Chapter 11 Liberal Party Candidates Meeting

Today was supposed to be a monthly free forum, but because everyone's enthusiasm for the free forum is not high, it was suspended this month.However, the room in the "Philadelphia Inquirer" building has already been reserved and cannot be wasted. Jim decided to hold a meeting with the Liberal Party candidates here today. A total of 5 candidates attended the meeting: Jim from the Liberal Party of Montgomery ran for the state legislature, Chuck ran for the federal representative; Jay Russel (Jay Russel) from other counties ran for the senator; last fundraiser The long-haired guy sitting to my left at the party, and Matt, whom I met for the first time, are running for the House of Representatives.

In addition, there are two extras, one is a friend of Ross, and the other is me.There are only 7 people in total. When everyone arrived, Jim asked, "Who's the most experienced candidate here?" Jay said: "It should be me. I have been running for elections for 10 years in a row." I couldn't help thinking disrespectfully in my heart: Then it seems that you have failed for nine consecutive years. His history is quite complicated. He started as a Liberal, later ran as a Republican candidate, and finally became a candidate for the Constitutional Party, and this year he returned to the Liberal Party.The past 10 years have not been in vain, let's move forward in a spiral.

His main point is that everyone should take action and do a good job of signing for the election, because if the Pennsylvania Liberal Party cannot successfully collect 30,000 signatures, then the presidential and senatorial candidates will not be able to get votes, and everything will be useless. For the other 4 representatives of the House of Representatives and candidates for the state assembly, life is a little easier. The number of signatures required depends on the constituency they are in. Only about a thousand signatures are enough.But the problem is that these signatures must be obtained in their constituencies, so the workload is not small.

Next, except Matt isn't ready, Ross, Chuck, and Jim start talking about their campaign platform.Ross first said, mainly: 1. Small government, tax cuts, elimination of government deficits, requiring state governments to reject federal funding (which naturally reduces their own obligations to the federal government); 2. Oppose the Patriot Act, demand the protection of personal privacy, legalize guns, and demand the abolition of "victimless crimes" (that is, crimes that do not harm others, such as drug use); 3. Privatization and marketization of health insurance (that is, opposition to government intervention), privatization of education, reform of welfare policies;

4. Free market, free trade, and opposition to government intervention in the economy. It's basically a cliché of the Liberal Party.But one of his views has caused controversy: the abolition of the death penalty.He said: "The power of the government is given by the people, and the power of the people is given by God. God did not give people the power to deprive others of their lives, so man naturally cannot give the government the power to deprive others of their lives. The death penalty is the government's abuse of the people. the powers given to them." I couldn't help blurting out: "This statement is simple and beautiful!"

Rose said triumphantly: "It's that simple!" But after careful consideration, I have another question: "However, God has not given people the power to deprive them of their freedom. Why can the government sentence some people to jail?" Rose quickly explained: "That's because they made a mistake, so they must be punished." Now everyone sees the problem, and before I can ask a question, Matt lashes out and says, "These people made a mistake, so they're punished by deprivation of freedom of movement, even if God didn't give us that right; Why can't they be punished by deprivation of life?"

So everyone fell into a melee.I am quite confused about the death penalty. On the one hand, I think it is necessary to keep the death penalty, but on the other hand, I feel that there is no crime that needs to be punished by deprivation of life.This is not bad at first, like a bat, when it sees a bird, it calls itself a bird, and when it sees a beast, it calls itself a beast.But I have been poisoned by skepticism too deeply. On the contrary, when I see a bird, I talk about beasts, and when I see beasts, I talk about birds.Perhaps, what I object to is the categorical truth itself.Anyway, I have always been more confused when it comes to big questions about right and wrong (I have always been very clear about small questions such as a store that gave me 20 cents less). In the end, I had to think that everyone was right, and it was better not to compete and seek common ground while reserving differences.

Far away.The scuffle took a long time.In the end, Jie said: "It is indeed an important question what position the candidates take, but if none of our candidates can appear on the ballot, what's the point? Let's continue with the original topic." Here's Chuck's stance on his campaign.He took out a thick book entitled "Cato's Position in Congress", which he downloaded from the website of the Cato Institute, printed it out and bound it himself.Ketu Institute is a liberal think tank in the United States, and Chuck gave us the link to this book: And finally Jim.Although he is only a "paper candidate", that is, he signed up for the election just to help the Liberal Party sign up for the election, and he does not really want to be elected to the state legislature, but the materials he prepared are the most beautiful, which is a color-printed propaganda Material.I roughly translated it:

Less government, more freedom and personal responsibility Why am I running for office? - I am very concerned about the growing corruption and out-of-control spending in Harrisburg.Now, our politicians treat the Constitution like a bible and never think about it when discussing legislation.People in both major parties are casting fake "ghost votes."I can no longer sit back and watch many Pennsylvanians get poorer while government spending, loans, and taxes keep getting higher.As a Liberal, I would like to lead the House of Representatives to restore Pennsylvania to the small government that our Constitution enshrines.

What is the Liberal Party? ——As a Liberal, I believe that everyone has the right to choose their own way of life.I do not advocate the use of coercion to achieve political or social ends.Founded in 1971, the Liberal Party is the third largest party in Montgomery County and the third largest party in Pennsylvania and the United States.The Liberal Party believes in America's liberal tradition: individual liberty and individual responsibility, a free market economy, a non-interventionist foreign policy, peace, and free trade. My promise - Once elected, I will read carefully every bill I will vote on.When I vote to approve a new law, I will publicly point out which paragraph of the Constitution this law conforms to.All laws that cannot be clearly interpreted by the Constitution, I will vote against.I will lead the state legislature to strike down thousands of unconstitutional laws that undermine our liberty and prosperity.I am asking my Republican and Democratic opponents to make similar commitments.

some issues Proper Function of Government—The function of government is to protect life and property. Jobs and the Economy - "We hold that a nation trying to increase prosperity through taxation is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift it up." - Winston Churchill It is a common myth that the government creates jobs.Politicians are happy to take credit for new jobs when they arise, but those jobs are created by business owners and their successful businesses.The best the government can do is do nothing.Once we cut taxes, corporate grants, government monopoly, Pennsylvania will be a magnet for new business.We need to empower Pennsylvania business owners to create the opportunity to prosper. Environment - The polluters, not the taxpayers, should be held accountable for pollution.That way we can attract more pollution-free economies to Pennsylvania, boosting prosperity and jobs while protecting the environment.Protecting our environment should be a top priority for Pennsylvanians.I will lead parliamentary calls to shut down the government's waste importation and detoxification industries.Now our government makes money through widespread "paid pollution" and then makes taxpayers pay the bill for cleaning up Pennsylvania.By protecting our own private property rights, we can hold polluters, not taxpayers, responsible for pollution.This will also attract the cleaning industry to our state. "Ghost votes" and fake votes in the Legislature - Believe it or not, our hand-elected MPs openly slip pen caps into voting machines so they can go fishing and the voting machines vote all day long yes vote.Some publicly admitted to casting bogus votes for absent MPs.That speaks volumes about their attitude toward the taxes we pay. Education - No one can be satisfied with the state of government education in Pennsylvania.Only by returning the responsibility and power of education to parents can we reverse the current critical decline in educational attainment. The Right to Bear Arms - Article 21 of the Pennsylvania Constitution: "The right of citizens to bear arms for the protection of themselves and the State of Pennsylvania shall not be questioned" - needless to say.