The key issue for libertarians in the ACT is a Canberra dragway. The LDP have been recruiting at Canberra’s Summernats. In Queensland, it’s guns.
[Via The Dead Roo.]
Blogging politics, culture, sociology and life from Brisvegas
The key issue for libertarians in the ACT is a Canberra dragway. The LDP have been recruiting at Canberra’s Summernats. In Queensland, it’s guns.
[Via The Dead Roo.]
The hypocrisy of this is a bit staggering. Noise and other externalities aside, the dragway can only be built with a substantial ACT government capital grant and probably an ongoing subsidy.
Where do these “libertarians” get off putting their hand in my pocket like this, at a time when the ACT can’t fund its hospitals and schools properly?
Vote 1 for a Canberra Dragway? Is the movie and now the Priscilla musical, not enough?
The LDP have a cunning plan.
They’re going to win popular power in Australia one sociopathic fringe group at a time.
I’m not aware of any LDP policy promising to build a dragway. Here are our actual ACT policies.
So, why does the ACT LDP set up a stall with a banner “Vote One for a Canberra dragway”, Yobbo?
Clearly the LDP have been the victims of entrism!
Trotskyite petrolheads: SHAME SHAME SHAME!
This is a tragic day for Australian democracy.
If people are happy to stump up the dough themselves, I don’t have a problem with it. What’s with the fun police around here all of a sudden?
I’ve heard their next marketing exercise is to appeal to the good citizens of Melbourne who’ve had to take the law into their own hands because of lax police response to anti-social behaviour. Fed-up residents torched a couple of cars belonging to hoons doing burn-outs.
Where does it say the LDP is looking for state sponsorship?
Funnily enough, I seem to recall reading that summernats required ACT government funding to survive this year. If this is the case, then following on from DD’s comment, it would appear that these so-called libertarians may have benefitted to some extent from subsidisies by taxpayers allowing them a venue to promote a scheme that would require further subsidies from taxpayers!!!
I can just see the next one: “Vote LDP for Free Beer” (you’ve gotta pay for it though, yourself)
Well yes Damien, and perhaps the roads are funded more than they should be but we can’t avoid using them. What’s your point?
Regardless of whether summernats could survive without subsidy or not if the LDP decided that summernats is a good recruiting ground, why should they hesitate to take full advantage of it? That is a mere *prudential* issue of furthering one’s interests, not a policy one. Why should libertarians have to handicap themselves to promote their agenda? They pay taxes like everyone else.
So do you support the idea that if you benefited from free education you have no right to support HECS? Lots of efficient policy reforms would be torpedoed this way.
Drag racing contributes excessively to greenhouse gas emissions. They must be stopped on environmental grounds.
silkworm,
Would you support (or at least not ban) carbon neutral drag races? If they planted enough trees? Or do you just oppose them as part of another agenda?
Perfectly logical Jason Soon.
Either the LDP has a policy on the Canberra Hoondrome, or it doesn’t.
It would appear that in the LDP universe (a small and dark one by all appearances) everything has a price, including truth.
Jason, if you were flogging margerine or toothpaste, we would understand, Jason. But I think you have claims to being a political party with integrity.
Jason, I was simply pointing out the irony of the LDP’s approach. In any event, as DD pointed out, they were advertising a policy that would require government subsidies to succeed.
I’m surprised you lefties have a problem with the LDP at Summernats. Or even with supporting shooters.
It’s hard to think of more blue collar sports than motor sports and sporting shooting. This is not silvertail territory folks, these are working class interests. Remember them?
The LDP obviously does not support spending taxpayers money on a dragway in Canberra. However, it does support the right of motor sports enthusiasts to establish a dragway without being regulated to death by disapproving upper class lefties.
Just so you don’t keep getting it wrong, the LDP’s traffic policy is here.
And try not to be so damn elitist.
Stop being intellectually dishonest or just plain obtuse Katz (actually likely the latter, from what I’ve seen of your performance, you’re a typical sufferer of verbal diarhhoea i.e. low on the actual IQ). I didn’t say the LDP should compromise on supporting spending for a dragway. I said the LDP has as much right to take advantage of the summernats as everyone else.
What’s the LDP policy on the environment, especially global warming?
Yet more irony!!! David asserts that upper class lefties are preventing average working class men and women from enjoying themselves. In doing so, he presents the LDP as defenders of the working class. Karl Marx must be turning in his grave!!!
Derrida, no one said anything about paying for it out of taxpayers dollars. It’s up to the enthusiasts and fans to pay for their own recreational activities. The LDP just wants to make sure that if a reasonable suggestion is put forward on where and how a dragstrip can be built, that the ACT government won’t ban it or bury it under reams of red tape in the name of the environment or the ‘public good’.
What seems hypocritical to me is that certain people and government officials will call for the banning of a facility like this in the name of the ‘public good’ when a large section of the public want it.
Katz’s view of working class Australians is perfectly clear from his earlier comment, David.
What’s the bet that Katz is your typical limousine leftie born with a silver spoon in his mouth? Pastoralist’s son? Doyen of a family of barristers?
Now you’re just being idiotic, Damien. You’re supposed to be an economist. You run a great economic rationalist blog. But you believe capitalism is the enemy of the working class?
Actually, given my previouys comment that mentions Karl Marx, I should note that I tend to think that the relatively free operation of market forces is likely to result in higher welfare for everyone, regardless of their class, than the alternative. Nonetheless, there are circumstances where intervention is required. These circumstances include environmental and other externalities. It is certainly not unreasonable to have some planning restrictions to account for these.
Revealing, isn’t it?
Jason, I did not say that capitalism was the enemy of the working class. I was not making a comment on economics. I was making a comment on the fact that most people of left wing persuasion tend to think much more in terms of class differences than others. In particular, I get the impression that Marxist economists view themselves as promoting the interests of the working class. It is somewhat ironic, then, that the left would be accused of preventing the working class from enjoying themselves.
Ironic indeed. If the left were genuinely interested in the working class they would endorse its sporting interests including shooting and drag racing. Instead it turns up its nose with elitist disdain.
Marx would turn in his grave at what the left has become, not the LDP.
Know your enemy!
http://world.std.com/~mhuben/leftlib.html
ALL of these thieving ‘libertarian’ creeps I’ve seen are statists - many of them are also xtian.
We are convinced that freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice, and that socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality so long live democratic and especially LIBERTARIAN-SOCIALISM!
Real libertarians don’t need no dragway (nor stinkin’ badges). We just race on the street.
wow, those vigilantes are keen. aren’t they concerned about tit-for-tat? i mean you can’t move a house from a street, or a street from a suburb…
the LDP rhetoric and actual policy in that ropad policy document is a classic case of right-wing libertarian ’small thinking’ where they ignore effects of individual behaviour that emerges on a scale beyond the individual, the thinking is posited as an expression of popularist ideologies, and from what i can figure out some of the policy ideas and justifications are just plain nonsense.
there is no evidence that a sentient being with a snifter of intelligent came up with this point besides the fact it has been written up and intended for communication.
am i to assume that these libertarians are all litigation lawyers looking to make a buck in actions brought by relatives of those that died ‘insignificant deaths’ against whichever government tries this little social experiment? because that is the only way i can see this point being logical
that is just funny. no, it is.
is this based on anything besides raw ideological sentiment recycled into policy (which is more distasteful than the current sewerage into drinking water issue)?
they are only the highlights of stupidity, more substantive comments can be made about the focus and rhetorical accent of the policy as being distinctly unproductive for working towards a better system of automobility.
only one good point was made (as half-a-point to something else):
sign-posted measures should be increased
David, the second example only involves irony if you believe both that the upper class is left leaning in the tradition of Marxist economists and that they are trying to prevent the working class from having fun. Neither of these is necessarily true. While I suspect that the people who are opposed to the dragway are probably also concerned with the welfare of less well off people, I doubt that see it as an upper class versus working class issue. The dragway is more of an environmental iussue for them. In particular, I suspect that they are concerned about noise externatities. Some people will also object to the use of public funds to either build or operate the dragway when those funds could be better used elsewhere. Both of these objections are quite reasonable and need to be addressed.
Anyway, in an attempt to be funny, I appear to have given the misleading impression that I viewed markets as bad things. This is not the case. My view is that the free operation of market forces, subject to suitable interventions to correct for market failures and inequality, is likely to result in better outcomes for most people.
You also need to take account of the history of the debate about the dragway in Canberra. You claim that the LDP’s policy is that it should go ahead onnly if it is funded by private sources. Yet much of the debate in Canberra has been about the extent that it would require government funding. For example, it appears that an upfront capital grant was going to be provided to assist with building the dragway. There has also been debate over whether or not the dragway would require further government support to actually operate. See the following link for example:
http://www.abc.net.au/stateline/act/content/2006/s1725326.htm .
The LDP enviro policy’s quite good, too.
ie do nothing - cf Easter Island
This whole project is missing the point. Drag racing is only fun if it is illegal.
Well, gotta go — Smokey’s on my tail, and so forth.
Lol -Yes it’s called the speedo guys!
What a crock. I also suspect libertarians have a rather unpleasant agenda when it comes to feminist issues but the website is coy on the subject.
This has nothing to do with the ‘fun police’, and everything to do with the geography of the ACT which doesn’t allow for a dragway to exist without greatly affecting nearby residents. It appears that Libertarians could care less.
There’s a world class facility in Goulburn, only an hour or so away.
Feminism means a movement relating to the liberation of women.
How is treating an individual as a sovereign entity antiethical to the above definition?
Unless you are referring to a proposed scuttling of the Office for the Status of Women.
What exactly do you suspect? Libertarians are one of the few groups who truly adhere to a philosophy of a woman owning her own life, choices, body and destiny. Not to mention equality of the sexes with regards to law. By the sounds of it I very much doubt your version of feminism can truly claim the same beliefs.
Junior Johnson: in nine words, you’ve taken the prize for makin’ a damn sight of sense.
May your carburettor always mix you a perfect cocktail, sweet, heady and full of air, a thousand times a minute or more.
Given the oh-so-sincere support of the alleged sacred sport of the working class, I’d suggest there’s been a bit of the slider clutch to ding a ding dang dang the dang a long ling long.
I can see how if these generous souls gave every voter a car and a gun they would be very popular for a while, but if you really want to have a party for the rich just join the Liberals. You’ll find your small government rhetoric will fit in well there, and you will get to cash in public assets to prove how little government you can actually handle.
The Poorer people will just ignore the LDP as there seems to be little if any reason for them to vote for paying more for less services.
I am equally sure that the competition for LDP votes will come from the right and not the left so I won’t be spending much time thinking about their policies. To my mind policies need to directed as those who can’t afford to pay for sevices the rich can look after themselves.
Yeah, anthony, he built mine too.
Right… so let me get this straight:
“Vote 1 for a Canberra Dragway” - LDP Propaganda
but…
“The LDP obviously does not support spending taxpayers money on a dragway in Canberra.� - David Leyonhjelm, LDP federal executive member.
“no one said anything about paying for it out of taxpayers dollars. It’s up to the enthusiasts and fans to pay for their own recreational activities.� - Michael Sutcliffe, LDP federal executive member.
Really now, a party so young to have so completely mastered the art of decievingly worded policy commitments!
That’s great Mr Devil, he actually ate my hot dog.
Anthony,
……….it’s a love affair, man,..
You poor misled soul, Kieran. You may be shocked to find that publicly useable facillities can exist without the government paying for them through taxation! It’s simply amazing! You need to get out of that ‘tax and spend’ paradigm and get on the freedom train, baby!
Kieran, I might also add that public facilities like a drag strip only tend to exist when the government gets out of the way. If it was Japanese herb garden for meditation and soy-latte appreciation it would probably not only have a good chance of funding in the ACT, it would be given a large section of prime public real estate by the lake somewhere between the High Court and the National Library. The LDP simply maintains a position that neither of these recreational facilities should be funded out of the public purse, and that the government has no right to decide whether they should be allowed to go ahdead on a basis of what is fashionable or politically correct. We’re not claiming that drag racing is the most environmentally friendly activity a person could take up, simply that it’s no worse than any number of permissable activities within our society. Just because Larvatus Prodeo readers think people following drag racing are a ’sociopathic fringe group’ doesn’t make it wrong.
Vote for us, you can have your dragway.
Just build it yourselves according to existing property covenants.
We won’t manipulate zoning, covenants, subsidise for or against you or create a blanket ban on such activity. On the other hand all land will become freehold including vast amounts of unused crown land.
It is inane to say that compressing that to a slogan is deceitful or manipulative.
So..
I get to put my ten million watt speakers on a trailer and park them outside Jason’s house and play my special “Hiroshima: sound of a city exploding” tapes do I?
I am bloody sure I could put a camera on it and sell a streamed version of his increasingly deranged responses and make a tidy profit.
Free enterprise, no government subsidy, and entertainment for the masses.
Herding cats, eh?
You look pretty organised to me
But they’re not, are they? That’s why the thing needs political support…
Nope.
Today, we’re the hypocrisy police.
Tomorrow, we’ll declare drag racing to be antithetical to the Aims of the Revolution,and THEN we’ll be the fun police.
David tiley, you know that’s not what we’re doing with our policy.
Does anyone on LP actually have any relevant and intelligent criticism? You put up the article on our policy, we turned up to discuss and defend it, and this is the best you can do?
“Does anyone on LP actually have any relevant and intelligent criticism? ”
Yes. What’s with your logo? That’s a seriously naff piece of design that looks like it belongs to a dodgy charter airline flying out of Vanuata. On the other hand maybe that is the kind of vibe you’re aiming for.
Also, what’s wrong with Wakefield? I’d imagine petrolheads of all people wouldn’t mind driving for a hour to indulge themselves at an existing top-notch facility.
Glad you’re happy to admit that.
You miss my point.
The simple fact of the matter is that “Vote 1 for a Canberra Drag way” will be read, for better or worse, by the punters as “vote for us and we’ll build you a dragway”. Furthermore, despite any qualification you might add after the fact, you are well aware of this.
Hence, promising a drag way, then int he fine print actually dodging the literal intent of the propaganda, which on the part of the LDP equals standard political deception.
Or, in light of your supposed ideals, hypocracy.
damn, I should really learn to proof read, especially with the lack of a public edit function in the comments.
Sorry - I’ll repost my previous comment with html markups so the libertarians can interpret it correctly…
<sarcasm>Tomorrow, we’ll declare drag racing to be antithetical to the Aims of the Revolution, and THEN we’ll be the fun police.</sarcasm>
Readers?
Despite rumours to the contrary, we’re not a COLLECTIVE HIVE MIND.
I’d have thought libertarians would be averse to assuming that because one person proffers a view in a particular forum, it’s shared by everyone who participates in that forum.
I expect to see the next LDP banner display that electorally enticing slogan then.
If the LDP (now where did that name come from) accepts the value of legislation that prevents excessive noise, they are acknowledging that the opponents of the track have a point.
From then on, it becomes a question of fact - will it or won’t it be noisy? I imagine the residents of Goulburn might have an opinion about that.
I live about five hundred metres from Albert Park in Melbourne. Personally, I don’t object to the chaos and noise of the race itself, but I am surely grateful it is not a permanent fixture.
Mark Hill: perhaps you’d like to explain the following comment you made on the “Thoughts on Freedom” blog: ”
Incest: As long as you’re consenting, I don’t care what you do, you weirdo. Now Bob, is this worth sending people to prison over?”
I mean I would say ‘yes’ but I’m clearly not living in your enlightened libertarian Universe. Perhaps I misunderstood though: I’m prepared to give you the benefit of the doubt.
There’s nothing wrong with Wakefield. It just simply hasn’t stopped people calling for a drag strip in the ACT. So long as they are willing to pay for the convenience and adhere to realistic planning laws then the LDP supports their right to have this facility.
I’m not a drag racing aficionado so I couldn’t compare the peculiarities of Wakefield and put up a case why there should be a different strip. Every time I’ve asked this question from various drag racing fans I’ve had various answers. My personal belief is that there is a bit of a rev head culture in and around Canberra, and as the nations capital it’s seen as a centre for ‘club level’ motorsport and car enthusiast events for a number of reasons. The main one is Summernats, but there’s also the dirt bike, flat track and go-cart tracks out near the airport which attract a lot of people who compete on various circuits. I personally believe that the people who attend these events want to round out their motorsport following with drag racing. This includes both the locals and people who travel to compete or spectate on the motorsport circuits.
And good on them. The LDP supports their right to the recreational activities of their choice.
One good turn deserves another.
And apart from you Mark (and maybe Glen), I’ve not seen evidence that anyone disagreed with that assessment, either. Much of this thread speaks volumes about various LP readers’ unwillingness to acknowledge that people you oppose may have reasonable views. As far as I can see, the only person who actually bothered to do any reading (and thinking) was Glen. Everyone else has either got on their greenie high horse or engaged in pointless snarks that reveal much about both (a) their ignorance and (b) their contempt for people who amuse themselves in ’socially unacceptable’ ways.
So that was explained to people who joined at the stall with the banner “Vote 1 for a Canberra Dragway”, was it, Michael?
Given what Damien and others have said about the context of the debate in the ACT and that the debate entailed taxpayer funding for the dragway.
From:
to
in only 62 comments.
Can anyone else spot the
hasty retreatstrategic refinement of policy?I don’t think so at all, SL. The comments here engage with the issues and do so politely, and are largely directed to whether or not the LDP is being disingenous with its electioneering/recruiting. Surely you’re not thinking of this sort of discourse as the sort of standard we should be aspiring to? I’d hate to say it was representative of Catallaxy as a libertarian forum:
http://catallaxyfiles.com/?p=2504#comment-17203
This is a lie. We make it perfectly clear that we don’t support funding from the public purse for these kinds of the facilities, or any other number of things. Anyone who cares to ask any question on this matter or look at our philosophy will be immediately aware of this.
Furthermore, the first hurdle to the drag way in the ACT is not funding from the public purse. It’s the red tape from the government, opposition from people who don’t like these ‘yobbo’ sports and have managed to get the government to pander to their bias, and people who are just fearful of a facility like this becasue they don’t have the facts (and the government plays on their fear). We oppose all of these things, and believe the government has no right to judge whether someone’s recreational activity is fashionable and politically correct enough to be permitted. So even if they didn’t ask questions about our policy, but cared about a drag way, we are representing their interests.
Nice try Kieran, but no cigar.
And signed up a few members to help with the AEC requirements into the bargain?
I’ve just reread the whole thread, Mark. A couple of people seem to want to hold the LDP to the highest possible electioneering standards (a very dangerous activity for those who’ve ever supported either the Rodent or the Kruddmeister). Most of it - including your post - is whinging about the noise all those nasty bogan yobs will make, and worrying that they may have guns as well. And a failure to understand that libertarians are always very, very upfront about three things:
1. Cutting taxes 2. Shrinking government 3. You want it, you pay for it.
I have no problems per se with the LDP targeting niche markets with hot button issues and barely veiled bribes. That’s just politics as usual.
And if they ever get a balance of power in any level of government, I’ll bet you a bottle of Glenlivet Gran Reserva to a UDL we’ll see even more politics as usual from factional infighting and bastardy to looking after mates and luxuriating in the perks of office. After all, as libertarians love to keep reminding everyone, we’re all too human.
My post really doesn’t say anything other than “this is what the LDP have been up to”, SL. It’s three sentences.
But it does seem to me that the use of such slogans and the choice of venue in order to induce people to join the party (I’m imagining that the LDP didn’t set up stalls at nudist conventions or the Nimbin marijuana fest or wherever else people might have recreations that should be free from government interference) lays the party open to charges of, at best, cynicism.
You can’t avoid that just by saying “other parties are as bad”.
The LDP also didn’t choose to highlight its opposition to most government spending (which as noted on this thread, has the potential to piss off heaps of voting constituencies):
http://ldpblog.wordpress.com/2006/11/23/what-to-cut-first
Err, no.
And I think that, as a number of other commenters have mentioned, excessive noise is a reasonable sort of externality to be concerned about. The two recreational practices I’ve just mentioned - ie nudism and pot smoking - both arguably have far less impact on others who don’t choose to participate in them. The choice of dragracing is obviously one that’s been made for a purpose. I’m just hoping that the tons of new members the website crows about have a full understanding of what they’re signing up for. That’s all.
If people want to get into recreational shooting or car racing, I don’t have a problem with it provided that it’s properly regulated so that the adverse impacts on those who are affected or potentially affected are taken into account.
And signed up a few members to help with the AEC requirements into the bargain?
We didn’t really need Summernats to achieve AEC requirements. The ones who filled out a registration form are more of a ‘buffer’ in this regard, in case lots of people resign or whatever. And we wouldn’t put them to the AEC anyway without first seeing if they adhered to all of our beliefs and wanted to be a member. Because, as you might know, the AEC conducts audits and we need people who are willing to say they are a member when asked by the AEC telephone operator.
It’s more about getting a list of people who may be responsive to our ideas if we contact them occasionally in the future. And you must admit, if you’re the party for freedom and individualism, Summernats probably isn’t a bad place to advertise?
Skepticlawyer, thank you for support, however as far as I’m aware the LDP has a faultless record with regards to electioneering standards. Everything is based on the classical liberalist philosophy, it’s clear for anyone to see, and we are truly the party of principle.
Yes, I imagine you outlined to all the prospective members there your opposition to middle class welfare.
skeptic, your claim that criticism of the LDP displays contempt for working people is itself an example of the presumption you’re condemning. My criticism, and probably that of others, is of the duplicity in the LDP’s promotion, not of the demographic you’re targeting.
It’s instructive that many libertarian enthusiasts were quick to categorise motor sports enthusiasts as working class and as a demographic different from their own. That categorisation says a lot more about libertarians than anyone else.
From my reading of LDP policies, the promotion to antique gun fans and motor sports fans was probably misleading if it didn’t explain to those groups what other positions your party supported. And, no, the major parties can’t get away with blatant misrepresentation to special interest groups because they know they would be exposed and crucified by the media and the opposition.
We haven’t done it yet, but it may well happen in the future. We have done gay and lesbian events however, on gay marriage and lifestyle choices. (And no Mark, we didn’t have a sign up saying that they also had to pay for their own marriages and lifestyle choices without government assistance).
We certainly support nudism (in appropriate places or on private property), and see marijuana use primarily as a ‘victimless crime’ which requires legislative reform.
But not:
4. Advertising slogan only. Actual results may vary.
Seriously, SL - the vast majority of posts on this thread haven’t about lambasting ‘bogan yobs’ - they’ve been about pointing out the hypocrisy of that campaign slogan, given your claimed points of principle. Your comment is as disingenuous as your campaign slogan itself.
But that’s OK, because:
Mind you, I’ll grant it’s a difficult position to defend without being disingenuous.
Even Jason Soon appears to have abandoned the cause…
Nimbin is definitely on the agenda, Mark - especially now we have enough people for NSW registration.
Crankynick, read the rest of the thread, ffs.
All pigs queued and ready for take-off, Tony.
“and we are truly the party of principle.”
I’m quite sure you are, as are most fledging political parties. The problem is in acquiring the power to put those principles into action which requires a lot of wheeling and dealing, compromising, pandering and other well..unprincipled behaviour. Stay brave and true! And don’t let the bedbugs bite.
Well, that’s kinda my point, Michael. A lot of the Summernats crowd are going to be benefitting from the sorts of welfare/tax breaks the Howard government has put in place. In fact for the majority of them who are straight, they’re going to benefit a lot more in terms of support for their “lifestyle choices” than gay and lesbian folks. The LDP has every right to sell its policies and its principles, of course, but I’d have thought that it would do better to do so by explaining exactly what they entail. That was the point of my link to the “cutting govermnent spending” thread on your blog.
Well, Mark, it was a car festival, so no, these kinds of conversations didn’t generally come up. However, we did have our economic expert on hand (he’s in the photo) for when they did. And occasionally they did, and we outlined our position. But believe it or not, most issues centred around car-enthusiast stuff like modified vehicles, drag strips etc and individual freedom.
To add some context to this discussion…
Shortly before summernats the ACT government made a decision to ban the construction of a new dragway. The government has also banned the use of the pre-existing dragway. The federal government has also added restrictions that prevent a dragway.
We are opposed to these restrictions. The viability of a new dragway is an open question… but the pre-existing dragway is much easier to make financially viable.
It is unreasonable to expect a party to outline their complete policy on a banner. We had our full transport policy on the table, along with information about the dragway.
Most of these welfare/tax breaks are simply churn, Mark. Most people have no trouble grasping (and preferring) a $30,000 tax-free threshold over baby bonuses, family tax benefit (everyone hates the form) and the like.
Actually, I’ll read into it, instead.
Jason Soon didn’t get the point of the slogan, and thought that you were “launching their debut in Canberra with a spending program?”
But I’m sure that your organisers at the event were explaining the nuances of your position to the 900 people that signed up on the day.
It’s an easy position to defend because it’s logically consistent and based on clear morality…………….so long as you’re willing to be honest and open with yourself and everyone else, and are prepared to make the difficult calls when they come up and not cop out. I honestly feel I could destroy any economic left wing position in a logical argument, as I could a right wing conservative one. At the end of it I’ll be arguing on logic and you’ll be arguing on emotion.
Jason Soon, while a great bloke, never really was fully with the LDP cause. I don’t even think he’s a non-voting member. He’s more of a classical liberalist intellectual and economic rationalist (in my opinion).
Perhaps, SL, but that’s not the case anyone was putting. And I think (having read over the cutting spending thread) you’d need to point out as well that the LDP would basically be getting the government out of health and education. I don’t think you’d find that that’s an easy electoral sell!
And was also smart enough to see the slogan for the stupid idea that it was.