More on Delay

[John Adams]

This stuff is reminiscent of when King Roosevelt threatened to stack the Supreme Court with 6 additional judges so he could get the results he wanted. Delay believes that his majority rule means that he can override all the rules. Yet the Constitution in its wisdom, was written to resist pure majority rule. Below are Delay's comments from an AP story, with my comments in brackets.

"The judiciary branch of our government has overstepped its authority on countless occasions, overturning and in some cases just ignoring the legitimate will of the people [since when is the judiciary supposed to answer to the will of the people. Nation of laws and not men. This is godawful frightening stuff he spouts.]," DeLay said. "But I also believe the executive and legislative branches have neglected the proper checks and balances on this behavior ... Our next step, whatever it is, must be more than rhetoric."

 

After Schiavo died last week, DeLay said federal judges "thumbed their nose at Congress and the president [What? The Congress, in amazing fashion, gave the Courts the ability to REVIEW the Schiavo case. Those Courts (11th Circuit is almost exclusively "red" states BTW) declined to overturn the lower Court's decision. That is how the process works!!!!! He doesn't want checks and balances. He wants total control.]. The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior." 

 

Delay run amok

 

 

Will the Republipuke Party ever splinter because of guys like this, who don't believe in smaller government, but instead believe that the government is a tool to push social agendas? God I hope so. For AD, Ken, and other Libertarians, *that* could be the start of a strong Libertarian movement.

[KRC]

God I hope so. For AD, Ken, and other Libertarians, *that* could be the start of a strong Libertarian movement.

299479[/snapback]

 

The Libertarian Party is growing but not all states are at the same level. Some states have strong parties while others are whithering on the vine. There are also problems on the National level, but that is a different story. I can only speak about the Pennsylvania party. We are the 4th strongest party in the country and are undergoing some revitalization. Things are being restructured a bit and there is new emphasis on getting the county parties stronger. Bucks County has fallen apart, but it is being put back together. Montgomery County seems to be strong and Philly is coming into its own. These three are important becuase it encompasses Philly and northern/western suburbs. I am not sure about Chester and Delaware counties.

 

One thing that will hopefully help the situation is that all of the minor parties in PA (Libertarian, Green, Constitution, etc) are getting together to try to change the ballot access laws. As you know, Third parties are held to a different standard then Reps and Dims. The ballot access is FAR more restrictive for third parties. We are hoping to have Legislation introduced shortly to change that to make sure it is a level playing field. We have learned the lessons of past attempts at this, and I feel that we have a pretty good chance this year.

 

All this is necessary in order to increase the size of the Libertarian Party and to make it more viable.

[Whiskey Dick]

This stuff is reminiscent of when King Roosevelt threatened to stack the Supreme Court with 6 additional judges so he could get the results he wanted. Delay believes that his majority rule means that he can override all the rules. Yet the Constitution in its wisdom, was written to resist pure majority rule. Below are Delay's comments from an AP story, with my comments in brackets.

Will the Republipuke Party ever splinter because of guys like this, who don't believe in smaller government, but instead believe that the government is a tool to push social agendas? God I hope so. For AD, Ken, and other Libertarians, *that* could be the start of a strong Libertarian movement.

299479[/snapback]

 

The Libertarians? I think the Greens have more clout.

 

For those confused over the DeLay ethics charges-and it is difficult keeping the assortment of violations in order-heres a handy dandy scorecard.

 

 

http://www.slate.com/id/2116392/

 

 

As to which one I find personally the most troubling I'd have to go along with

the author. If it turns out DeLay is connected to bilking Native Americans out of millions by his association with Abramoff then he shouldn't just be thrown out of congress, he should be in jail.

 

Ripping off Indians, imagine that.

[Campy]

The Libertarians? I think the Greens have more clout.

 

For those confused over the DeLay ethics charges-and it is difficult keeping the assortment of violations in order-heres a handy dandy scorecard.

http://www.slate.com/id/2116392/

As to which one I find personally the most troubling I'd have to go along with

the author. If it turns out DeLay is connected to bilking Native Americans out of millions by his association with Abramoff  then he shouldn't just be thrown out of congress, he should be in jail.

 

Ripping off Indians, imagine that.

299595[/snapback]

The guy's dirty. For the life of me, I don't understand how he's lasted this long.

[KRC]

The Libertarians? I think the Greens have more clout.

299595[/snapback]

 

How do the Greens have more clout than the Libertarians? The Libertarians are the third largest party in the country and are continuing to grow.

[Adam]

This stuff is reminiscent of when King Roosevelt threatened to stack the Supreme Court with 6 additional judges so he could get the results he wanted. Delay believes that his majority rule means that he can override all the rules. Yet the Constitution in its wisdom, was written to resist pure majority rule. Below are Delay's comments from an AP story, with my comments in brackets.

Will the Republipuke Party ever splinter because of guys like this, who don't believe in smaller government, but instead believe that the government is a tool to push social agendas? God I hope so. For AD, Ken, and other Libertarians, *that* could be the start of a strong Libertarian movement.

299479[/snapback]

 

I thought JBL was

[Whiskey Dick]

How do the Greens have more clout than the Libertarians? The Libertarians are the third largest party in the country and are continuing to grow.

299638[/snapback]

 

 

Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think the Libertarians have ever had a major impact on a Presidential election.

 

As for the Greens, their impact has been blunted after Nader-2000 and the backlash that brought about. It splintered the party into two factions in NY. Shame because for a period there they were supporting some decent candidates for various offices.

[KRC]

Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think the Libertarians have ever had a major impact on a Presidential election.

 

As for the Greens, their impact has been blunted after Nader-2000 and the backlash that brought about. It splintered the party into two factions in NY. Shame because for a period there they were supporting some decent candidates for various offices.

299679[/snapback]

 

I do not think that the Libertarians have, but the Greens only shot was with Nader. After that, they fell apart which negates any clout they would have had after 2000.

 

I know that the Greenies have been falling apart in other states, as well, which is why Nader had to switch parties from state to state in 2004. He couldn't even get on the ballot in PA, because there is a rule that you cannot register with one party when you are on the ballot with another party in another state.

 

It would not suprise me to see more coalitions between third parties. It is happening here in PA regarding ballot access. By keeping it simple, there is a better chance of getting agreement between the parties along with it improving the chances that it will pass through the Legislature. The Libertarians, Greens, and Constitution parties are working together to get the law passed. There is no way that the coalitions will be permenant, but on individial issues you might see it happen.

[Whiskey Dick]

I do not think that the Libertarians have, but the Greens only shot was with Nader. After that, they fell apart which negates any clout they would have had after 2000.

 

I know that the Greenies have been falling apart in other states, as well, which is why Nader had to switch parties from state to state in 2004. He couldn't even get on the ballot in PA, because there is a rule that you cannot register with one party when you are on the ballot with another party in another state.

 

It would not suprise me to see more coalitions between third parties. It is happening here in PA regarding ballot access. By keeping it simple, there is a better chance of getting agreement between the parties along with it improving the chances that it will pass through the Legislature. The Libertarians, Greens, and Constitution parties are working together to get the law passed. There is no way that the coalitions will be permenant, but on individial issues you might see it happen.

299693[/snapback]

 

 

It's healthy to know that their are a number of activists trying to promote the idea of third party unity in matters of ballot access and such but that may be as big an impact as they're going to have. The current machinary is in place for a reason, so's not to threaten the status quo.

 

While third party people continue to struggle and shout to be heard most Americans sigh a collective yawn and pull the lever for A or B.

[Whiskey Dick]

'When in doubt, don't slam a majority leader who is right on the money and knows a lot more than you could ever dream of.'

 

 

Tom DeLay once stated that DDT is not harmful.

[Campy]

a majority leader who is right on the money

299740[/snapback]

Interesting choice of words.

[KRC]

It's healthy to know that their are a number of activists trying to promote the idea of third party unity in matters of ballot access and such but that may be as big an impact as they're going to have. The current machinary is in place for a reason, so's not to threaten the status quo.

 

While third party people continue to struggle and shout to be heard most Americans sigh a collective yawn and pull the lever for A or B.

299717[/snapback]

 

Ballot access is the first step. The more you see the Dims implode and the Reps to stupid stuff while in power, you will see more people look outside "A or B." It has already started and I see it continuing. The Dims are doing nothing to fix themselves and the Reps are making things worse.

 

The problem with the third parties is that the most vocal are the ones who are the most extreme in ideology. The third parties need to promote the moderates. Saying "Bush Bad" or "Dims Bad" is not going to cut it (as evidenced by the pitiful display by the Dims in 2004). You need a solution. The Dims refused to supply a solution to the Republican agenda, which is why they failed. The thrid parties are victim to the same mentality. They rip the Dims and Reps, but are not providing the solutions which will sway the public in their favor.

 

The next few election cycles will be interesting. Third Parties have a golden opportunity to make a difference. It is up to them to properly seize that opportunity.

[Whiskey Dick]

Ballot access is the first step. The more you see the Dims implode and the Reps to stupid stuff while in power, you will see more people look outside "A or B." It has already started and I see it continuing. The Dims are doing nothing to fix themselves and the Reps are making things worse.

 

The problem with the third parties is that the most vocal are the ones who are the most extreme in ideology. The third parties need to promote the moderates. Saying "Bush Bad" or "Dims Bad" is not going to cut it (as evidenced by the pitiful display by the Dims in 2004). You need a solution. The Dims refused to supply a solution to the Republican agenda, which is why they failed. The thrid parties are victim to the same mentality. They rip the Dims and Reps, but are not providing the solutions which will sway the public in their favor.

 

The next few election cycles will be interesting. Third Parties have a golden opportunity to make a difference. It is up to them to properly seize that opportunity.

299798[/snapback]

 

 

What I find more important is the concept of baby steps to attain the goal of third party viability. While most would look at the Presidency as the end result it would be much more advantageous to start small (local, state level) and work one's way up. As I mentioned previously the Greens were starting to do this until the 2000 election/Nader thing caused some to rethink their alliance with the party and it's goals (which I was never to clear about to begin with) thus causing the splintering.

 

 

They have yet to recover so the moral of the story is start small.

[KRC]

What I find more important is the concept of baby steps to attain the goal of third party viability. While most would look at the Presidency as the end result it would be much more advantageous to start  small (local, state level) and work one's way up.  As I mentioned previously the Greens were starting to do this until the 2000 election/Nader thing caused some to rethink their alliance with the party and it's goals (which I was never to clear about to begin with) thus causing the splintering.

They have yet to recover so the moral of the story is start small.

299814[/snapback]

 

The Libertarians fully understand this principle and have worked hard to get people to run on the local level.

[nobody]

As I mentioned previously the Greens were starting to do this until the 2000 election/Nader thing caused some to rethink their alliance with the party and it's goals (which I was never to clear about to begin with) thus causing the splintering.

They have yet to recover so the moral of the story is start small.

 

 

On the state level the greens were gaining ground but the national Nader event did indeed hurt them.

 

 

And KRC - being a former presidential candidate - you should be above name-calling. Calling dems "dims" probably cost you the election.

[bobblehead]

The more you see the Dims implode

299798[/snapback]

 

 

The Republicans turned liberalism into a 4 letter word, but the embarrasing part of it for the Dems is that the Dems let them. I saw George W Bush demonize liberals during the debates and then saw John Kerry proceed to do nothing about it.

 

As the Libertarians grow and reach out to the moderates, as I think KRC is right about, the Republicans will attack the moderates as having no passion, backbone or stance on anything. I hope the Libertarians see this coming and embrace moderation as their stand, thier backbone, and their passion, and not fall into a name/calling trap like the Democrats/Liberals did.

[KRC]

Calling dems "dims" probably cost you the election.

299923[/snapback]

 

Yeah, I am sure that was it.

[KRC]

The Republicans turned liberalism into a 4 letter word, but the embarrasing part of it for the Dems is that the Dems let them. I saw George W Bush demonize liberals during the debates and then saw John Kerry proceed to do nothing about it. 

 

As the Libertarians grow and reach out to the moderates, as I think KRC is right about, the Republicans will attack the moderates as having no passion, backbone or stance on anything.  I hope the Libertarians see this coming and embrace moderation as their stand, thier backbone, and their passion, and not fall into a name/calling trap like the Democrats/Liberals did.

299944[/snapback]

 

The Dems stood for nothing in the last election other than "I oppose anything Bush favors." Not a way to win an election. You need to stand for something. There is nothing wrong with ripping Bush, as long as you propose a solution. They didn't do that. They just said, "I have a plan." That is fine, but they did not expand on that plan other than to say, "I was in Vietnam."

 

On your other point: there is no question that the Reps and Dems will attack anyone who is moderate. I heard this during the last election, and they will increase those attacks as they start to lose control. I can speak on the PA state level of the Libertarian Party, and they understand the concept of providing solutions. They know that attacks with no solutions spells failure. There is emphasis on informing voters of the benefits of electing Libertarians and what they can provide to the constituents.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

The Republicans turned liberalism into a 4 letter word, but the embarrasing part of it for the Dems is that the Dems let them. I saw George W Bush demonize liberals during the debates and then saw John Kerry proceed to do nothing about it. 

299944[/snapback]

 

Kerry did do something about it...he told the American people that he had "a plan" to reverse the demonization of liberals.

 

Really, Kerry isn't the cause of Democrats' inability to get their message across so much as symptomatic of it. If the party had any real coherence to its platform, it would have chosen a viable candidate. That it chose a total lame-ass like Kerry, who somehow managed to lose the election to a startlingly beatable incumbent, is evidence of the Democratic party's - and by extension, liberalism's, as Kerry's nomination was arguably more due to the far left than the party moderates - relatively pronounced lack of direction.

[Whiskey Dick]

The Libertarians fully understand this principle and have worked hard to get people to run on the local level.

299823[/snapback]

 

 

Any gains for the Libertarians in your neck of the woods (I think you said you were from PA) in town, city, or state government? The Libertarians in these parts aren't very visable. Maybe I'm wrong but I seem to recall them missing the ballot in '00 or '04 in NY.