Libertarians

[tailfins]

Doubtful. The Dems in IL have only Chicago. The rest of the people in the state are predominately conservative.

The electoral college nullifies your vote and puts it in the hands of someone presuming to think for you.

OK, then, Chicago could come up with enough votes to win the Presidency. They just need to report last and know how many votes to submit.

[Gunny]

OK, then, Chicago could come up with enough votes to win the Presidency. They just need to report last and know how many votes to submit.

[Drummond]

You have to work hard to be this off topic. You've never identified Libertarians there.

Definitely a lie !

You may not be aware of it, but we're just a couple of weeks away from a General Election. So, if what you say is 'true', and the UK has little if any 'identification' of Libertarianism, then how come THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY EXISTS, AND HAS PUBLISHED ITS MANIFESTO ???

I've taken a quick look at it, and it contains stuff which I think Americans would recognise. But interestingly, it simultaneously talks of the UK controlling its own borders (which we could only properly do if we left the EU and saw the UK become fully self-governing) and, THE CARVE-UP OF THE UNITED KINGDOM, AND OF WESTMINSTER'S POWERS.

That would be a gift to the SNP, or Scottish Nationalists, who themselves want an independent Scotland. Having the UK devolve right down to the level of Governmental disunity the Libertarian Party wants would be a gift to them and all they stand for.

In case you don't know .. the SNP is considered to be further to the Left than EVEN the Labour Party !! Yet, we have a measure of common cause observed between both Parties - SNP and Libertarians.

Nearly everyone is expecting a 'hung Parliament' to come out of the election. The SNP has already offered to work in cooperation with Labour, but has said that under no circumstances would they EVER support the Conservatives.

BTW, try pointing out a thread where I've been "bested." Better yet actually open one and defend your position rather than dragging yet another thread off into your imagination.

Don't be tiresome - get some help for that attention deficit issue you have. I've already referred to the fact of how the UK is prospering, i.e, NOT going the way of Greece. In between indulging your pro-Leftie 'Austerity Sucks' mantra, you claimed that this WAS the fate in store for the UK. I have bested you on that whole subject. More importantly, the SUCCESS OF the Conservative Austerity policy has bested you.

You, and our Labour Party, share dissatisfaction with Conservative success on this issue.

Of course you do. You, and them, think much alike on that.

[tailfins]

Definitely a lie !

You may not be aware of it, but we're just a couple of weeks away from a General Election. So, if what you say is 'true', and the UK has little if any 'identification' of Libertarianism, then how come THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY EXISTS, AND HAS PUBLISHED ITS MANIFESTO ???

I've taken a quick look at it, and it contains stuff which I think Americans would recognise. But interestingly, it simultaneously talks of the UK controlling its own borders (which we could only properly do if we left the EU and saw the UK become fully self-governing) and, THE CARVE-UP OF THE UNITED KINGDOM, AND OF WESTMINSTER'S POWERS.

That would be a gift to the SNP, or Scottish Nationalists, who themselves want an independent Scotland. Having the UK devolve right down to the level of Governmental disunity the Libertarian Party wants would be a gift to them and all they stand for.

In case you don't know .. the SNP is considered to be further to the Left than EVEN the Labour Party !! Yet, we have a measure of common cause observed between both Parties - SNP and Libertarians.

Nearly everyone is expecting a 'hung Parliament' to come out of the election. The SNP has already offered to work in cooperation with Labour, but has said that under no circumstances would they EVER support the Conservatives.



Don't be tiresome - get some help for that attention deficit issue you have. I've already referred to the fact of how the UK is prospering, i.e, NOT going the way of Greece. In between indulging your pro-Leftie 'Austerity Sucks' mantra, you claimed that this WAS the fate in store for the UK. I have bested you on that whole subject. More importantly, the SUCCESS OF the Conservative Austerity policy has bested you.

You, and our Labour Party, share dissatisfaction with Conservative success on this issue.

Of course you do. You, and them, think much alike on that.

One really wacky thing about SNP and Plaid Cymru is that they want to be independent countries, dependent on the EU.

[Drummond]

One really wacky thing about SNP and Plaid Cymru is that they want to be independent countries, dependent on the EU.

I suppose 'wacky' is one way of describing Socialist thinking !! Both the SNP and Plaid Cymru are Left wing Nationalist Parties, neither having the smallest interest in working with the Conservatives in the event of a hung Parliament. It actually figures, therefore, that their fondness for EU membership is shared by both, as well as by the mainstream Socialists, Labour.

The Conservatives offer a Referendum on EU membership, should they win. Plaid Cymru, SNP, Labour, none of those Parties offer such an opportunity.

Interestingly, the Libertarian Party want us out of the EU, which sees them breaking ranks with the Leftie Parties on that. But, this is more than balanced by their preferred devolution of powers away from central Government in Westminster. You could, in Libertarian-world, see England divorced from the EU, but with the Welsh and Scottish Nationalists grabbing enhanced freedom to operate as THEY want to ...

... leading to a 'back door' rise of Socialist power-bases ....

[Gunny]

Definitely a lie !

You may not be aware of it, but we're just a couple of weeks away from a General Election. So, if what you say is 'true', and the UK has little if any 'identification' of Libertarianism, then how come THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY EXISTS, AND HAS PUBLISHED ITS MANIFESTO ???

I've taken a quick look at it, and it contains stuff which I think Americans would recognise. But interestingly, it simultaneously talks of the UK controlling its own borders (which we could only properly do if we left the EU and saw the UK become fully self-governing) and, THE CARVE-UP OF THE UNITED KINGDOM, AND OF WESTMINSTER'S POWERS.

That would be a gift to the SNP, or Scottish Nationalists, who themselves want an independent Scotland. Having the UK devolve right down to the level of Governmental disunity the Libertarian Party wants would be a gift to them and all they stand for.

In case you don't know .. the SNP is considered to be further to the Left than EVEN the Labour Party !! Yet, we have a measure of common cause observed between both Parties - SNP and Libertarians.

Nearly everyone is expecting a 'hung Parliament' to come out of the election. The SNP has already offered to work in cooperation with Labour, but has said that under no circumstances would they EVER support the Conservatives.



Don't be tiresome - get some help for that attention deficit issue you have. I've already referred to the fact of how the UK is prospering, i.e, NOT going the way of Greece. In between indulging your pro-Leftie 'Austerity Sucks' mantra, you claimed that this WAS the fate in store for the UK. I have bested you on that whole subject. More importantly, the SUCCESS OF the Conservative Austerity policy has bested you.

You, and our Labour Party, share dissatisfaction with Conservative success on this issue.

Of course you do. You, and them, think much alike on that.

Drummond, you kinda need to wrap your head around this:

"Libertarians" in this country are on the RIGHT, not the left. Those called libertarians and some even call themselves libertarians are predominately conservatives who don't toe the neocon GOP party line. You're using labels instead of definitions, and you're using YOUR country's labels, not ours. Europe is WAY ahead of us moving left. We're getting there.

A conservative in the US by today's definition was a perfect Democrat in the 60's and 70's. I've said this before: My beliefs haven't changed. The political paradigm has as it continually moves left. In the 70s I was a liberal. By dictionary definition I still am. By today's political definition I'm not even close.

In practice, the Democrats are actually conservative, not liberal. They just have a different standard than the so-called "right" in this country. The very second you take a stand on ANY issue, regardless where on the political spectrum you wish to put it, you are conservative. You take a stand on an issue and are unwilling to listen to the other side or compromise, you are conservative. The so-called "left" seems to take a lot of stances. Well, all but their President who couldn't take a stand on a podium.

Point is, you are arguing definitions and labels that don't mean the same here that they do in the UK.

[Gunny]

I suppose 'wacky' is one way of describing Socialist thinking !! Both the SNP and Plaid Cymru are Left wing Nationalist Parties, neither having the smallest interest in working with the Conservatives in the event of a hung Parliament. It actually figures, therefore, that their fondness for EU membership is shared by both, as well as by the mainstream Socialists, Labour.

The Conservatives offer a Referendum on EU membership, should they win. Plaid Cymru, SNP, Labour, none of those Parties offer such an opportunity.

Interestingly, the Libertarian Party want us out of the EU, which sees them breaking ranks with the Leftie Parties on that. But, this is more than balanced by their preferred devolution of powers away from central Government in Westminster. You could, in Libertarian-world, see England divorced from the EU, but with the Welsh and Scottish Nationalists grabbing enhanced freedom to operate as THEY want to ...

... leading to a 'back door' rise of Socialist power-bases ....

What is a leftwing Nationalist party? You mean like the Nazi's? Who the left in this country SWEAR was right wing?

[Drummond]

"Libertarians" in this country are on the RIGHT, not the left. Those called libertarians and some even call themselves libertarians are predominately conservatives who don't toe the neocon GOP party line. You're using labels instead of definitions, and you're using YOUR country's labels, not ours. Europe is WAY ahead of us moving left. We're getting there.

I agree. You are indeed 'getting there'. I think you're managing the shift in small, creeping degrees, but yes, you're getting there.

And I think that a lot of 'why' that is has to do with too many Americans not being conscious of what it is that's ranged against American Conservatism ... and they allow the Left to win out through a form of blindness to it.

You say that American Libertarians - some - are Conservatives not toeing the GOP line. Ah ... but, in weakening the GOP, are they strengthening the opposition, giving your Left victories it might not otherwise enjoy ?

And don't you think they're AWARE of that ??

A conservative in the US by today's definition was a perfect Democrat in the 60's and 70's. I've said this before: My beliefs haven't changed. The political paradigm has as it continually moves left. In the 70s I was a liberal. By dictionary definition I still am. By today's political definition I'm not even close.

Small, creeping degrees, indeed.

It may be a rehash of social pressures brought to bear over here ... the acceptance of societal standards as 'obviously correct', from which other views are built .. but with those social standards being Left wing in nature.

In practice, the Democrats are actually conservative, not liberal. They just have a different standard than the so-called "right" in this country.

Well, I wonder about that.

You have the leader of your Democrats, Barack Obama. Hasn't his version of Presidential decision-making been the most Left wing your country has ever seen ?

Consider 'Obamacare'. Obama originally wanted to go further with it, isn't that so ? To make it more closely resemble our own, LEFT WING CREATED, National Health Service.

What's the track record, pre-Obama, on matters such as that ?

Obama's shift away from Christian dominance in the US, even declaring that the US was not a Christian country. In this, he could have common cause with OUR Socialists ... and again, isn't it a further shift to the Left ?

And Obama is the leader of your Democrats. What did the Democratic Party's Manifesto have to say ? Was all this change unrepresentative of what it described ?

No, I think that Obama has had ambitions to make the US more like the UK. He and his Party both have those aims.

Point is, you are arguing definitions and labels that don't mean the same here that they do in the UK.

Maybe. But this will evolve over time. The real question is, will Americans sleepwalk themselves to eventual conceptual parities ?

Here's a thought ... on the subject of racial segregation. Consider Abraham Lincoln's 'progressive' thinking. Then consider that, a generation LATER, Woodrow Wilson tried implementing policies which were far removed from Lincoln's own 'enlightened' ones. I think it outrageous that, these days, black Americans consider Wilson's Party to be THEIR Party these days, when the real home of friendship to them was that of LINCOLN'S Party !!!!

[Gunny]

I agree. You are indeed 'getting there'. I think you're managing the shift in small, creeping degrees, but yes, you're getting there.

And I think that a lot of 'why' that is has to do with too many Americans not being conscious of what it is that's ranged against American Conservatism ... and they allow the Left to win out through a form of blindness to it.

You say that American Libertarians - some - are Conservatives not toeing the GOP line. Ah ... but, in weakening the GOP, are they strengthening the opposition, giving your Left victories it might not otherwise enjoy ?

And don't you think they're AWARE of that ??



Small, creeping degrees, indeed.

It may be a rehash of social pressures brought to bear over here ... the acceptance of societal standards as 'obviously correct', from which other views are built .. but with those social standards being Left wing in nature.



Well, I wonder about that.

You have the leader of your Democrats, Barack Obama. Hasn't his version of Presidential decision-making been the most Left wing your country has ever seen ?

Consider 'Obamacare'. Obama originally wanted to go further with it, isn't that so ? To make it more closely resemble our own, LEFT WING CREATED, National Health Service.

What's the track record, pre-Obama, on matters such as that ?

Obama's shift away from Christian dominance in the US, even declaring that the US was not a Christian country. In this, he could have common cause with OUR Socialists ... and again, isn't it a further shift to the Left ?

And Obama is the leader of your Democrats. What did the Democratic Party's Manifesto have to say ? Was all this change unrepresentative of what it described ?

No, I think that Obama has had ambitions to make the US more like the UK. He and his Party both have those aims.



Maybe. But this will evolve over time. The real question is, will Americans sleepwalk themselves to eventual conceptual parities ?

Here's a thought ... on the subject of racial segregation. Consider Abraham Lincoln's 'progressive' thinking. Then consider that, a generation LATER, Woodrow Wilson tried implementing policies which were far removed from Lincoln's own 'enlightened' ones. I think it outrageous that, these days, black Americans consider Wilson's Party to be THEIR Party these days, when the real home of friendship to them was that of LINCOLN'S Party !!!!

We've creeped left, and if you saw my rant in the other thread, you'd see how I feel about the holdouts that didn't vote. But they don't call themselves "libertarians". They call themselves disaffected conservatives.

The GOP HAS TO appeal to the moderate voters. Whoever gets the moderates and centrists usually wins. Hard-line conservatives got their heads up their butts about that regardless reality.

Jimmy Carter was a HUGE shift left. Obama another huge shift left. The further you get from what got you here and the more into entitled thinking, the further left you go. The history of humanity is the same. Those that are hungry fight for what they want and to keep it. Then the pussies move in and huddle in cities under the proection of others and have no clue what it is to fight for something, To be hungry. Sleep in the cold and/or rain. And their idealistic stupidity brings about their downfall because they forgot where they came from and the wimps legislate the strong that gave them even a life out of power.

Now, am I speaking of the Greek, Roman, or British empire(s)?

[Drummond]

What is a leftwing Nationalist party? You mean like the Nazi's? Who the left in this country SWEAR was right wing?

I don't think either resemble the Nazis, no. Neither is trying to wipe out Jews, for example ...

The Labour Party used to be very Left wing ... just one step to the Right of Communists, at one time. Pro-Nationalisation of State services, like the railways, for example.

Mrs Thatcher came to power, winning her landslide victories. Michael Foot, leader of Labour during the 1980's, offered a traditional Left wing Party as opposition to her, and kept losing ... heavily, repeatedly. The perception was that Labour was unelectable.

So, Labour underwent a reinvention, making itself 'New Labour', still broadly Socialist in many ways, but with its goals substantially softened, even 're-engineered'. The reinvention ultimately worked, and Tony Blair came to power ... remarkably 'conservative' in Labour terms.

Plaid Cymru and the SNP are both Parties resembling the older Labour model. Both want greater Nationalisation powers. The SNP argues that we should scrap Trident, which is the UK's nuclear deterrent system. Labour just want a reduction, the SNP insist it be scrapped entirely.

It's differences like this that characterise the Nationalist Parties ... they look more like the old 'loony Left' that Labour tries NOT to resemble.

There's one change in the Welsh NHS which is likely to come about, with full Plaid Cymru backing. Right now, UK citizens can offer to be a part of the State Organ Donation scheme, allowing the use of body parts like kidneys, liver, heart, after death, to assist others in need of them. It's a purely voluntary scheme, which you 'opt in' to, as a matter of choice.

The Welsh NHS is on course to turn that principle on its head. Instead of opting IN, you have to opt OUT. The Welsh NHS wants an automatic right to plunder organs, UNLESS the individual in question has provably opted OUT of that.

This makes human bodies, effectively, the property and raw material of the State, unless individuals register their resistance to that ownership through provable means.

To be fair ... the Welsh Labour Party also agrees this. It's not just Plaid Cymru, but other Lefties as well.

See ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_T...es%29_Act_2013

The Human Transplantation (Wales) Act 2013 (anaw 5) (Welsh: Deddf Trawsblannu Dynol (Cymru) 2013) is an act of the National Assembly for Wales, passed in July 2013. It permits an opt-out system of organ donation, known as presumed consent, or deemed concent. The act allows hospitals to presume that people aged 18 or over, who have been resident in Wales for over 12 months, want to donate their organs at their death, unless they have objected specifically. The act varies the Law of England and Wales in Wales (still applicable in England), which relied on an opt-in system; whereby only those who have signed the NHS organ donation register, or whose families agreed, were considered to have consented to be organ donors.

The law will come into effect in 2015, to allow time for a Welsh Government public information campaign to take effect.

The act is considered by the Welsh Government to be the "most significant piece of legislation" passed in Wales since additional lawmaking powers were acquired by the Assembly in 2011, under the Government of Wales Act 2006.

I will be subject to that law myself, if I don't 'opt out' of it.

[Gunny]

I don't think either resemble the Nazis, no. Neither is trying to wipe out Jews, for example ...

The Labour Party used to be very Left wing ... just one step to the Right of Communists, at one time. Pro-Nationalisation of State services, like the railways, for example.

Mrs Thatcher came to power, winning her landslide victories. Michael Foot, leader of Labour during the 1980's, offered a traditional Left wing Party as opposition to her, and kept losing ... heavily, repeatedly. The perception was that Labour was unelectable.

So, Labour underwent a reinvention, making itself 'New Labour', still broadly Socialist in many ways, but with its goals substantially softened, even 're-engineered'. The reinvention ultimately worked, and Tony Blair came to power ... remarkably 'conservative' in Labour terms.

Plaid Cymru and the SNP are both Parties resembling the older Labour model. Both want greater Nationalisation powers. The SNP argues that we should scrap Trident, which is the UK's nuclear deterrent system. Labour just want a reduction, the SNP insist it be scrapped entirely.

It's differences like this that characterise the Nationalist Parties ... they look more like the old 'loony Left' that Labour tries NOT to resemble.

There's one change in the Welsh NHS which is likely to come about, with full Plaid Cymru backing. Right now, UK citizens can offer to be a part of the State Organ Donation scheme, allowing the use of body parts like kidneys, liver, heart, after death, to assist others in need of them. It's a purely voluntary scheme, which you 'opt in' to, as a matter of choice.

The Welsh NHS is on course to turn that principle on its head. Instead of opting IN, you have to opt OUT. The Welsh NHS wants an automatic right to plunder organs, UNLESS the individual in question has provably opted OUT of that.

This makes human bodies, effectively, the property and raw material of the State, unless individuals register their resistance to that ownership through provable means.

To be fair ... the Welsh Labour Party also agrees this. It's not just Plaid Cymru, but other Lefties as well.

See ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_T...es%29_Act_2013



I will be subject to that law myself, if I don't 'opt out' of it.

Wow. I hate crap like that. "You're automatically enrolled unless you opt out". That's bullsh*t, and them hedging their bets on the lazy that won't bother to read and/or opt out.

That would be a deal breaker with me. They'd never get my vote with that kind of crap.

[Drummond]

We've creeped left, and if you saw my rant in the other thread, you'd see how I feel about the holdouts that didn't vote. But they don't call themselves "libertarians". They call themselves disaffected conservatives.

The GOP HAS TO appeal to the moderate voters. Whoever gets the moderates and centrists usually wins. Hard-line conservatives got their heads up their butts about that regardless reality.

Jimmy Carter was a HUGE shift left. Obama another huge shift left. The further you get from what got you here and the more into entitled thinking, the further left you go. The history of humanity is the same. Those that are hungry fight for what they want and to keep it. Then the pussies move in and huddle in cities under the proection of others and have no clue what it is to fight for something, To be hungry. Sleep in the cold and/or rain. And their idealistic stupidity brings about their downfall because they forgot where they came from and the wimps legislate the strong that gave them even a life out of power.

Now, am I speaking of the Greek, Roman, or British empire(s)?

I think that you could be speaking of British Libertarians who became hungry for power, saw (realised) the truth that real power lay in numbers, and so formed their Leftie Trade Unions, defying the State whenever they could craft a case for doing so !

The 'huge shifts left' under Carter and Obama both occurred courtesy of DEMOCRAT Leaders arranging it !! I come back to my objection: did they embark on those lurches, independently of their Party, OR, was it all mapped out in manifesto commitments and discernible Party agreements ?

I think the truth about the Dem Party is that it truly IS a hard-Left Party, that manages to sell itself as something more moderate ... until an Obama figure proves otherwise.

Over here, over generations, we've had so-called 'inalienably correct' standards dripfed into peoples' consciences. The 'gay' issue is one ... just a generation ago, it was unthinkable to consider 'gay marriage' as anything acceptable ! Least likely to ever support such a thing was our Conservative Party.

A generation later, with Leftie sensibilities drilled into everyone, and it's now the Conservative Party that supports it !!!!

[Drummond]

Wow. I hate crap like that. "You're automatically enrolled unless you opt out". That's bullsh*t, and them hedging their bets on the lazy that won't bother to read and/or opt out.

That would be a deal breaker with me. They'd never get my vote with that kind of crap.

I see that the same way.

But you see, this is part of the Socialist nightmare. Socialists want everyone owned by the State. It's key to their power mania. Mark my words ... it may be a long time coming in the US, but one day, some American Leftist will start pushing for just such a change.

You may not believe it. But it'll happen.

The only answer is to starve the Left of power, as completely as is possible. And do what it takes to ensure that, EVEN if it means what some may see as the compromise of the GOP winning through.

[Gunny]

I think that you could be speaking of British Libertarians who became hungry for power, saw (realised) the truth that real power lay in numbers, and so formed their Leftie Trade Unions, defying the State whenever they could craft a case for doing so !

The 'huge shifts left' under Carter and Obama both occurred courtesy of DEMOCRAT Leaders arranging it !! I come back to my objection: did they embark on those lurches, independently of their Party, OR, was it all mapped out in manifesto commitments and discernible Party agreements ?

I think the truth about the Dem Party is that it truly IS a hard-Left Party, that manages to sell itself as something more moderate ... until an Obama figure proves otherwise.

Over here, over generations, we've had so-called 'inalienably correct' standards dripfed into peoples' consciences. The 'gay' issue is one ... just a generation ago, it was unthinkable to consider 'gay marriage' as anything acceptable ! Least likely to ever support such a thing was our Conservative Party.

A generation later, with Leftie sensibilities drilled into everyone, and it's now the Conservative Party that supports it !!!!

The Democratic Party shifted left after Carter. They did not support him. He was actually an independent who ran as a Democrat. The Democratic Party, when I was a kid, backed Krushchev down and went to war in Vietnam. And Ronald Reagan was a Democrat.

You say Lincoln was a Republican but he couldn't be one today. He'd be a Democrat.

I grew up in a family of Democrats. All were in the military and hardcore. 1980 changed that. Now, 2008 has changed it again.

My point is it isn't about the label. It's about the belief. Parties shift up and down and claim this or that and depending upon one's belief's, you can get called any and everything because people have to label.

Now if you want a REAL question, explain why American Jews are almost universally Democrats? Becuase they can't think outside their box. Let's start from "Go".

We refused Jews trying to escape Germany sanctuary pre-WWII. Democrat President and Congress.

We were against the reformation of Israel in 49. Dem President and Congress.

Now, Tsar Barry has done everything but declare war on Israel and/or provide Palestine direct military support.

[fj1200]

Definitely a lie !

You may not be aware of it, but we're just a couple of weeks away from a General Election. So, if what you say is 'true', and the UK has little if any 'identification' of Libertarianism, then how come THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY EXISTS, AND HAS PUBLISHED ITS MANIFESTO ???

I said you didn't identify Libertarians there. That is true. You are trying to make the case that unions there are Libertarian which is a ridiculous statement to make. At the same time you both make that argument and then try to say that you're not making that argument. You make ridiculous connections in the first place and then think that those connections prove your point. Newsflash: They don't prove your point.

Our Vision

What The Libertarian Party Stands For
• Individual liberty, freedom and the self-responsibility thatcomes with it.
• Free enterprise and Honest Markets for the prosperity andopportunity they bring.
• Small Government and low taxation.
• Rule of Law applied without fear or favour.

Wow, such horrid leftieism there.

In the 2009 local elections, Andrew Hunt came bottom in Cambridgeshire, Wisbech South, with 140 votes.^[5] In the United Kingdom local elections, 2010 Stuart Heal came bottom in Manchester City Council, Miles Platting and Newton Heath ward.^[6]
The party participated in the United Kingdom general election, 2010. Nic Coome stood in Devizes, coming last with 141 votes (0.3%), and Martin Cullip in Sutton and Cheam, coming second last with 41 votes.^[7] On 28 November 2010, Andrew Withers was elected as party leader. In the May 2011 local elections, Withers was elected as an independent parish councillor for Clevedon Walton ward inNorth Somerset, resigning around March 2012.^[8]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...lections,_2011

320 votes over two cycles and maybe one elected official??? OMG, stop the leftie scourge.

You, and them, think much alike on that.

Listen up coward, open up the thread and point out where my tax cutting proposal matched Labour's position. Oh yeah, you can't, you prefer to lie. That's what cowards do; that and eventually slink away and try and start things up again in a completely different thread.