Third parties and independent candidates since 2008


Libertarian Party of Rhode Island to gubernatorial candidates: “Thanks, but no Thanks”

October 29th, 2010 · written by · 8 Comments

Press release emailed to contact.ipr@gmail.com:

Rhode Island Libertarians withhold support for gubernatorial candidates

At The Libertarian Party of Rhode Island’s recent convention they passed a motion declining to support any candidates running for governor in Rhode Island.

LPRI believes in smaller government through less taxes and more personal freedom. After reviewing each of the candidate’s positions they feel that no candidate meets those requirements.

“Rhode Island needs a governor who will not intrude into our personal lives,” says Brian Stack, vice-chairman for LPRI. None of the candidates on the ballot are committed to both lowering taxes and giving the people back their civil liberties.

LPRI believes that in this current economic situation raising taxes will not boost the economy and may lead to an increase in Rhode Island’s unemployment rate which is already one of the highest in the country.

The Party is also weary of many of the candidate’s stances regarding protecting civil liberties and ensuring equality for all people in the state.

To find out more about the Libertarian Party of Rhode Island visit their website at www.lpri.us

Filed Under: Libertarian Party

8 responses so far ↓

  • 1 Starchild // Oct 29, 2010 at 10:16 pm

    If none of the candidates on the ballot are good on both sides of the libertarian equation — civil liberties and economic freedom — then the Rhode Island Libertarian Party did exactly the right thing.
    Kudos to Brian Stack and the other Rhode Island libertarians for demanding a commitment to freedom across the board!

  • 2 Be Rational // Oct 29, 2010 at 10:19 pm

    The Party is also * “weary” * of many of the candidate’s stances regarding protecting civil liberties and ensuring equality for all people in the state.

    ???

    “wary”

    “leary”

    ???

  • 3 paulie // Oct 29, 2010 at 10:22 pm

    Dictionary.com says

    wea·ry
    ? ?/?w??ri/ Show Spelled [weer-ee] Show IPA adjective, -ri·er, -ri·est, verb, -ried, -ry·ing.
    –adjective
    1.
    physically or mentally exhausted by hard work, exertion, strain, etc.; fatigued; tired: weary eyes; a weary brain.
    2.
    characterized by or causing fatigue: a weary journey.
    3.
    impatient or dissatisfied with something (often fol. by of ): weary of excuses.
    4.
    characterized by or causing impatience or dissatisfaction; tedious; irksome: a weary wait.

  • 4 Be Rational // Oct 29, 2010 at 10:35 pm

    Paulie,

    There would be little reason to be tired of something that is presented as a positive. Connotatively we can recognize that the wrong word was chosen.

    It is quite likley that the LPRI meant that they were “wary” or “leary” which would imply that they are “doubtful, worried, distrustful” of the positive statements of these same candidates. It was possibly just a typographical misspelling, but could indicate confusion as to meaning of the word “weary,” or could derive from pronunciation issues.

  • 5 paulie // Oct 29, 2010 at 10:40 pm

    Possibly, but I think #3 may fit: impatient or dissatisfied with something (often fol. by of ): weary of excuses.

    IE, they are [dissatisfied with] many of the candidate’s [weak] stances regarding protecting civil liberties and ensuring equality for all people in the state.

    However, I just noticed another mistake there:

    many of the candidate’s

  • 6 Be Rational // Oct 29, 2010 at 10:47 pm

    candidates’

    This one is a more common and understandable mistake.

    We all need good editors and proof readers.

  • 7 Michael H. Wilson // Oct 29, 2010 at 10:53 pm

    I have always found that it is best not to try and proof read my own stiff. ;)

  • 8 Vaughn // Oct 30, 2010 at 8:19 am

    …But they will probably vote Chafee? I’m not familiar with the rest of the candidates.

Leave a Comment