4 votes

Why the Libertarian Party is trying to make Excuses for Sarvis and giving us a Socialist

I call bullshit, The Liberatarian Party and it's ilk pushing a pile of garbage called Sarvis, a globalist, open border liberal who could care less about the Constitution just like the rest of the extreme end of the Libertarian Party. Bottom line is that those extreme members of the LP dont give a damn about the Constitution or the Unitted States of America, they care about an ideology that pushes no form government that has anything to do with Nation states. I have met with these people over the course of 20 years and that's the bottom line, they want a collapse of the United States, they want a collapse of our economic system, they don't want to follow a Constitutional form of government.

Those that walked door to door to push a person like Sarvis in my opinion failed the State of Virginia and in the long run the United States. Now it will be that much easier to steal elections in the future, including the 2016 Presidential race.

The Libertarian Party is dead to me, I will actively push to destroy it in my area, it's there for one purpose and one purpose only, give elections to socialists, which in the end will result in the collapse of the United States.

No Thanks

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.


I don't know who you've met but you're being incredibly unfair. It's clear you have not been acquainted with even basic Libertarian thought.

Libertarians support the rule of law. The majority believe there should be a general government in DC and thus a nation state.

The dissolution of immigration laws usually comes with the caveat that all welfare be abolished first and the rule of law maintained.

They certainly do not want to collapse the US economy. No clue where this is coming from.

They would all jump for joy if the Federal government started following the Constitution. The trouble is, it doesn't. It never has. And there's a pretty good case that has been made over the last 200 years that it never will.

You are seriously mischaracterizing classical liberal thought here.

He sounds too ignorant

To be relevant anyway. I doubt he can get anything done and his support for the LP or the GOP is of no consequence.

Bruce Majors, Libertarian for Mayor


Parties have agendas and People have rights.

The data is always more important than the source. I choose to vote for people who stand on principles, and have statistical history as proof. If neither candidate has principles that what does it matter?

My power is in the conversations I have with my family, friends and associates.

"A vote for the lesser of two evils is a vote to keep things the same", Buckminster Fuller..
A choice for liberty is always a choice for liberty.

The data is always more important than the source


The Diamond Dog is a real cool cat. | Reporting on the world from an altitude of 420.

here here

Bingo. These are anarcocapitalists that want to end the US. The Libertarian party is useless.

The Libertarian Party is more effective

Since Cuccinelli spent over $14 a vote and Sarvis spent less than $3.

Bruce Majors, Libertarian for Mayor


But the LP only got 7% of the

But the LP only got 7% of the vote. How is that affective? Also, the democrat I believe outspent the Cooch 10-1 and only won by a sliver. I'd say the Cooch was more affective.

However, the important thing everyone here is missing is that the majority of Virginias voters did not want the democrat. He was not the peoples choice.


If the Libertarian Party is "useless".....Then the republican party must be evil

Fearing the Collapse?

Dont worry, joeinmo. Not everything lasts forever. If you were counting on social security or medicare - i am sincerely sorry. But dont say you werent warned. We are talking about natural market forces, whether libertarians want it to happen or not is irrelevant.

"...they want a collapse of the United States, they want

a collapse of our economic system..."

It seems to me that most of the Ron Paul supporters on this site are hoping that the economy crashes sooner than later. I, for one, am pulling for it.

And by the way, I and many others left the LP and supported Ron Paul not because of the LP's supposed "radicalism," but because of the lack of radicalism and principle the LP has exhibited in recent years.

I thought we were all here to

I thought we were all here to save the United States.

I wish to save what the

United States is supposed to represent. I couldn't give a rat's buttocks about the United States federal government.

not all all

There are many here that want to destroy the us. They want to destroy all government.

That's not true

Voluntaryists (and AnCaps), simply want to be able to opt out. You can keep your corrupt monopolistice coercive govt. if you wish, but let others be truly free. If the voluntaryist experiment fails then they only have themselves to blame, but I don't think it will. I think it is the logical evolution of man.


Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it. ~Thomas Paine


When voting for VA governor, I wasnt really concerned with the border between VA/NC/MD - so that wasnt really high on my priority list

Those Tarheels

Will take your women.

Bruce Majors, Libertarian for Mayor


They've been allowed to mix in here so freely

that they're beginning to look like us!

Yes, VA will now have a socialist as Governor,

but I'm telling you, Cuccinelli held some rather unsavory views of his own. In particular, I happen to think oral sex is a great thing, and the thought of some arrogant, self righteous, imperfect sinner like Cuccinelli dictating what I can do with my wife in the privacy of our own bedroom is as abhorrent to me as someone who wishes to increase my income tax by 1%.

Why do you lie?

"The law is only applied to sodomy committed against minors, against non-consenting adults, or in public. In fact, contrary to misinformation peddled by Terry McAuliffe and his liberal allies against the defenders of this law, the law is not – and cannot be – used against consenting adults acting in private."


That you have to lie to make your guy seem better tells me a lot about you and your choice.

If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.
James Madison

If the GOP weren't so incompetent

They'd keep Governor McAuliffe under investigation and then indicted his entire term.

Bruce Majors, Libertarian for Mayor


Yep, one could just as easily

Yep, one could just as easily say it was the GOP who gave us the socialist governor by nominating a gay hating, bedroom patrolling theocrat.

I must be willing to give up what I am in order to become what I will be. Albert Einstein

It was the Crimes Against

It was the Crimes Against Nature statute that outlaws sodomy and oral sex. My guess is that it was an issue against gay sex but to keep the law fair ( so to speak) he banned it for everyone. I'm not in favor of this either but this would not have been the deciding factor for me in this election considering he was endorsed by Ron Paul. I feel in my gut there was strategy to that endorsement.

Everyone has some issue which is a "litmus test"

as to whether or not they can bring themselves to vote for someone. For some it is abortion (pro or con). For me it is peace and basic civil and personal liberties. I'm sorry, but I wouldn't vote for Cuccinelli for Dog Catcher.

Which is why Ron Paul is so refreshing. I literally could find nothing offensive about him. Even though I am more pro-choice than him, he nails the legality of abortion law right on the head - it's up to the states. Even though I feel that open borders should be achieved immediately, and he feels that we should deal with the fiscal issues first, he shows himself to be a man of good will without a racist or xenophobic bone in his body. I trust him because he "gets" liberty, and in my book liberty simply equates to human love and respect.

My only major disagreement with Ron is about his endorsements. I know he was forced to endorse Texas Republicans by party rules, but that is not in play with Cuccinelli. He should have simply abstained from endorsing anyone, in my opinion. Be that as it may, I am sure he has his reasons. I will just peacefully agree to disagree with him on this.

Common sense tell me they are

Common sense tell me they are looking to the 2016 elections. With the Cooch as governor we may have had a better chance at advancing Rand in a much needed swing state. Even if Rand gets the GOP nomination...Virginia is now most likely going to vote for Hitlary.

I also think that because Ron Paul endorsed him and lost but Crispy tore it up now the GOP is going to say " I told you so" and leave us Ron Paul Republicans in the dirt.

It's like a game of chess. Every move is critical. But if you want to win, you have to learn to play with the big dogs. This could have been a huge advancement for us.

missed it, why is Sarvis a socialist?


I believe she was saying

that McAuliffe is a socialist, and that somehow Sarvis running made McAuliffe win. That assumption is questionable however, as Sarvis spoke more to the Civil Liberties/Anti-War crowd than the tea partiers, and certainly drew his share of liberal votes.

Read it again.

Read it again.

"...open border liberal"

Open borders is not a liberal position, and certainly not a socialist position. It is, however, a libertarian (small-l) position. The free market does not respect borders, and a support for absolute property rights certainly means you can choose which house you wish to buy to live in, however it also means you cannot forcibly prevent someone else from buying the house next door to you, even if they are as "undesirable" as a Mexican.

open borders

Is an anarchist position. People thrive with boundaries.

Are you asking to be tied up?

Do you like flogging too?

This isn't a dating website you know.

Bruce Majors, Libertarian for Mayor