Libertarians qualify for November

June 29, 2010 15:59 pm

by Jason · 97 comments

Candidates running under the Libertarian Party of Georgia‘s banner qualified this afternoon at the Secretary of State’s office:

The Libertarian Party of Georgia on Tuesday officially entered the 2010 campaign season when party leaders placed a dozen candidates on the November ballot.

Libertarians in Georgia do not hold primaries, but choose their general election candidates at a convention in April.

“Today is a historic occasion for the state of Georgia, as well as the Libertarian Party of Georgia,” said Daniel Adams, chairman of Libertarian Party of Georgia. “We just qualified our first full statewide slate, including the first African-American candidate for governor and the first female candidate for lieutenant governor on the general election ballot.”

The candidates are:

Tiberius June 29, 2010 at 4:46 pm

Shall we forecast who (of the statewides) gets the largest % of vote? And what % that may be?

Historicall, PSC does very well.

bluedogdem June 29, 2010 at 4:51 pm

Kira Willis wins in a runoff
Chuck Donovan gets beat in a runoff
John Monds gets at least 20% and forces a runoff. John might get more depending on how stupid the GOP voters are in a couple of weeks.

drjay June 29, 2010 at 4:58 pm

whatever, if ANY of the libs get more than 5% of the vote in any of these races, i’ll eat my hat…

seenbetrdayz June 30, 2010 at 12:41 pm

I think it will happen. —Not because the libertarians have proven themselves (or had the chance) to be competent in any particular venture, but because the leadership of both major parties have had too many chances to prove themselves to be incompetent in nearly every particular venture.

Chris June 29, 2010 at 5:02 pm

yawn

bluedogdem June 29, 2010 at 5:03 pm

Get ready to eat your hat.

Steve Perkins June 29, 2010 at 5:10 pm

I’m sure that John Monds will garner well above 5%, given that so many people have pledged to vote against Oxendine in the general.

Tiberius June 29, 2010 at 5:10 pm

5-7% is a good guess for most of the down ballot with PSC leading the way.

John Konop June 29, 2010 at 9:22 pm

David Chastain did well last time if remember right. I wonder how well he will do this time. I do not always agree with Dave, but he is very smart guy and always a great to debate with.

Doug Grammer June 29, 2010 at 10:50 pm

Normally I’d cap them at 5%, but this year I’ll predict they might get as high as 8% in one or two races, but the net effect is the same. The “keep trying” party forces a runoff and the tax payers money. When they field a candidate that breaks 20%, I’ll give them a lot more credit. Until then, they haven’t earned it.

Soulja Boy June 30, 2010 at 10:45 am

Doug,

I don’t want to ever hear you b*tch and complain about tax payer money ever again, until you get that GOP big-government throbbing member out of your mouth. You’re the biggest GOP blowhard on this blog.

What did your party do for eight years, four of which you had total control of? Not a d@mn thing except for grow Government and increase spending.

Doug Grammer June 30, 2010 at 11:03 am

Soulja,

You are obviously a gentleman and a scholar. I am perfectly fine with being the most committed Republican on this blog.

I don’t really care what you want from me in terms of what I decide to exercise in terms of free speech. If you think I am wrong on facts, please feel free to challenge those facts. Your opinion and mine can differ. However, I wouldn’t presume to try to silence you on what you say because I disagree with it. On the contrary, I would fight to preserve you right to say. If you are wrong on your facts, I will challenge you on them.

As far as what the Government has done, that’s a long conversation. If you can have a civil discourse without giving analogies of things in peoples mouths, or in other words, behave like a grown up, perhaps I’ll indulge you with a conversation. It will suffice to say it hasn’t been perfect, it hasn’t done everything I wanted it to do, but it’s been far better than the alternative.

polisavvy June 30, 2010 at 12:55 pm

Have you every heard of civility? You’re a little too out of control. It’s fine that you have your point and want to express it; however, why do you feel compelled to be so incredibly nasty in expressing your opinion/thought? Just curious.

David Staples June 30, 2010 at 3:22 pm

Soulja – you can disagree with someone and still be civil about it.

David Staples June 30, 2010 at 3:24 pm

Doug – you’re always quick to point out the taxpayer money that is spent on the runoff when the LP is the cause of it… what about the taxpayer money at stake when the GOP is the cause of it? I do believe many in the GOP have been talking about the primary runoff for Governor, correct? I don’t believe there’s a single Libertarian in that race.

Lady Thinker June 30, 2010 at 9:31 pm

Good point Doug. Wish I had thought of it.

Doug Grammer July 1, 2010 at 11:27 am

David,

There are enough Republicans and Democrats to justify the use of the primary system. The LP can barely get enough people to attend a convention to show interest in that party. How many people attend your past convention? If the GOP or the Dems announced that those parties Georgia primaries would be decided by convention, a big enough venue does not exist. I don’t like tax money spent on a run off cause by a party or individual who has no chance of winning. I can’t tell you who will be in the run off for the GOP primary so therefore, there is a legitimate reason for us to pick our nominee that way. Did you have more than one person willing to run for every office?

By the way, did you know that the LP allowed a convicted felon to be one of their presidential electors in 2004? Couldn’t find enough law abiding citizens to show enough interest to represent your party?

Jace Walden July 1, 2010 at 11:29 am

Kind of like letting a child molester be a candidate for Governor, isn’ t it?

Jace Walden July 1, 2010 at 11:30 am

Or a 50 year old man who likes teenage boys serve as a sitting congressman.

Jace Walden July 1, 2010 at 11:32 am

Or a child pornographer serve as a delegate at your national convention

Jace Walden July 1, 2010 at 11:34 am

Or a congressman who had sex with a female minor who worked as his congressional aide

Jace Walden July 1, 2010 at 11:36 am

Or letting a confirmed segregationalist who impregnated a 15 year old black girl serve as a U.S. Senator

Jace Walden July 1, 2010 at 11:43 am

Pot: [to kettle] You’re black.

Doug Grammer July 1, 2010 at 12:17 pm

Nope, not really.

Doug Grammer July 1, 2010 at 12:17 pm

Didn’t happen in Georgia. Do you want me to look outside of Georgia to find a member of the LP acting a fool? Can’t find a LP Congressman. They don’t exist.

Doug Grammer July 1, 2010 at 12:16 pm

I have no idea of whom you are talking about. Did they come from Georgia?

Doug Grammer July 1, 2010 at 12:15 pm

Didn’t happen in Georgia. Do you want me to look outside of Georgia to find a member of the LP acting a fool?

Doug Grammer July 1, 2010 at 12:13 pm

The law states that if they pay the fee and sign the oath, they become a candidate. We let the primary system determine who the nominee is. You draw straws and see who gets stuck with the nomination? Did a law require your party to send the felon?

Jace Walden July 1, 2010 at 2:03 pm

No but a party law required you to allow a child molester on the ballot.

David Staples July 1, 2010 at 2:05 pm

Ssssshhhhhh!!! He might be reading this and is sure to add you to the list of those he’s going to sue… after the election of course!

Jace Walden July 1, 2010 at 2:06 pm

GOP=Party of Child Molesting Hypocrites?

Doug Grammer July 1, 2010 at 2:14 pm

You must be moving up in the world. It’s a Dem strategy to attack the messenger of bad news and ignoring the FACT that your party had a convicted felon as a Presidential elector.

Jace Walden July 1, 2010 at 2:14 pm

I didn’t attack the messenger. I asked a question.

Doug Grammer July 1, 2010 at 2:30 pm

Ok. Fair enough. GOP doesn’t equal Child Molesting Hypocrites. It stands for Grand Old Party. Does Jace Walden equal Child Molesting Hypocrite?

Jace Walden July 1, 2010 at 2:51 pm

No. Jace Walden=Awesome

Doug Grammer July 1, 2010 at 8:06 pm

Why am I not surprised that you would use a word like awsome?

Doug Grammer July 1, 2010 at 2:12 pm

It’s not a party law, it is O.C.G.A. Do you want me to look it up for you? I love the way you do not have a reason for allowing a felon to be a presidential elector for your party.

Jace Walden July 1, 2010 at 2:14 pm

Oh no, your party can stop someone from being on the ballot as a Republican…Just ask Raymond Boyd.

Doug Grammer July 1, 2010 at 2:28 pm

Raymond Boyd stopped Raymond Boyd. If he wanted to the the Republican nominee, all he had to do was run. If he wasn’t willing to support our party, then why should he want to run as a Republican. He didn’t, and he didn’t.

Doug Grammer July 1, 2010 at 2:37 pm

typo, first “the” should have been a “be”

Jace Walden July 1, 2010 at 2:39 pm

No. All he had to do was sign the loyalty oath. That’s what stopped Raymond Boyd from running as a Republican.

The same loyalty oath allowed a child molester to run as a Republican.

That’s a party rule, Doug.

Doug Grammer July 1, 2010 at 8:05 pm

Are you saying he didn’t know how to sign his name? We had a lot of other candidates who managed to do so.

Jace Walden July 2, 2010 at 7:24 am

Nice try, Doug. You know exactly what I’m saying though. He didn’t want to take a loyalty oath (a Party rule). Thus, he was prevented from running as a Republican.

Again, you can avoid it all you want, Doug. A party rule prevented Boyd from running, but allowed a Child Molester to run.

GOP=Family Values?

Doug Grammer July 2, 2010 at 10:10 am

Jace,

You need to go to back to school and do better at reading comprehension. I’ve already told you what GOP stands for.

The man didn’t support the GOP so why should he be our nominee? If someone won’t at least pretend to be Republican, why should he or she be on the ballot as such?

Don’t forget the LP elected a felon to run as a presidential elector for their party…. not someone accused, but someone who spent over a year in jail. If a child molester get our parties nomination, then you may feel free to complain about that all day long. It’s not going to happen. Your state party elected a felon to represent it nationally.

Jace Walden = bad at reading comprehension. That’s not a question.

Jace Walden July 2, 2010 at 10:12 am

Doug=Tired, bitter, irrelvant old crank who loses sleep at night over the Party of 5% or less.

That’s not a question either.

Doug Grammer July 2, 2010 at 10:25 am

Jace,

You don’t even know me. I’m not tired. I am in a good mood. I think I’m good at my job. I take a little pride in making those that I care about smile. I don’t feel that old, but I know I’m not as young as I used to be. As for my sleeping habits, I don’t want you to know me that well. (see your coming out of the closet remarks in another thread.)

At least you didn’t refute that you have reading comprehension difficulties.

Jace Walden July 2, 2010 at 10:27 am

You are a tired, bitter, irrelevant old crank who loses sleep at night over the “party of less than 5%”. Get used to it.

GAPoliticsisfun July 2, 2010 at 10:28 am

Doug,
You give yourself way to much credit. It is sad that you are in a leadership position in the party.

Doug Grammer July 2, 2010 at 10:32 am

I freely admit that most of the things that are done in my neck of the woods are done without my input. I am blessed to live where I live. That doesn’t mean I have no impact and I’m not good at my job.

Jace Walden July 2, 2010 at 10:38 am

But you don’t have any impact.

Doug Grammer July 3, 2010 at 4:48 pm

I’ve impacted you by letting you know your party elected a felon to represent it at a national level. Did you know that before I told you? If not, consider yourself impacted.

David Staples July 1, 2010 at 2:15 pm

“By the way, did you know that the LP allowed a convicted felon to be one of their presidential electors in 2004?”

Had no idea… I was living in SC at the time and wasn’t really interested in politics at the time. Who was it and what were they convicted of?

Jace Walden July 1, 2010 at 2:18 pm

OMGSHOOTMENOWI’MGONNADIETHELIBERTARIANPARTYALLOWEDACONVICTEDFELONTOSERVEINANONPUBLICCAPACITY

That’s 10 times worse than all of the Republican Child Molestors who have actually spent time in public office.

Doug Grammer July 1, 2010 at 2:35 pm

Anyone from Georgia, Jace? I could talk about all of the elected libertarians, but I can’t seem to find any.

Doug Grammer July 1, 2010 at 2:34 pm

He has a long list of crimes, but one of them was assaulting a police officer. He used to be a member of the GOP and we kicked him out back in 1996. For fairness sake, I won’t blast his name all over PP, but give me your e-mail and I’ll tell you privately.

David Staples July 1, 2010 at 2:42 pm

david-at-ponytailacres-dot-org :-) Thanks!

drjay June 30, 2010 at 11:03 am

in a year when gop enthusiasm for mccain was suspect the libs, with a native son, no less, garnered less than 1% in the prez race, in a year when gop enthusiasm for chambliss was suspect the libs got 3%, excluding the monds race that had no dem in the race, the high water mark was 5% for the other psc seat…despite the machinations of the “plugged in” on PP i fail to see how this year will be any different…

Doug Grammer June 30, 2010 at 11:07 am

The only way I see this year as a little different is because I allow for a little more anti-incumbency mood which could translate into a small bump in the anti-major party vote.

Soulja Boy June 30, 2010 at 11:15 am

3%-5%…isn’t that about what you got in your city council race, Dr. Jay?

Doug Grammer June 30, 2010 at 11:38 am

Soulja,

That doesn’t change his fact on what % Congressman Barr got in Georgia.

drjay June 30, 2010 at 11:38 am

no, i did a fair piece better than that actually, and i’m not sure how it relates to my assessment of the libertarians potential vote totals…

Soulja Boy June 30, 2010 at 11:40 am

It means that Libertarians and you have one thing in common: Both have ran failed political campaigns.

drjay June 30, 2010 at 11:45 am

then you are right, that makes me particularly qualified to discuss their election prospects…

Soulja Boy June 30, 2010 at 11:46 am

So we’re in agreement that the Libertarians and you will still have the same thing in common this time next year.

drjay June 30, 2010 at 11:50 am

well i certainly don’t see them winning anything this year, if that’s what you mean…and i’m not running for anything right now, so my results won’t change either…

Doug Grammer June 30, 2010 at 11:59 am

+ 3 to 8%

Hank Reardan June 30, 2010 at 2:25 pm

I am not sure how we will do but we are running some great candidates this year. I will tell you Ihave been to GOP conventions and Libertarians conventions. The big difference is almost 100% of the Libertarians want fredom and smaller government. At the GOP meetings maybe 60 %.I have had GOP tell me they believe gay people need to be locked up (told this last week not 15 years ago) People who use drugs should or sell them should lock up for life in prison.
The GOP has some great people in it but they still does always get it when it comes to Liberty and Freedom. If that is what you are looking for then your are welcome to the Libertarian party
http://www.lpgeorgia.com

Doug Grammer June 30, 2010 at 3:12 pm

“People who use drugs should or sell them should lock up for life in prison.” The last time I checked, those activities are against the law. Is it the “for life” portion you have a problem with or locking them up at all?

Would you want to drive on 285 with half the people on the road on drugs? Liberty and freedom are fine but don’t forget about individual responsibility and accountability for ones actions.

BTW, I think that a lot more than 60% of the Republicans I know want freedom and smaller governemnt. I know quite a few.

David Staples June 30, 2010 at 3:20 pm

Doug – I don’t think any libertarians that I know of have suggested that using drugs and driving is okay any more than drinking and driving is okay. Everyone always wants to bring up the DWI argument. Nobody’s saying that law should go away. But why should that prevent someone from using in the privacy of their own home? (with no driving involved) It’s not my cup of tea, but then again I’m not a big fan of those energy drinks like Red Bull and whatever else that so many people are fond of either. To each their own.

Doug Grammer June 30, 2010 at 3:34 pm

Controlled substances, are just that…controlled. A Doctor can give out a prescription in the right doses. Someone else can kill themselves without proper medical instruction and or supervision. I don’t do red bull either, and I rarely drink alcohol.

Society has decided that drugs lead to addiction and some addictions lead to crime. It’s just not socially accepted that people can be meth-heads in the privacy of their own home. I am not trying anything that will want me to steal from my family and friends to continue to get it. I am fine with this being one of the differences between the LP and the GOP.

Breaking one law seems to give the law breaker the attitude that if they can break one law, they can break others. Disclaimer, I have been known to speed, but I pay my debts to society when I am caught. I’m a recovering speeder, but IMO, that’s better than other additions.

David Staples June 30, 2010 at 3:44 pm

Perhaps methamphetamines should stay illegal then. But what about marijuana? I’ll go one further… what about industrialized hemp? Hemp has been used for ages to make rope, cloth, bedding for horses (Queen of England currently uses it in her stables), and many other things. It’s legal to grow hemp in Canada, England, France and a variety of other industrialized nations. It’s difficult to even import the products made from hemp into the US.

What exactly is the government protecting us from there? Do you think people are going to go crazy buying too many hemp shirts or just have to have another spool of hemp twine? (Help! I’ve got a rope addiction and I don’t know where to turn! It’s causing me to buy spool after spool of hemp rope, dwindling away my savings accounts and preventing me from feeding my family…… (end sarcasm)).

Doug Grammer June 30, 2010 at 4:13 pm

I’m one of those Republicans who think that either smoking should be banned or marijuana should be legal. Disclaimer, I am speaking JUST for myself on this issue. Other than it’s an individual choice, why should smoking be legal? It’s addictive to the point we have outlawed other products similar to it. I consider second hand smoke an assault and don’t usually attend bars that have smoking. Does it have any real health benefits that drinking wine has?

As far as making marijuana legal, does it fall under ATF or USDA? The biggest pro claim is that we could tax it if it were sold legally. That still isn’t enough of a benefit to me. I’d like to get rid of all sin taxes. Either it’s legal or it’s not.

drjay June 30, 2010 at 4:20 pm

has a quantitative pot test been developed, if it has then i might be amiable to legalizing it, otherwise you are creating an enforcement nightmare if you are stuck w/ just the qualitative test and the subjective opinion of a LEO…

David Staples June 30, 2010 at 5:19 pm

There have been numerous studies and tests for both sides of the argument. I think most studies I’ve seen have been biased one way or the other though… don’t really have the time to spend looking for them right now… maybe another day…

David Staples June 30, 2010 at 5:17 pm

I think marijuana falls under the DEA – Drug Enforcement Administration if I’m not mistaken.

bowersville June 30, 2010 at 6:42 pm

California (yeah I know it’s on the left coast) has Proposition 19 on the November ballot. The voters will vote to decriminalize growing, having and using MJ. The proposition will also allow California to tax distribution.

My understanding is that controlled substance laws are federal and written into state codes to allow state and local enforcement as well. If California votes to decriminalize MJ on the state level, state and local law enforcement will no longer make MJ arrests.

The war on drugs has gotten our society no where. We have filled our prisons. We have a shooting war on the Mexican side of the border that is spilling into the states and we have enriched the cartels and thugs.

The Prohabition law on alchohol did the same for the mob.

Hank Reardan June 30, 2010 at 3:25 pm

Doug if they drove while using it would be treat just like a drunk driver that would not change as you well know.But if a man is sitting inhis house why should you care.You know what most of you GOP people do care and you want to put your moral compass on the rest of us. If I have 100 gop members lined up I bet more than 40% would lock up pot smokers or pass a law against gay people. Or ban alchol on sunday or gambling and the list goes on.
You want freedom with you money and the freedom to dictate my personel life . So yes you guys are always for freedom

Doug Grammer June 30, 2010 at 4:01 pm

Hank,

Aw come on….Name one member of the state legislator who ever presented a bill to lock up people for being gay. You are being silly. Just because some people don’t approve of a behavior doesn’t automatically mean they want a law against it.

The last time I checked smoking pot is against the law, so that’s a crime and there should be punishment. If it’s enough for intent to distribute, I think jail time is appropriate.

If you have no moral compass, that’s your problem. I think killing someone is against my moral compass and I will state I think the majority of society agrees with me. There are plenty of laws that fall under the definition of “moral compass” that you are probably fine with. Rape, kidnapping, and theft, are all morally wrong. I have no problem with alcohol being sold on Sunday, but that’s me. Don’t assume you know what I think without asking me questions. No offence, but I really don’t care much that about your personal life until it starts to affect mine or others.

David Staples June 30, 2010 at 4:04 pm

“No offence, but I really don’t care much that about your personal life until it starts to affect mine or others.”

And that’s where we agree. But what about someone gambling in a casino affects your personal life or others? What about marijuana affects your personal life or others? We already agree on Sunday sales, but not all Republicans do. Their reason? “It’s the Lord’s day.” Bull honkey, it’s my day and I should be able to do with it as I darn well please so long as it doesn’t affect someone else’s life. (excuse my language… haha)

Doug Grammer June 30, 2010 at 4:24 pm

When I was very young, my parents divorced. They remarried each other a few years later. One of the reasons that they divorced was that my dad developed a gambling habit to the point where we didn’t have enough money to make the house payment (more than once.) I remember one Christmas that I got four ounces of gold. I was so happy about that. A few months later, I had to give it back so we could pay our bills. He got his habit under control (many, many, years ago), but I think I can speak with personal authority that gambling habits can affect other peoples lives and it definitely affected mine. For any of you out there who know my parents, I would appreciate that you not share that I shared this story with you. By telling it, it’s the best way I know to show why gambling should be illegal. I love them very much and don’t want their feelings hurt.

David Staples June 30, 2010 at 5:10 pm

Doug – I completely understand that gambling *can* have an affect on one’s family. But to say that just because some people develop addictions to it that it should be illegal for all I believe is unreasonable. Some people are addicted to caffeine. Are you ready to propose outlawing coffee? Some people are addicted to video games. Shall we outlaw those too? Some people are addicted to sex, food… the internet. How about we make those illegal too?

David Staples June 30, 2010 at 5:11 pm

On second thought… I’m addicted to work! :-D

Doug Grammer June 30, 2010 at 6:22 pm

I would agree we need to treat those afflicted with addictions of any kind as a medical or even psychological problem as opposed to a criminal problem. For those who are pushing drugs for the money, put them behind bars and leave them there.

B Balz July 2, 2010 at 11:51 am

Dr. Jay has a point on this. Unlike booze which is water soluble, THC (active ingredient in MJ) is fat soluble. So presence or absence can be detected well after the effect is gone. How does law enforcement handle that?

We have a real problem with MJ, societal, prison, workforce productivity costs. Yet, making it legal gives me an image of stoners running things, not too pretty.

One thing about Mr. Grammer, he doesn’t back down and he doesn’t quit. I have gone a few rounds with the guy on RTL issues. I think the guy ought to get credit for being more statesmanlike and reasoned in his opinions.

This is a debate and idea forum, probably no right or wrong, but an avenue to effect finding a common ground, if one can be found. I am a moderate conservative and really dislike some Georgia GOP views. I should be a perfect candidate for the third Party, but they cannot get it together.

Doug Grammer July 2, 2010 at 8:14 pm

Thank you. When I’m in a disagreement on here, I like to review my goals. Am I trying to change the mind of the person I have a disagreement with? Sometimes that is the case. In other times, I am just out to either prove their facts are wrong, or convey information. Occasionally, I am out to showcase how dumb someone may be. That falls a little below statesman like, but I am human and have failings.

I will always start with the assumption that I can disagree with someone and we can agree to disagree and be civil. Some people on here don’t play by those rules, and for the readers how grow bored with that, I apologize.

You are correct that I do not back down, unless I think there is nowhere to go and I’ve done all I can do. When I realize I am wrong on something, I will own up to it. I’ll never quit. To borrow a line from the untouchables, “One more thing, you have an all out prize fight, you wait until the fight is over, one guy is left standing. And that’s how you know who won.”

In the past two or three days, I have educated the readers that the LP elected a convicted felon to represent their party as a presidential elector. I have had one of their members openly admit that the LP isn’t serious about winning lections, just making sure the major parties field better candidates. If the LP party isn’t trying to win elections, all it is accomplishing is costing the tax payers money for a run off. I’ve also found one of their members who can’t put a complete sentence together correctly.

I’ll talk about issues all day long. There are some LP issues I agree with them on, but some of their issues are just dumb. There are some members of the LP that I like and respect. (Mr. Staples for example.) There are others who whine like a baby for ballot access, but won’t lift a finger to earn it. (I’ll be nice today and not name names.) I will talk about their party until it is on the back of a milk carton or until they get better at trying to win lections. This is granting that one assumes the LP really exists. How many counties does the LP have originations in? As nears as I can tell, they can’t get more than 2 people from each of the five public service commission districts to participate.

I know that I may not be making the members of the LP feel really warm about me, but I’m betting it might help cut into their 5% and maybe make it 4%. If that’s enough to avoid a run off, I’ve accomplished what I wanted.

Hank Reardan June 30, 2010 at 8:10 pm

Doug did you send you kids to government schools did you pay the full cost of their education. I send my kids to private school so you don’t have to pay. So if you don’t pay for you kids to go to private school (which you may)jI have help you educate your children.So you have effected me by taxing me for this. Thanks
If you are selling pot how is this different then selling hot dogs to a fat kid or a coke to a kid with high sugar levels where does it stop.
So if they law says that I can own you and you work my farm then you should work my farm and if you try to run I can kill because it is the law.
If i tell you sit on the back of the bus because of the law are you going to take it.
Man just admit Libertarian are more freedom driven then you GOP guys. You are the same people who used Jim Crow laws and moral grounds to justify prejudice against people not like you. I understand that freedom is a hard thing to get you brain wrapped around, and you can use all these scary stories you want but you are scared of freedom.
BTW it is people like your father they used as a reason to start social security because what do we do with those people who cant handle their money.So lets take some of yours to give to him because he can’t handle freedom

Doug Grammer July 1, 2010 at 11:13 am

Hank

I have no kids, so I don’t ask for your taxes for my children. Even if I did, society seems to think that an educated population is in the best interest of society and you have a minority opinion on the subject. We do require your taxes to pay for paved roads that I use, so thank you. The LP plan of let everyone pool their money and pave their own road doesn’t work.

Coke a cola and hot dogs contain nutritional value, and please factor in what I said about individual responsibility. Parents should be the ones to control their children’s diet.

I will accept your premise that not all (previous & current) laws are just, but you should accept my premise that the vast vast majority of them are.

Jim Crow laws were passed by the Dems not the GOP. We fought a war about 150 years ago to end slavery and promote freedom.

I am a southern gentleman and I rise when a lady enters the room or leaves the table. I shared something very personal about my childhood to prove point. That also means if you talk about my family and are man enough to be in my face or even say your real name, you may wish that you hadn’t.

If you can’t make a point without acting like a fourth grader calling names and talk about peoples families, what does that say about you? You could have countered with Las Vegas seems to do OK, and then we could have a real conversation about gambling. Instead, you take the low road and I won’t join you there.

Hank Reardan July 1, 2010 at 3:39 pm

I can handle myself Doug. I called you a name ? What did I call you? I repeated a story you told here I did not make it up. Oh my real name is Doug Craig I am the poltical director of the GA LP. I am also on the LNC. I am also the owner of Viking Metals. The largest maker of commercial gutter in the southeast, Sales up 13.8% year to date in this economy. How is your business doing. I will take freedom every day of the week and twice on Sunday.
Just saying :)

Doug Grammer July 1, 2010 at 8:21 pm

Well your sales are almost 3 times higher than any percent of the vote of any lp statewide candidate in the last election cycle.

I liked your quote on: http://www.crazyforliberty.com/

“Has any thought abpout who they are supporting for LNC chair. It looks like I am going with George Phillies . I supported him early for the 2008 presidential campaign until I got wrapped him in the Bob Barr campaign.”

Hank Reardan July 2, 2010 at 7:23 am

well I guess I could use a spell checker you looking for a job? I can start you out at about 10 bucks an hour

Doug Grammer July 2, 2010 at 7:35 pm

I only work with people that I respect. To get respect from me, you got to give a little and I’m not sure you are capable of doing that. As evidenced in your last post, you also have problems with punctuation and capitalization. Why don’t you use those $10 an hour to get a tutor, so you can learn how to type it correctly yourself?

sahughes June 30, 2010 at 9:36 pm

I am a little bit irritated at the lack of respect for LP candidates when John Monds is probably the most commendable candidate for governor running right now. If the Ox wins the primaries, I would bet that LP gets more than 8% votes.

Lady Thinker June 30, 2010 at 10:14 pm

SAH,

I bet you are very correct. If Ox wins, which I think is highly unlikely, I will vote for Monds also.

B Balz July 2, 2010 at 11:53 am

A vote for Monds may send a signal. To Roy.

Goldwater Conservative July 1, 2010 at 9:17 am

Yes. Votes for libertarians = Help for the Democratic party.

Doug Grammer July 1, 2010 at 12:19 pm

+ 3 to 8%. They should be happy I’ve bumped them up from 5%, even though they haven’t earned it yet.

B Balz July 2, 2010 at 11:53 am

I think you are correct.

Comments on this entry are closed.