What political group is more likely to promote personal freedoms in our lives per legislation/philosophy rather than Government control?

Volunteerists. Though they aren't a political group and legislating freedom is oxymoronic.

Libertarians. Personal freedom is the platform.

Democrats

The dumocrats are carpet baggers 100%.

Libertarians?.

By FAR.

When comparing two piles of crap perhaps... I prefer to choose real liberty rather than the illusion.

Waste your vote writing in Paul if you want, but you are wasting your time on me.

I see, one of those 'don't confuse me with the facts' type huh?

THIS RACE WILL BE DECIDED by electorial votes,any body know any or are they smoking mirrors?

Yeah right... good one... I think that they are just as obtrusive as the Democrats...

See my reply above.

I have been wasting my time voting for Libertarians since 1976, and unlike back then they now get matching federal funds for their campaigns... if I listen to people like you I would have to pick between the dog pie or cat pie sandwich and wonder what is going on, maybe the politicians will catch on, or maybe the rest of the people will eventually catch on. but sometimes you have to do something even if it does not amount to a hill of beans..

Dems and Repubs are the dumbest people on the planet.

You forgot about the people that believe in them.

Oh yes! But doesn't that make them dems and repubs?

No, of course not just wanna be somethings.

Your not free unless you have health care, job security, and a living wage.

Hows that working out under Obama?

ROFLMAO, Obama sucks.

Pretty good, even got a raise at my main job. I think things would be a lot worse with the Republicans. I can see they have been going downhill since 2010 when the Republicans took over the House.

Yeah, all the things that the founders of this country started with... right?

Actually, the founding fathers were a pretty diverse group, but yes a majority seem to have believed in those things.

That's plain goofy.

Job security?, Wage? Health Care?, all of this is bunk... Wages are for slaves and jobs are for lackeys, as for the Health Care... We do not have health care in the US, We have ghoulish schills in lab coats who trick you into believing you are healthy or sick based upon your ability to pay... wrong idea Bill.

agreed

IOW, you're not free unless someone is forced to work for you, forced to employ you and forced to pay you more than you're worth.

Nobody is forced to employee me. Nobody is working for me. Nobody pays me what I'm worth.
Now let me ask you are you forced to employee someone? Is there someone who is forced to work for you? Are you paid more then you are worth?
Do you know anyone who thinks they are paid what they are worth?
Opinion is something that varies a great deal. Everyone thinks theirs is right and is wrong some of the time.

"Your not free unless you have health care, job security, and a living wage."

Mandatory health care has to be provided by someone else if you don't provide it for yourself. Therefore someone is forced to work for you.

Mandatory job security forces employers to retain employees against their interests. It makes slaves of individuals who employ others.

Minimum wage (aka living wage) removes the real freedom of individuals to pay according to one's labor output, forcing them in some instances to pay someone more than they are worth, particularly when combined with your second condition of "freedom".

All the "freedoms" you speak of require others to act on your behalf and allow no one to freely choose to associate or dissociate should they feel that their interactions are not mutually beneficial. Thus, that is not freedom, but forced servitude.

Neither major political party, as a whole, supports constitutional individual social and economic liberties today. The left yaps uselessly about social freedoms from a collective group rights standpoint and supports a huge top down nanny state economy while the right yaps about more economic liberty and supports hypocritical social mob laws, corporate welfare a huge aggressive military/police/prison state.

If you are looking to support social and economic individual liberties from a more consistent philosophical standpoint I would suggest looking to the Libertarian mini-archists who are the rightful intellectual heirs of the more Jeffersonian Classical Liberal founders.

Republicans fight for what they believe are individual freedoms without a guarantee, Democrats want it in writing to ensure it cannot be taken a away.

You mean the same party that says that I shouldn't be able to keep the money that I work hard for unless I am "poor", the same party that is requiring me to buy medical insurance that isn't as good as my current insurance, the same party that says that I can be held without a trial indefinitely under NDAA 2012, the same party that thinks the internet must have a kill switch because what I say may be "harmful"? Oh and before you retort like I'm an idiot Republican or Conservative, know that I am part of the party that actually values personal liberty & not the liberty trampling centralized government duopoly.

NDAA 2012, Can you please post the Chapter, Heading and paragraph. I have just finished reading over the enrolled PDF formatted law, and I see nothing there of which you speak.

The Medical Law says nothing about you having to take on lessor insurance, where did you read that nonsense? Bill O'Reillys talking points?

There is nothing that says only the poor keep their money. The idea is to have the wealthy pay their share, and to erode several of the tax shelters that have allowed them to get by these last 10 years or so.

See page 266, section 1022, b, 1:
(b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS AND LAWFUL
RESIDENT ALIENS.—
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement to detain
a person in military custody under this section does not extend
to citizens of the United States.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/...

Notice the 'REQUIREMENT' to detain United States doesn't exist, but it can be exercised if the government deems it applicable.

See this article on a Federal Court Judges ruling upon that section: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/20...

FYI; NDAA 2013 has the same language in it as well.

It states that it is NOT applicable to US Citizens. What did I miss? It does state that no-citizens can be, and it also goes on to say that you can be detained if you violate Federal Law, but that is to be expected even IF NDAA isn't there.

agreed

Libertarians, you missed the most obvious answer.

Actually the groups who are in my opinion champions of personal freedom and limits on federal power would be the TEA party movement and Ron Paul supporters.

With all the talk about Ron Paul on this site.Why is not Ron Paul sitting where Romney is?