Leave it to the Montana GOP to flip me the bird (once again) as soon as I put up a post declaring my intention to go quietly into the night. Rusty over at MTPundit has the details, as does today’s Helena IR. It looks to me that all that’s left of the thing are some fairly mild “Castle Doctrine” changes. As usual, these Republicans are happy to defecate on liberty in order to get a slap on the back from all of the “important” people. It’s also obvious that those who value liberty ain’t included in that number.
-
« Home
-
Categories
Comments 4
Great.
Posted 03 Apr 2009 at 12:15 pm ¶I guess they were afraid Obama wouldn’t invite them to dinner.
So what was the point of it all?
Further, what was the point of fighting to make America and keep it free?
From what I understand MT allows amendments to the state constitution by initiative and referendum.
Maybe the legislature puts a lot of roadblocks in your way, but if it’s practical you might try to amend the constitution to open up the system for existing or new third parties. You could elect one house of the legislature by proportional representation. Israel and the Netherlands (among many, many other countries) elect their legislatures via PR and have a choice of many parties. I’m not saying that 15 or 20 parties would be a good thing, but there should be a choice of more than the usual two-especially since the GOP has spent the last 8 years thoroughly discrediting itself. It would be simple to construct a proposal that avoids the pitfalls that tend to plague, for example, Israel after every election. Also existing term limits would prevent party hacks from gaining lifetime sinecures.
And this is a completely separate issue from
that of conversion to parliamentary government.
Given the status quo 99 times out of 100 any candidate not a D or an R is relegated to joke status.
A conservative argument for PR:
Posted 04 Apr 2009 at 5:01 pm ¶http://www.fairvote.org/?page=505
PR may get a voice like mine representation, but in my opinion that would still have a negligible effect on policy. The problem, as always, is with the people casting the majority of the votes. The upside, if you want to call it that, is that at eventually those who’ve made the bed actually have to lay in it.
Posted 05 Apr 2009 at 6:22 pm ¶What I understand is they put enough in the bill that they could afford to have a few things thrown out,kind’ve like decoys. Gary Marbut said that while he was disappointed that some things got thrown out but it was still a pretty good bill. You want a better bill next go round? Get more conservative legislatures elected then,it’s not THAT hard. Further more if your local central committee holds your local legislature to the MT-GOP’s party platform you should get a much better results from your senators and rep.s. In Ravalli county we have changed our county by-laws so that we do not have to support the legislatures if they do not follow the state platform. We have seen alot of improvement,not good enough in most cases,but still alot of improvement in our legislatures. As far as third party,remember Rick Jore held a seat in the legislature as a Constitution party member,so it is possible. The weakness I see in the state third parties is they cannot seem to stop fighting amongst themselves to accomplish anything. I think perhaps,if they can get their act together third parties may be able to make great strides with things as they are. People are sick of the b.s. the Republicrats are handing them.
Posted 30 Apr 2009 at 11:10 am ¶Post a Comment