6 posts tagged “libertarian”
..
Sept 14, 2009
Letters to the Editor
Los Angeles Times
" Sept. 14, 2009
The events that I have attended were protesting high tax, and the Republican Party. I do not remember a Democrat being mentioned. There was only about 15 thousand people at the events. Possibly too few citizens for the media to count??
Libertarian Party headquarters staff and interns joined the 9/12 Tea Party March on Washington with "Republicans Equal Big Government" signs. $400 billion Medicare drugs, $700 billion bank bailout, $3 trillion budgets, $1 trillion war" Again, possibly just too few citizens for the media to count. 
LP Staff Photo
My opinion is the main stream media is disperate to portray these protests as a Repblican Party events. The question is why. Both major parties are corrupt and in the spirit of going 'Green' both need to be recycled.
Lightfoot Letters
Published in part or whole: Los Angeles Times, Huffington Post
Source: LA Times, AM 640, LP,ABC, FOX,CNN
Fri 5-9-09
Lightfoot Letters,
Cervical cancer ran in Katie Brickell’s family, so she tried to get a routine pap test.
That’s no problem here in the United States, but Britain’s National Health Service refused the procedure because she was only 23.
Finally, after three requests, the government-run health care system finally allowed Katie to get a pap test. The results were tragic.
She had terminal cervical cancer – and had she gotten the test when she first asked for it, her cancer would have been found while it was treatable.
If that doesn’t make you angry nothing will.
President Obama and Rep. Henry Waxman
Barack Obama wants to abolish your health care and replace it with a deadly rationed-care system like the NHS.
He claims government-run care costs you less. Not only is that a lie, his system attempts to save money by simply denying you treatment.
Snuck into the details of the “stimulus” package was the creation of the Federal Coordinated Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research (FCCCER, don’t say it out loud.)
Its purpose? To monitor health care and begin “coordinating” it from Washington, D.C.
According to Obama, medication and procedures aren’t expensive because the government meddles in it. He thinks they’re expensive because too many people are getting medical care.
His plan? Cut off YOUR access to medical care.
In fact, the White House announced on “Meet The Press” on April 19 they want to ration access to medical procedures.
That means you, can look forward to stories like the one that ran in major newspapers like London’s “Daily Mail” a few weeks ago:
“Thousands of patients with terminal cancer were dealt a blow last night after a decision was made to deny them life prolonging drugs. The Government’s rationing body said two drugs for advanced breast cancer and a rare form of stomach cancer were too expensive for the NHS. (Daily Mail, March 5, 2009)”
Robert Kraus
Acting Executive Director, Libertarian National Committee
P.S. For Katie Brickell, government-run health care was a death sentence. It requires government to ration access to procedures, meaning she was repeatedly denied a pap test. By the time she got it, the cervical cancer it found had become terminal.
And now Obama wants to bring NHS-style care here. The White House has already announced on national television it plans to begin rationing access to health care. They claim that submitting to a government-run system gives you less expensive care. What they don’t say is that they save that money by denying you critical treatment.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/you/article-1114446/A-smear-test-saved-life.html
Note: Not the work of Lightfoot Letters but worth printing and debate.
George and Sharlee McNamee bought their home 32 years ago in Corona del Mar, California. In 2001 the California Coastal Commission decided to tell George and Sharlee how and under what circumstances they could use their property which amounts to constructive eminent domain without just compensation. In fact no compensation what so ever, only threats.
The Coastal Commission creates policy, rules and regulations that carry the weight of law, with fines and punishment, but do not follow the 'rule of law.' In this case fines of six thousand dollars per day. This is a clear violation of the 'seperation of powers' doctrine. That is; to make policy (legislate) with the weight of law and enforce the same policy with the force of law (judicial) by the same agency.
If there was ever a time for the City of Newport Beach to step up to the plate for a citizen, that time is now! The City should do whatever it can thru legal action or otherwise to deal with the Coastal Commission in defense of George and Sharlee. Especially, since the Coastal Commission is accountable to no one. Not the County of Orange, The City of Newport Beach and especially not mere senior citizens in their 70s.
If the City of Newport Beach can not or will not go to bat for one of its own we have elected the wrong people. People who can not tell right from wrong and have no respect for the 'rule of law. These seem like strong words and they are intended to be so regarding the Coastal Commission that acts like the King or a Banana Republic with the force of a dictator. And, I do realize Newport Beach is between a rock and a hard place with few options because the Coastal Commission treats the City no better than the McNamee's. But that can be overcome, if we as a people, support efforts by the City to retain control by local government for local citizens. Yes, this could cost lots of money, blood, sweat and some tears. But to rid the community of an un-elected king, tyrant or dictator will always be worth the cost.
I think John Phillips of KABC Radio said it best, "Joseph Stalin is back in charge."
CLINTON PALIN and the SISTERHOOD and it's existence?
Photo - Kieth Srakocic
The words “disapproval of the McCain-Palin ticket” attributed to young women and the photo worded “Women for Obama” struck a chord with my inner self that I did not know I had (“Praised, panned in Costa Mesa,” Oct. 5).
I have heard since I was a young boy that there was a sisterhood among all women. What women experienced in life was very different than the good old boys’ world experience. Most women had insight into the pain and glory, that bound them together based on life experience. Any time one of the sisters was unfairly treated or physically harmed it was an attack against the sisterhood as a whole.
If the theory is true, it has met it’s greatest test. What is that test? The crucifixion of Alaskan Gov. Sarah Palin.
No, not questions of policy or experience, which I would expect. An all-out personal attack regarding her lifestyle, beliefs, husband and her children. Not unlike what happened 
to Sen. Hillary Clinton as she campaigned for the Democrat Party nomination for president.
Both Palin and Clinton have been the target of demeaning slurs and personal questions of all types. Saying she is only qualified to run the PTA or that her daughter proves she is an unfit mother is a slur against all women. Because Palin and Clinton both have more experience than Sen. Barack Obama, I can only conclude that the crucifixion of each has more to do with their being successful moms and successful in their chosen fields.
We know the good old boy network does exist, and Palin and Clinton do not belong. Each in their own way, remind me a little of Margaret Thatcher.
The sisterhood did rise up somewhat to the personal attacks against Clinton from many sides of the political arena.
Then, possibly the message 'be all that you can be' is intended for all women.
My best guess, and just a guess, the answer is no. However, if there were a true sisterhood they should realize that if they do well in life the good old boys and the media will crucify them!
Things could change
.
Beanie wrote: Nov. 2, 2008 - I just went and read your post on Sisterhood. Very compelling.
Commentary by Lightfoot - Published LA Times Daily Pilot, Freedom Newspapers, OC Register, Alaska Daily News
FROM PAUL ANDERSON @ LATIMES.COM
Are these edits OK for Publication?
Mark Levin of ABC radio says liberalism is, “the philosophy of the stupid.” Sean Hannity, also of ABC radio and Fox News, is misleading on a daily basis about what it means to be a liberal. Randi Rhodes, formerly of Air America and now on the Nova M Radio Network, is misleading on a daily basis about what it means to be a conservative.
Jameshed H. Dastur (“Will the Pilot let any liberal views through?” Sounding Off, April 8) and Barbara Venezia (“I, a conservative shill? Hardly,” Recipe for Success, April 17) appear to have no clue about what it means to be a liberal or conservative. Dastur thinks if you support Sen. John McCain that makes you a conservative. Venezia thinks tattoos, music or volunteer work makes you a liberal. This is emotional thinking, at best. Possibly they listen to Sean and Randi too much...way too much! My two cents follows....I don’t have any fifty-cent words.
First, what you do is what you are...Not what you say. Being a liberal and liberal philosophy is a way of living. Liberalism is not a political party nor does it have anything to do with any particular political party.
Second, there are no negative definitions of liberal, libertarian or conservative until partisan hack teachers, politicians, newsprint and media talking heads use the words. The use of the word “liberal” (by authoritarian socialists and conservatives) or to use the language of liberalism (by Marxists and communists) does not make them liberals ....not any kind of liberal.
Third, Democrats are not liberals, never have been liberals and probably never will be. Unless they stop past and present, being members and supporters of the Ku Klux Klan , The Race, violent unions, extreme intolerant groups, Jim Crow Laws and public policy that rewards or punishes citizens based on race, culture or status.
Fourth, the LA Times and most print media are authoritarian in nature, neither liberal nor conservative. They claim a special source of trustworthy knowledge that allows them to mold the news as they think best for the good of all society. Said a different way, authoritarian social engineers, not reporters of facts.
Fifth, most libertarians and conservatives have co-opted core values and principals of liberalism and call it their own, but not Democrats or the Green Party. I wish they would.
Sixth, conservatives aim to keep guard, to preserve with the ability to improve, and are not radical, not revolutionary. They strive for well-planned small incremental changes in political, social and religious institutions. They preserve established traditions or institutions and oppose change.
Seventh, libertarianism: Individuals are free to choose to act other than they do, they are personally responsible for what they do, and freedom rules out causal determinism. They are protectors of human rights, life, liberty and property. To initiate aggression is never acceptable
And last but not least, what it means to be a liberal and liberalism: Attitude, philosophy, or movement that has as its core concern the development of personal freedom, popular sovereignty, right of rebellion against oppression, free markets, free trade, and the exercise of free will.
One of its central theses has long been that a government’s claim to authority is justified only if the government can show those who live under it, that it secures their freedom, and is concerned to protect their life, liberty and property. The government that governs least governs best. It’s also about freedom of conscience and limited government that does not try to re-distribute wealth or goods. Benefits and burdens are distributed justly when government allows every individual the freedom to do what he chooses to do for himself and others.
And it’s suitable for a freeman, tolerant of views differing from one’s own — of republican forms of government. Liberalism favors reforms as in religion, education, etc, specifically favoring political reforms tending toward personal freedom for the individual. Liberalism is distinguished from progressivism as connoting more conservatism. Individual freedom is the natural state of man, as men were created free. It implies emancipation from what binds the mind or will. The roots of liberalism can be found in the individualism of John Locke and John Stuart Mill — the idea that the best society is one in which individuals are free to pursue their own interests as each chooses without causing harm to others. Liberals are noble, generous, and free from prejudice.
"I predict future happines for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."
“What country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that the people preserve the spirit of resistance.”
Thomas Jefferson, 1787.
These are not the words of a socialist or a conservative. These are the words of a liberal.
Published April 24, 2008.
Rob Dickson wrote on Apr 24, 2008 2:49 PM: " This is one of the best opinion pieces ever written in the Pilot. A true reminder of how far off the mark modern political parties, pundits and the media are from the true definitions of liberal, conservative and libertarian. If you examine the party platforms historically, they are far off what poses for a Republican or Democrat today. Thank you, Mr. Lightfoot. "
Letter to the Editor - Daily Pilot - LA Times
Date: Wed. Mar. 5, 2008 "Media to blame for misconceptions". (regarding Islam). It is not the job of the media to explain the tenets of Islam or Christianity. That is the responsibility of each person of faith. Nor is it the job of the media to hire people because of their religion or faith. George Orwell would find this as scary as I do.
Phil Bennett, the Washionton Post's managing editor, speaking at UCI Monday about the lack of Muslims working in American newsrooms. Courtesy UCI
Part of a radio broadcast fro the NAZI campaign during WW II.
Mufti-Hajj Amin el-Husseini
See....I knew there was a very special reason we celebrated Feb. 14th. Now, if you must buy something to celebrate Feb. 14th. make it a copy of Common Sense by Thomas Paine, especially for the kids that you love the most!!
Sept. 4, 2004
Mr. K,KABC Radio 790 Mark Germain
>
> You said the Democratic Party has changed....the
> only change I see is party
> members are less violent....which is good!!!....but
> not a change in core
> beliefs.
>
> The old Democrats wanted to restrict jews, blacks
> and catholics from
> indivudal progress.
>
> The new Democrats won't to restrict caucasians and
> asians from individual
> progress, especially in education
> opportunity......and I think jews are
> making the list again.
>
> The old Democrats supported and were members of
> racist groups like the KKK,
> and supported racist public policy (Jim Crow Laws).
>
> THe new Democrats support and are members of racist
> groups like Mecha and La
> Raza and still support racist public policy
> (affirmative action, and all
> public laws based on race).
>
>
> and again the change is.............?
>
>
> ps: the Democrats are not alone in supporting race
based public policy!!Mark Germain wrote: What I said on the air is that if you look at the
platform of the Democrats and Republicans from 50-70
years ago, you'll find that the parties have switched.
=====================================================================================
Denver Post
Headline - THE CANDICATES ON ROCKY FOOTING - This article implies that the
Democrat Party has changed in some way. The old Democrat Party
restricted the rights of Jews Blacks and Catholics, were members and
supporters of violate unions and the Klan(KKK). The New Democrat Party
restricts the rights of caucasians and Asians and are members and
supporters of violate unions and The Race (la Raza).
The Democrat
Party, unionist, collectivist, socialist is one of the most un-liberal
groups in all society. The change is exactly what?
published in part; Denver Post June 29, 2008
