The press release is available below:
http://www.independentamericanparty.org/wp-content/uploads/Press_Release.pdf
Thanks to Cody Quirk for the link.
72 Comments
Comments are closed.
July 23, 2026
Your Premier Source on Third Parties and Independent Candidates Since 2008
The press release is available below:
http://www.independentamericanparty.org/wp-content/uploads/Press_Release.pdf
Thanks to Cody Quirk for the link.
I've been a contributor for IPR since January 2013. I consider myself to be a paleoconservative. I'm also the founder of American Third Party Report. Email me at [email protected].
Comments are closed.
http://blog.colbornemmx.com/2014/04/summary-and-reactions-to-cattlemen-and.html
I’m for that. There’s only about 4,000 other laws that have to be changed at the federal level to deal with that and who knows how many at the state and local level. Everything from hospital visitation, inheritance, immigration, testimony in court…you name it.
In the meantime, marriage equality.
Paul said: “So no more marriage licenses to people who are too old to have kids,”
How about no more marriage licenses for anybody? The state should not be in the marriage licensing business in the first place. How about a national boycott on state marriage licenses? People who want to get married should just get married without getting a government marriage license. People who have government marriage licenses could burn them in public GET THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF MARRIAGE LICENSING protests.
People should stop going to the state for permission slips (which they have to pay for) to get married.
I know some people prefer the kinder, gentler IPR, but personally, I find this sort of stuff to be far more entertaining. All I need now is a nice, big bag of popcorn!
Meanwhile, back at the ranch…
http://www.thelibertybeacon.com/2014/04/18/liberty-movement-rising-the-fight-is-just-beginning/
I have clearly defined what sex is. You chose to ignore my definition. Everything I have said is based on fact. Everything you all said is based on anecdotes and emotion. Do some research. I’ve done mine.
What you said is nonsense. I know lots of gay men and lots of women who have all had lots of anal sex and none of them are incontinent. If anal sex causes incontinence it must be in a trivially small percentage of the people who have it. And marriage discrimination applies against lesbians, not just gay men.
That would be an incorrect presumption. Many, I would guess most, straight couples also have anal sex. And not all gay men do.
To enforce your “health” rationale equitably, all couples, straight or gay, would have to be videotaped at all times to monitor what sex acts they do or do not engage in.
Exactly.
Repeating nonsense does not make it valid.
That’s false. There are plenty of male couples who only have oral sex, mutual masturbation, etc., for example.
All of this has already been addressed. If you repeat your nonsense again it still will not be true.
Maybe the truth is bigoted. Anal sex is the only type of sex possible between men. It is presumed in the same sex marriage. Anal sex is not the only sex possible between men and women. It is not presumed. If you want the government to not decide what to subsidize, then stop subsidizing. But it is stupid to subsidize something with no benefit that only causes health problems.
“It becomes the government’s business”
The only thing the government needs to know about you is your name, and even that I go back and forth on.
“when it is subsidized.”
I don’t want a subsidy, I want to get married.
“As I said, gay sex causes incontinence.”
Gay sex and anal sex are not the same thing. Some straight people have anal sex. Some gay people don’t have anal sex. Again, your bigotry is showing when you continue to call anal sex gay sex. Also, most sex educators agree that the risk of incontinence related to anal intercourse is minimal, at best.
It becomes the government’s business when it is subsidized. As I said, gay sex causes incontinence. Jill’s anecdote about pregnancy is not evidence.
CLC said: “Marital sex between husband and wife is presumed”
Presumed by you. I could give many examples of why it’s not always healthy, as I did in the comment above about childbirth. Your bigotry is showing, as Jed said.
Gay sex is not inherently unhealthy any more than straight sex is. Your bigotry is showing.
What people do in the bedroom and whether or not it is healthy is none of your or the government’s Goddamn business.
This might be the greatest thread derail in IPR history. I need to start trolling here more often again.
The State should not subsidize sex between men also because it is inherently unhealthy, as I said. Marital sex between husband and wife is presumed to be healthy vaginal intercourse.
Why not? If the reason to discriminate against gay couples is that they can’t conceive children, it follows that we have to discriminate against any other couples that can’t or won’t conceive children. And to do so in as fair a manner as possible, we have to make absolutely sure that they aren’t cheating by, say, having non-vaginal sex or using birth control, don’t we? Otherwise our stated reason for discriminating against gay couples in issuing marriage licenses starts to fall apart, doesn’t it?
That’s not reasonable paulie.
So no more marriage licenses to people who are too old to have kids, have had their tubes tied, or can’t prove themselves to be fertile after a mandatory test without which no marriage license may be issued? And of course no abortion or even birth control, since we want people to have as many kids as possible? After all it would just be cheating to allow someone to get married unless they can prove that they are trying to and are capable of conceiving children? Naturally we’ll have to have proof that they are actively trying to conceive, as well.
Fair enough. I find you calling my sex life “unhealthy” insulting, but I respect that we have a difference of opinion.
If we returned to the 19th century when being gay wasn’t an identity but a choice in activity, we wouldn’t have hate crimes or bullying. That exists because of identity politics.
The anus is an orfice in the vicinity of the genitals. The mouth is not in that vicinity. Frotting, though involving the genitals does not include penetration.
I can understand why you find it strange that straight men watch gay porn. I once felt that way. I also felt the idea of it was disgusting. But after watching the transsexual beauty pageant on the Howard Stern show, I appreciated the aesthetically pleasing combination of male and female features. The only thing that stopped me from seeking one out was my knowledge of the prevalence of AIDS in that community and from what I read about the health problems associated with anal sex. I then put two and two together and understood the Bible’s ban. I am not suggesting laws be passed to ban the practice. I am saying that I understand such bans and will follow one myself. So yes, I’ve become more appreciative of the aesthetics of the male genitals and so enjoy gay porn, but I find the female form to be more wholesome. This doesn’t make me bi or gay because I don’t believe such concepts mean anything. People develop tastes for certain things from experiences. Do you think prisoners go in wanting to have sex with other men? Probably not. Likewise, most men prefer a certain race in a woman. There’s no word for that, it’s just a preference. If you prefer having sex with men, why should society care? Should I get a gold star for exclusively having sex with white women? Our society today is making too much of the sex preference and it’s leading to confusion to children who feel they have to identify as something . I say, you don’t have to be anything. Your life will guide your preferences and it’s probably something that’s going to change. For me, one year I prefer blondes, right now I have a thing for brunettes. But society has purpose to subsidize the choice of activities that will benefit it. Marriage benefits subsidized opposite sex couples to encourage procreation in a stable environment. Society has no reason to subsidize men who have sex with men because such activity has no benefit to society. Such only encourages unhealthy activity. Can we just drop identity politics? It unnecessarily divides us. There are no gay people. There are no bi people. We are just people with different preferences and we shouldn’t care.
Also, more open about enjoying transsexual and gay porn.
Hey, look at it on the bright side. At least CLC is more open-minded than Don Grundmann.
For your punishment, you will be placed in backward-facing stocks for a week inside a Turkish prison.
Sure you have.
It can be good authority for you if that is what you want. Just keep it out of the laws that are enforced against other people who do not consider it to be good authority for them.
So why exactly is anal sex sex, but oral sex not sex? What’s the “logic” …behind… that?
It’s a bad, but addictive, habit. Much like trolling itself.
“sex the Bible allows”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_DEp1lz0CM
Just like lots of straight guys enjoy gay male porn. It’s possible that you don’t know how ridiculous you sound, but highly unlikely.
Also, if activity between men involving the mouth and penis is not sex why was it banned by sodomy laws? And why did it get countless men thrown in dungeons and insane asylums, mutilated, whipped, hung, shot, pelted with rocks or burned at the stake for violating such regime edicts?
I admit to having trolled out of humor, but in this discussion I have been completely frank and honest. I do not base my sexual practices on the Bible. I base them on what is healthy for my body. It happens to conform with the Bible and from that discovery I concluded that the Bible is good authority.
Fellatio is not sex. Frotting is not sex. Hand jobs are not sex. Those activities can be fun and exciting when engaged with a person one finds aesthetically pleasing, but they are not sex.
Sex is considered the penetration of the excretory or vaginal orfices with the genitals or extension thereof. Though included in that definition, the anus was not made to be penetrated. It is for excreting solid waste. Penetration can interfere with that process and so it is reasonable for the Bible to forbid it.
He’s just trolling. Not even sure why I bother humoring his absurd statements. Mild amusement I guess.
“Sex between husband and wife does not involve the anus. Activity between men involving the mouth and penis is not sex.”
More absurd statements.
The whole idea of asking God who I can have sex with strikes me as absurd, also.
The only people I know who are incontinent are women who have given birth vaginally several times. Ban hetero sex and childbirth because they’re unhealthy.
“sex the Bible allows”
What an absurd phrase. .
“Sex between husband and wife does not involve the anus.”
You poor, poor man. All my straight male friends have wives who let them do butt stuff.
“Activity between men involving the mouth and penis is not sex.”
Bill Clinton taught you well I see. Yes, oral sex is sex. So is frotting. I’ll give you time to Google that.
By “sex between husband and wife” I mean the sex the Bible allows.
Sex between husband and wife does not involve the anus. Activity between men involving the mouth and penis is not sex.
I’ve never suffered incontinence from having anal sex, nor has any other gay person I know. Also, not all gay people engage in anal intercourse.
Also, straight people have anal sex too, so you should be equally worried about straight women becoming incontinent.
So straight sex can make people incontinent, transmits HIV & STDs, AND can result in unwanted pregnancy. Given that last qualifier, gay sex is far more healthy & safer than straight sex.
To quote my favorite President: You lose.
Pregnancy is necessary to maintain society. That is why the Bible allows straight sex in a committed relationship (marriage). Incontinence is absolutely unhealthy. The Bible does not want incontinence and so it bans sex between men.
“Sexual orientation is a myth. Anyone can love anyone, but gay sex between men is banned because it is unhealthy.”
Straight sex can result in unwanted pregnancies. Straight sex between men & women should be banned because it is unhealthy.
I disagree that all sex is unhealthy. Vaginal sex in a committed, monogamous relationship is emotionally and physically healthy. Lesbian sex between two healthy females is likewise healthy and probably one of the most beautiful things one can witness.
Sexual orientation is a myth. Anyone can love anyone, but gay sex between men is banned because it is unhealthy.
All sex is unhealthy.
I watch straight porn for the entertainment value, so that part of your comment I get.
I’ve been very clear that I am straight. As I said, I was tricked by an episode of the Howard Stern Show but I rejected gay sex as unhealthy. I see no problem in watching gay porn. It’s entertaining. The Bible doesn’t prohibit it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-mjl63e0ms&feature=kp
Congrats to CLC for coming out….
Well I wasn’t watching gay porn back then, but maybe i’ll check it out now.
Jed: I prefer Brent Corrigan in Getting Levi’s Johnson…
CLC: I enjoyed that movie.
Well, I guess you guys have something in common after all..
🙂
I enjoyed that movie.
“I admire Lisa Ann in Who’s Nailin’ Paylin but that’s about it as far as my admiration of Palin goes.”
I prefer Brent Corrigan in Getting Levi’s Johnson, but I suppose we’ll have to agree to disagree.
I admire Lisa Ann in Who’s Nailin’ Paylin but that’s about it as far as my admiration of Palin goes.
Interesting. I’ve used that term and was not aware she coined it. In fact I think I heard it earlier than 2008, although I’m not sure on that.
She coined the term “lame stream media.” Use of words demonstrates who one admires either consciously or subconsciously.
“God bless you Jed, I never knew you were a Sarah Palin fan.”
I didn’t sneeze, and I despise Sarah Palin.
“Concerned troll, what does Sarah Palin have to do with this?”
I used the term lame-stream media. While often used by Palin, Bernie Goldberg, and other neo-cons, I feel it’s an apt description for all major media, including Faux News.
Concerned troll, what does Sarah Palin have to do with this?
God bless you Jed, I never knew you were a Sarah Palin fan.
^
Exactly.
Gotcha. It’s all good.
Those of us who contribute here do so for free. I feel we’re already doing a service by giving coverage to candidates and parties the lame-stream media ignores, or openly mocks at their worst. If you don’t like how we do things here, by all means start your own blog.
I was actually agreeing with Jed. Sorry if that was not clear.
Not you Jed. EW/CLC/other non-contributing complainers.
For the record, Paulie, I wasn’t bitching, I was agreeing with you.
Copy & Paste the contents of the pdf into the post. Or even better, don’t post about this IAP club.
Never expected that. But don’t whine about a free gift you are getting and bitch about how it’s not better than it is. I think we are doing a good job for no pay. Sure, it could be better. Show us how it should be done.
God bless you paulie, but don’t expect everyone to worship the ground you walk on.
I love how people who do no work to help create what they comment on here then piss and moan about how we do it or that we don’t do more work (such as fixing the formatting after copying from a pdf). Pay me and I’ll consider it.
It’s fine. You can copy & paste from a pdf, but fixing the formatting can be a bitch.
Start your own website then and do it the way you prefer.
You have the facts backward–cause for effect. Bundy quit paying grazing fees because the BLM forced him and his fellow ranchers all out of business to preserve habitat for the desert tortoise. Ask all the ranchers in Nevada if they support him and they do wholeheartedly. They perhaps don’t share his view of Nevada ownership of the Federal land (but he only began making that argument when the BLM kicked him off the federal land and he did not want to appear to be breaking the law). Even if he were to pay grazing fees (which is not possible, since the BLM will not accept them), the BLM still would keep him off land that he had rights to graze on. So, it’s not as simple as you say it is. Bundy would have continued paying his grazing fees to the BLM if they had never kicked him off in 1993.
What crawed up your vagina this morning?
If you have a problem with the format of the announcement, then email the National Chair yourself about it.
Oh I wouldn’t talk like a bratty 5-year old if I want to be taken seriously.
Hey IAP (Idiotic Asshole Party), I will be sure not to click on your link and not pick up whatever malware you’re trying to infect my system with.
Press releases are designed o be reprinted. Linking to a pdf is just obnoxious.
The fellow wants to run animals that he owns on land I am part owner of (as a US citizen and member of the “public”), and do so to make a profit with those animals who arfe being fed on land I partly own — the guy owes me money. And in this circumstance the federal government is acting to protect my ownership interests. Of course the feds messed it all up. The feds should never have given him all this leeway, they should have nipped this off years ago. Now there is no way to successfully get this man to pay what he owes me (us). Perhaps that 1000 armed Far-rightists can pony up the money he owes me?