Yep. I'm a liberal libertarian. Let's break it down a little bit to let people know how exactly someone can be both of those at once, but first a little bit of history about myself. I've lived in rural Colorado for many years now, previous to that I lived in the fairly large city of Denver Colorado. I have both large city and small town values instilled in myself. Second, my parents where foster parents for as long as I can remember (I am their real son), I've seen more kids than I can remember flow in and out of my home, all of which expanding my knowledge and open mind to so many different point of views and ways of life. I've seen people from every corner of the country, richer kids from corperate America, struggling people on the verge of bankrupcy, and as hard as it was, the worst side of society, abusive parents or families, physical, sexual, menally, all of the above. I know how bad it can get, and yet I know how good it can get as well. My parents raised me to be open to other way of living, to other points of views, to accept people for who they are, and finally, to respect everyone I come into contact with. It is that which makes us different that makes us great was the philosophy that I was raised around, and I've lived my life by it.
Enough about myself now. Back to my original point, Liberal libertarian follows two normally different views, but I've found the way people. Liberal, the dreaded L word and one that's normally associated with Democrats and the left wing. I've very liberal an social and human issues. Torture, any form of it should be banned. Gay Marriage, I think it should be allowed but my views on that are completely personal (more on that later). Discrimination, why are we still living in the past?
this one I'm going to rant on a little more. Libertarian now, a term previously given to republicans(although I don't think the current generation really can use this term anymore) and the conservative right wing. It's pretty obvious, I support the smallest government possible. A government that doesn't get into anyones lives at all or as little as possible. The Patriot act, what ever happened to the Right to Privacy and the Constitution? The recent Bailout or Rescure, whatever. Obama keeps saying that it's an important first step and that we need to look back on how we got into this situation to begin with, I humbly disagree, but I don't agree with McCain either (as he voted for it then showed a stance against it later saying, "We need to get the government out of the business of bailing out banks"). What we need to do is bring the budget under control and have no use for 700 billion dollars, the government shouldn't have that much in it's yearly budget to begin with. Cutting spending by reforming or eliminating projects is the way. Ron Paul, look him up, ridding us of the IRS, cutting earmarks to almost nothing, a non-interventualism policy saving billions in the military, starting fair trade to encourage economic growth, eliminating the income tax, all fo these are brilliant ideas and can easily be acomplished with a reduction in beurocricy and over bloated and inefficient government policies. There is a reason the IRS is slow in calculating taxes, and obviously we can do better in a way that spends less money. I am tired of paying someone to take my money and then to mismanage it later. This libertarian view is also the reason I can't say "legal" or "illegal" about Gay marriage, now if I had to chose either, yes I support gay marriage 100%. )One of my foster brothers came from lesbian parents and was one of the best kids to ever cross my threshold, bankrupcy and the loss of their house was the reason he was placed in foster care.) Now sit down and think about it, where in the Constitution does it say that the supreme court can say *anything* about marriage or who can marry? It's simple, it doesn't. First of all, nothing government related should have anything to do with gay marriage, it should be a church issue since marriage is from a religious foundation. Second, why is it that being married effects your standing with the government, example the income tax? It shouldn't, and never should have. Being married in a religious ceremony should have nothing to do with the government. I want to go the other direction with the government and say that, "anyone can be married as long as the church is willing to accept it, but in order to effect standing in any way, shape, or form, you must apply for a domestic partnership." What this would basically do is to reduce the title Marriage to just that, a title. If your married but don't have a domestic partnership, your treated like two individual people, if you have a domestic partnership but not married, then you get the same benefits as a current married couple does. This sets everyone on equal terms as people cannot be turned away from a domestic partnership, and the religious sect can not be upset because it doesn't give the government the power to say that gay marriage is legal or not. It keeps the LGBT community happy because they have the same equal rights as everyone else, and gives the religious side nothing to complain about. Now that's one of my most extreme possitions on things. This stance puts me at some opposition to both the religious side as I'm reducing the idea of Marriage, and many LGBT people want to be able to marry people, I understand this, but like abortion, I can see no simple "yes" or "no" that will please anyone, logically this is the best solution I can find myself.
Now the reason I'm supporting Obama is because my social and humanity issues take priority on how the government is run. As long as the government is sensitive to our rights, it can be as big as it wants for the time being if that's what it takes to mend the economic crisis.
Yeah,I know, the US lags about 19th in internet speed and total bandwidth on the planet. Just recently I heard about a new set of lines under construction in Japan that provide 1 Gbps (a full DVD quality movie in about 4 seconds) for about 50 dollars per month, and yet here I am, paying 69 per month for a 1 Mbps (one thousanths the speed). It is imperitive that we fix this problem, the country that created the internet should be first in speed, simple as that. As far as technology goes, McCain has remained completely silent, his website is even secretive about his plans for the internet and technology. My suggestions are to impliment internet as a utility, like electricity or water. I would also like to see the internet flow into the next generation as far as wired connections go, internet via powerlines. Why you ask? For one, powerlines are everywhere. Second, they are capible of far more speed than phones lines. Powerline internet would be the country standard with the choice of going digital cable, dsl, or satellite still.
I'm also a big supporter of NN, or net neutuality. As Obama himself has said, the net is one of the last totally free untouched mediums left. It's the only place where you can find a GLBT site, and then hope on google and find a neo-nazi site (no i'm not advocating nazism by any means, it's just an example).
