Marijuana.com

Plainsman1963

Woman heads Libertarian ticket
04-12-06 | Montgomeryadvertiser.Com | John Davis

It took 16 votes to give Loretta Nall the Libertarian Party's backing for governor. It's going to take 40,996 more registered voters to get her on the November general election ballot.

Nall, who lives in Alexander City, is in step with Republican and Democratic candidates in some ways, and in others, not so much. She supports a lottery and wants to reduce the prison population.

But Nall, who is appealing a 2004 misdemeanor drug possession conviction, also is in favor of legalizing marijuana.

"Making the drugs illegal hasn't stopped anybody from getting drugs," she said Tuesday at her nomination announcement on the Capitol steps. Her campaign for governor is backed by the U.S. Marijuana Party that she founded.

Nall said changing drug laws could lead to reducing Alabama's 28,000-plus prison population, a population that will cost the General Fund $319 million next year.

Despite opposition in her own small ranks -- six out of 22 people cast votes against her at the party's convention Saturday -- Nall says her "chances are as good as anybody else's."

She believes the government has been "stupid on crime." Other things she's against: the war in Iraq, the Patriot Act and Jesus in government.

"I think we need to get the government out of education as much as possible," she said, pushing for tax breaks and vouchers for people who send their kids to private schools.

In addition to Nall, Dick Coffee of Mobile won the party's nomination for U.S. House, District 1. Dick Clark of Auburn will run for state House District 79 in the general election and William McLaurine is a candidate for Auburn city mayor.

None of the Libertarian candidates are being challenged by other party members in the June primary.

__________________


"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." - Claire Wolfe

Posting Guidelines

 

Pskitzo

It will be a miracle if she gets elected, and if so, it would be an even bigger miracle if she managed legalization in Alabama. Stranger things have happened though. If I were old enough to be a registered voter, I would most definetaly vote for her. But alas, I am not.

Oh well, I'm enjoying the "best years of my life," and I'm going to be sad the day I have to move out and have to pay taxes/mortgage/utilities/car payments/etc.

Dalamar49

Good luck Libertarian Loretta!

Little Nicky

Who do you think she'll be the spoiler for? The Dems or the Cons?
Ralph Nader gave us GW in 2000. Remember that when you go to the polls and bet on a long shot.

Toking Jedi

I'd vote for her, if I was considering only that. But the problem will be that many people will only see that issue when they see her. She'll become the "marijuana candidate", and that might not be so good.

Plus, I don't agree with her other policies:
I'm for public payment for public education, public healthcare, and public social security. I don't agree with the libertarian idea that government shouldn't meddle in private affairs. Call me a Social Democrat: I believe that being a citizen of the United States, I am a participant in the social contract that all other citizens participant in; thus I am obligated to pay taxes, obligated to vote, and obligated to support government policies and laws that improve the social network and safety net.

That's why I don't agree completely with this woman. Sure, legalization is great, but then what? Legalization works when marijuana production and retail is incorporated into the social contract through being TAXED. The tax money then should go to the budget of public education to educate kids about being smart about trying marijuana and marijuana use. Tax cuts mostly go to the richest 1% of the population. Taxes poured into public education go to the poorest 50%. I certainly support the latter.

__________________

 

Plainsman1963

Personally, I am real tired of that argument.

There are a few assumptions being made whenever that opinion is bandied about, imo.

First, how do you know who they would have voted for if they didn't vote 3rd party?
How do you know they would have voted at all?

Sometimes, the people that bemoan anybody voting 3rd party are the same people who are saying "there really isn't a 2 party system, they are just different sides of the corrupt political machine".

Well, how in the hell do you think we will ever get out of a strict 2 party system unless we start voting out of the box? Instead of people blaming folks for voting 3rd party, they should be cheering, as far as I am concerned.

My state just lost the libertarian party. They didn't get 3% of the vote last election, so now there are no registered libertarians in the state.
Plus the more folks that vote for a 3rd party means the more matching funds (or just getting matching funds) received which can be used to get out of this two party rut we are in.

Now, I am not advocating voting 3rd party just to vote 3rd party.

But I will continue to vote for the best candidate for the job, regardless of party affiliation and if that person happens to be a libertarian, or green party or whatever...So be it.
Somebody wants to blame me for somebody else getting voted in, that's fine, but I ain't buying it.
I vote for somebody, not against somebody.

TheNewGuy

Why, just because you were born here? I definitely believe that all citizens should pay taxes so we can keep our roads intact and maintain a police force and stuff like that, but why should I have to pay for every single other persons medical bills? Just because I was born in America I am obligated to pay for other peoples mistakes? So what, my only option if I want to be free I have to swim out to international waters and find my own island?

This is why I like the Libertarians: They believe the government should only intervene when absolutely necessary, and thats the way it should be. The government's only job should be to protect the people, and keep everything in check not to play mommy and daddy (or landlord) for the people.

By the way, if you vote Democrat or Republican, just take all the hope you had for legalization and flush it down the toilet, because big-time parties like those aren't willing to get bad press by pushing for legalization of any recreational drug. There might be some here and there that support medical marijuana, but support for outright legalization is pretty limited.

__________________
"Anyway, no drug, not even alcohol, causes the fundamental ills of society. If we're looking for the source of our troubles, we shouldn't test people for drugs, we should test them for stupidity, ignorance, greed and love of power." ~P.J. O'Rourke

Buzzby

It would be pretty hard not to think of her in that way since she is the President of the US Marijuana Party.

__________________

Little Nicky

96000 people voted for Nader in Florida and you're saying that they (all 96000 of them) wouldn't have voted if Nader didn't run. Face the facts...Nader is responsible for GW being in office. Just like Clinton got elected because Perot was in the mix. Third parties in america are just spoilers who have no chance of winning and usually cost the election of the guy who is more similar to their beliefs than the guy that won.

Little Nicky

Go and buy a lottery ticket. You have a better chance of winning that lottery than she does of winning an election in Alabama.