Obama Doing His Best To Get A Libertarian Elected Next President

[MTAtech]

Originally Posted by texdav

Libertarians have no real support nationally or they would have at least made a showing in one of the presidential elections. They haven't.Ron Paul ran as a republican because he needed the support to get elected congressman. he never influence the Republican platform even during that time.

Agreed. There is only fringe support for libertarians and their ideology. There isn't a mass movement to slash Social Security and Medicare nor other social programs.

[BentBow]

Originally Posted by dsjj251

The bold is confusing, what was the point of you responding to me in the way you did?

It seems your other post were arguing that Libertarianism wasnt an ideology, now it seems you agree with me in saying it is.

Am I missing something ???

I didn't say Libertarian was an ideology.

I said it was a political party, of which Rand Paul is a Republican.
Rand has never called himself libertarian. Neither has his father.

[LargeKingCat]

Originally Posted by LauraC

Every day I wake up and wonder what freedoms this President is going to make a grab for next. Besides deciding what your kids should be having for lunch (and I'm speaking of the kids that bring their lunch from home),

That is because most people are too stupid and ignorant to know how to pack a healthy lunch for their kids. Banning candy, soda pop, chocolate, alcohol and processed foods in school lunches does children a favor. Avoiding these foods leads to a healthier lifestyle, with less obesity, less diabetes and lower risk for heart disease. Could this mean fewer absences as well? Not to mention that the children, absent from a post lunch sugar rush, are more productive in the class room setting. Now True, a libertarian will argue whether or not it is the leader's right or position to implement such changes. And, Most reputable private school had these guidelines in place long before Obama as well. But the intention of improving the health of children is admirable. (That is, unless you hate children)

Originally Posted by LauraC

f***ing with your healthcare,

Well, this has yet to happen. I work in healthcare. I now have more patients, more work, and more money because people can finally afford to seek the care that they need. Which is how it should be. No one should ever have a barrier to healthcare due to finances.
Now there are a few things that still need to be corrected. The last Bush certainly created a mess with Medicare D. And insurance rates have been on the rise, since long before Obama.
Savvy investors will quit crying and take advantage of the ACA and the Insurance mandate to make monry through investment in healthcare and insurance related businesses. (Some of us already are.)
In another not, I have, over the years, treated or been involved in the treatment of many poor and indigent persons for free. I do this because it is the right thing to do. (Unless you hate humanity, in which case I am committing some sin) I would guess that I have done more to help others by getting up and going out and doing the work as opposed to reposting propaganda and serial lies about Obamacare. But, again, I chose to work, not cry.

Originally Posted by LauraC

messing with education - common core,

The biggest educational mess we have here in Florida was started by George Bush's less intelligent brother, JEB "JETHRO" Bush when he was working to become one of the worst governors in the history of the state. The test which he started , the FCAT, has resulted in lower educational standards and lower college prep than existed before. Common Core Standards will be an improvement.

Originally Posted by LauraC

using the IRS as your administration's own personal gestapo,

Which resulted in resignations /firings along the way?

Originally Posted by LauraC

unilaterally changes laws without going back to Congress,

By law, some laws and policies can be changed and enacted by presidential order, others cannot. perhaps you should dig out that college political science book that you held on to and re-read it?

Originally Posted by LauraC

gun control illegal meetings (no public notice as required by law) with lobbyists and gun grab UN treaty,

Of course, that policy referred to a re- importation of guns sold as surplus to foreign nations back into private hands. how many of your guns has he taken? none here, and no change in the gun ownership situation here.

Originally Posted by LauraC

NSA collecting all kinds of data on everybody and lying to Congress about it, and other things, the idea of having an FCC monitor in newsrooms is very, very disturbing.

FCC monitors in newsrooms have been around since LBJ at least.....certainly Nixon knew of it.
As for the NSA , I am sorry we live in a world where we need an increased sense of security. I want to know if my neighbors are terrorists. I want to know if the trailer trash is planning to shoot up a school or mall. I want to know where some right wing Christian terrorist is planting bombs at the next sporting event. The NSA is not the problem. Our society , which has so fragmented and divided against itself that anyone seeks to use violence out of desperation to prove any point is the problem. Mental illness, poverty and social apathy are the problems. We can fix these problems by working together, and persons like myself are out there daily addressing issues one at a time.

BUT some people would rather whine.

Originally Posted by LauraC

"The purpose of the CIN, according to the FCC, is to ferret out information from television and radio broadcasters about "the process by which stories are selected" and how often stations cover "critical information needs," along with "perceived station bias" and "perceived responsiveness to underserved populations." How does the FCC plan to dig up all that information? First, the agency selected eight categories of "critical information" such as the "environment" and "economic opportunities," that it believes local newscasters should cover. It plans to ask station managers, news directors, journalists, television anchors and on-air reporters to tell the government about their "news philosophy" and how the station ensures that the community gets critical information."

Ajit Pai: The FCC Wades Into the Newsroom - WSJ.com

Since this latest issue has been hashed out along with other freedom grabbing issues in the P&OC main forum, I don't want to discuss it all over again.

If you think a presidential election is a referendum against the departing President, do you think the 2016 election backlash (against Obama, in this case) could actually get a Libertarian elected? My own opinion is that 2016 is the first time I think a Libertarian might actually have a shot at becoming President if along with that he has some job creation ideas.

Has anyone EVER been able to reign in the press? NO
Will they? NO

SO to answer your question, I think that IF the voters allow themselves to make the 2016 election a backlash against Obama, as democrats did with Bush in 2008 to some degree, then we will see only a new set of problems. And will this happen? Sadly, probably yes.
American voters have long had a long history of swinging to extremes. Carter/Reagan was a great example.
Bush/Clinton

Clinton/Bush
Bush /Obama

There has been a measurable swing. What we need is level headed thinkers, like the ones so absent from these forums (who tend to post all or nothing ideas) regardless of political party. That was one aspect of Obama's administration which I have been very disappointed: He had this grand idea of bringing politicians together to solve America's problems. He lacked the insight to know that politicians do not want to solve America's problems. They want to argue and make themselves look good instead.
Sad thing when the American people start copying that. The result is social apathy. Far better to get out and be a part of the SOLUTION rather than part of the Problem. Think about that.

Now all of you get back to work.