Skip to main content

Margaret Melson gets some major head-to-head coverage against Pete Schwarzkopf

The Cape Gazette again proves to be the most open news organization in the state toward carrying third party news and candidates.

A teaser that shows Margaret can hold her own with anybody:

Q: With redistricting, Dewey Beach has become part of the 14th Representative District. Do you support town officials in their efforts to reduce public drunkenness and promote a family-friendly environment?  Why or why not?Schwartzkopf: I believe in home rule – decisions should be made by the elected people closest to the problem or situation.  I will respect that philosophy and handle issues and complaints right up to the town limits of Dewey and let their elected council members handle the town.  I will always be prepared to lend assistance should they request it.  I love Dewey, and I think that the town leadership should draw a line in the sand and move forward seeking a partnership with the business community to address the issues of the day.
Melson: I support efforts to reduce public drunkenness on the basis of public safety and property destruction. These laws exist.  However, I find it patently absurd that someone would move next door to a nightclub and be shocked that it is loud at night and there are drunken people. No one forced you to buy there. It is your responsibility when you are purchasing property to be aware of the surrounding environment.

Comments

anonone said…
So she supports efforts to control private behavior (drunkenness) on the basis that a property crime or unsafe act MIGHT be committed by a publicly drunk person.

She sounds just like an ole "nanny" statist you Libertarians are always railing against.
October 24, 2012 at 10:05 AM
Margaret Melson said…
I support enforcing laws that exist to protect private property rights and public safety. If a person chooses to become drunk, I could not care less....that is their choice. It becomes an issue if they run over someone, or ruin someone's front lawn, or disturb the rights of others. As long as the person in question is behaving within legal parameters agreed upon in the community where this person happens to be, that is not my business, nor yours. The people in the local community can set the laws and rules according to their standards. I live by the creed, do what you will, so long as it harms none. I suggest you might consider for yourself, as well.
October 25, 2012 at 10:56 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...
44 comments
Read more

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...
70 comments
Read more

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...
31 comments
Read more