Well Mathgeek your right everyone has their own opinion. And my opinion is your a douche bag troll.

Cereal question here...


Mathgeek, you seem to offer quite a few quips aimed at Libertarians based on only the libertarian standpoint in regards to cannabis.

I would have guessed / thought that in most regards you would generally agree with the libertarian platform (let's leave whether they are a viable option or not out of the discussion for now)....

I think i speak for most on here when i say that we understand that your not a fan of cannabis legalization / decrim... but what about all their other platform positions.

ie... http://www.lp.org/platform

Also... I bet the trolling would work quite well. I could certainly imagine that it might make a very effective method for finding concentrations of fish.

Also... Nissan over merc.... uhhhhhh YAMAHA?

everyone's allowed an opinion. just because we disagree doesn't make any of us any more right or wrong.

Also.. just wanted to note the irony...


A post asking questions about trolling... end's up being a poo flinging match discussing internet trolls....

Where the hell is "W"

:P

It's nice to know I've challenged your thinking on some issues.

You should get out (of your comfort zone) more often.

Couldn't have said if better myself!!!

For many years I thought my only differences with libertarians were suicide, drugs, porn, gambling and abortion.

Since Sept 11, I've also realized that I am uncomfortable with the degree of isolation many libertarians advocate in foreign policy. I do think that the US should be much less interventionist in foreign wars and avoid being the world's policeman. But when US soil is attacked, or US citizens, we need to put a hurt on the bad people. I also feel strongly that we need to live up to duly passed treaties and international obligations that we have duly incurred. Even if they were a bad idea, backing out on duly incurred treaty obligations is a worse idea. In these cases, we should look for a mutually agreeable way to disentangle ourselves from international messes.

I have also grown to be a convinced federalist. Just because I believe something is a "good idea" or a "bad idea" for government to be involved with; I feel even more strongly about keeping the proper separation between the Constitutional roles of federal and state powers. As a resident of Louisiana, for example, I shouldn't strong arm the federal government for my "good idea" policy changes at the federal level if the matter at hand is not a proper federal power, and I shouldn't exert undue influence on policy issues in other states. It's OK for 50 states to have 50 different state level drug laws, driver's license requirements, drinking ages, etc. The Libertarian party platform almost demands uniformity of laws in different states.

I wouldn't mind too much if the feds got out of the drug game, but the US really needs to extract itself from some duly passed international treaties first, as well as (at the Federal level) get out of welfare, health care and higher education. Legalizing drugs would be much more tenable if the federal government would let abusers crash and burn (per a libertarian philosophy). Legalizing drugs while providing a "safety net" for drug abusers sounds like a step toward libertarian policies, but in the end will yield a bigger and more controlling government.

It is interesting to me that libertarians usually are making public policy pushes for the most egregious parts of their overall platform. Rather than less taxes and smaller government, 2nd amendment rights, and reduced regulation on businesses, they tout stuff like drug legalization, gambling, and pornography. Some even tout gay marriage.

Gambling is a great example where "legalization" increases rather than decreases government control and involvement. I fear drugs will likely turn out the same way.

Everybody gets a trophy

Usually a good idea to base policy on science and not fear.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

this is so fawking gay .... troll deez nuts

As a scientist and an American, I disagree. We live in a Constitutional republic with a democratic republican process.

We do not live in a scientocracy, nor would I ever recommend it.

Science can and should inform public policy, but public policy should be based on the will of the people, within Constitutional boundaries.

When the people are smart enough to see through scientific shams like global warming, their will should dominate.

If the good people of Louisiana and their Legislature remain convinced that the pro-cannabis material is pseudoscience, then their will should dominate.

Or would you favor a federal imposition forcing the legalization of cannabis based on science?

I am not doing this again with you. Each his own. 56% of Louisiana agrees with me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Leave it to Pox lol...

Maybe, maybe not. Thank God we don't change Louisiana laws based on ACLU polls of 636 people.

At the only poll that matters (electing legislators), the people of Louisiana overwhelmingly disagree with you.

Although it's true that the LP certainly has pushed some agenda's via social networking that are popular with younger voters.

They have in my opinion been quite steadfast in pushing less taxes, less government, 2nd amendment rights, and reduced business (handouts / regulations / bailouts etc) and taking a laissez faire approach to business. (ie.. no catering to special interests etc,)

I guess what i am trying to nail down here.. is on voting day, do you choose to align yourself with a particular party who's ideal's you endorse. Or do you take the "lesser" of two evils route.

As i am asking you for an answer, i will provide you with mine first (as it's only fair of me to do so).... I choose to vote for a party who's ideals i endorse to the greatest extent, and no longer choose the "lesser" of two evils route.

As far as the continuing discussion about cannabis your exceedingly aware of the enourmous scientific body of evidence supporting why legalization / decrim is the right way to go. You choose to still take a stance opposing it.... fair enough you have the right to make that choice. So no hard feeling on that matter.

Overwhelming public sentiment favors legalization / decrim it's not even discussionable anymore.

If you get real serious about it you can take a marker and mark your line so you know how much is out and can keep track of what length/depth they're biting best at. Also when you catch one. Troll up enough to let out enough line to get you where were before turning around. Make another pass through where you caught the first one. If you pick up another you can just stop and throw lures now that you know there is a school therr. Its easy to cover alot of water by trolling and then casting. We normally troll along the ledge. One on each aide of the boat. One on the shallow drop and one in the deeper drop. Then cast towards the bank.

Neither. I vote for the candidate I like the most. It's a balance of trust, character, and policy issues. Not all policies are equally important to me.

I've occasionally voted for democrats when their policies and character are more to my liking, but those days are probably over.

I see myself easily voting more for third party candidates than Republicans over the next 20 years, especially at the national level. However, I expect I'll vote for a lot more Constitution Party candidates than Libertarian Party candidates.

Or should I abandon my principles and vote Libertarian because they are the only viable third party?

Absolutely not.. stick by your guns!!! I am actually glad to hear that you intend to vote with your conscience.. we need more... not less of that.

Geek. You need to go have a drink,smoke a joint and get some *****. Live a little.