Spoiling the chances of the establishment ruling class to implement the single party system. There are only two parties in contention Libertarians and even that is a suipposition and the government party.

The platform threw some off as it does not match the candidates so that idea applied to a Lib/Trump and currently one suggest ed by others and pushed by the Millennials is correct but not with the correct side of things. For sure they dont represent their iparty platform so what say the party bosses over their in lib land?

Certainly and it's the reason pursuit of happiness was included in the Declaration. Attacking someone takes many forms so as the founders thought about it they came up with a qwuality of life statement. Life with out Liberty is impossible when pursuit of happiness is impaired. I got this one straight from the explanation offered in the Hillsdale course ont he Constitution. and it is the reason for those words being included. Don't bother the neighbors.

That can easily be stretched to inlude what iyou said about dumping toxics and it' sa direct attack meaning defense is authorized.

As to the rights the false premise is assuming they have the right to impose a right that in turn infringes on a previously granted or natural right or rights.

Money as free speech came about exactly that way if you follow the trail which started with King George III. But the proponents of that which in modern terms says Corporations have a person hood and tht gives them the rights of individuals and vice versa EXCEPT for two reasons the courts ignored. The smallest minority is a group of one and of those groups who can outspend a corporation. The whole reason for that personhood thing was to protect stock holders in a suit against the corporation and allow corporate employees at the highest level to hide behind that protection. But it's evolved into much more and now allows everything except direct contact with a candidate or public official using money. Corporations can be for example a 'Foundation. registered as an LLC.' That's their escape hatch.

The second reason goes like this. it's the Soros mantra. "I Have The Right without explanation to take away your rights without exception.

Cast your eyes over the Consitutiton and bill of rights and see how many rights were trampled by money as free speech. Something like Five if memory serves. But the court only considered none of that.

So we have to maintain that no right can be put in place that infringes in existing rights.

And that goes for states rights over turned by rogue bought and paid for judges who use their judicial power to overturn parts for the Constitution they don't like. I's a standard Soros secular progressive ACLU tactic followed by the circular but still false premised arguments which is radical reasoning for repeat a lie enough and it becomes the truth especially if you control education and the media. Look at how well that worked with the balanced budget with a surplus scam. And that was a five minute research job to disprove and a overnight weight to clarify one point with the Treasury Department.

But then we were dealing with reporters not journalists.

I thought about that and looked at the suggested existing efforts. given the size at the present timeI'll hold off. I really like not being in, at least in one phase in my life, a collective as much as possible. It' seems to defeat the purpose but given something the size of a libertarian party an easy goal really I would do like all good objectivists and apply the new information. I still believe the way to accomplish that is coalition politics but the idea is to new in the USA except of course for the Democrats and Republicans. But I have been watching as with anything while it may not be personally useful right now Law Three always keep testing. I belong to no organizationis at the present time and contribute on my own to some orphanages and the local ambulance service. Comes from spending time as a single hander in sailing.