Medical Marijuana law proves Arizona is Libertarian not Conservative (Maricopa: gated, wages)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Medical Marijuana law proves Arizona is Libertarian not Conservative
The passage of this law proves Arizona is truly a libertarian state and is often incorrectly labeled a conservative state. A law like this would not pass in a traditional conservative state like those found in the South. If this passes, Arizona would join 14 states that have medical marijuana laws. Take a look at these 14 states.
Independent voters, who run all across the political spectrum, are a huge influence in statewide, and even county, elections. While there's still a lot of conservatives here (many of whom are registered as Independents), you are correct that it is not at all like the south. There's a large number of people who would call themselves fiscally conservative, but on social issues are more tolerant. It's nice to know there are enough of those here to outvote the conservative-on-everything far right.
Independent voters, who run all across the political spectrum, are a huge influence in statewide, and even county, elections. While there's still a lot of conservatives here (many of whom are registered as Independents), you are correct that it is not at all like the south. There's a large number of people who would call themselves fiscally conservative, but on social issues are more tolerant. It's nice to know there are enough of those here to outvote the conservative-on-everything far right.
Agreed! I'm one of those people (fiscally conservative/socially liberal). That's essentially libertarian. Most libertarians vote Republican because the ideas of limited government intervention is embraced by Republicans more than Democrats. Even the state's support for 1070 is based on libertarian ideas. 40% of the Hispanic population embraced 1070 because the idea was less about race and more about safety and creating jobs. But of course, the media painted Arizona as if it was South Africa and engaged in some type of apartheid in which we were racially discriminating against Hispanics. I think the law was bad from a public relations point of view and it was and it cost the state jobs and ultimately it resulted in nothing happening.
I was not all surprised by the turnout on medical marijuana.
Jan Brewer dominated. Joe Arpaio is a rock star. No true libertarians hold office in AZ. This prop barely passed. I'm sorry but AZ is not libertarian. Sure, it's not Mississippi but it's not libertarian.
Even the state's support for 1070 is based on libertarian ideas.
What?!?!
If you live in Maricopa County please come to the Maricopa County Libertarian Party next month and explain to us why we are wrong for not supporting SB1070. Visit Maricopa County Libertarian Party | The Party of Principle for details.
Did you read the comments on your posted article? My brother is one of those conservatives that voted yes on that bill. As well as some others I saw in your article. Why do you think it means AZ is more liberal? I'm confused? I think it means that a lot of young conservatives voted yes on that bill.
If you live in Maricopa County please come to the Maricopa County Libertarian Party next month and explain to us why we are wrong for not supporting SB1070. Visit Maricopa County Libertarian Party | The Party of Principle for details.
As Libertarians, we can agree to disagree ... and I know a good share of Libertarian minded people who supported the concept of SB 1070 for the exact reasons AZ Riverfan pointed out. While I'm not a diehard supporter of SB 1070, it is a matter of state's rights at work, which is a Libertarian principle. Also, most Libertarians believe in limiting national defense to what it was originally intended for: security of our borders.
Quote:
Originally Posted by twiggy
Did you read the comments on your posted article? My brother is one of those conservatives that voted yes on that bill. As well as some others I saw in your article. Why do you think it means AZ is more liberal? I'm confused? I think it means that a lot of young conservatives voted yes on that bill.
Not "liberal", but Libertarian. There is a big difference! I think of liberal as wanting more government intervention in all aspects of people's lives, including the presence of social/welfare programs in order to "spread the wealth". Unfortunately, these programs are nothing more than entitlements, and they actually end up creating more dependence, more laziness, and more poverty. Libertarians believe in self sufficiency, and eliminating government waste, including all these entitlements & unnecessary laws/regulations.
As Libertarians, we can agree to disagree ... and I know a good share of Libertarian minded people who supported the concept of SB 1070 for the exact reasons AZ Riverfan pointed out. While I'm not a diehard supporter of SB 1070, it is a matter of state's rights at work, which is a Libertarian principle. Also, most Libertarians believe in limiting national defense to what it was originally intended for: security of our borders.
Not "liberal", but Libertarian. There is a big difference! I think of liberal as wanting more government intervention in all aspects of people's lives, including the presence of social/welfare programs in order to "spread the wealth". Unfortunately, these programs are nothing more than entitlements, and they actually end up creating more dependence, more laziness, and more poverty. Libertarians believe in self sufficiency, and eliminating government waste, including all these entitlements & unnecessary laws/regulations.
SB1070 violates the spirit of free market capitalism and is quite racist as only those with brown skin will be questioned as to their legal status. American citizens will have their rights violated when asked of their legal status. SB1070 makes migrant workers the scapegoat but does not address the local, state and federal governments that do nothing to enforce immigration policy or the buisiness' that cater to black market labor. Why go after people that have been allowed to come here that contribute to our economy.
Again, I invite anyone that calls themselves a libertarian to attend the Maricopa County Libertarian Party meeting. It's held the first Monday of every month. All details can be found in the link I posted above. Please come and inform us what is libertarian about SB1070. I'm not trying to sound like a douche or anything...I'm serious.
Again, I invite anyone that calls themselves a libertarian to attend the Maricopa County Libertarian Party meeting. It's held the first Monday of every month. All details can be found in the link I posted above. Please come and inform us what is libertarian about SB1070. I'm not trying to sound like a douche or anything...I'm serious.
I won't be able to attend your meeting as I will be at a mandatory meeting of the Anarchist Party that night, but...
An "Open Border" policy is not generally associated with the libertarian doctrine, is it? There is an oft-cited argument among libertarians that protecting the country's borders and keeping the roads working are among the legitimate functions of government.
Administration policies that encourage the illegal entry of non-citizens impact upon the country's legitimate need to know who enters the country, whether that be a terrorist or someone with a criminal history - such as a child molester - from a foreign country. There is no libertarian interest - or any other rational sort - in completely open borders.
A libertarian is also not obligated to support policies that may be the result of illegal immigration that pick one's pocket, including the health care costs of emergency room visits, education, social services, law enforcement, etc. that are not reimbursed by taxes from those using them.
One can argue whether the presence of illegal immigrants in this country is a net economic gain or economic loss to the taxpayer, and also whether SB 1070 and Arizona's prior law regarding employer sanctions effectively reduced the level of illegal entry into the United States, or whether those laws were one of several factors including the U.S. economic downturn and increased law enforcement. Both pro- and anti-open border advocates can cite their own studies on those issues. But it is a legitimate area for disagreement, especially between doctrinaire capital-L Libertarian Party members and lowercase-l libertarians. The two probably shouldn't be confused.
I won't be able to attend your meeting as I will be at a mandatory meeting of the Anarchist Party that night, but...
An "Open Border" policy is not generally associated with the libertarian doctrine, is it? There is an oft-cited argument among libertarians that protecting the country's borders and keeping the roads working are among the legitimate functions of government.
Administration policies that encourage the illegal entry of non-citizens impact upon the country's legitimate need to know who enters the country, whether that be a terrorist or someone with a criminal history - such as a child molester - from a foreign country. There is no libertarian interest - or any other rational sort - in completely open borders.
A libertarian is also not obligated to support policies that may be the result of illegal immigration that pick one's pocket, including the health care costs of emergency room visits, education, social services, law enforcement, etc. that are not reimbursed by taxes from those using them.
One can argue whether the presence of illegal immigrants in this country is a net economic gain or economic loss to the taxpayer, and also whether SB 1070 and Arizona's prior law regarding employer sanctions effectively reduced the level of illegal entry into the United States, or whether those laws were one of several factors including the U.S. economic downturn and increased law enforcement. Both pro- and anti-open border advocates can cite their own studies on those issues. But it is a legitimate area for disagreement, especially between doctrinaire capital-L Libertarian Party members and lowercase-l libertarians. The two probably shouldn't be confused.
Actually I have vast problems with libertarian support of the SB1070 or similar. In general that is police stuff not protection of the border. It is a violation of the law that is being enforced by the government. How is it that a citizen is hurt by the lillegal? Why would he protest? Even if you agree that the illegal depresses wages and working conditions that should not bother the libertarian...those willing to work cheapest, hardest and most efficiently should not be harrassed by the government for the benefit of the less capable.
And again libertarian principles would lead to the legalization of recreational drugs which would vastly reduce the chaos on the border.
So I would think there is some libertarianism in AZ...but a lot more explained by a large red neck population. Can you be a xenophobe and a libertarian? I would think not...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $53,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
