Libertarian Christine Smith is the third highest ranked Libertarian in the race for 2008. Smith answered these questions for The Conservative President 2008.
1. Why are you running for President?
I love America and feel called to help save it by being part of creating a freer and better America through the Libertarian Party.
I will take my campaign as far as it can go, enlightening the American people to the principles of the Libertarian Party, and inviting them to join us in our quest for smaller government, less taxes, and far greater individual liberty.
2. What makes you the best candidate?
Truth is my priority.
I am knowledgeable about the issues; seek to listen and learn; and am dedicated to implementation of Libertarian solutions for the benefit of all Americans. I base my platform on the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
As a charismatic articulate spokesperson (experienced before live audiences, radio, tv, etc.) I am capable of generating media interviews and public appearances.
I have chosen to serve my political party in this way out of a passion to help make America better. My campaign will recruit, educate and inspire, attracting more young people, women, minorities, in addition to more men to join the LP.
Most importantly, I am a candidate who is motivated from love of my country and its people, not from the ego. I will always use the political power I gain (be it simply the media platform I am given or be it elected office) in service of the Libertarian principles I believe are the solution to America's problems.
3. What is the top issue of your campaign?
Smaller government.
Smaller government means: you pay less taxes, you keep more of the money you earn, you have greater freedom in every area of your life.
Smaller government means shrinking the size, power and cost of the federal government resulting in less waste, inefficiency, and corruption.
All of my proposals, whether international or domestic, can be achieved through smaller government. Smaller government will benefit every American.
Smaller government means more personal and financial freedom for you.
4. Do you think you could get the support of conservatives?
Yes. I've already heard from conservatives who have told me my platform is one they can support.
For example, I am a firm supporter of restoring the right for Americans to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment. And, I believe less government is the solution to many of America's societal ills.
My proposals will significantly reduce the size of government thereby eliminating big government spending and excessive regulation of the individual and business in our society.
I invite readers to visit my campaign website: http://www.LibertarianForPresident.com
Showing posts with label Christine Smith. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Christine Smith. Show all posts
Friday, December 29, 2006
Saturday, November 11, 2006
Candidates React to Midterms
Four candidates for President told The Conservative President 2008 what there reaction to Tuesday's election results in the House and Senate and how they thought it would effect the 2008 Presidential election.
Independent Steve Adams: "Two years is a long time to forecast, and much will depend on what the Democrats do with their new balance of power. The takeover of both the House and Senate clearly demonstrates that the American public is disappointed with Republican leadership. My prediction is that in two years, they will also be equally disappointed with Democratic leadership. What this means for the presidential election is perhaps the desire to look elsewhere, such as an independent candidate like me. I plan on being there to offer that choice."
Republican John Cox: "This election validated what I have been saying for the past ten months all over the country. Republicans have not been acting like Republicans and have not been adhering to the principles of our party, the principles of Ronald Reagan. Just as the party responded after the 1976 loss to Jimmy Carter, we will reform our party around those principles that define us; fiscal responsibility, strong defense and traditional values. We must do more than merely mouth the words, we must lead with policies that effectuate solutions that reflect those principles and that address the challenges the public wants to have addressed.
This result will definitely impact the 2008 election. The public spoke - they are tired of the money seeking, power seeking career politicians. They are looking for positive solutions; they demand integrity, fiscal discipline and a resolution in Iraq. They reject arrogance and wish to see the US promote opportunity and hope for Americans as well as all people of the world. They don't want to see Americans die in battle but do want the best defense we can provide. They want our values defended but do not want partisan attacks and division. They absolutely insist on border security and enforcement of the law to address the immigration crisis.
The celebrities running in 2008 are in for a rude awakening. The public wants substance and action, not sound bites. My experience in the private sector and in politics will be attractive. The experience of the successors to three governors planning presidential bids has to hurt their prospects. The low regard for Congress has to impact any US Senator or Congressman planning to run. Former NY Mayor Rudy Giuliani has name recognition but is out of sync with the social conservative wing of the party.
Conservatives, who still form the base of the Republican party; they will appreciate my humble roots as I represent the small businesses that have built this country and create the jobs and economic growth we enjoy. I represent the American Dream and that is the vision of the Republican party we need in 2008."
Democrat Randy Crow: "I wish I was not so pessimistic. The bad guys, Karl Rove and company, have worked hard to make the United States a one party system. In North Carolina partisan judgeships are a thing of the past and in my area major Democratic and Republican candidates did not print party affiliation on mail outs for the November 7 election. Things, namely the war in Iraq and the Mid East have the possibility of becoming much worse under Democratic leadership. It is my guess the Karl Rove, Big George Bush, and yes James Baker, Republican game plan will be to get the Democrats to sanction and support Israel's, which really means the USA's, bombing of Iran and the approval of John Bolton as our ambassador to the UN. So I see the Democrat control of the US House and Senate as a possible plus for the bad guys. As the country's Republican and Democratic voters sigh a sigh of relief that comrade Little George has been stopped, the bad guys will get the Democrats to lead the charge of killing every Arab that moves, spreading bird flu, gutting the US Constitution, making the US a police state, and stealing every quart of oil in Iran and the Caspian Sea. Expect Democrats to demand that the USA become energy sufficient, which is a typical mantra at this stage of the game - which of course will never happen, with oil, anyway, and is a stupid suggestion for the purpose of justifying an invasion of Iran and then Russia. Recently I read an interesting article which stated that whoever controlled Russia' heartland controlled the world. So the Neocon path may be to Russia's heartland via, Iraq, Lebanon, Iran, Caspian Sea.
Little George is irreplaceable for touting the bad guy agenda. So I have not ruled out the bad guys making a move to seize the USA before November 2008. If we accidentally have Election 2008 with comrade Little George out of the picture, the anointments will be contrived and scripted by great writers to make people think we are not a communi$t country and that a two party system is alive and well, ho, ho, but there is no real difference between the Republicans and Democrats. Bad guy Republicans want the minimum wage increased, inflation, and big government so badly they can taste it."
Libertarian Christine Smith: "Overall, due to my rejection of the invasion of Iraq, I am pleased the election results show, in my opinion, an overwhelming rejection by the American people of the course the current administration has pursued.
However, I am simultaneously quite concerned with government spending. Although this may mean a more preferred foreign policy, the prospect of our nation's "budget" will probably not improve. Frankly, I view both the Democratic and Republican parties as big government, big spenders.
I am deeply concerned about America's problems, especially the precarious economic situation I think we're in. We and generations to come may have to eventually face an inflationary future and extreme economic strife due to the enormity of our national debt. Thus since I view Republicans and Democrats as big spenders I don't think the mid-term elections will change that.
Fiscally, I'm conservative. I seek less government at all levels because I believe less government means less taxation and less regulation of business (as well as less intrusion into people's private lives). Perhaps the gridlock of a divided government will result in less government spending, which will prove beneficial.
How does this affect the presidential 2008 election? I think it shows the people, when disgusted with the party in power, are willing to express it at the voting booth. Despite the probability the opinion ratings of the president may now go up before he leaves office, I still think he will go down in history as one of the worst presidents we've had. I think that will be reflected in the 2008 presidential election, as many Americans will again vote for candidates that are not Republican.
Voting for either a Democrat or Republican, is simply continuing the corrupt status quo...it's choosing between the lesser of two evils, it's still voting for more spending and bigger government. It's time the people vote for a candidate, not simply against a candidate who represents a party whose sitting president's policies they reject. The mid-term election shows the people will vote for change, but in the long run neither major party will, in my opinion, produce much change in areas that matter most. With the Democrats success of this mid-term, I think it will of course help them in 2008, but I am still hopeful that those who want smaller government will look toward candidates who want to limit government not expand it."
Independent Steve Adams: "Two years is a long time to forecast, and much will depend on what the Democrats do with their new balance of power. The takeover of both the House and Senate clearly demonstrates that the American public is disappointed with Republican leadership. My prediction is that in two years, they will also be equally disappointed with Democratic leadership. What this means for the presidential election is perhaps the desire to look elsewhere, such as an independent candidate like me. I plan on being there to offer that choice."
Republican John Cox: "This election validated what I have been saying for the past ten months all over the country. Republicans have not been acting like Republicans and have not been adhering to the principles of our party, the principles of Ronald Reagan. Just as the party responded after the 1976 loss to Jimmy Carter, we will reform our party around those principles that define us; fiscal responsibility, strong defense and traditional values. We must do more than merely mouth the words, we must lead with policies that effectuate solutions that reflect those principles and that address the challenges the public wants to have addressed.
This result will definitely impact the 2008 election. The public spoke - they are tired of the money seeking, power seeking career politicians. They are looking for positive solutions; they demand integrity, fiscal discipline and a resolution in Iraq. They reject arrogance and wish to see the US promote opportunity and hope for Americans as well as all people of the world. They don't want to see Americans die in battle but do want the best defense we can provide. They want our values defended but do not want partisan attacks and division. They absolutely insist on border security and enforcement of the law to address the immigration crisis.
The celebrities running in 2008 are in for a rude awakening. The public wants substance and action, not sound bites. My experience in the private sector and in politics will be attractive. The experience of the successors to three governors planning presidential bids has to hurt their prospects. The low regard for Congress has to impact any US Senator or Congressman planning to run. Former NY Mayor Rudy Giuliani has name recognition but is out of sync with the social conservative wing of the party.
Conservatives, who still form the base of the Republican party; they will appreciate my humble roots as I represent the small businesses that have built this country and create the jobs and economic growth we enjoy. I represent the American Dream and that is the vision of the Republican party we need in 2008."
Democrat Randy Crow: "I wish I was not so pessimistic. The bad guys, Karl Rove and company, have worked hard to make the United States a one party system. In North Carolina partisan judgeships are a thing of the past and in my area major Democratic and Republican candidates did not print party affiliation on mail outs for the November 7 election. Things, namely the war in Iraq and the Mid East have the possibility of becoming much worse under Democratic leadership. It is my guess the Karl Rove, Big George Bush, and yes James Baker, Republican game plan will be to get the Democrats to sanction and support Israel's, which really means the USA's, bombing of Iran and the approval of John Bolton as our ambassador to the UN. So I see the Democrat control of the US House and Senate as a possible plus for the bad guys. As the country's Republican and Democratic voters sigh a sigh of relief that comrade Little George has been stopped, the bad guys will get the Democrats to lead the charge of killing every Arab that moves, spreading bird flu, gutting the US Constitution, making the US a police state, and stealing every quart of oil in Iran and the Caspian Sea. Expect Democrats to demand that the USA become energy sufficient, which is a typical mantra at this stage of the game - which of course will never happen, with oil, anyway, and is a stupid suggestion for the purpose of justifying an invasion of Iran and then Russia. Recently I read an interesting article which stated that whoever controlled Russia' heartland controlled the world. So the Neocon path may be to Russia's heartland via, Iraq, Lebanon, Iran, Caspian Sea.
Little George is irreplaceable for touting the bad guy agenda. So I have not ruled out the bad guys making a move to seize the USA before November 2008. If we accidentally have Election 2008 with comrade Little George out of the picture, the anointments will be contrived and scripted by great writers to make people think we are not a communi$t country and that a two party system is alive and well, ho, ho, but there is no real difference between the Republicans and Democrats. Bad guy Republicans want the minimum wage increased, inflation, and big government so badly they can taste it."
Libertarian Christine Smith: "Overall, due to my rejection of the invasion of Iraq, I am pleased the election results show, in my opinion, an overwhelming rejection by the American people of the course the current administration has pursued.
However, I am simultaneously quite concerned with government spending. Although this may mean a more preferred foreign policy, the prospect of our nation's "budget" will probably not improve. Frankly, I view both the Democratic and Republican parties as big government, big spenders.
I am deeply concerned about America's problems, especially the precarious economic situation I think we're in. We and generations to come may have to eventually face an inflationary future and extreme economic strife due to the enormity of our national debt. Thus since I view Republicans and Democrats as big spenders I don't think the mid-term elections will change that.
Fiscally, I'm conservative. I seek less government at all levels because I believe less government means less taxation and less regulation of business (as well as less intrusion into people's private lives). Perhaps the gridlock of a divided government will result in less government spending, which will prove beneficial.
How does this affect the presidential 2008 election? I think it shows the people, when disgusted with the party in power, are willing to express it at the voting booth. Despite the probability the opinion ratings of the president may now go up before he leaves office, I still think he will go down in history as one of the worst presidents we've had. I think that will be reflected in the 2008 presidential election, as many Americans will again vote for candidates that are not Republican.
Voting for either a Democrat or Republican, is simply continuing the corrupt status quo...it's choosing between the lesser of two evils, it's still voting for more spending and bigger government. It's time the people vote for a candidate, not simply against a candidate who represents a party whose sitting president's policies they reject. The mid-term election shows the people will vote for change, but in the long run neither major party will, in my opinion, produce much change in areas that matter most. With the Democrats success of this mid-term, I think it will of course help them in 2008, but I am still hopeful that those who want smaller government will look toward candidates who want to limit government not expand it."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Visitors Since 9:16 PM EST. 12/11/2006:
free web counter