The Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania - Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to the LPPa forum. 
Feel free to join the discussions.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
The Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania - Forum > Discussions > Political Discussions > Congress Reaches All Time Low
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
« previous next »
  Print  
Author Topic: Congress Reaches All Time Low  (Read 1462 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
caomhin10p
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 110
« on: July 09, 2008, 12:02:43 am »
And not just metaphorically this time.  They have an approval rate of 9%.  That's N-I-N-E.  I can't even think of another institution with such a low rating.  I keep thinking, with all the Messianic themes that Obama supporters have thrown upon him, that F. A. Hayek's The Road to Surfdom actually would have a chance of happening here.  9%, unreal.
Logged
JohnKOTR
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 140
« Reply #1 on: July 09, 2008, 12:17:39 am »
If the Republicans were smart, they'd be blasting the Democrats on this.
Logged
johngalinac
smf LPPa Members
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 122



Email
« Reply #2 on: July 09, 2008, 06:51:22 am »
Quote from: JohnKOTR on July 09, 2008, 12:17:39 am
If the Republicans were smart, they'd be blasting the Democrats on this.

They aren't.
Logged
To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical. – Thomas Jefferson
georgedonnelly
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 65



WWW Email
« Reply #3 on: July 09, 2008, 09:41:58 am »
We need to field a full slate of candidates for Congress. If not this year, then in 2010.

LP national says there are about 125 LP candidates for House and Senate nationally, but some are still being nominated.
Logged
George Donnelly
http://georgedonnelly.com
sgtmtmiller
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 17
« Reply #4 on: July 09, 2008, 10:39:41 am »
Hoo-rah the American people beginning to realize that both parties are one and the same.

The Demo-can party ruining America one session at a time.
Logged
caomhin10p
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 110
« Reply #5 on: July 10, 2008, 12:43:50 am »
Sgtmiller-
That pic reminds me of the Ghostbusters movie-
DON"T CROSS THE STREAMS! haha
I think the time is ripe for more citizen advocacy.  Definitely.
Logged
foobar
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 23
« Reply #6 on: July 10, 2008, 04:31:19 pm »
Here's the article: http://www.taxpayer.net/search_by_category.php?action=view&proj_id=1094&category=Wastebasket&type=Project
Quote
These numbers don’t include non-binding legislative resolutions that the Senate or the House took time to consider and then passed. Here are some of our favorites from among the resolutions: 1) Recognizing soil as an essential natural resource, and soils professionals as playing a critical role in managing our Nation's soil resources; 2) Designating July 2007 as "National Watermelon Month”; 3) Congratulating the men's volleyball team of the University of California, Irvine, for winning the 2007 NCAA Division I Men's Volleyball National Championship; 4) Recognizing the 70th anniversary of the Idaho Potato Commission and designating May 2007 as "Idaho Potato Month”; and 5) Expressing support for designation of June 30 as "National Corvette Day".

Both presidential candidates pushed resolutions of their own. Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) worked to successfully pass a resolution to congratulate the Chicago White Sox on winning the 2005 World Series Championship. Not to be outdone, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) co-sponsored and succeeded in passing a resolution congratulating the University of Arizona Wildcats for winning the 2007 NCAA Division I Softball Championship. Indeed, some of the more important matters of our time.
Logged
georgedonnelly
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 65



WWW Email
« Reply #7 on: July 11, 2008, 08:05:45 am »
I wish they would spend all year on those kinds of legislative matters.  Tongue
Logged
George Donnelly
http://georgedonnelly.com
Mik
smf LPPa Moderators Area
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 303
« Reply #8 on: July 13, 2008, 01:30:03 am »
At least this kind of diversion would keep them from further eroding the rights of the citizens. However, at that point why should we be paying for their time, travel, expenses, health care, or staff?

Mik Robertson
Logged
caomhin10p
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 110
« Reply #9 on: July 14, 2008, 01:21:05 am »
We shouldn't be.  I think that a nice law to be added to the books would be Median Income.  I've given this alot of though.  I think politicians should only earn the median income of the area in which the legislature takes part.  That's it.  Lobbyist dollars, etc, should constiute bribery as should gifts, etc and the charges that would follow. 
Logged
JohnKOTR
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 140
« Reply #10 on: July 14, 2008, 01:41:45 am »
In the interests of the public, it is my opinion that a new service should be added to the state and local election regulatory agencies. They ought to require a uniform number of petition signatures for every candidate for office to be listed on the ballot, numbers being based on the office sought and the district. Those candidates receiving the required signatures will have a complete profile, including their voting record, sent to all registered voters throughout the district so that the voters are informed about whom they're voting for. This information should also be available on the internet, on a government website.
Logged
georgedonnelly
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 65



WWW Email
« Reply #11 on: July 14, 2008, 08:52:17 am »
Dare I ask, how do you plan to pay for this government program? Smiley

It doesn't sound very libertarian to me.
Logged
George Donnelly
http://georgedonnelly.com
JohnKOTR
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 140
« Reply #12 on: July 14, 2008, 11:05:25 am »
Quote from: georgedonnelly on July 14, 2008, 08:52:17 am
Dare I ask, how do you plan to pay for this government program? Smiley

It doesn't sound very libertarian to me.

I am more a pragmatist than I am a libertarian. We'll have better government if the people know who they're voting for, and this probably wouldn't cost more than a billion or two, if even that much. We spend a combined 1.5 trillion on national security, defense, and war each and every year. I think we can afford to let the people know who is on the ballot and what their profile is.

If anything, the government sharing information and keeping the American people informed about its activities ought to be one of the few duties that it does have. The government has information and the people ought to have access to it.

How libertarian do you want to get? If someone's house is burning down or they're being raped in their bedroom by some home invader, should we expect them to handle it themselves? Should we close the fire house and police departments? Should we get rid of OSHA and leave it up to employers' honor to provide a safe work place? Should we allow corporations to form monopolies over resources such as oil, food, or metals? None of these institutions, laws, and policies are libertarian in nature, but they are all essential to providing a stable economy and serve the public interest. I may be a libertarian, but I will not sacrifice the public interest for ideology.

That is why we consistently lose elections. It is why Mr Ventura is a small-l libertarian, along with so many others. You have your own idea of where the line on libertarianism ought to be drawn and there are millions of others within the party that have their own differing opinion. Too many libertarians are so enthralled in the ideology that they advocate policies that would ruin this nation, and people know it.
« Last Edit: July 14, 2008, 11:08:53 am by JohnKOTR » Logged
georgedonnelly
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 65



WWW Email
« Reply #13 on: July 14, 2008, 11:39:21 am »
Don't you still have to take the non-aggression pledge to join the LP?

Advocating any program which forces people to pay for something is a violation of that pledge.

As a practical matter, it's just as much junk mail and will promptly go into the trash in many, if not most, households.

Practically speaking, you're advocating putting bureaucrats in charge of defining what candidates stand for. Now THAT is a recipe for dictatorship.

The people do have access to a lot of govt information, and we should have more. But are you going to ship the entire national archives to every US citizen? That seems to be the logical conclusion of your argument. And we already spend trillions on everything else, so why not spend trillions more on this? Where does the spending of other people's money end?

Libertarian does not (necessarily) mean anarchy. And it does not mean every man for himself.

I have no doubts that a good libertarian community would have a fire department that people could voluntarily subscribe to to gain assistance when there is a fire. Or maybe it would be priced like exterminators. When there is a problem, you call them, they help you, and then they send you a bill. A fire department can work just like any other business. And maybe if the government wasn't so involved in building codes, and people demanded information on their buildings before buying and renting, we would have more fire-safe buildings.

Many, if not most, libertarians are in favor of a strong police force, I certainly am. They're also for 2nd-amendment rights.

Your examples are more hyperbole, because the gravity of fire and initiation of force are orders of magnitude greater than any perceived need to send lots of paper out to people in the mail.

Quote from: JohnKOTR on July 14, 2008, 11:05:25 am
I may be a libertarian, but I will not sacrifice the public interest for ideology.

What is the public interest but the individual self-interest of each individual person, as decided by them?

What gives you the right to decide someone else's self-interest for them and force them to pay for it or abide by it? That's the base problem we face today: politicians thinking they know better than us and thinking they have the right to enforce their high-minded ideas at the barrel of a gun.

Progress towards solutions for today's problems will not be found with more of the same tactics.
Logged
George Donnelly
http://georgedonnelly.com
caomhin10p
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 110
« Reply #14 on: July 14, 2008, 11:55:05 pm »
There's basic necessities of government, of course local governments should have police, fire, rescue, ambulence, etc.   That is a public good that should be administered by the government and benefits everyone.  Are there many services that can be changed or run privately?  Sure.  I'm all for school vouchers, another public good which can be imporved with private competition, but infrastructure is much different.  Someone who doesn't have the money for fire fighters putting out their house ablaze is certainly not something anyone would ever want to see.  Volunteers for these services are great, but there is nothing wrong with providing these basic services that allow people to survive and have an emergency contact.  I think that is the greater point here.  No one is upset about this.  It is other laws that people have issues with.  Efficiency is of course the most important thing but government does have a roll for these types of services.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
  Print  
« previous next »
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.4 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC
Joomla Bridge by JoomlaHacks.com