How does this sync with your support of universal health care, continued taxation, continued social security, etc? Does it seem odd to you that you agree with Libertarians where Democrats would usually agree, and differ where Democrats usually differ? Looking at the platform you came up with, I'd say you differ with Libertarians on some very defining issues.

So how dissimilar to Libertarians can you be and still call yourself one, I wonder? To me, it sounds like you're a Democrat who wants legal pot.

and sure, i disagree with them on several things. but i agree with them on many as well. you are gonna read it your way tho,,,i can't help that. i don' tthink you understand that just because i may have a view, or a thought,,,that every one of those are "written in stone." and unlike you, i am willing to listen to different points of view. a lot of the libertarian platform is "in a perfect world" the way they'd like to see things. some of mine are more real world based. and that article, if you botehered to pay attention, was about starting a discussion. per usual, you distort and exploit things out of context and without regard to anyone or anything.

I'd be interested in reading anything about how your views differ from the Democrats.  If you claim to be a libetarian, that is fine, but if in the end, if you are only changing the label, what's the point?

I almost joined the Libertarian Party myself, I even had pen in hand, ready to sign.  Then I read the ONE thing that you have to put your name to when you join.  That was the Libertarian Oath.

First of all, I think "Libertarian Oath" is so oxymoronic it borders on satire.  But more importantly, putting the oath on the signature line will always keep me out of the party.  If you go by the oath then even the Revolutionary War was immoral because it was definitely an example of initiating military force to achieve social and political goals.

 In fact, anyone who detests tyrany should refuse to sign that oath, since it states that the signer might fight back, but would never initiate force against the tyrant.

ok, 1st off,,,funny cartoon jennifer, thanks for sharing!

2nd, baker, feel free to point out that i support universal healthcare and am a libertarian. i also support social security and some other goverment programs. that is because they are designed to help the least amongst us. my religious beliefs trump my political beliefs there. i believe in the principle, if you can help someone who is helpless, do what christ would do (imho) and help them.

the libertarians believe, on their platform, that most , if not all goverment assistance programs should be done away with. i don't see it as practical. maybe someday, but not today. that is for many reasons, not the least of which is that today's business leaders can't be rusted to pick up the slack, imho.

if given the choice of having the goverment help, or having a person suffer becasuse of a political platform plank, i choose helping. no, it may not be the ideal way, but if mouths are fed, medicine is given, etc, i can support it.

there are many platform planks i do support by the libertarians. and like i said before, i have never regretted my decision to carry their card. that doesn't mean i am drinking their kool-aid, it just means i am comfortable with them.

real world politics involves compromise. theoretical politics allows us to be more idealistic than is sometimes practical. i see things my way. others see it theirs.

and that's politics, and that's america.

As I said, it seems pretty obvious that you agree with Libertarians where the Dems agree, and you disagree where the Dems disagree. That said... why not just be a Democrat?

you are misreading or misinterpreting something here baker. you are so hell bent on painting me a democrat, you can't see anything else.

i'll give ya a few examples of things i have disagreed with concerning the democrats. ....

1st...the PMRC thing in the 80's was a big turn off for me. It wasn't an exclusive democratic thing, but tipper and several other democrats were involved. and it turned me off big time. remember, i'm a musician. when hillary and rick santorum teamed up to stop video games recently, i was equally turned off.

2nd...any democrat who voted for the Iraq war was wrong imho. i was mighty dissapointed in the spinelessness of the democrats when the war drums were being pounded.

3rd...democrats are too liberal on abortion rights. yes, roe v wade is established law and should be respected. but the democrats are too adamant in their "hands off anything" approach to abortion. i don't agree with the right wing either btw there. my position is more science based than anything. but please don't get into a pissing contest about 1 scientific report or another...it's a complicated issue and i'm not trying to get into a debate about it. let's just say i disagree withthedemocrats for this discussion's purposes.

4th...some democrats tax too much. i am for simpler, less intrusive taxes. i am not for welfare for the rich either. this is a subject that is always a hot potato, so again, i don't want to get into a tax debate. but i do feel that there are too many democrats that aren't on the right page on taxes too often for my comfort level again, for the purpose of this discussion.

5th...democrats have gotten too "PC" with issues like religion and such. i don't subscribe to some right wing views that i feel violate church and state principles either.

we can debate these things, i'm sure, down the road as far as "what is the right view." i did not throw those up there to be nitpicked or debated. i just wanted to show you i don't subcribe to all the democratic values that you claim i do.

get over it baker, i'm a libertarian. do you really think you are gonna change my mind from your annonymous bully pulpit? i know you want nothing more than to cure your obsession with me and "prove" i am really am a democrat, but it just ain't so. my support for the democrats have more to do with checks and balances than anything else. if the dems get a piece of the power pie. you will see me hold their feet to the fire as much, if not more, than i do this disaster of a republican administration.

oops did not mean to reply here, thought it was someone elses article

lol...pulling back your libertarian stripes?

no worries mm, all are welcome...feel free to share your thoughts.

The minor issues you cite there are nothing compared to the huge issues core to Libertarianism that you disagree with

i said these are just a few examples,,,God , you are nauseating.

Call yourself what you want, but I'm not buying your suggestion that you aren't partisan. You're most certainly Dem-oriented politically

dude, i've said there are democratic positions i believe in. and yeah, i lean left a little, esp on some social issues. so what????????????

i lean right on NRA issues, tax issues, and some others. so what??????????????

again, get over it, i'm a libertarian, and the libertarian party is a far bigger tent than either of the 2 majors. i could really care less who or what you know about libertarians. i've been in the party for 10 years and i have yet to have anyone outside of this website, question my views. the people who know me, know what i stand for. you get a snippet of who i am, very little. you are taking my casual thoughts and writings WAY too freakin seriously dude...we have never even had an actual conversation on this, all you know about me is what you have nitpicked out of some "thoughts, views, opinions and rants" (the title of my blog)that are more like a diary, sometimes brainstorming, sometimes passing thoughts, sometimes whatever the fuck i feel like sayin. much of what i write is to start a conversation, not to change your mind. god no, everyone knows your mind can't be changed.

but as long as you want to use me as some sort of "lightning rod" till next tuesday,,,i'm game:)

The minor issues you cite

nonsense!

dude, does it ever occur to you that what is the most important issue to you...isn't to someone else??? of course not, because you seem to have a problem with anyone who thinks differently than you. to you, the world is made up of the good people who think like you and the bad ones who think any other way .

look at any poll if you want proof. at most , you might get 1/2 the people to agree on what is most important. that means 1/2 the people have other priorities.

you might not understand this, but my "art" and the art of others and their freedom to express it is one of MY core issues. over the years, i've seen republicans try to ban art, and democrats try to ban art. i've never seen a libertarian call for any ban.

on the other hand, where i want less and simpler taxes, they have never been a big issue in my life. i've paid my fair share and always had food on the table. and i am thankful for what i have. and trust me at least on this, i've led a pretty good life and enjoyed my fair share of luxuries. i also lived in my car for a week unvoluntarily. but that's a whole nother subject....

anyway, point is, taxes aren't my biggest issue by a long shot. i had plenty of money during clinton, as i have bush, as i have other presidents.

but if someone wants to start censoring my or someone else's art, that's a priority, because that's a huge part of my life and who i am.

so stop trying to tell me what is "core " to me, or even what should be. live your life, i'll live mine.

you are in fact very partisan,

no i'm not. but you are entitled to your opinion.

run along now...

i believe in the principle, if you can help someone who is helpless, do what christ would do (imho) and help them.

Why, then, if Christ expected the governments to be responsible for caring for the poor and needy, did He not head to Rome and argue before the Senate there? Becuase it is the responsibility of INDIVIDUALS, not of their government.

Gideon: Am I wrong to question this? I mean, I keep getting the 'big tent' speech from SConn1, but in reality does the Libertarian party really want to define itself as an ala carte menu for the disgruntled in other parties?

Am I wrong to say that the foundation ideal is what spawns the platform? In other words that drug decriminalization, abortion, gay marriage, ending taxation, etc., aren't individual issues as much as they are different ways the overall ethic is applied? I mean, you can believe in drug legalization, and not be Libertarian about it, right?

The idea here seems to be that the Libertarian party is a buffet. To me it is a themed, multi-course meal. I don't see how SConn1 can agree with part of the platform, when in reality it is the execution of the ethos that gives RISE to the platform. It isn't like the party can take one and not the other, since they all rise from the Libertarian ideal.

But to say you favor a smaller government and argue for two of the biggest boondoggle programs (national health care, social security) is oxymoronic bordering on the absurd.

a lot of my libertarian views are about personal freedom. i am not as trusting as some when it comes to corporations. as far as SS goes, no, it's not the most efficient system in the world, but it has provided a great service to americans for over 60 years now. i haven't seen a privatization plan i like, so i default to a system that has a history, and in my opinion, a good one. i think we are better off with ss than without it. we can debate it's future of course, and i am more than open to new and better ideas, but until i see one, i 'll go with this one, by default.

on healthcare, that's where my religious view trumps my political one. i believe in helping the helpless. yes, some libertarians draw the line in a different place than i where goverment services and function of goverment are concerned, and that's fine. if a day comes where universal healthcare isn't necessary, in my view, i would certainly consider it. but our system now which leaves 48 million americans, many of whom are children, uninsured is amoral in my view.

skewing me as being "all for" these things is misarachterizing my view. and frankly, i can't even express my views fully in this limited forum. i've cultivated my views out of almost 40 years of study and life experience, explaining all that in a couple of soundbytes is impossible.

i said before, some of my positions are REAL WORLD positions, not theoretical. many of the libertarian platforms are more theory and will probably never see the light of day. i was always taught to "work with what ya got."

I don't see the LP as a "smorgasboard

well, according to the national committee website...

In a sense, Libertarians “borrow” from both sides

but i am called absurd and oxymoronic. abortion is a major plank for both parties...but...

is rudy absurd for being a republican and pro choice?

is bob casey absurd for being a pro life democrat?

most people would say no, and point out their big tent theory. why am i being singled out as absurd then?

this is just personal guys. especially for you baker.

.. also support social security and some other goverment programs. that is because they are designed to help the least amongst us. my religious beliefs trump my political beliefs there.i believe in the principle, if you can help someone who is helpless, do what christ would do (imho) and help them.

Why, then, if Christ expected the governments to be responsible for caring for the poor and needy, did He not head to Rome and argue before the Senate there? Becuase it is the responsibility of INDIVIDUALS, not of their government.

To sit back and expect the government to be the basis of our charity services just shows laziness.

Re the last quote, I would have said modern day Liberalism, but lazy works as well.

I always get a kick out the people who try to justify Government run and mandated charity (also known as welfare) by insisting that 'it's what Jesus would do'.

I get this ridiculous image of Jesus going before Pontius Pilate arguing for money to be taken from the rich to help the poor. 'I would do it myself, Pontius, but it really should be handled by the Government, besides I'm a little too busy what with planning this get together for all the disciples'.