Badnarik Interview- Thoughts?

[DA]

So, I've been bad in the last couple of months and I havn't been listening to my NPR station (or any station for that matter). In that absence I missed this interview: http://www.kuow.org/weekday.asp?Archive=08-16 . I just finished listening to it and I think MB made himself sound kind of like an ass. And it made me feel more like he is an extreamist. Extremists don't get votes. Hrmm.. anywya.. thoughts?

Final comment, I agree with the guy who is concerned about the environment.

[DA]

The wierd thing is, he didn't seem that way to me in things he wrote (except for the 2nd amendment issue, he foams at the mouth over that baby).

[DA]

So, I've been bad in the last couple of months and I havn't been listening to my NPR station (or any station for that matter). In that absence I missed this interview: http://www.kuow.org/weekday.asp?Archive=08-16 . I just finished listening to it and I think MB made himself sound kind of like an ass. And it made me feel more like he is an extreamist. Extremists don't get votes. Hrmm.. anywya.. thoughts?

Final comment, I agree with the guy who is concerned about the environment.

I listened to part of it. What in particular bothered you about it?
In my opinion it was not one of his better performances because he seemed to be distracted and not as clear as he sometimes is. But I didn't hear anything that sounded extreme unless you believe that Libertarian philosophy ( belief in the constitution) is extreme.

It's hard to put my finger on it a day later, but there definately were a few things there. I'll agree that he seemed off because so did the host of the show. That station is usually top notch.

[DA]

There are a couple of people here at ND that have fallen in love with Badnarik. Thankfully there are only a couple. I can't stand libertarianism.

So, you prefer govt. control over your life?

[DA]

So, I've been bad in the last couple of months and I havn't been listening to my NPR station (or any station for that matter). In that absence I missed this interview: http://www.kuow.org/weekday.asp?Archive=08-16 . I just finished listening to it and I think MB made himself sound kind of like an ass. And it made me feel more like he is an extreamist. Extremists don't get votes. Hrmm.. anywya.. thoughts?

Final comment, I agree with the guy who is concerned about the environment.

I listened to part of it. What in particular bothered you about it?
In my opinion it was not one of his better performances because he seemed to be distracted and not as clear as he sometimes is. But I didn't hear anything that sounded extreme unless you believe that Libertarian philosophy ( belief in the constitution) is extreme.

It's hard to put my finger on it a day later, but there definately were a few things there. I'll agree that he seemed off because so did the host of the show. That station is usually top notch.

Sometimes Michael Badnarik is very impressive and sometimes he's not. He was very good at the convention, but somedays he seems clumsy. Bush was like that before too, although he is a better speaker now than when he was first elected.
I think Badnarik was surprised to win the nomination and now feels obligated to put his heart and soul into  the campaign. He might be pushing a little too hard.

Heart and sole my foot and crotch! I finally listen to the debate between he and Cobb- he totally prewrote everything! Watch it (CSPAN), Cobb wrote down the questions when they were asked so that he could address each part, Badnarik just played a tape and moved his lips. And it was the same stuff he tried to work into the "interview." That's why it seemsed off, he was forcing his square pegged answers into round holed questions. He did a much better job of pulling of improvisation at the debate though. If it wern't for their "few (major) disagreements" (i.e, Cobbs views were like Badnariks on the major disagreement issues) then I'd vote Cobb. A vote for Cobb shows the main parties we want socialism (not saying that he's extremely socialist or anything, just that it's his most noticable feature) whereas a vote for Badnarik shows we want freedom, to boil it down.

[DA]

If I was asked to run a Libertarian presidential campaign, I'd say you need $500 million or there's nothing I can do for you. People need to feel like your a serious candidate--and the way you do that is by making significant ad buys, that sound just like the Reps and Dems (Badnarik's sound like a mini-infommercial). That would also result in a lot more serious media coverage.

But you can't run a campaign without the money. If the Libs really want to ever win a presidential election, they're going to have to get 2 million supporters who are willing to donate $100-200.

The better idea, of course, is to worry about gubernatorial races, where you don't have to make ad buys in 13 states.

Hah, look at how much money the Reform Party had. Look how much Nader spent last time... ok, good point. We need money. I don't think we can screw up as much as the RP.
I think local elections are what most Libs are banking on. Being a major party in WA got us a bunch of free publicity this year. Long story short the whole state had to use a new primary by court order and the state department wanted to make sure people didn't get confused and invalidate their votes so a bunch of tv ads, mail fliers, bus ads, etc were issued explaining that you had to choose either Democrate, Republican, or Libertarian this year. That got our name in everyones head and our symbol to boot.

[DA]

I recently listened to Badnarik's constitutional class at:

http://www.archive.org/movies/details-db.php?collection=election_2004&collectionid=Michael_Badnarik

After sitting through 7 hours (not all in one go) I feel he is certainly a man who understands the Constitution and freedom very well.

As for extremism? Well, that is so relative isn't it? I mean many things which are very good and very true are considered extremist, as are things which are very bad and false.

One can allow a little "foaming at the mouth" in those who have taken the time and made the effort to learn just what is going on in the world today, and those forces seeking to rob us of our liberties.

If I were an American I would vote for someone like Badnarik or Peroutka *never* Bush or Kerry who both uphold and promote policies which lessen freedom.

  I understand that he know.. well seemingly everything about the constitution (and expects others to too, ). What I'm saying is that I wouldn't feel safe, as such, going to the man's house for dinner.
  I think Peroutka is for taking away plenty of freedoms.
  Side thought: Is there any way that foriegners can help the LP in the US?
  Off topic: You blokes call us liberals in Europe right?

[DA]

So, I've been bad in the last couple of months and I havn't been listening to my NPR station (or any station for that matter). In that absence I missed this interview: http://www.kuow.org/weekday.asp?Archive=08-16 . I just finished listening to it and I think MB made himself sound kind of like an ass. And it made me feel more like he is an extreamist. Extremists don't get votes. Hrmm.. anywya.. thoughts?

Final comment, I agree with the guy who is concerned about the environment.

I listened to part of it. What in particular bothered you about it?
In my opinion it was not one of his better performances because he seemed to be distracted and not as clear as he sometimes is. But I didn't hear anything that sounded extreme unless you believe that Libertarian philosophy ( belief in the constitution) is extreme.

It's hard to put my finger on it a day later, but there definately were a few things there. I'll agree that he seemed off because so did the host of the show. That station is usually top notch.

Sometimes Michael Badnarik is very impressive and sometimes he's not. He was very good at the convention, but somedays he seems clumsy. Bush was like that before too, although he is a better speaker now than when he was first elected.
I think Badnarik was surprised to win the nomination and now feels obligated to put his heart and soul into  the campaign. He might be pushing a little too hard.

Heart and sole my foot and crotch! I finally listen to the debate between he and Cobb- he totally prewrote everything! Watch it (CSPAN), Cobb wrote down the questions when they were asked so that he could address each part, Badnarik just played a tape and moved his lips. And it was the same stuff he tried to work into the "interview." That's why it seemsed off, he was forcing his square pegged answers into round holed questions. He did a much better job of pulling of improvisation at the debate though. If it wern't for their "few (major) disagreements" (i.e, Cobbs views were like Badnariks on the major disagreement issues) then I'd vote Cobb. A vote for Cobb shows the main parties we want socialism (not saying that he's extremely socialist or anything, just that it's his most noticable feature) whereas a vote for Badnarik shows we want freedom, to boil it down.

OK my friend I have to disagree with you. Badnarik was campaigning for many months before the convention. He had virtually nothing in the way of campaign contributions and was living out of his car and without income. At the convention when Gary Nolan threw his support behind Michael he said no one had worked harder than Michael. Take a look at his calendar and you can tell he's been very busy. As I understand it he's getting by on just 4 hours sleep. Even Slick Willie said he needed 6.

Michael is not as polished a speaker as David Cobb, who BTW was excellent in the debate. But do you want a polished speaker or someone who is devoted to the constitution?

  For President? I'd rather have a polished speaker with some great ideas. Badnarik would be more effective as a Senator. But I will vote for him as President because that's how our issues can get more press.

  And I didn't know about how hard he's worked, apologies, but his way of answering is almost as bad as the way Republicrats answer in thier debates (infomercials ).

[DA]

There are a couple of people here at ND that have fallen in love with Badnarik. Thankfully there are only a couple. I can't stand libertarianism.

So, you prefer govt. control over your life?

Wake up and smell the coffee. My paying extra taxes to help fund the less fortunate in our society isn't having the government control my life.

So no, I just prefer justice and social order to the anarchism of the Libertarians.

And why should I ever be forced to give the money I worked hard for to someone else? It only promotes not working hard, not learning more skills, and not bothering to use discrenment (at work). How much more apathy can this country take?!

Minarchists.

(I just had a funny thought of what socialist video games would be like. No competition. No one bothers to fight evil monsters to level up or gain money. They just use their state issued money to buy level-up and recreational "potions." No one saves the princess. The government can't defend itself because there's no defense budget and all the heros are on welfare & out of shape. )

Regarding CP's abortion stance: A) God's punishment for killing a foetus is laid out in Exodus 21:22-25. Basically it says that the killer must pay the mother's husband (strangely, this doesn't have to be the father) an amount of money as to be determined by judges. In addition it should be noted that killing a slave, considerd property with worth just above animals, was punishable by death Ex: 21:20-21. I'm no Christian, so I may not have a say in it, but it seems to me that they have no biblical basis for making abortion illegal.

[DA]

How much more beating up can my grammer and spelling take? I'll leave it, as I think the meaning is clear.

[DA]

Libertarians aren't inherently extreme, it's just that most libertarians don't vote for the LP.  Rarely more than 20% of the population even considers voting Libertarian, rarely more than 4% actually does so in any race.  The result is only the more extreme libertarians join the LP, or those who aren't extreme but won't join the other two parties.

I may have relatively non-moderate ideas, but I am a hardcore incrementalist.

That sounds about right to me. Also, there are the people that really care about freedom in one paticular issue and know that the LP supports them. I didn't mean to suggest that a lot of libs or Libs are extreme, but that Badnarik seemed so in this interview.