In my post about the idiotic over-reaction to a New Jersey 10-year-old posing with his new squirrel rifle , Dana Garrett left me this response: One waits, apparently in vain, for you to post the annual rates of children who either shoot themselves or someone else with a gun. But then you Libertarians are notoriously ambivalent to and silent about data and facts and would rather talk abstract principles and fear monger (like the government will confiscate your guns). It doesn't require any degree of subtlety to see why you are data and fact adverse. The facts indicate we have a crisis with gun violence and accidents in the USA, and Libertarians offer nothing credible to address it. Lives, even the lives of children, get sacrificed to the fetishism of liberty. That's intellectual cowardice. OK, Dana, let's talk facts. According to the Children's Defense Fund , which is itself only querying the CDCP data base, fewer than 10 children/teens were killed per year in Delaw
Comments
"Less than 24 hours after a man espousing conservative and libertarian views surprised the state’s political scene by winning the Democratic nomination, the Tennessee Democratic Party disavowed him, saying he’s part of an anti-gay hate group.
The party said Friday that it would do nothing to help Mark Clayton, 35, who received nearly twice as many votes as his closest challenger in Thursday’s seven-candidate primary, winning the right to challenge Republican U.S. Sen. Bob Corker in November."
Every party has nuts. At least the Dems have disavowed him and stated that they will do nothing to help him. Can you give me examples of the GOP or Libertarians doing the same with their nuts? (Serious question, btw)
David Duke would be one.
You just turned this into one of your usual silly DL games, pandora. No surprise there.
So don't expect me to play by different rules. So-called "real" Democrats in Tennessee simply didn't work hard enough to keep this nut off the ballot, so they--and all other Democrats--now own him.
When you guys start playing nice in the first place, come back and talk.
No. Those "nuances" do not apply to Tennessee Libertarian candidates.
No one outside a party is going to trouble to influence a party primary when that party garners less than 1% of the total vote in a general election. In 2008, even Ralph Nader out-polled Libertarian Bob Barr by over 3,000 votes in Tennessee.
The Libertarian Party of Tennessee is just not big enough to be taken so seriously by the D and R parties.
As for Public Advocate, I have no idea about the organization, but you could pretty much take the Republican Platform's social agenda and find its mirror. That is hardly a hate group. It is mainstream. Now that is the real reason the Democratic party in TN is losing more and more. They are calling a large segment of their own party let alone a majority of the state haters and nuts for believing traditional values. Then refuse to acknowledge the duly nominated candidate based upon it. That is outrageous. The Democrat headquarters should be surrounded with protesters demanding the leadership's ouster. Your job is to listen to the people if you can't do it, leave.