The Last Few Days Exemplify Why I'm Libertarian (and Why You Should Be Too)

Many Libertarians are homosexuals. Not all, but most. Very democratic in that women can be Libertarian lesbians too.,Which category do you 'fit' in Deckhand?

Many Libertarians are homosexuals. Not all, but most.

That isn't true.

Many Libertarians are homosexuals.

Another delusional post.

Never heard of the Log Cabin Republicans sport?

Never heard of the Log Cabin Republicans sport?

Libertarian homos are more subtle. They're under the L umbrella with the other misfits.

In 1972, John Hospers, who was widely believed to be gay (although not openly so),ran for President as the Libertarian Party's first presidential candidate.

In 1975, Ralph Raico helped to create the Libertarian For Gay Rights caucus within the party and subsequently published Gay Rights: A Libertarian Approach.

The second LGBT rights organization to operate from a libertarian perspective was the Libertarians for Gay and Lesbian Concerns. The organization held its first national convention in 1985 and sought to promote libertarianism to LGBT Americans.

In 1998, Outright Libertarians was formed. Outright Libertarians are also affiliated with the Libertarian Party and takes many of the same position that the Libertarians for Gay and Lesbian Concerns did in the 1980s.

Many Libertarians are homosexuals. Not all, but most.

Many white people are homosexuals. Not all,but most homosexuals are white.

Better make an appointment to be skinned or I am going to start calling you a sissy-boy.

Many white people are homosexuals. I am going to start calling you a sissy-boy.

What's white people have to do with it?

I'll call you girley man.

What's white people have to do with it?

ADD got ya down,Bucky?

Most homosexuals in America are white.

Most homosexuals in America are white.

Gallup survey, based on interviews with more than 121,000 people, showed that 3.4% of U.S. adults were lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT)

•Highest proportion in black community, at 4.6%, followed by Asians (4.3%), Hispanics (4%) and Caucasians (3.2%)

•Poll found 44% of LGBT adults were Democratic, and 13% Republican

Around 80% of R's are fags, but only about 20% of D's and Indy's are as gay as Mitt.

What's white people have to do with it?

Just reinforcing your point that "most Libertarians are homosexuals",Ruth.

After all,most Libertarians are white people.

Most homosexuals in America are white.

Gallup survey, based on interviews with more than 121,000 people, showed that 3.4% of U.S. adults were lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT)

•Highest proportion in black community, at 4.6%, followed by Asians (4.3%), Hispanics (4%) and Caucasians (3.2%)

Ahh,you still don't understand the concept of "most" being more than 51 percent,do you,Betty?

Out of the total black population,what number does 4.6 percent represent?

Out of the total white population,what number does 3.02 percent represent?

Final question,good for bonus points so make sure you take your time with this one,and be free to consult with relatives and imaginary friends before answering,

Which group has more homosexuals by ACTUAL NUMBER,NOT "proportions?

Around 80% of R's are fags, but only about 20% of D's and Indy's are as gay as Mitt.

Speaking from personal dating experience,Hondo?

Around 80% of R's are fags...

Huh...What??

The Republican Party contains homos?

Say it ain't so!

Huh...What??

The Republican Party contains homos?

Say it ain't so!

I think they all live in Log Cabins in places like Martha's Vineyard,Malibu,and the North Shore.

Wealthy Dim homos live in mansions in DC,the entire left coast,and the northeast.

The political extremism of Donald Trump, Democratic Socialists, and others is a great argument for reducing the size and scope of politics in everyday life.

Uhhh... No. Arguments may be made, but that sure ain't a minimally good one, much less a great one.

"Our Country is Free, Beautiful and Very Successful. If you hate our Country, or if you are not happy here, you can leave," the president counseled today, as if exit is the only legitimate option when it comes to lobbying for political change

But, of course President Trump did not say exit is the only legitimate option when it comes to lobbying for political change. He said it was one possible option if you hate our country and are not happy here. President Trump is correct.

Trump's basic argument is reductio ad Archie Bunkerism—love it or leave it. It's not worth engaging seriously and indeed, the only reason he isn't being more roundly mocked is that he's wrapped his dumb canard in ugly, divisive language that participates in long traditions of racial and ethnic exclusion.

The Libertardian's basic argument is that he is so smart, wise, and sophisticated that countering Trump's successful arguments is beneath him. Open borders for all. If you're not Libertardian, you are raciss and in Hillary's bucket of deplorables.

The unwillingness of Ocasio-Cortez to acknowledge good-faith disagreements even with her political allies—she's accused Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D–Calif.) of "explicitly singling out newly elected women of color," insinuating that the Democratic Speaker of the House is racist like the president—is a tactic used by Trump and his supporters

Really, how libertardian to state that overt racist statements of Ocasio Cortez claimed that Pelosi is racist like the President. How libertardian to claim that the use of overt racist claims, such as those used by Ocasio-Cortez, is a tactic used by Trump and his supporters.

This is politics at its absolute worst. It helps explain why the long-term trend of Americans refusing to identify as a Democrat or a Republican proceeds apace. Last month, Gallup found just 27 percent of respondents admitting that they are Democrats and only 26 percent admitting that they are Republicans. Each of those numbers is at or near historic lows

But the percentage of respondents who would admit to being Libertardian is so small as to be embarrassing to Libertardians and not mentioned by the propagandizing Libertardian.

Who can blame us, really? Especially when there is a legitimate alternative to reducing your entire existence to political grudge matches between repellent teams who explicitly tell you to check your brain at the door? "The Libertarian Moment" didn't materialize when Matt Welch and I first coined the phrase in 2008, nor did it materialize when it was being talked about in the pages of The New York Times Magazine, that's for sure. But the idea of living in a world beyond politics, where we can agree to disagree about how to live most of our lives, is looking better and better all the time.

Which explains why the Libertardian Party can get absolutely nobody elected.

It is precisely because of Libertardian, morally superior fruitcakes like this that Team Deplorable won and Team Hillary's Bucket lost.

We all remember the Libertardian Moment when their candidates ran for president against Donald Trump. Gary Johnson and William Weld. Anti-Trumper Weld is not available because he is running for the Bill Kristol award. Gary Johnson is on a research mission to determine what is a leppo. But superhero anti-Trump Justin Amash is available.

Just think of how bright the Libertardian Moment of the future looks.

https://www.salon.com/2019/05/19/libertarian-party-chairman-justin-amashs-positions-seem-to-most-closely-match-those-of-the-party/

Libertarian Chairman: "I agree with Representative Amash's conclusions," could be our 2020 nominee

Nicholas Sarwark, the chairman of the Libertarian Party, talks about Justin Amash running for president in 2020

Matthew Rozsa
May 19, 2019 4:00PM (UTC)

Nicholas Sarwark, the chairman of the Libertarian Party, told Salon on Sunday that he agrees with GOP Rep. Justin Amash that President Donald Trump committed impeachable offenses... and also argued that Amash could be the Libertarian presidential candidate in 2020.

"Based on my own reading of the redacted Mueller report, I agree with Representative Amash's conclusions that the President committed impeachable offenses and would have been indicted for obstruction of justice if he was not the sitting President," Sarwark told Salon by email. "Our constitution provides impeachment as a tool, but whether to use that tool is up to the House."

As Sarwark explained to Salon, however, the Libertarian Party's interest in Amash goes beyond his willingness to break ranks and call for Trump's impeachment.

"Many Libertarian Party members have been publicly encouraging Representative Amash to seek the 2020 nomination. Of all the members of Congress, his positions seem to most closely match those of the Libertarian Party, so he would likely have a base of support within the party if he joins the contest that will be decided in Austin next May," Sarwark wrote.

[...]

"The Libertarian Party opposes the President on immigration, free trade, the national debt, his support for the racist war on drugs, and his support for Saudi Arabia and their bombing of Yemen with our munitions," Sarwark explained. "We have applauded his statements about getting out of Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan, but haven't seen any meaningful follow through yet."

Amash has also parted ways with the president on immigration, trade policy, spending, foreign policy and the war on drugs.

This isn't to say that it would be easy for Amash to defeat Trump in the 2020 presidential election if he becomes the Libertarian Party nominee. Because he is part-Palestinian and part-Syrian, he could encounter racism as a result of his Middle Eastern background. In addition, although the 2016 Libertarian Party nominee Gary Johnson had the best showing of any third-party candidate in 20 years and outperformed every previous Libertarian presidential nominee, he still only garnered roughly 3 percent of the popular vote.

Who is ready for President Amash? If you are not, you are raciss!

And the the never-Trump Libertardians are already queueing up the charge of racism against a prospective 2020 Libertardian candidate. And the war on drugs is, of course, racist. The Libertardians appear almost indistinguishable from the never-Trump Democrats and Socialists. They must share many of their script writers.

The Last Few Days Exemplify Why I'm Libertarian (and Why You Should Be Too)

The article exemplifies why nobody should join your never-Trump crusade.

By the same token, the Ocasio-Cortez squad offers no hope of escaping politics, either. Instead, it seeks to fully regulate expression in the name of political purposes. One of its members, Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D–Mass.), effectively channels Trump's "you're with us or against us" mindset when she declares, "We don't need any more brown faces that don't want to be a brown voice. We don't need black faces that don't want to be a black voice. We don't need Muslims that don't want to be a Muslim voice. We don't need queers that don't want to be a queer voice."

Rep Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) "We don't need any more brown faces that don't want to be a brown voice. We don't need black faces that don't want to be a black voice. We don't need Muslims that don't want to be a Muslim voice. We don't need queers that don't want to be a queer voice"
pic.twitter.com/2NIj5Vvcor — Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) July 15, 2019

The unwillingness of Ocasio-Cortez to acknowledge good-faith disagreements even with her political allies—she's accused Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D–Calif.) of "explicitly singling out newly elected women of color," insinuating that the Democratic Speaker of the House is racist like the president—is a tactic used by Trump and his supporters

The racist statements of Ocasio-Cortez and Ayanna Pressley typify the repulsiveness of The Squad. The repulsive author attempts to make their racist comments about President Trump.

And then there is the ignorant race baiting of Ocasio-Cortez about the Electoral College being a scam with racial injustice. The Electoral College is raciss.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/458122-ocasio-cortez-blasts-electoral-college-as-a-scam

The freshman lawmaker said the Electoral College is a "scam" that has a "racial injustice breakdown" undermining the votes of people of color.

"Due to severe racial disparities in certain states, the Electoral College effectively weighs white voters over voters of color, as apposed to a 'one person, one vote' system where all our votes are counted equally," she says, before pushing back against the argument that eliminating the Electoral College would give big states too much power.

"Could you image if we had this kind democracy-altering 'fairness' provision for literally any other group?" she asks. "If we weighed, for example, black and indigenous voters more because of unfairness?"

Ocasio-Cortez later asserts that plenty of Republicans live in Democratic-leaning states, saying that their votes would count equally in a popular vote.

"Facts are facts America," Ocasio-Cortez concludes. "The Electoral College has to go."

News flash. The people of America have never voted for President. The Constitution has no provision providing or guranteeing that anyone but those selected for the Electoral College vote for President. In the early elections, there was no popular vote and it was constitutional.

The vote for President is made by the members of the constitutional Union. The members of the Union are the States, not the individual citizens. Whether any popular vote takes place in a State is at the discretion of the State. States did, and still could, have delegates to the Electoral College chosen by the State legislature.

Horror of horrors, Donald Trump won the electoral vote without winning the popular vote.

No popular vote was recorded prior to 1824. In 1824, the candidate elected President was John Quincy Adams. Andrew Jackson won the popular vote 151,271 to 113,122. Andrew Jackson won 99 electoral votes to 84 for John Quincy Adams. John Quincy Adams was elected President in 1824 and Andrew Jackson was not. And lo and behold, nobody found that it was raciss.

https://twitter.com/AOC?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
21h21 hours ago

I see Fox News is big mad about abolishing the electoral college.

So let’s talk about it.

1) If the GOP were the “silent majority” they claim, they wouldn’t be so scared of a popular vote.

They *know* they aren’t the majority. They rely on establishing minority rule for power.

- - - - - - - - - -

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
21h21 hours ago

2) This common claim about “if we don’t have the Electoral College then a handful of states will determine the presidency” is BS.

a. It’s the *EC itself* that breaks down power by state, pop vote decentralizes it

b. The EC makes it so a handful of states DO determine elections

- - - - - - - - - -

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
21h21 hours ago

3) LASTLY, this concept that the Electoral College is provides “fairness” to rural Americans over coastal states doesn’t hold any water whatsoever. First of all, virtually every state has rural communities. NY. California. Much of our states are rural.

But very importantly...

- - - - - - - - - -

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
21h21 hours ago

4) We do not give electoral affirmative action to any other group in America. Do Black Americans have their votes count more bc they have been disenfranchised for 100s of years? Do Reservations get an electoral vote? Does Puerto Rico and US territories get them? No. They don’t.

- - - - - - - - - -

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
21h21 hours ago

5) The Electoral College isn’t about fairness at all; it’s about empowering some voters over others.

Every vote should be = in America, no matter who you are or where you come from. The right thing to do is establish a Popular Vote. & GOP will do everything they can to fight it.

- - - - - - - - - -

The Electoral College does not give, nor was it designed to give, affirmative action to groups in America. Affirmative action was unknown when it was implemented.

The Electoral College is about fairness.

The Electoral College does not provide “fairness” to rural Americans over coastal states.

The Electoral College is designed to provide fairness, and provides fairness, to co-equal States who are the members of the constitutional union, be said States rural and lightly populated, or be they States with large urban areas and with large populations. It provides fairness to the members of the Union, and those are co-equal States. It was those member States that ratified the Constitution prior to joining the constitutional Union.

"Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector." U.S. Constitution, Article 2.

It takes quite a stretch of the imagination to find that having each state appointing its designated number of electors, in the manner of their choosing, is somehow raciss.

Libertardians, Democrats, and Socialists have the creatives imagination to accomplish that task, even if they can't accomplish much else. They can find racism everywhere. Orange man bad.