote is the uneducated and simpleton approach to American politics and elections. The theatrical performance of men who deem it unnecessary to dig deep into the problems riddling America; because those who run the parties deem it too dangerous to their proven money/power/influence.

Half a billion spent by the Big Two, and I'm sure that's a fairly conservative estimate.

THAT is sad. Like Mike said, two different mascots for the same party.