Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
We've seen more and more Tea Party members claim to be "libertarian" (Rand Paul and even his father Ron before him) as well as past threads about Libertarian views. I went to decide for myself if there was a link and found this nugget in the Libertarian Party website
Now since the Tea Party really started in 2007 there have been more and more people saying that Republicans are RINOs because they aren't conservative enough and/or are not fiscally conservative. I've voted mostly Republican in 2008 and again in 2012 because I didn't think the Obama Democrats were the answer to problems. But now in 2014 I think the Tea Party and the conservative Libertarians who claim to be Republicans aren't the answer either. I personally want a moderate choice rather than just a far right choice or a far left choice like it has seemed the two parties have done. If given the choice, I may just end up voting for anyone but Hillary and a far-right candidate in 2016 (if both happen.)
What say you libertarians of C-D, are the libertarian Tea Partiers like Rand Paul hurting the Republican party more than helping it?
Actually, the original TEA Party began in Minnesota in 1974 by members of the newly created (created in 1972) Libertarian Party. The TEA Party held their very first national protest in DC on April 15, 1977.
The Ron Paul fanatics highjacked the TEA Party in 2007/2008 and twisted it to fit their warped political agenda, which had absolutely nothing to do with the original intent of the TEA Party. The only original purpose the TEA Party had prior to being sabotaged by the Ron Paul nut jobs was to protest massive tax increases by Congress (and always by the Democrats).
You have been brainwashed by the Ron Paul zealots into believing they had anything to do with the original TEA Party. They did not. Ron Paul was not even in politics when the TEA Party was created.
With regard to RINOs, when you have more than 300 Democrats switching parties during 1995 alone, after the GOP took control of Congress, you end up with a political party full of pretenders who merely want to stay in the majority. They do not hold the same values as real Republicans, such as preserving life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and they sure as hell are not fiscally conservative. Hence, they are Republican In Name Only.
RINOs also have absolutely nothing to do with the TEA Party.
Actually, the original TEA Party began in Minnesota in 1974 by members of the newly created (created in 1972) Libertarian Party. The TEA Party held their very first national protest in DC on April 15, 1977.
The Ron Paul fanatics highjacked the TEA Party in 2007/2008 and twisted it to fit their warped political agenda, which had absolutely nothing to do with the original intent of the TEA Party. The only original purpose the TEA Party had prior to being sabotaged by the Ron Paul nut jobs was to protest massive tax increases by Congress (and always by the Democrats).
So you are ticked they went after massive tax increases and debt by the Republicans also. That's pretty sad.
That is possible, I can think of Democrats who put support to Republicans and Republicans who put support to Democrats (not too recently though) so it wouldn't surprise me to see Libertarians be voting Republican or siding with Tea Party conservatives. The Tea Party is more of a logic than an actual party anyway. The issue is some status quo Republicans buy into Tea Party politics (they always were Goldwater conservatives) but they just voted Republican because they were the Republican nominee.
The issue is as someone who wants to vote Republican. I stand for more things economically on the Republican side than the Democrat side, I see the wack-ball social issues of Tea Party Candidates about say rape pregnancies and a male, no human being I am applaud. I'm not saying they need to be the same as a Democrat but when you are far right socially, it's not redeemable. To tie into Paul, I wanted to like him but as I've seen and heard more and more of him, the more I grow to not like him.
I was, and still am, a "Goldwater conservative." I also voted for Nixon. The Republican Party today has been infiltrated by so many Democrats pretending to be Republicans that the GOP today no longer resembles the GOP of the 1960s and 1970s.
The GOP of the 1960s and 1970s vehemently opposed the cradle-to-grave nanny State the Democrats created. They opposed MediCare/MedicAid. They opposed LBJ's Great Society and War on Poverty. They opposed the creation of the Department of Energy and the Department of Education. However, that was then.
Now, the GOP fully embrace everything they once opposed. Which is why I have not voted for a single Republican candidate for President since 1992. Bush43 is what happens when a RINO is elected President.
With regard to social issues, since we have completely abandoned civics in the US, I will remind those who are not aware - the federal government was never intended to be involved in any social issues, ever. All social issues were powers reserved exclusively to the States by the US Constitution. Which, of course, the federal government has usurped in its efforts to seize more and more power.
If you want something like Social Security or MediCare/MedicAid or ObamaCare, then look to your State government. That is who has the constitutional authority to implement such social programs, not the federal government.
So you are ticked they went after massive tax increases and debt by the Republicans also. That's pretty sad.
When did that fantasy ever happen?
Obviously you do not know much about history. That is not just sad, it is pathetic.
In 1976 the Democrat controlled Congress massively increased income taxes. As a result the TEA Party held their very first national protest on April 15, 1977.
In 1993 the Democrat controlled Congress massively increased income taxes, again, and this time retroactively even though the US Constitution specifically prohibits retroactive laws. As a result the TEA Party held their second national protest on April 15, 1994.
Then in 2007/2008 the Ron Paul nut jobs highjacked the TEA Party and subverted it to their own agenda in a desperate and vain attempt to get Ron Paul elected President. The original TEA Party still held another national protest on April 15, 2009 after Democrats once again massively increased taxes in January 2009, but by then nobody was paying any attention because the Ron Paul lunatics were holding "Tea Party" protests every other week for every nut ball issue they could contrive.
He committed treason. You had to read the entry before using it right?
Quote:
Yaser Esam Hamdi (born September 26, 1980) is a former American citizen who was captured in Afghanistan in 2001. The United States government claims that he was fighting with the Taliban against U.S. and Afghan Northern Alliance forces. He was declared an "illegal enemy combatant" by the Bush administration and detained for almost three years without charge. He was a US citizen, as he was born in Louisiana. On October 9, 2004, on the condition that he renounce his US citizenship and commit to travel prohibitions and other conditions, the government released him and deported him to Saudi Arabia, where he had grown up.
The bold shows why he was detained. Technically he committed treason by fighting WITH Taliban forces against the U.S. and the Afghan Norther Alliance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp
You do not lose your rights simply because you are abroad.
No, you lose your rights by going abroad, you lose them by becoming an enemy of the state like he did.
Obviously you do not know much about history. That is not just sad, it is pathetic.
In 1976 the Democrat controlled Congress massively increased income taxes. As a result the TEA Party held their very first national protest on April 15, 1977.
In 1993 the Democrat controlled Congress massively increased income taxes, again, and this time retroactively even though the US Constitution specifically prohibits retroactive laws. As a result the TEA Party held their second national protest on April 15, 1994.
Then in 2007/2008 the Ron Paul nut jobs highjacked the TEA Party and subverted it to their own agenda in a desperate and vain attempt to get Ron Paul elected President. The original TEA Party still held another national protest on April 15, 2009 after Democrats once again massively increased taxes in January 2009, but by then nobody was paying any attention because the Ron Paul lunatics were holding "Tea Party" protests every other week for every nut ball issue they could contrive.
I don't think you have any standing to be throwing stones.
Actually, he was a POW. As was Jose Pedilla. To be a traitor one must first be convicted.
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court." --- Article III, Section 3, Clause 1 of the US Constitution
During a State of War, like the US has been in since 09/18/2001, POWs are taken and held indefinitely without being charged with a crime until the war is officially over. When Public Law 107-40 is finally repealed by Congress then the State of War the US has been in for 13 years will be over and the POWs will either be freed or tried by a military tribunal if they are responsible for war crimes or crimes against humanity.
It is how we have always fought wars. Why people think this war is any different from all the prior wars were we also took POWs and held them indefinitely without being charged with a crime, defies explanation. I can only blame the liberal indoctrination centers that was once known as public education.
For the record, you never lose your inherent rights - ever. No matter where you happen to be. That is what inherent means. What you lose by going abroad is the jurisdiction of the US Constitution. The jurisdiction of the US Constitution extends to the borders of the US and no further.
Do you have the inherent right to free speech in foreign countries? Absolutely.
Does every foreign country acknowledge your inherent right to free speech? Absolutely not.
Actually, he was a POW. As was Jose Pedilla. To be a traitor one must first be convicted.
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court." --- Article III, Section 3, Clause 1 of the US Constitution
During a State of War, like the US has been in since 09/18/2001, POWs are taken and held indefinitely without being charged with a crime until the war is officially over. When Public Law 107-40 is finally repealed by Congress then the State of War the US has been in for 13 years will be over and the POWs will either be freed or tried by a military tribunal if they are responsible for war crimes or crimes against humanity.
It is how we have always fought wars. Why people think this war is any different from all the prior wars were we also took POWs and held them indefinitely with being charged with a crime, defies explanation. I can only blame the liberal indoctrination centers that was once known as public education.
For the record, you never lose your inherent rights - ever. No matter where you happen to be. That is what inherent means. What you lose by going abroad is the jurisdiction of the US Constitution. The jurisdiction of the US Constitution extends to the borders of the US and no further.
Do you have the inherent right to free speech in foreign countries? Absolutely.
Does every foreign country acknowledge your inherent right to free speech? Absolutely not.
The Supreme Court ruled that American citizens held as POW still had due process rights, including the right to challenge that designation in a court of law. Bush tried to argue they don't.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 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 2 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.
