Libertarian Party motto: "Smaller Government, Less Taxes, More Freedom"
"Lower Taxes" ..."working families struggle to pay their taxes" www.lp.org/issues/taxes
Libertarian Party: How Can We Cut Taxes?
... politicians spend millions to subsidize tobacco farmers...
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Goes After Farm Subsidies President-elect Obama gave an example of one piece of wasteful government spending: farm subsidies.Obama cited a GAO report that said from 2003 to 2006, "millionaire farmers" got $49 million in farm subsidies despite earning more than the $2.5 million cutoff in annual income. "If it's true," Obama said, "it's a prime example of waste."
"More Freedom"
Libertarian Party: Freedom of Speech, Against Censorship"We defend the rights of individuals to unrestricted freedom of speech, freedom of the press and the right of individuals to dissent from government itself....We oppose any abridgment of the freedom of speech through government censorship, regulation or control of communications media."
http://www.lp.org/issues/freedom-of-speech
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Freedom of Speech, Against Censorship
President Obama is committed to creating the most open and accessible administration in American history. To send questions, comments, concerns, or well-wishes to the President or his staff, please go to website: http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/Contact/
"Removing the troops from Iraq"
"Immigration" http://www.lp.org/issues/immigration
Libertarian Party: "For those workers already in the United States illegally, we can avoid "amnesty" and still offer a pathway out of the underground economy. Newly legalized workers can be assessed fines and back taxes and serve probation befitting the misdemeanor they've committed. They can be required to take their place at the back of the line should they eventually apply for permanent residency."
President Obama: http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/immigration/
Many ballots canvassed today were rejected because they had no signature.
http://www.abcactionnews.com/mediacenter/local.aspx?videoid=11171@wfts.dayport.com
Reported by: Don Germaise Email: dgermaise@abcactionnews.com
TAMPA, FL -- 103 absentee ballots out of 10,000 filed so far in Hillsborough County have been flagged for irregularities. The Hillsborough County Canvassing Board rejected 91 of those, saying they will not count in the November 4th General Election.Canvassing Board member Kevin White told ABCActionNews.com that 51 of 103 ballots canvassed today were rejected because they had no signature.White, who is a Hillsborough County Commissioner, is warning those with absentee ballots to sign the ballots themselves, or they will not count.Other problems with the ballots were signatures that didn't match what was on file and signatures that didn't match the name on the ballot.
http://www.ercpinellas.org/newsblog.htm?blogentryid=4174770
Watch Video at YouTube
Concern in Pinellas County about early voting sites
Video
Reported by: Keith Baker Email: kbaker@abcactionnews.com
Voters wait in line at a Largo early voting location
PINELLAS COUNTY, FL -- Some voters in Pinellas County are concerned about the number of locations for early voting with only three sites. As a result of the robust turnout, voters are upset, saying they feel their right to vote early is being suppressed.
More than 600,000 are registered to vote in Pinellas County, with many voters opting to vote early creating lines in some cases.
One voter says a woman in a wheelchair couldn't wait for the hour it was taking to move through so she left the line and was joined by two others.
A Democratic National Committee leader is calling for a Grand Jury to investigate Pinellas and Manatee Counties to find out why so few voting locations were assigned for early voting.
The Pinellas County Supervisor of Elections said she didn't feel there was any merit to the need for an investigation and is confident that the current early voting program is in the best interest of Pinellas County.
Manatee County has one early voting location. The other counties with the number of designated early voting locations in the Tampa Bay Region are:
Hillsborough 13
Sarasota 7
Pasco 7
Polk 6
Oct 23rd 2008From The Economist print edition
A striking number of conservatives are planning to vote for Obama
Illustration by KAL
IN “W.”, his biopic about his Yale classmate, Oliver Stone details Colin Powell’s agonies during George Bush’s first term. Throughout the film Mr Powell repeatedly raises doubts about the invasion of Iraq—and is repeatedly overruled by the ghoulish trio of Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Karl Rove. In one of the final scenes, with his direst warnings proving correct, Mr Powell turns to Mr Cheney and delivers a heartfelt “F*** You”.
The real Colin Powell used more diplomatic language in endorsing Barack Obama on October 19th, but the impact was much the same. Mr Obama is a “transformational figure”, he mildly said, and his old friend John McCain had erred in choosing a neophyte as a running-mate. But you would have to be naive not to see the endorsement as a verdict on the Bush years.
Mr Powell is now a four-star general in America’s most surprising new army: the Obamacons. The army includes other big names such as Susan Eisenhower, Dwight’s granddaughter, who introduced Mr Obama at the Democratic National Convention and Christopher Buckley, the son of the conservative icon William Buckley, who complains that he has not left the Republican Party: the Republican Party has left him. Chuck Hagel, a Republican senator from Nebraska and one-time bosom buddy of Mr McCain has also flirted heavily with the movement, though he has refrained from issuing an official endorsement.
The biggest brigade in the Obamacon army consists of libertarians, furious with Mr Bush’s big-government conservatism, worried about his commitment to an open-ended “war on terror”, and disgusted by his cavalier way with civil rights. There are two competing “libertarians for Obama” web sites. CaféPress is even offering a “libertarian for Obama” lawn sign for $19.95. Larry Hunter, who helped to devise Newt Gingrich’s Contract with America in 1994, thinks that Mr Obama can free America from the grip of the “zombies” who now run the Republican Party.
But the army has many other brigades, too: repentant neocons such as Francis Fukuyama, legal scholars such as Douglas Kmiec, and conservative talk-show hosts such as Michael Smerconish. And it is picking up unexpected new recruits as the campaign approaches its denouement. Many disillusioned Republicans hoped that Mr McCain would provide a compass for a party that has lost its way, but now feel that the compass has gone haywire. Kenneth Adelman, who once described the invasion of Iraq as a “cakewalk”, decided this week to vote for Mr Obama mainly because he regards Sarah Palin as “not close to being acceptable in high office”.
The rise of the Obamacons is more than a reaction against Mr Bush’s remodelling of the Republican Party and Mr McCain’s desperation: there were plenty of disillusioned Republicans in 2004 who did not warm to John Kerry. It is also a positive verdict on Mr Obama. For many conservatives, Mr Obama embodies qualities that their party has abandoned: pragmatism, competence and respect for the head rather than the heart. Mr Obama’s calm and collected response to the turmoil on Wall Street contrasted sharply with Mr McCain’s grandstanding.
Much of Mr Obama’s rhetoric is strikingly conservative, even Reaganesque. He preaches the virtues of personal responsibility and family values, and practises them too. He talks in uplifting terms about the promise of American life. His story also appeals to conservatives: it holds the possibility of freeing America from its racial demons, proving that the country is a race-blind meritocracy and, in the process, bankrupting a race-grievance industry that has produced the likes of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.
How much do these Obamacons matter? More than Mr McCain would like to think. The Obamacons are manifestations of a deeper turmoil in the Republican rank-and-file, as the old coalition of small-government activists, social conservatives and business Republicans falls apart. They also influence opinion. This is obvious in the case of Mr Powell: Mr Obama is making liberal use of his endorsement to refute the latest Republican criticism that he is a “socialist”. But it is also true of lesser-known scribblers. At least 27 newspapers that backed Mr Bush in 2004 have endorsed Mr Obama.
Moreover, the revolt of the intellectuals is coinciding with a migration of culturally conservative voters—particularly white working-class voters—into Obamaland. Mr Obama is now level-pegging or leading among swing-groups such as Catholics and working-class whites. A recent Washington Post-ABC poll shows him winning 22% of self-described conservatives, a higher proportion than any Democratic nominee since 1980.
Don’t blame the rats
The more tantalising question is whether the rise of the Obamacons signals a lasting political realignment. In 1980 the rise of the neocons—liberal intellectuals who abandoned a spineless Democratic Party—was reinforced by the birth of working class “Reagan Democrats”. Is the Reagan revolution now going into reverse? There are reasons for scepticism. Will libertarians really stick with “Senator Government”, as Mr McCain labelled Mr Obama in the best slip of the tongue of the campaign? Will economic conservatives cleave to a president who believes in “spreading the wealth around”?
Much depends on how Mr Obama governs if he wins, and how the Republicans behave if they lose. Mr Obama talks about creating an administration of all the talents. He promises to take the cultural anxieties of Reagan Democrats seriously. For their part, hard-core Republicans are handling their party’s travails abysmally, retreating into elite-bashing populism and denouncing the Obamacons as “rats” who are deserting a sinking ship. If the Republican Party continues to think that the problem lies with the rats, rather than the seaworthiness of the ship, then the Obamacons are here to stay.
http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12470555
Why Libertarians (in swing states) should vote for Obama as the lesser evil.
Article by Vaughn (Libertarian)Tuesday, October 21, 2008
http://www.nolanchart.com/article5264.html
Why Lovers of Liberty* Should Support Barack Obama* In Swing States
I want to begin my first column for Nolanchart.com with a little personal history. In eight presidential elections since 1976, I've voted for one party Libertarian. In cases where a Libertarian wasn't available, I would usually vote for the Republican, considering that the lesser of the two evils. No longer. In the 2006 Congressional elections, I voted Democratic.
Why? In short, because George W. Bush and the Karl-Rove-dominated GOP has betrayed every ideal that Republicans and Libertarians have in common. They lied us into two unnecessary wars. They've busted the budget and bankrupted our country. They've gutted the Bill of Rights and spied on Americans, with the excuse of a hugely-exaggerated terrorist threat. And- this is probably most unforgivable - they've been complicit in the confiscations of guns in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.
So it's my opinion that the GOP needs to be rebuked, strongly and decisively, even if it means voting for "the enemy." Now in my case, I may still vote Libertarian (despite my utter dislike of Bob Barr ) because I live in Arizona and I think it's quite unlikely that McCain will lose in his home state. The same goes in other states that are decisively for McCain or Obama . By all means, show your displeasure by voting third party, any third party.
But what about those states where the race is still up for grabs? In those states, I believe we should support the clear lesser evil: Barack Obama.
By now, all my Republican friends and colleagues are shouting "heresy!" (At the moment, I'm registered Republican myself- which I did so I could vote for Ron Paul in the primary, naturally.) But I think I can list ten good reasons why libertarians and even conservatives should hold their noses and vote for Barack.1. Much of the stuff going around about Obama on the internet is total nonsense. "He's a Muslim, he supports terrorism, he hates the flag." As Colonel Potter would say, "Horse-hockey!" I'll admit there's plenty to dislike about Obama's politics without resorting to lies. The man isn't THAT bad.
2.Obama has a more sane, even-tempered personality than McCain. McCain was a hot-head to begin with, then he spent five years in a POW camp, which will mess anyone up psychologically. I don't want John McCain's finger anywhere near the nuclear button.
3.Likewise, despite my strong dislike of Joe Biden, at least he's not Sarah Palin. The woman is unqualified to be dogcatcher, much less Vice President. She has indicated a willingness to go to war with Russia in support for Saakashvili's Georgia, a despotic regime in a small country with absolutely no strategic importance to the US.
4.The right-wingers say that despite Obama's flip-flops on the "war on terror" and US support for Israel, that he still holds to his radical anti-military views, and will immediately pull out of Iraq and end our "special relationship" with Israel. We can only hope! Look, we've got a presence in over a hundred countries, and we spend almost as much on our military as all other countries combined. Isn't that a little overkill?
5.Speaking of the Welfare Queen of the Mideast, if you've ever checked out the Israeli press online, the candidate who received the most vitriol was Ron Paul. The second most hated man was Barack Obama. Anyone who's that despised by the Israeli right wing can't be all bad. Look, I've got nothing against Israel, I'm just tired of supporting its government, which is influenced out of all proportion by the fanatical loud-mouthed Arab-hating settler community.
6.I'll admit it- either Obama or McCain could conceivably try to become dictator, but Obama is less likely to succeed. That's because the Right already hates him, and they're the ones with the guns. Anything McCain does, they're likely to accept like bleating sheep, because he's a "war hero" who will invoke patriotic rhetoric to justify his actions. His biggest foes would likely be in the Peace Movement. As much as I respect them, most of them are liberals who are far too wimpy to stage a revolution, should one (God forbid) become necessary.
7.With the public uproar over the bailout of Wall Street, it's likely we'll have a backlash against the Democrats in the House, the majority of whom supported that fiasco. So Congress could easily go to the Republicans. And a divided government is good for freedom =checks and balances and all that.
8.The American free enterprise system may not survive another corrupt big-government conservative administration. George W Bush has done more damage to capitalism than any president since FDR. His Social Security privatization plan was so flawed that it may be a generation or more before we have another crack at it. And the mortgage meltdown ? Forget the propaganda about the Community Reinvestment Act. The major cause was the Fed's super-easy money policy, enacted with Bush's support, to try to fix the economic damage caused by the Tech Bubble and the 9/11 attacks (which were in turn enabled by the criminal negligence of You Know Who.)
9.Obama is just plain smarter than McCain. Obama graduated from Harvard Law School in the top ten percent of his class. McCain graduated from Annapolis near the bottom of his class. Voting for McCain is like telling your kids, "Don't study, do nothing but party in college, and you too can become President."
10.Our first Black President, how cool would that be? I'd rather it be Walter Williams or Thomas Sowell or even Colin Powell- but still, it would say to the world that we're finally putting this racism stuff behind us.
-VT
When intelligent Libertarians examine Barack Obama they see his high intelligence and intellect as an asset for rational thinking. Combined this with his background as a civil rights lawyer and constitutional law professor who's favorable to voluntary, free community organization, and who as a Senator, took a daring stand against the Iraq War -- it becomes easy to see that Barack Obama is more "libertarian" than not.
A general definition of a libertarian is: "A libertarian is a person who upholds the principles of individual liberty, smaller government, lower taxes and more freedom."
Barack Obama's background favors many principles held by libertarians and Libertarian Party members.
Obama has the "libertarian" advantage over McCain (or Bob Barr for that matter):
-OBAMA Upholds the principals of individual liberty:
Advantage, Obama. For libertarians, Obama's heart seems to be in the right place overall.Here are some of the principals of individual liberty which Obama supports and John McCain does NOT:
-OBAMA Wants smaller government:
Advantage, Obama. Obama's favorable to withdrawl and ending the Iraq [war] occupation saving taxpayers $100 billion+ in war spending. McCain talks a good game on against earmarks and other wasteful spending. But, as Bleeding Heartland points out, the cost of earmarks in 2007 was about $17 billion. The cost of the Iraq war, which McCain wants to both continue and expand, is about $165 billion. And earmarks don't breed new government programs that destroy our civil liberties.-OBAMA Supports lower taxes:
Advantage, Obama wants to lower taxes for MORE people (about 90-95% of taxpayers) that is everyone making less than $200,000 but raise taxes for those making over $250,000. McCain wants to lower taxes for the rich, and lower them less than Obama for the middle class. A hybrid plan would be nice, but unless you are in the "millonaire bracket" Obama's tax plan favors more people overall than McCain and one of McCain's top advisers recently said that, if elected, McCain plans to raise taxes too. (Historical Reminder: Republican George Bush Sr. said, "Read my Lips - No New Taxes" but eventually raised taxes after he was elected.)-OBAMA Wants more personal freedom:
Advantage, Obama. Only one major candidate is pro-choice, against a ban on flag burning and wants to soften drug laws and reduce the use of mandatory minimum sentences.
The Libertarian Case for Obama - Seven potential upsides to a hope-monger presidency
Terry Michael | September 19, 2008
Discuss this article online.
http://www.reason.com/news/show/128902.html
Perhaps the best reason... to strike back at the Republican Party who have been a real thorn in the Libertarian Party's side since the 2000 elections.
For years Republicans have made thing more difficult for third parties and have even stolen our votes. Remember all those hanging chads in Florida, many Libertarians believed those votes were likely stolen by the Republican Party.
But it didn't stop there, many of the leading Libertarian activists across the US saw themselves being kicked out of their own state and county affiliates by neo-conservative right wing Republicans claiming to be Libertarians, we call them "LINO's" Libertarians in name only, because they buy a party membership and do more harm than good.
Their agenda was a kind of hostile takeover of the Libertarian Party, but also the Greens and the Reform Party were attacked hard also. So as you can imagine, the diehard Libertarians are no friends of the Republican Party and vice versa.
On the other hand, the Democratic Party does NOT act hostile against Libertarians. Democrats have been fair and friendly even working with us on common ground issues.
Don't buy the media myth, many Libertarians such as myself will vote for Obama.
