It’s been said that a definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results. This charge could certainly be levied at the Libertarian Party, many of whom want to keep doing the same things that fail to get them elected.
Ironic for an organization whose phone number is 1-800-ELECT-US.
Yet it certainly appears to be true.
Sunday morning I attended a panel at the New Hampshire Liberty Forum entitled, “Moving the Libertarian Agenda.” The original purpose of the panel was to be a debate between Bill Westmiller of the Republican Liberty Caucus and 2004 Libertarian Party presidential candidate Michael Badnarik on how best to influence public policy in a libertarian direction.
It turned into something else entirely.
Westmiller, who spoke first, admitted that he and Badnarik had few areas of disagreement. “We can argue about whether the Republican Liberty Caucus is the best option or whether the Libertarian Party is the best option,” he said, “but after 15 years I’ve realized that social change, that political change is not revolutionary, it’s evolutionary. People don’t change their minds overnight. It takes time to communicate ideas, it takes time to change people’s minds, and everyone has a different context, where they’re coming from politically.”
Indeed, he said, David Nolan created the Libertarian Party to use the political process as a vehicle to communicate libertarian ideas.
A schism exists, though, between those who want to continue using the LP as a vehicle to communicate ideas, even if it continues to fail, and those who want to succeed at putting libertarians in office.
“We are in an ideological war, a war of ideas,” Badnarik said. “But Libertarians have not learned to work together as well as I would have liked.”
Badnarik said that LP members should strive to emulate the Oregon LP, and that it has been effective “because people have not been tearing down each other.”
Indeed, he commented that during his 2004 presidential campaign and 2006 congressional campaign, the only negative press he got was from people who said they were libertarians.
“If we are going to be successful in presenting our ideas and getting other people to work with us for more liberty and less government control of our lives, we’re going to have to learn to work together among ourselves, before we can get other people to cooperate with us,” he said.
In 2006, libertarians accused Badnarik’s congressional campaign of wasting campaign contributions and overpaying its campaign manager, Allen Hacker, charges Badnarik called “laughable.”
And on Friday night, Badnarik endorsed Republican Rep. Ron Paul (Texas) for President in 2008, which excited most people in attendance, but solidly annoyed a vocal few, such as George Phillies, who is vying for the 2008 LP nomination.
Phillies, who was in the audience Sunday morning, was visibly upset and asked why Badnarik would cross party lines. “Ron Paul is a Republican,” he said.
“I don’t care if Ron Paul is a Martian,” Badnarik responded. “He is the one person in Washington who understands the Constitution, the one person I trust implicitly.”
Most outside observers agree that Paul makes a much better choice for president than Phillies, especially given Phillies’ declared support for the Federal Reserve system of fiat currency, inflation and economic slavery. Phillies told dozens of Free State Project members this weekend that he supported the Federal Reserve because they maintained “the elasticity of money.”
Ron Paul said Sunday that he opposes the Federal Reserve and wants to return the U.S. to value-backed currency, the gold standard, to stave off imminent economic collapse.
Badnarik said he continues to support the Libertarian Party and will support an LP candidate if Ron Paul fails to get the GOP nomination.
“We always tend to ascribe ulterior motives to anything that happens,” even when they are unfounded, Badnarik said.
“We need to work together. We need to support more than one cause. Ron Paul is not the only answer, the Free State Project is not the only answer. You can support one or both or neither and still be a good individual. . . . Look at the people around you. These are your liberty family. If they are not on your side, then you have nothing.”
Westmiller even agreed. “We don’t need to fight amongst ourselves. That won’t accomplish anything.”
I certainly will support Ron Paul if he should choose to run for president, and after what George Phillies did, and for his very unlibertarian stance on economic issues, I will not support him.
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
Tropical WeatherLast week, in the wake of another uptick in the official unemployment rate, the administration continued to claim that their economic policies were working, just not fast enough. Not only does the administration have a funny way of ending a war, but now they claim their economic policies are successful. For whom, I wonder?
Gardner Goldsmith teams up with Brett Veinotte, of the excellent School Sucks Project and the School Sucks podcast. Gard and Brett discuss the impetus of the series and project, and why public education must be stopped.
Except where otherwise noted, content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works license.
Video published by this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Sampling+ license.
Facebook
Digg
del.icio.us
reddit.com
Newsvine
Gary McGath
Feb 25, 2007
Running presidential candidates who we know can’t possibly win is a waste of scarce resources, whether Badnarik or Phillies or Paul is the candidate. Running candidates at the local level, where they stand a chance, makes sense. I prefer to give my support to organizations like Cato, which promotes ideas, or the Institute for Justice, which challenges government power in the courts.
Michael Hampton
Feb 25, 2007
Economics isn’t a zero-sum game. There aren’t just so many slices of the pie. You can bake more pies.
Calling some bit of activism a “waste” because it’s not YOUR top priority is ridiculous. You need not contribute your own resources, of course, but if you’re attacking the people who do, then you too are part of the problem.
disinter
Feb 25, 2007
I liked Phillies until I read this. I had know I idea he supported the Federal Reserve.
To support ANY LP candidate for ANY federal office (US Rep, US Senate, President etc) is absolutely insane – not to mention a complete waste of very scarce resources (namely money). If the LP wants any kind of electoral success, it is going to have to come together as a whole and only focus on one or two state-level legislator races each election. And this is the one we should all support for 2007:
http://www.arinsime.com/home.aspx
disinter
Feb 25, 2007
know = no. Mistype.
I forgot to ask, did you see Ron Paul’s speech?
Whhhhhaaaaht?!
Feb 25, 2007
Badnarik say what?
“Badnarik said that LP members should strive to emulate the Oregon LP, and that it has been effective “because people have not been tearing down each other.â€
The Oregon LP is in the middle of a civil war, with lawsuits among other things. What the heck is he babbling about?
“Indeed, he commented that during his 2004 presidential campaign and 2006 congressional campaign, the only negative press he got was from people who said they were libertarians.”
The only reason he got any press at all in 2004 was because he stumbled into the nomination afetr Russo and Nolan cancelled each other out.
In 2006, he got practically no press at all, which is why he ended up with less votes than the Libertarian and *write-in* candidates in that same district in 2004, both of whom spent ZERO money. In 2006, the Democrat in his district, who spent one eigth the money Badnarik did, got ten times as many votes.
In fact the libertarians (and others) who pointed out what a rip-off him and his Scientology reject campaign manager are
gave him more coverage than anyone else.
“In 2006, libertarians accused Badnarik’s congressional campaign of wasting campaign contributions and overpaying its campaign manager, Allen Hacker, charges Badnarik called “laughable.â€
OH really? What else would you call raising $400,000 plus and getting 4% of the vote in a Congressional race? Where did the money go? There were no TV ads, hardly any radio, two lame billboards that did not show the candidate’s name, a lame highway sign brigade that also did not advertise his name, no yard signs, no door knocking, no district mailers…what happened to the money?
““I don’t care if Ron Paul is a Martian,†Badnarik responded. “He is the one person in Washington who understands the Constitution, the one person I trust implicitly.â€
Somehow the Ron Paul/Badnarik libertarians just don’t get the difference between libertarian, Constitution Party and Republican. Libertarians should be for individual rights rather than Constitutionalism and State rights. Libertarians should be pro-choice on everything (remember that slogan?) and yes, that certainly means pro-choice on abortion. Libertarians should defintitely be pro-open borders and pro-gay marriage.
No drug warriors like Bob Barr or warmongers like Neal Boortz should be considered libertarians.
Nor should someone who endorses the Federal Reserve or child tuition tax credits.
How about Doug Stanhope (if he actually runs) or Steve Kubby?
Bryan
Feb 25, 2007
There are some issues we can debate until the proverbial bovine return home. The macro issues such as gay rights, (as if any libertarian should believe that rights can belong to groups), and abortion to name two. Individuals have rights, not groups and until someone much smarter than any of us can proclaim with 100% accuracy whether or not life begins at conception or at some later date then neither of these two issues are for the State to decide. In these two instances neither legalization nor prohibition are libertarian positions. It is simply not a legitimate function of government and therefore, none of their business. On the other hand, the case of the US Federal government granting a private bank, (The Federal Reserve Bank Of The United States), the monopoly privilege on the printing of fiat, (counterfeit), currency is something of which libertarians should be concerned. Don’t know why? Do a Google video search for “Money, Banking and the Federal Reserve” and watch the whole thing.
Ron Paul in ‘08!
Feb 25, 2007
Ron Paul grassroots support proved - Homeland Stupidity
Jane
Feb 25, 2007
To quote another commenter: “Libertarians should be pro-choice on everything (remember that slogan?) and yes, that certainly means pro-choice on abortion. Libertarians should defintitely be pro-open borders and pro-gay marriage.”
Saying libertarians ’should’ be anything is unlibertarian. I suspect Paul is pro-life because he is a baby doctor. Open borders are just one-worlders and helping the one-worlders who are socialists! So I would be suspect of any libertarians who are for ‘open borders’. Otherwise why bother have a ‘free’ country or a ‘free state’ for that matter?
Michael Hampton
Feb 25, 2007
I’m not expressing an opinion about Badnarik’s statements, just reporting them.
Allen
Feb 26, 2007
LastFreeVoice (comment No.5 above) should under no circumstances be considered possesing any integrity or credibility. He continues here with his crew’s dishonest mixing of lies and ignorance with a few irrelevant facts.
Yes, lies. He’s ben told what’s what, and willfully chooses to continue to repeat falsehoods. That’s lying, and it’s gotten really, really, old.
What an embarrasing bore.
-0-
Whhhhhaaaaht?!
Feb 26, 2007
That was just a link Allen, I got another one on this one.
Not everyone here has read your “explanations” …why don’t you repeat them for the good folks here.
By the way I know a few people who know you personally and they all say you are full of doo doo and pad your resume outrageously, and your corporate clients are fictitious.
And everyone can tell you don’t know anything at all about running political campaigns, except how to bilk people (which will probably never happen again) and nogoodnarik is the only campaign you have ever had as a client.
Whhhhhaaaaht?!
Feb 26, 2007
Bryan,
Nice double talk bro.
“The macro issues such as gay rights, (as if any libertarian should believe that rights can belong to groups),”
Those who think marriage should only be for straight people obviously do.
“Individuals have rights, not groups ”
Exactly.
“until someone much smarter than any of us can proclaim with 100% accuracy whether or not life begins at conception or at some later date then neither of these two issues are for the State to decide.”
Uh, yeah, I think that’s what I said – the state should have nothing to do with a woman’s personal decision about abortion.
“It is simply not a legitimate function of government and therefore, none of their business.”
Exactly!
“On the other hand, the case of the US Federal government granting a private bank, (The Federal Reserve Bank Of The United States), the monopoly privilege on the printing of fiat, (counterfeit), currency is something of which libertarians should be concerned.”
I agree. Fortunately, so do at least some of the other candidates running for the Libertarian nomination. That would obviously not be George Phillies (since he supports the fed) or Ron Paul (since he is not running for the Libertarian nomination).
“Saying libertarians ’should’ be anything is unlibertarian. ”
Right, we should have no philosophy or logical position at all. Anyone who says they are a libertarian is therefore a libertarian?
“I suspect Paul is pro-life because he is a baby doctor. ”
Good for him. If he wants government to enforce that view, he should not be elected to office.
“Open borders are just one-worlders and helping the one-worlders who are socialists! So I would be suspect of any libertarians who are for ‘open borders’. Otherwise why bother have a ‘free’ country or a ‘free state’ for that matter?”
I’m more concerned with free individuals.
Quoting an email I recently received;
Only legitimate property owners have any legitimate right to enforce their property lines. Unless we accept the claim that states or the federal regime is a legitimate owner or part owner of all the property in the country, it has no right to enforce any such lines. But, if we do accept such a claim, then they logically have all the other rights of property owners: for example banning guns and drugs (you certainly
have a right to do so on your own property, after all), collect rent (taxes), etc.
Whhhhhaaaaht?!
Feb 26, 2007
Michael.
I didn’t see anyone express an opinion about your views about Badnarik.
Marshall
Feb 26, 2007
I’m a Libertarian and I love the fact the Bob Barr has officialy joined the party and is on the LNC. I have been listening off and on to Neal Boortz since the early 1990’s. I have met Michael Badnarik, attended his constitution class, and socialized w/ him at a Georgia LP function and I think the world of him. He’s hard-core, that’s for sure, but I truly respect him. And finally, I have been a huge fan of Ron Paul ever since I first heard about him. I will be supporting his bid in every way I can. I believe in strict constitutionalism, state rights, and individual rights. I believe in the libertarian ideals of limited government and social & economic freedom. Am I less of a Libertarian than any of ya’ll? And as for doubts about Dr. Paul’s “libertarianism” because he is pro-life, who gives a shit!!! He would obviously be 10 X’s better that anyone else who has a chance to win.
Tom Walls
Feb 26, 2007
I agree with Marshall’s astute comments. Kudos to Badnarik for endorsing Ron. We are all in this together, and principles are more important than party. There are many roads to liberty. There is no monopoly on pro-freedom activism.
Partisan zealots who insist on allegiance to one party or strategy hurt the cause and have done so for too long.
Running in the GOP primaries, Ron Paul can get in the debates, get more press, and get the message out more effectively, and will automatically have more attention paid to him. Far as I know he hasn’t compromised on anything. In closed primary states, you HAVE TO register as a (R) to vote for Ron Paul (provided he goes through with a run). I wish one didn’t have to, but that’s reality.
Always be marketing liberty….
NLandholt (Texas)
Feb 26, 2007
If the Libertarian Party and individuals who run for office do not support the U.S. Constitution, then no wonder they are often called LOSERtarians.
And, yes, Ron Paul, M.D., is against the murder of babies in their mothers’ wombs. Science, and Dr. Paul, know that a human life begins at conception. And for all those “pro-choice” Libertarians out there, I present Doris Gordon and http://www.L4L.org/
Allen
Feb 26, 2007
Okay, Whhhhhaaaaht?!
Whhhhhaaaaht?!’s your name? Why are you hiding?
Why do you insist on passing wind instead of saying anything with substance? Nobody you know knows anything about who my clients are because nobody knows who they are -that’s the nature of a true confidentiality greement.
No, I will not follow you and your immature friends around and re-answer your unsubstantiated and irrelevant accusations in every forum you want to piss on. Instead, how about since it’s you making the accusations, you put up some substance?
Here’s a really good place to begin: Whom do you know who knows me well enough to speak to the things you allege, and exactly what did they say?
It’s easy to parrot rumors and the lies of of idiots and saboteurs, you have shown yourself eminently capable of that. But do you have anything forthright and honorable to say?
-0-
#\\Whhhhaaaaht?
Feb 26, 2007
“Whhhhhaaaaht?!’s your name? ”
Yes.
“Why are you hiding?”
I’m right here. Who’s hiding?
“Why do you insist on passing wind?”
Because it smells better than your BS
“Nobody you know knows anything about who my clients are because nobody knows who they are -that’s the nature of a true confidentiality greement.”
Or more likely BS. Perhaps your clients existed on an alien planet where you were the Emperor of a galactic confederation of nine planets. Do I really have to embarass you by bringing up the link where you made that claim?
It’s pretty obvious to even the casual observer you either know nothing about running campaigns or are a ripoff, but more likely both.
“Instead, how about since it’s you making the accusations, you put up some substance?”
I’m not making any accusations Allen. What did you do with the money?
“Here’s a really good place to begin: Whom do you know who knows me well enough to speak to the things you allege, and exactly what did they say?”
I can’t tell you – that’s the nature of a true confidentiality agreement. Let’s just say at least two of them have worked on some of Badnarik’s campaigns, and leave it at that.
“But do you have anything forthright and honorable to say?”
Sure. But it will wait until after you publish your report that explains how we have chosen you as our mentor.
Oh yeah, what did you do with the $400,000?
#\\Whhhhaaaaht?
Feb 26, 2007
“If the Libertarian Party and individuals who run for office do not support the U.S. Constitution, then no wonder they are often called LOSERtarians.”
More likely because they keep skewing their pitch to the right wing.
#\\Whhhhaaaaht?
Feb 26, 2007
“I’m a Libertarian and I love the fact the Bob Barr has officialy joined the party and is on the LNC. ”
Yeah, it’s great to have an unrepentant drug warrior who includes Tancredo among his heroes, authored the Defense of marriage Act and wants to have the military discriminate against some religions (among other things) on the LNC.
“I have met Michael Badnarik, attended his constitution class, and socialized w/ him at a Georgia LP function and I think the world of him. He’s hard-core, that’s for sure, but I truly respect him.”
Sounds like a personal problem. Did you notice where he defends Allen, or how he got 4% of the vote in a Congressional race after taking LP donors for $400,000 (which along with Ron Paul’s run is why real LP candidates can’t raise any money right now), or where he claims the Oregon party is a model?
“I have been listening off and on to Neal Boortz since the early 1990’s. ”
Why? He’s a racist Republican warmonger who believes the FBI should be spying on antiwar protestors.
“And finally, I have been a huge fan of Ron Paul ever since I first heard about him.”
And that’s what’s been wrong with the LP ever since he ran the first time. At least.
“He would obviously be 10 X’s better that anyone else who has a chance to win.”
He doesn’t have a chance to win.
“Running in the GOP primaries, Ron Paul can get in the debates, get more press, and get the message out more effectively, and will automatically have more attention paid to him.”
Yeah, it sure works for the RLC. Gee, ya think this is a new concept? People were trying it before the LP was ever formed which is why it was formed in the first place. Guess what, it doesn’t work.
Allen
Feb 26, 2007
Right, Wha*t,
You have nothing to say.
-0-
Allen
Feb 26, 2007
To All,
As you can see, Wh*t has no basis for the things he said and is now trying to cover up his bad behavior by pretending to have important questions. Notice how one of those pretendedly valid questons is impossible to answer.
I urge all of you to check out the following report and seriously consider what it says about what’s really wrong with the LP.
Reuters.com – One “bad apple” does spoil the whole office:
-0-
#\\Whhhhaaaaht?
Feb 26, 2007
Thanks for writing back, Allen.
What did you do with the money?
how many more votes did Badnarik get than he would have had if he had never hired you?
-0-
Feb 26, 2007
The Crossed Pond » Catty Libertarians
#\\Whhhhaaaaht?
Feb 26, 2007
Yes Alien…and that bad apple would be you.
What did contributors to Badnarik for Congress get for $400,000?
-0-
How many other campaigns has Allen managed?
-0-
What proof or evidence exists of Allen’s claims that he is a competent manager or consultant?
-0-
How many more votes did nogoodnarik get than he would have had if he had never hired Alien Hack?
-0-
What have we learned about what happened to the $400,000?
-0-
What did Allen contribute to the campaign he mismanaged?
-0-
How many clients has Allen elected to office?
-0-
In fact, what substance is there to back up anything Allen claims?
-0-
Besides Allen, how many members of his weirdo religious cult exist? You guessed it, probably…
-0-
Allen
Feb 26, 2007
:-)
100% predictable.
You’re a walking demonstration of the definition of insanity: you just keep saying your shit, hoping the repetition will make it come true –straight out of Hegel and Marx.
But what the heck, you just go on, keep proving my point. You’re the only one who can’t see it.
You must be soooo proud of yourself.
-0-
#\\Whhhhaaaaht?
Feb 26, 2007
Allen, what did they nice men in the white coats tell you about talking to yourself?
BTW How much of the medication they prescribed you have you been taking lately?
-0-
Allen
Feb 27, 2007
Wh*t?
Still nothing worth saying?
Okay, everybody, you’ve seen it all now. No need for me to continue. He’ll take another shot or two at the last word, but he won’t say anything worth sticking around for.
The sad part is that this kind of crap has always worked. The few bad apples and their dupes over the years have successfully kept all good efforts in disarray while the constitution and your opportinuties were being eroded undefended.
Turn your backs on these creeps and pull together. Make some good happen.
-0-
What? What?
Feb 27, 2007
Mike had something very accurate and intelligent to say about this whole matter over at ThirdPartyWatch.com:
Nothing against Ron Paul, but it’s almost laughable to see Michael Badnarik, who squandered nearly $440,000 while pretending to run for Congress last year, giving advice to Libertarians. Has this man no shame?
Perhaps this is all part of a strategy to rehabilitate himself in the eyes of Libertarians across the country, to the thousands who gave generously to his make-believe congressional campaign.
But the fact of the matter remains that Badnarik’s disastrous congressional campaign last autumn has already had a chilling effect on the fundraising efforts of other Libertarian candidates, including current LP presidential hopefuls George Phillies and Steve Kubby. There’s little question that Badnarik’s poor excuse for a campaign last year will probably hurt Libertarian Party candidates across the board—- from President on down—- during the 2008 election cycle, if not beyond. That’s quite a legacy…
Besides, there’s something a little unsettling, almost disturbing, about watching Badnarik ask Libertarians to to dedicate their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to Ron Paul’s uphill campaign for the Republican presidential nomination. Not only does it ring hollow, but it also sounds eerily similar to some of those strange and long-winded fight-to-the-death appeals made by a certain congressional candidate’s campaign manager last year…
If he had an ounce of dignity left, Badnarik would quietly exit the stage. The LP doesn’t need his advice. Neither does Congressman Paul, for that matter.
Steve Allison
Feb 27, 2007
Flame wars accomplish much; don’t they?
Those exchanges were a debate?
Sheesh . . .
What? What?
Feb 27, 2007
What debate?
Allen never answered any questions or made any arguments. He did call me names though, and hilariously accused me of the very things he is guilty of.
There’s just the facts, which I’ll be happy to keep representing. If anyone has counterarguments, or facts not in evidence, by all means, please put them forth.
-Whhhhaaaat! Whhhhaaaat!
“Mr. Bush and Mr. Bin Laden are two separate heads of the same seven-headed dragon”
Allen
Feb 27, 2007
WW,
Be careful giving us all the credit for what’s happening now. Phillies and Kubby both have their own serious limitations.
-0-
What? What? Whhhhhaa
Feb 27, 2007
Nobody’s giving you any more credit Allen, you abused all the credit you could get last year.
But go ahead, humor us with your critique of other candidates.
Maybe you can tell us what their campaigns should be doing so we would know what NOT to do.
Allen
Feb 27, 2007
#31
Note that while you’re so damn sure I’m burnt, real forward-looking libertarians are still sending in money and are chanping at the bit to help with what’s next.
Your opinion is nothing more than that, and your input is 100% negative.
So, not only are you wrong, the best you can come up with is feeble attempts to tear me down. You could be trying to build something, but this bad-apple shit is so much easier, isn’t it?
Keep it up – all you’re doing is amplifying the poison.
Think about it.
-0-
What? What? Whhhhhaa
Feb 27, 2007
#2 on the bottom of a shoe,
So you still got some fish on the line? So what?
How do you know what I’m trying to build and what I’m not?
You’re the one tearing things down. Anyone trying to raise money for any Libertarian project not associated with you already knows this.
Think about what good you have accomplished in your whole entire life.
-0-
Feb 27, 2007
After the New Hampshire Liberty Forum - Homeland Stupidity
Jon
Feb 27, 2007
Badnarik needs to get a better feel for what is happening in the Libertarian underworld. Oregon is a mess and has been since the early ’90s. Sure they have a neat $2500 a month office and signs up but they people run for offices that have no competition and they like public schools and are afraid of the drug war and are losing members left and right and waste money and don’t get out a newsletter. And a bunch more things that have no impact on improving the world in Oregon. So tell Badnarik next time he is in Oregon try talking to those not in the office. Get out and about and visit those in the peanut gallery.
JON
Sean
Feb 28, 2007
Um, it doesn’t work? Perhaps you failed to notice that little Representative part in front of Ron Paul’s name? Obviously it has worked for Ron, since he is a 10 term congressman. Which members of the LP are currently holding federal office?
Anonymous
Feb 28, 2007
Regarding Ron Paul’s stance on abortion. He truly don’t support it. But he also recognize that the constitution doesn’t give any power to the federal government to regulate it. He said so many times and I believe he will hold this standpoint. So abortion is a non-issue. It doesn’t matter in the first place as it is uncontituional.
re: Barr
Feb 28, 2007
Whhhhhaaaaht?! and others — You should be aware that Barr is changing his position on the Drug War. Look up info, if you can find it, on his “debate” with Ethan Nadelmann. He surprised everyone by agreeing with Ethan.
Joe
Mar 01, 2007
Michael Badnarik is a good guy. I’d vote for him for President again if he ran again, but chances are slim to none that he ever will. I’d send him money for a campaign again (preferably for county commission or state legislature rather than a high-level office), *unless* his campaign was being run by Allen Hacker. I’ll never donate another nickel to any campaign he runs.
Fortunately, Hacker’s spectacular failure (I’ll be kind and ascribe it to ineptitude rather than fraud) with the Badnarik for Congress campaign very likely means that he will never be asked to manage any political campaign, for any candidate of any party, ever again. Unfortunately, he took down a good man’s reputation and $400K of other people’s money with him. Including, regrettably, some of mine.
This time I’m supporting Ron Paul, right up to the time he wins or is mathematically eliminated from the GOP nomination. As many times as he has won election to Congress, he obviously has a good campaign staff and knows what to do to be competitive. I believe his people will make much better use of my money than Hacker could ever dream of. I hope Ron will consider pursuing the LP nomination if he doesn’t get the other one (or, even if he does – there’s nothing that says more than one party can’t nominate the same person).
Robert
Mar 01, 2007
You can’t change a culture unless you reach the individual. If individuals are a dying breed it is kinda tough to change a culture, since there isn’t a culture to begin with at this point.
I heard a musician today, a Jimmy Vaughn (SP?) sing a song for his Texas brothers to illustrate the chains of the RFID and other abominations thrust against a free people. He got his ideas by attending a class on the Constitution by Michael Badnarik.
More would get accomplished if people held in their living rooms small educational classes as Michael has done. It takes almost no money and it changes lives. You build relationships and enhance participation in your community. That leads to great things in time. Forget politics.
Teach Liberty.
Wealth comes from every facet of life when things are in voluntary mode. To replace the issuer of wealth which could be called LIFE with an artifice like the Private Federal Reserve System shows just how far humanity’s cheese has slipped off the cracker. We have been all fooled by allowing a top down economic structure to dictate every facet of life for almost a hundred years. An Abusive Wotan who masquerades as a benevolent friend has called the shots for almost a century. That we are now acting in the interest of a foreign power in a place that is not even on our border and am turning that power’s enemies into weakened indians on reservations would not be happening unless we had a Federal Reserve System. That is what flexibility without gold can do for you.
Without starting at the very bottom, it is impossible to build a party that is viable. The LP would be better off sending inquiries to county and city party offices, leave their phone number on forward that answers on a rotational basis to the state organisations. Have a website and a P.O. Box in some city called Independence. Break the lease at the Watergate and never look back at the swamp in D.C. until
2/3rds of the State governments are ours. That is the only way.
LP members seriously Erred by imitating the two major parties who live off of Large corporate and PAC bribes for favors. We cannot operate on the same basis, and expect to end up differently. We reach for the Ring of Power without having the wisdom to understand that we do not want it.
The LIE of pretending to be within reach of a major breakthrough if we would just make another donation that max out our credit cards is not ever going to cut it. That Lie needs to die.
The LP will show signs of maturity when it closes shop in D.C.
miche
Mar 01, 2007
I was singing to my conservative R friends (ones who would NEVER vote L) today about Dr. Paul. I am a county chairman (L) and would really like to see the party grow, but I think the party needs every shouting voice it can get. It is my understanding that in TX, I can support Ron Paul in the primary and still be and vote libertarian. I am hoping that Wes is reading and will jump in if I’m wrong.
We should strive for the desired result regardless of party affiliation. It is the only way to be true to our stated purpose. If libertarian on many issues Ron Paul wins the R nomination, libertarians will have to decide whether or not to be true to our core values. FWIW, I will finally admit, at this point, my favorite Ls are Paul and Kubby.
I don’t fault Badnarik for his principled desire to live in a free country. In times of hunger, you sometimes have to settle for the best shot available instead of the perfect one.
Mr. X
Mar 05, 2007
Who are these “outside observers”?
Robert
Mar 05, 2007
I am an outside observer.
Kris Overstreet
Mar 13, 2007
I refuse to support Ron Paul for two reasons:
(1) He has endorsed race-based groups such as the League of the South, referring to the “right to cultural defense.” As such, I regard him as at best a closet racist.
(2) He has repeatedly taken advantage of invitations to Libertarian Party events to attempt to recruit Libertarians into the Republican Party and to destroy the Libertarian Party outright.
I absolutely cannot comprehend how any person who has been in the Libertarian Party longer than two years could ever support Ron Paul.
Finally, about money: since the creation of the Federal Reserve Note, the value of gold has been a rollercoaster ride with vast upward and downward sweeps- as evidenced by the doubling of its price in the past four years. Further, the amount of gold in the United States, publicly or privately owned, would only cover about one-tenth of the currency, tangible or electronic, currently in circulation here. Going back to a gold standard would not avert a depression, it would cause the utter collapse of our economy- and a return to periodic panics and life-destroying depressions as experienced in the 1800s.
Robert
Mar 13, 2007
No one can debate that with the existing system about to totally collapse, there would be no advantage in reviving it in another monopoly form with the same defects that got us to this point.
No one can make a private bank go away, unless that private bank destroys itself. It’s the monopoly status that is the cancer.
Doing away with the monopoly status of the privately owned FRB would liberate everyone. The excuse for forming the FRB was a bank failure rate engineered by J.P. Morgan and His owners that resulted in failure of only 2.8 percent of banks.
Making government pay all its debts in gold or silver would institute self discipline. Something government does not have.
Private commercial banks can co-exist with banks that warehouse silver and gold for those who have assets that need protecting.
There need not be one system. But there must be a uniform system for governments to use that do not allow the government to inflate or crash economies or harm an individual government disfavors.
Insisting on gold and silver for government use is a good thing. The amount of metal out there is not a problem. If people want more gold, the earth can provide it if enough effort is expended.
Doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome is?
Robert
Mar 13, 2007
I see nothing out there better than Ron Paul.
We don’t have time to run a third party candidate in a system that is designed to favor the two major parties. For over 30 years we have not had time. The only hope is for a man like Paul who understands we need to reign in government. Badnarik understands we have a chance to send a message with Paul as a President.
Under Libertarian theory:
Since when does a group NOT have a right to defend its culture and traditions, provided they are not interferring in other’s same rights?
To Kris:
Please show me where Paul has erred. What has Paul said or done that violates anyone’s Rights?
Robert
Mar 14, 2007
Money and Fiat.
Powerchuter
Mar 25, 2007
Quote from above #43
Kris Overstreet | March 13, 2007 2:57 pm
I refuse to support Ron Paul for two reasons:
(1) He has endorsed race-based groups such as the League of the South, referring to the “right to cultural defense.†As such, I regard him as at best a closet racist.
(2) He has repeatedly taken advantage of invitations to Libertarian Party events to attempt to recruit Libertarians into the Republican Party and to destroy the Libertarian Party outright.
End Quote…
Addressing #1 – You’ve bought into the big lie of “racism”! I notice you didn’t use the NAACP as an “example of a racist group!?!
Addressing #2 – That’s just bizarre…are you an idiot? Since when do “labels” mean anything(except to the idiots and sheeple)!?!
Denis Goddard
Mar 25, 2007
I have picked up a hobby in the past few months: pro-liberty lobbyist at the NH State House. I go to public hearings and give testimony on issues, when I think I have something useful and persuasive to say.
Personally, I love it when a well-spoken LP member also gives testimony. They are free to say things that are pretty far removed from the status quo, so I can come in and suggest something *slightly* less extreme, and pull the whole center of gravity in the liberty direction.
That said, 9 times out of 10 the LP folks who show up are terrible speakers, have done zero research on the issue, and succeed only in alienating the legislators. It’s the 1 in 10 that I’m thankful for.
Apr 18, 2007
Why I gave Ron Paul $100 - Homeland Stupidity
Buxley
May 08, 2007
What a weird discussion. I support Ron Paul.
I’m an out-and-out anarchist; i.e. I don’t believe ANY form of coercive government is legitimate. That includes the constitution, which was no more than an abusive compromise between liberty and slavery for the sake of winning a revolution.
That being said though, I’ll take a constitutionally limited state over what we have now.
I think Ron Paul has a chance of restoring (at least temporarily) a constiutionally limited government.
If Ron Paul gets elected:
He will bring the U.S. military back from the hundreds of countries that it is currently in. That’s a good thing.
He will end our conflicts abroad, which will save Billions of dollars in REAL wealth (not just worthless dollars). It will also save lives. That is a good thing!
He would VETO the living daylights out of a huge percentage of spending bills. That’s a good thing.
He would NOT ENFORCE the income tax and would dismantle the IRS, which would actually be within his power as the executive. That’s a good thing!
He would once and for all make the international banking cartel a focal point of public discussion. That’s a good thing whether you’re for “elastic money” or a gold standard. International banks should not have a monopoly over money; money in it’s right form after all represents exchange, which is the embodiment of consensual community. Let’s not continually sell our right to determine our own means of exchange.
He would veto ANY and ALL bills that restrict gun ownership, which is a good thing.
He would veto any bill that restricts or prohibits substance farming, manufacturing, or trafficking. Effectively, he would end the ludicrous and evil drug war. This could save countless lives and billions of dollars of real wealth.
He would empower States over the Federal government, which is not IDEAL, but is better than empowering the centralized federal government. With state government’s empowered, our battle against coercive government is on a slightly more local level. That’s a good thing!
Lastly, if New Hampshire (or any other small community for that matter) attempted to secede, I have full confidence that Ron Paul would not take military action. THAT IS A GOOD THING FOR GOD SAKES!
I’m not an L or an R, and I have NEVER voted in my hole life for anyone; not on principle alone, but because I’ve never trusted that anyone would actually make ANYTHING better.
I’d rather just educate myself in the science of economics and try to convince people that coercive government is evil.
Again, I’m no Libertarian or Republican, and I don’t believe that the government has any legitimate power, except where unilateral consent of the ruled exists, which in my opinion is an impossibility.
I’m voting for Ron Paul nonetheless. I even gave him money, because if he wins I will likely have less of my money STOLEN from me. THAT’s A GOOD THING.
But let’s remember that even if Ron Paul loses, humans are SLOWLY (very slowly) learning that freedom is better than institutional slavery.
Even if Ron Paul loses, we are still slowly making headway toward what we all want: peaceful, noncoercive society.
If you don’t want to vote, I don’t blame you. But if you are going to vote, then you have three choices:
1. Vote for a mainstream candidate that you feel is BARELY less evil than the other mainstream candidate. I personally can’t pick one out.
2. Vote for someone who has actually NO chance, like Phillies, who I also happen to disagree with pretty significantly.
3. Vote for someone who has enough of a chance to get into the debates, even if he is a LONG shot, like Ron Paul. This way your principle compromise will be less than the mainstream candidate, but you’ll at least have a candidate who is guaranteed to get SOME national attention (GOP debates etc.)
I’m not telling anyone else to support Paul, but I do think it is one possible option that could possibly make some things better.
If I’m wrong, I still believe in the ultimate triumph of freedom over slavery, and therefore I am a hopeful person. We’ll get there some day, and in the meantime, I’m just trying to learn what I can and be a positive force in the world.
Whose with me? Just curious. I’m not trying to elected or anything.
-Bux
Julius
May 09, 2007
I am with you on supporting Ron Paul. He has integrity and a consistent track record of voting pro Constitution. I have no patience for the kind of watergate libertarian who supports the Federal Reserve System. The LP is dead. Long live Ron Paul!
Melissa
Aug 09, 2007
Bux, I’m with you. I’ve never joined a political party, but have always considered my political views to be somewhere between Libertarian and Constitutionalist. I felt I was somewhere out there in political Siberia: Until about a week ago, when my husband drove under a Bellevue, WA overpass on I-405 and saw a “Ron Paul rEVOLution” banner, I never dreamed there would be a candidate who shared my beliefs on preserving individual and states’ rights rather than the Big Government that D.C. seems so fond of.
WA was once a 3-party state (we had LT elected officials), but a 9th District Court decision, and heavy lobbying from the 2 political parties here, messed up our primaries and all but killed any chance of a Libertarian being elected here. (Gee, thanks, guys.) The fact that Ron Paul, once a Libertarian candidate, is now running on the GOP ticket, gives me a wild hope that he might actually have a shot, IF people come together from all sides of the political spectrum -D, R, L and G- and vote for him, party hardliners be damned.
Run, Ron, Run!