--- In [email protected], "terry12622000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> Those of Us that want a principled party may have no reasonable 
> choice but to split. Really it would be better the reformers could 
> get more votes I don't doubt that and they may advance liberty and 
> reduce government, the purist will get more votes because they 
would 
> finally be voting with a party of 
> principle.                                  
>          Look The Rasmussen Poll showed around 15% of voters are 
> libertarians, Classic Liberals, Constitutionlist and  libertarian 
> leaning people are even more, yet most of these people vote for 
> others including the libertarians and those who say they are 
> libertarian, many if not most don't vote but a big percentage of 
them 
> would if they had someone to vote 
> for.                                                         
>    The other best option to a split is to pull away the endorsement 
> of anyone running for office or holding office if they don't follow 
> the party line via the platform and the oath, if the reformist 
> candiates don't like it and are not willing to follow it then they 
> would have no other choice than to move 
> on.                                        
>    Personally I think most of the reformers are honest people but I 
> suspect there is either government interest and or other powerful 
> interest behind these reform efforts. It really appears A German 
> neoliberal think tank with a lot of cash was behind the take over 
of 
> the party in Costa Rica ( go to the Free State Project board for 
> discussion and links on this take over).--- In 
> [email protected], "David Macko" <dmacko@> wrote:
> >
> > I still think that it would be better to avoid a split until
> > we reduce government to some level where our differences
> > are meaningful in relation to a real political campaign.
> > 
> > For life and liberty,
> > David Macko
> > 
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "terry12622000" <cottondrop@>
> > To: <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2006 2:33 PM
> > Subject: [Libertarian] Re: New Libertarian Party -> American 
> Libertarian 
> > Party
> > 
> > 
> > > David I disagree, I think the numbers of votes will improve 
with a
> > > divorce between the reformers and the purist. At least the 
> reformers
> > > can't blame the purist anymore if they fail. It probally would 
be
> > > better for the reformers to join the RLC or the Democrat counter
> > > part, or as a independent ( which is the way many states list 
all
> > > non Republicans and Democrats anyway). If the  reformers really 
> think
> > > they have the talent to get votes and advance liberty with their
> > > gradulist polcy then they have the chance to prove it, when the 
> fail,
> > > they can't blame the purist and we can tell them " see there we 
> told
> > > you it would not work". If their policies make improvements we 
can
> > > always tell them with fair certainty," yeah but far from
> > > enough".
> > >       I actually think the purist will get more votes to 
without 
> the
> > > reformist candiates and office holders because those who want a
> > > pricipled party and candiates that follow those principle will 
> have
> > > nothing to do with the LP the way it
> > > is.
> > >   To give one example Tony St. James has a  fairly new show on 
> WGOW-
> > > fm talk radio 102.3 in Chattanooga, Tennessee on saturday 
> mornings,
> > > this morning he said he approves of the LP priniciples and the
> > > platform but he gets the impression the party goals are no 
better
> > > than the Democrat and Republican Parties goals get people in 
> power in
> > > Washington so they can tell others what to do. --- In
> > > [email protected], "David Macko" <dmacko@> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> It is highly unfortunate that there appears to be a split in 
the
> > >> Libertarian Party of Florida. This cannot benefit anyone except
> > >> enemies of liberty. I hope that all of you can get together and
> > >> straighten out this problem. Remember Benjamin Franklin's
> > >> admonition that we must all hang together or we will all hang 
> alone.
> > >>
> > >> For life and liberty,
> > >> David Macko
> > >>
> > >> ----- Original Message ----- 
> > >> From: "Franklin Perez" <perezfranklin@>
> > >> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >> Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 1:04 PM
> > >> Subject: [Libertarian] New Libertarian Party -> American
> > > Libertarian Party
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> > Hello Folks:
> > >> >
> > >> > I have just gone to the website of the Florida Division of
> > > Elections at
> > >> > the
> > >> > http://election.dos.state.fl.us/cgi-bin/ComHtml.exe?
> account=42227
> > >> > hyperlink
> > >> > and noticed that there is a new Libertarian Party that has
> > > registered with
> > >> > the Florida Division of Elections.
> > >> >
> > >> > It's chairman is none other than James Coakley, an individual
> > > that has had
> > >> > his share of problems with the Libertarian Party of Seminole
> > > County
> > >> > Florida
> > >> > (LPSC) as well as the Libertarian Party of Florida (LPF). 
It's
> > > initials
> > >> > are
> > >> > LBT. As you all know, James Coakley has been helping me out 
> with
> > > my run
> > >> > for
> > >> > Florida State House (District 33) by distributing some of my
> > > campaign
> > >> > literature. (Note: You may read about my problems with the 
LPSC
> > > and LPF by
> > >> > going to the 
> http://www.geocites.com/fperez2006/why_npa_eng.html
> > >> > hyperlink.)
> > >> >
> > >> > I have spoken about this new political party with James 
> Coakley.
> > > Has has
> > >> > stated to me that this new party, called the American 
> Libertarian
> > > Party,
> > >> > shall have a Libertarian political philosophy but that its 
main
> > > purpose
> > >> > shall be to actively run and encourage candidates to run 
under
> > > their party
> > >> > label so long as they hold Libertarian political principles. 
> This
> > > attitude
> > >> > is in sharp contrast with the Libertarian Party of Florida, 
> whose
> > > main
> > >> > goal
> > >> > seems to be to not want to run or encourage ANY political
> > > candidates to
> > >> > run
> > >> > under its banner.
> > >> >
> > >> > I think that this new American Libertarian Party will be a 
VAST
> > >> > improvement
> > >> > over the current Libertarian Party of Florida because it 
will 
> not
> > > stand in
> > >> > the way of its candidates from running for political office. 
It
> > > will
> > >> > actually ENCOURAGE Libertarian-leaning people to run under 
its
> > > banner and
> > >> > will not set up roadblocks to keep them from running.
> > >> >
> > >> > So folks, if you are disgusted with the political nonsense 
and
> > > manure that
> > >> > is ocurring with the Libertarian Party of Florida and wish to
> > > join a REAL
> > >> > Libertarian party, please consider joining the American
> > > Libertarian Party.
> > >> >
> > >> > I would like to congratulate James Coakley for having the
> > > conviction to
> > >> > set
> > >> > up this new political party.
> > >> >
> > >> > Sincerely,
> > >> >
> > >> > Franklin Perez (No Party Affiliation)
> > >> > Florida State House Candidate (District 33) - Year 2006
> > >> > Libertarian Minded and Independent! Not Beholden to Party
> > > Politics!
> > >> > http://www.geocities.com/fperez1776
> >
>






ForumWebSiteAt  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian  
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Reply via email to