Purger

Archive for June 2008

George Phillies’ statement to Massachusetts State Committee

In Libertarian on June 30, 2008 at 7:42 pm

Phillies Statement to the Massachusetts State Committee
(Edited from the May LPMass Minutes)

Last week I spent eight days in scenic Denver at our libertarian party national convention. As our state chair, as a voting delegate, I spoke up vigorously for our libertarian message of peace, liberty, and prosperity. I am deeply troubled to report on the outcome of that convention.

I shall preface the remark with the observation that I am a presidential elector for our state party, and having promised to perform those obligations, I intend to perform them by voting for our national candidate if I am in fact placed on the ballot and if we happen to carry Massachusetts. Mind you, the likelihood of the latter event taking place appears to be vanishingly small.

Let us recall where our state party is. We have very limited resources of people and money. Last year, we couldn’t use those resources both to recruit and support candidates for our state legislature and to support a Federal campaign. We don’t have enough money or people. We chose to commit those resources to place on the ballot our presidential candidate. After all, our libertarian party had had excellent opportunity to exploit the current political situation.

The situation has not developed as favorably as might have been hoped. The keynote speaker of the convention, and I personally protested, was Richard Viguerie. In 1976, Viguerie competed with Lester Maddox for the nomination of the American Independent Party started by George Wallace. Viguerie’s direct mail campaigns are well known to have supported such right-wing racists and bigots as Jesse Helms, Sun Young Moon, Oliver North, George Wallace, and Donald Wildmon. Viguerie advised Jerry Falwell on the formation of the Moral Majority. His presence as keynote speaker can only be viewed as a conscious decision by our national chair William Redpath to identify our party with right wing conservative bigotry. In Massachusetts, the first state to eliminate slavery, this espousal of white racism by our national party is not a positive selling point.

Earlier this election cycle, our party national committee used party resources to assist in the presidential campaign of the candidate of the George Bush party of conservative racism. Those resources were given to our national committee to advance the campaigns of libertarian candidates, not to advance the campaigns of Republican candidates. The decision of our Libertarian National Committee to use those resources that to support the Republican was a gross breach of the fiduciary responsibilities of our National Committee. Unfortunately, many of these people were reelected to office.

I regret to note that our presidential candidate, Bob Barr, not ten years ago attempted organize an army pogrom against the Wicca faith. To its credit, the army refused to cooperate. Having a presidential candidate who attempted to drive members of any faith out of the army will not be a positive selling point for our other candidates. Many of Barr’s other stands are equally problematic, and most Massachusetts residents have adequate political sophistication not to believe the election-day conversion of a political candidate from one stand to another.

The net result of all this, in my opinion, is that our national party has thrown away its political opportunity to expand our party. Our decision as a State Committee, however reasonable, to emphasize supporting a presidential campaign has proved a disaster for our party for which I must personally take responsibility. We now have neither a presidential candidate who is viable in Massachusetts nor the possibility of exploiting the ongoing collapse of the Massachusetts Bush Republican war party of bigots.

I am not unaware that I have previously accepted the nomination of the New Hampshire Libertarian Party to be its presidential candidate, a matter that was well known in advance, and so in other places I will be obliged to keep my other promises. I note that in the highly controversial and well-researched national convention that we just finished, none of my opponents viewed my prior commitment to our New Hampshire sister party to be worthy of comment or criticism, and therefore I do not feel that keeping both sets of promises at the same time is contradictory.

Having said that, I did participate in our Libertarian National Convention, and I remain personally obliged, until such time as my state committee or state party invokes my prior commitment to them and instructs me otherwise, to be supportive in Massachusetts of our presidential candidate.

The underlying difficulty, which we will need to resolve, is that our national party is in the grip of southern white bigots who gave us a candidate who addressed the Council Of Conservative Citizens, and who gave LNC resources to a Republican presidential candidate whose current position is that “don’t ask don’t tell” is all right with him. It remains my duty, a duty as heavy as a mountain, to support our presidential candidate. However, I do not believe it can be said to be in the best interests of the libertarians of Massachusetts to avoid some correction in circumstances relating to a national party whose national chair de facto just endorsed white racism by having a former George Wallace and Donald Wildmon fundraiser, a man who ran against Lester Maddox for national office nomination, as a keynote speaker.

Robert Milnes: Request 100 Green signatures for GP presidential nomination

In Libertarian on June 30, 2008 at 5:12 pm

Please forward to interested persons or groups. I have been informed that 100 signatures of Green Party members must be received as part of approval process for presidential candidates. With this email I request Green party members to consider supporting my candidacy by sending a letter of support to Presidential Campaign Support Committee. I know it is late in the time preceding the convention. And I know one candidate is the presumptive nominee by already getting enough pledged delegates for a first ballot nomination. However I would like to make a statement at the convention and possibly give the delegates a chance to adopt the Progressive Alliance Strategy. Such strategy would request the nominee to choose a libertarian for the vice-presidential slot on the ticket thus making a “fusion” ticket. This has proven to be very difficult. But I think it should be tried. If you agree please contact the PCSC: Maria Kuriloff, rmkuriloff@optonline.net , Tom Yager, vagreen@earthlink.net , Gregg Gerritt, gerritt@mindspring.com Thank you for your support.

Steve Kubby: “States’ Rights” is an Anti-Libertarian Concept

In Libertarian on June 30, 2008 at 5:06 pm

The following is published with the permission of the author, Steve Kubby. Steve Kubby is, of course, a highly respected longtime Libertarian activist, a former candidate for Governor of California, and a popular 2008 Libertarian presidential candidate.

“States Rights” is an Anti-Libertarian Concept

By Steve Kubby

The concept of “FEDERALISM” is properly used to describe a system of government in which sovereignty is constitutionally divided between the federal government and the states.

In contrast, the term “STATES’ RIGHTS” is a fraudulent and profoundly ANTI-Libertarian concept that has no other purpose but to deceive and rob us of our natural, inalienable, inseparable, non-transferable rights as human beings.

The Ninth Amendment says: “The numeration in the Constitution, of certain RIGHTS, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the PEOPLE.

In other words, just because the Constitution doesn’t mention a particular right, that doesn’t mean we don’t have that right — and those RIGHTS are retained by the PEOPLE, not the State or the Federal Government.

The Tenth Amendment says: “The POWERS not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

States and governments have POWERS, but not RIGHTS. Only people can have rights. The US Constitution and Bill of Rights were conceived and written to limit government, not allow it to usurp our rights through some insipid oxymoron like “States’ Rights.”

Bob Barr tells America what “Libertarian” means

In Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US on June 30, 2008 at 6:02 am

Libertarian Party presidential nominee Bob Barr, in an appearance yesterday morning on Fox News Sunday:

[W]hat makes me a Libertarian is the fact that I deeply and truly believe in the Libertarian platform and what resonates with most Americans, and that is to shrink the size of the federal government.

Let’s take just one example there, the Defense of Marriage Act. The Defense of Marriage Act simply stands for the proposition that each state can set its own definition of marriage and can’t be forced to adopt a different definition of marriage forced on it by another state.

That’s a very conservative principle reflecting the fundamental notion of states’ rights in our country.

I recall Barr apologizing for DOMA, or at least part of it (the part he leaves out above, wherein the federal government is prohibited from recognizing marriages that don’t pass his preferred religious test). I recall Barr promising to work to repeal DOMA. For some reason, I forgot the part where he promised to present DOMA as a shining example of libertarianism.

Full transcript here.

Barr campaign hiring computer specialists

In Libertarian on June 29, 2008 at 9:13 pm

From Bob Barr campaign site:

The Barr 2008 Campaign and Terra Eclipse are looking for exceptionally talented designers and developers who want to join our teams in California and Georgia to help elect Bob Barr.

We are currently seeking to hire the following positions:

* Site Designer
* LAMP Web Developer
* Web/Graphic Designer

Read the rest of this entry »

A note to all those dedicated paid LP petitioners

In Activism, First Amendment, Fraud, Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics, Libertarian Politics 2008, Lies and the lying liars who tell them, Protest on June 29, 2008 at 8:23 pm

To Andy, Paulie, Mark, Gary and all those libertarian activist/paid petitioners:

You are getting screwed by LPHQ! They do not appreciate the hard work you have done for the party as a paid petitioner/activist. They marginalize your abilities to produce signatures. They pay mercenary/renegade petitioners more money and don’t give a fuck about the Libertarian Party and just do it for the quick dollar.

We just finished up a petition drive here in Illinois to put our presidential and US Senate candidates on the ballot and depended on many of you to help us our candidates on the ballot. I did validity rates on many petitioners, paid and volunteer. We had a crew from Chicago that “round-tabled” petitions to make that quick buck. Luckily, I (not National) caught their devious shenanigans after the second signature pickup and were promptly fired. Unfortunately, we spent about 10K for those signatures and most were not used in the final turn-in last Monday. We are very fortunate that we were able to stop that debacle and collect better signature to ensure we will not have to endure a challenge but it came at a cost. I appreciate you and had I run our petition drives across the country it would have been done differently.

Our top gunners should get paid more than these mercenaries only because the party has a history with them and knows what quality signatures you’re able to produce. Obviously, LPHQ is not very efficient with petition drives.

Here’s a few suggestions I would like to make for those paid/activist, Libertarian petitioners currently working in various states.

-If you are currently collecting signatures, do not stop until the drive is done. If the LPHQ ever gets its head out of their asses and start doing things better, they will need you in the future.

-After that drive is done, don’t work on LP ballot access drives in other states. Look to work for other parties and/or pro-freedom initiatives in other states. If LPHQ hires these mercenary petitioners and produce lower validity rates that cause the National ticket to be on less state ballots than their goal, LPHQ will realize that they should have never screwed you guys over.

-Continue to work on LP ballot access drives across the country but realize that you may or may not get paid. Angela Keaton has warned us that the LP will go broke by the end of the election. The LP has opportunists within the party who do fundraising and collect a 40 percent commission, which is ludicrous; the party gets what the party deserves but it may take months before you get paid for your services. Besides do you want to work for a party who devalues your time, effort and pride by paying YOU less for producing better results? The choice is yours; I’m merely making suggestions.

Haugh demands ballot petitions be burned

In Libertarian on June 29, 2008 at 5:52 pm

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 15:03:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Question about Alabama
From: sean.haugh at lp.org
To: markpickens at hotmail.com
CC: scott at draftresitance.org; robert.kraus at lp.org

Mark, I just received evidence that Gary Fincher is working in Massachusetts on our drive through you. I have told you before that this is completely unacceptable. I am now going to call the LPMA and instruct them to burn (quite literally) any signatures collected by Gary, whether they paid for them or not. I had warned them too.

Since it’s obvious that I can’t trust you to keep Fincher away from our petitions, I cannot work with you any longer. I’ll figure out some other way to keep Paul. This decision is final, and frankly I’m very
disappointed.

yours in liberty -
Sean

UPDATE: Gary Fincher responds

From: Liberty Crusader
Subject: Massachusetts Burning
To: sean.haugh at lp.org
Cc: richardwinger at yahoo.com, wredpath at his.com, chair at lp.org, phillies at 4liberty.net
Date: Sunday, June 29, 2008, 1:15 PM

Sean, one of the voters whose petition signature you threatened to burn is a New Bedford, Massachusetts police officer whom I will be meeting with later this weekend. He and I will be discussing the Massachusetts law making it illegal to “alter, deface, mutilate, destroy or suppress” an official Masachusetts nomination petition.

By the way, although I refuse to work on petitions for national (obviously, you’ve seen my resignation letter, tendered 9/29/07), I nevertheless am perfectly willing and able to work on petitions through the state parties, and will do so whenever I good and feel like it, as I’m in high demand for my services by thrilled state party ballot access coordinators. Do you understand?

My hunch is that your days as political director for this party are numbered. Let’s see how this unfolds over the next days or weeks as news breaks around the party of your eagerness to waste donors scarce resources in destroying perfectly valid, paid-for signatures (such of which are 2,000 freshly turned in this weekend).

Yours in REAL liberty,

Gary

Jim Davidson: “The Rotting Carcass of LP National”

In Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Politics on June 29, 2008 at 5:35 pm

What’s wrong with the Libertarian Party? Nothing. Nothing is wrong with the party in principle. Not too much is wrong with the party’s platform at this point. Clearly, nothing is wrong with the LP’s most active enthusiasts, the ones who do all the work, write all the blogs, and contribute most of the money – because those people are hard at work in this party, in the Personal Choice party, and in the Liberty party, to name a few places.

But something is wrong with the LP leadership, organization, and key personnel. There is a mighty stench of corruption which makes it too foul for many of us to work there. It is hard to get people to contribute money to an organization they suspect of corruptly allocating their money. It is hard to get people to volunteer for a party organization that ignores their opinions and uses party funds to benefit particular candidates before the nominations convention. It is hard to get people to work for a campaign that does not represent their core values.

Click here to read the entire article

Hat tip Brad Spangler

Post-show wrap-up

In Libertarian on June 29, 2008 at 4:46 pm

I would like to take this opportunity to thank Dr. George Phillies for appearing on LFV Live! last night,and for his kindness in rescheduling when we experienced technical difficulties on Friday evening.  We discussed many topics, including ballot access and the inclusion of his name on the ballot in New Hampshire and Massachusetts, as well as the legal fight to have Barr’s name placed on the Massachusetts ballot.  We also took callers, and even took some questions and comments out of the chat room.  I would therefore also like to thank our listeners, who made some very interesting observations and questions during the show.

A little over halfway through the show, I lost my connection to blogtalk.  Paulie Cannoli was helping me host the show, and he also got disconnected.  Since I no longer had access to the switchboard, I didn’t realize he was no longer on until George asked him a question, and had no way of bringing him back on live.  I also lost my access to the chat room, so I was unable to see what listeners were writing after that point.  I apologize for the difficulties.

Libertarians for Obama

In Civil Liberties, Constitutional Rights on June 28, 2008 at 7:57 pm

Libertarians For Obama (not the same as libertariansforobama.com) argues, among other things, that Barack Obama is more libertarian than Bob Barr. Here are a couple of excerpts from their site:

From Five Reasons This Libertarian Prefers Barack Obama Over Bob Barr:

1. Obama is consistent. I believe Barr when he says that he’s against the war, but Barr voted for the war in 2002, and continued to support it for several years, even when it became clear that there were no weapons of mass destruction and that the Iraqis didn’t consider the war a “liberation.” As far as I can tell, Barr didn’t start denouncing the war until earlier this year (if there’s an earlier citation of him speaking out against the war, please let me know). He’s also switched positions on the Patriot Act, war on drugs, gay marriage and several other issues. This change of heart would be easier to accept if it hadn’t come less than two years before Barr launched his presidential campaign. Obama has always been against the war and the Patriot Act.

From More Wayne Allyn Root Nuttiness:

And please check out this great Las Vegas Sun profile, in which Root shares his opinions on kids who are bullied (”You get bullied day and night if you’re weak.” – I am not taking this out of context. Root really does appear to look down on kids who are bullied), takes a seemingly un-libertarian position on campaign contributions (calling them “bribes”), insinuates that Barack Obama did not graduate from college (there are records confirming that he did) and insults New Orleans hurricane victims for good measure (“Their mouths were open and their hands were out and they were praying for Mama Bird to throw something in there.”)

Tom Knapp posts campaign position on immigration

In Congress, Immigration, Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Politics on June 28, 2008 at 6:16 pm

Tom Knapp, Libertarian candidate for Congress (and Boston Tea Party Vice Presidential candidate) has posted a position on immigration on his campaign site. Here is an excerpt:

“Know-Nothingism” is a perennial trend in American politics. It’s a convenient tool for drumming up baseless fears and turning those fears into money and votes. Unfortunately, even a few Libertarian candidates for public office have yielded to the temptation to exploit it.

Unlike my opponent, US Representative Todd Akin, I decline to cater to the politics of fear. I support the most “open border” policy possible. Peaceful individuals should be able to cross the border “through the front door” at any port of entry with no more scrutiny than you or I receive when we board a bus or enter a bank (which, if you think about it, is considerable scrutiny — surveillance cameras are endemic to American society now and facial recognition software linked to databases of known criminal suspects is becoming more and more common).

The facts are indisputable. Let’s talk about the things the fearmongers don’t want you to know.

Click here to read his entire issue statement.

Liberty Cap Talk Live: Angela Keaton interviews

In Libertarian on June 28, 2008 at 5:49 pm

Todd Andrew Barnett of Liberty Cap Talk Live has conducted a two-part interview (total 110 minutes) with LNC member Angela Keaton.

Click here to listen to part one

Click here to listen to part two

Thanks to Todd Andrew Barnett for forwarding this information for LFV readers!

LPMass poll: “Bill Redpath vs Angela Keaton”

In Libertarian on June 28, 2008 at 5:46 pm

The Libertarian Party of Massachusetts has started an online poll, asking readers who they trust the most on the Libertarian National Committee.

The site requires registration before one can vote, but registration only takes a minute.

http://lpmass.org/publicbb2/viewtopic.php?t=1168&sid=bc3f9449dd265c1a3901b009c1fbf4f9

Man who gave Christine Smith her “Outstanding American Award” arrested for fraud. Again.

In Christine Smith, Courts and Justice System, Crime, Fraud, Law, Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Politics, Presidential Candidates on June 28, 2008 at 4:27 pm

Last year, I warned that the “awards” touted on Christine Smith’s presidential campaign website were not authentic, and in fact were laughable given where she got them.  I also warned that her “Outstanding American Award” came from Alex Merklinger, a New Age charlatan previously incarcerated for a $39 million fraud scheme.

In that scheme, Merklinger falsely claimed to be a surety for private companies bidding on government projects.  When he was asked to pay claims under the surety contract and could not do so (since he wasn’t really a surety company, and allegedly had only had $13,000 in assets despite having taken $885,000 in surety fees), he filed bankruptcy, leaving the private companies holding the bag for millions.  He also was convicted of multiple counts related to that fraud, and sentenced to federal prison.

I also warned that additional fraud charges were pending against Merklinger, due to a con in which he convinced an older gentleman that he was an Investment Banker, then pocketed $125,000 of the man’s money.  Previously on El Paso County’s “Most Wanted” list, Merklinger was finally arrested on Wednesday, and charged with Securities Fraud in connection with the fraudulent Investment Banker scheme.

It is a very good thing that the delegates declined Christine’s candidacy, given how embarrassing this situation would be to the Libertarian Party.

Click here to read ENM’s previous article about Merklinger’s frauds on Adventures In Frickintardistan

Jason Gatties: “Please consider helping the cyclone victims instead of my campaign efforts this weekend”

In Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Politics on June 28, 2008 at 3:30 pm

The following is from Jason Gatties’ campaign website:

First, please read the following info, courtesy of www.uscampaignforburma.org:

On Friday May 2, Cyclone Nargis hit southwestern Burma (Myanmar) with winds at speeds of 120 mph. Five divisions in Burma have been declared national disaster areas – Pegu, Irrawaddy, Rangoon, Mon and Karen. The numbers of those affected continues to skyrocket. It has been hard to estimate the death toll because it has been impossible to get access to some of the worst hit areas- but as of right the numbers range from 80,000 to 130,000 dead, with hundreds of thousand missing and millions displaced. Many older Burmese are saying this is the worst storm they have ever seen and international media is claiming this to be the worst natural disaster in Asia since the 2004 tsunami.

The Myanmar government has prevented most foreign aid and many people are homeless and starving. I have a love for the people of Burma & Tibet, so this nightmare has hit home with me. For those of you who may be considering a donation to my campaign this weekend, I ask that you give money towards Burma’s disaster relief instead. Any amount of money could mean a world of difference. Now unfortunately, due to the paranoid nature of the Myanmar regime, I can’t guarantee that the aid will find its way to the people, but I hold out hope that it will.

If you would like to donate to help the cyclone victims in Burma, please click here.

Robert Milnes: “Open Letter To Greens”

In Libertarian on June 28, 2008 at 3:24 pm

Please forward to interested people or groups. Greens, your party is about to make a great mistake and fail you. You know you are going to lose the election, don’t you? The Libertarian Party, Boston Tea, Constitution & all the Socialist parties will also lose. Nader too. By a LOT. Nader might get about 2%. The GP & LP will get about 1%. Boston Tea & Constitution & the Socialist parties far less than 1%. The GP is about to make the same mistake as the LP: nominate a recently joined former Congressperson for the name recognition. This strategy will fail miserably. However there is a strategy that could possibly win in a close three way race: The Progressive Alliance Strategy. Simply that is to try for the inclusive progressive vote of about 40% (leftist vote 27% + The Libertarian Vote 13%) by nominating a fusion ticket. That would be a man and woman and a green and libertarian. That would appeal to most greens & leftists and also most libertarians. Also many progressive democrats & libertarian leaning republicans. A fusion Green ticket plus 100% or near 100% ballot access could win the election. Further, by coordinating the inclusive progressive vote, many Green and Libertarian downticket candidates could also win. Both the Green and Libertarian parties were advised of this. The Libertarian Party rejected it. Now comes the Green convention. If you want to try to win you must support a fusion ticket at the convention. This is why I am running and why I would like to go to Oklahoma to try to get Indian support to get on the Oklahoma ballot before the July 15 deadline. However, finding a libertarian to participate in a fusion ticket has proven difficult. So if you know of a libertarian that would be willing to participate in a fusion ticket, please inform the GP & me. How can you help me? I need campaign & website support & legal assistance. Go to www.robertmilnes.net & click Make a Donation. From there go to www.robertmilnes4president2008.com & click Volunteer. I look forward to your support.

LFV Live rescheduled to Sat 6/28 at 7:30 pm EDT

In Libertarian on June 28, 2008 at 12:17 am

Tonight’s “LFV Live!” blogtalk show with our special guest, Dr. George Phillies, ran into some strange technical problems.  Essentially, it logged me in as host, but for some reason thought I was calling more than once from the same number.  As a result, it logged me in but locked me out of the hosting area, kept disconnecting me on the basis that the host had already called in, and all listeners got to hear was a cool Blind Melon tune, followed by nothing but dead air.  :-(

Luckily, Dr. Phillies has most graciously agreed to reschedule for tomorrow evening (Saturday, 6/28) at 7:30 pm EDT.

I sincerely apologize to all who tuned in, and hope that you will tune in again tomorrow, when I will (finally) get to interview the ever-interesting and extremely intelligent Dr. George Phillies.  :-)

PROBLEMS WITH LFV LIVE

In Libertarian on June 27, 2008 at 11:34 pm

Blogtalk says that I have already called in, so it will not connect me to the host module.  Instead, I am simply disconnected each time I call. I have no idea what’s going on. I will try a few more times, then I’ll reschedule (unless of course Paulie or another LFVer is actually called into the host number)

**********************************

We are still experiencing the same difficulty, which must be coming from blogtalk since it will not disconnect my number from the switchboard, even when it disconnects me.  Very weird.  Right now my phone is idle, but the switchboard shows me as hosting the show.  As long as it shows a host logged in via telephone, we will get nothing but dead air, and I can’t log in to host since only one host is permitted at a time.

Hopefully George Phillies can reschedule without too much inconvenience.  I apologize to George and everyone, hopefully this technical glitch will be cleared up by tomorrow.

Fake drug warrior abuses citizens of small Missouri town with full cooperation of real cops

In Libertarian on June 27, 2008 at 6:46 pm

GERALD, Mo. – Bill Jakob arrived in this small town with an offer to help police curb the community’s methamphetamine problem. He had a badge and a gun and told officials he had previously worked as an anti-drug agent in Illinois. He even drove a fully equipped Ford Crown Victoria, which he said was for undercover work.

There was just one problem: Jakob was no cop. He was an unemployed truck driver with a criminal record and had recently filed for bankruptcy.

Now this village of 1,200 people southwest of St. Louis is confronting allegations that Jakob and other officers mistreated and robbed many of the people they arrested.

At least 17 people have sued, including an elderly woman who was involuntarily committed to a psychiatric ward because she didn’t cooperate with the police and a man who said Jakob held a gun to his head and threatened to shoot while the man’s child watched.

“Not only did they break in and threaten to kill people and violate their civil rights, they stole money, prescription drugs and legally owned weapons. It’s crazy that this could happen in 2008,” said attorney Dan Briegel, who represents the woman who was placed in the psychiatric ward for a week.

Read the rest of this disturbing MSNBC article

Victims of the Bob Barr/Ron Paul Immigration Policies

In Libertarian on June 27, 2008 at 4:57 pm

Ultimately, a massive bureaucratic immigration policy as advocated by both Barr and Paul (and numerous folks from both of the old parties) has a number of victims.

First, you’ve got people who want nothing more than an opportunity to sell their labor, as a commodity, in the United States.  Efforts to block them from selling their labor are good old fashioned protectionism, no different than banning or limiting the sale of Korean cars, Japanese electronics, or French cheese.

Secondly, you’ve got the entire country as a whole, who pay higher prices for lower quality labor due to deterioration in competition.  When one is guaranteed a job through government intervention and protection from competition, quality suffers and costs increase.  You’d think libertarians would understand this.

And finally, you’ve got a frightening number of cases like this one:

Varsha Sabhnani, 46, was convicted with her husband in December on a 12-count federal indictment that included forced labor, conspiracy, involuntary servitude and harboring aliens.

The trial provided a glimpse into a growing U.S. problem of domestic workers exploited in slave-like conditions.

The victims testified that they were beaten with brooms and umbrellas, slashed with knives, and forced to climb stairs and take freezing showers as punishment. One victim was forced to eat dozens of chili peppers against her will, and then was forced to eat her own vomit when she couldn’t keep the peppers down, prosecutors said.

The poor women in this case were exploited not only by Sabhnani, whose light sentence is shocking, but by the government itself.  These women sought nothing more than to clean houses for profit — selling their most basic commodity, their labor, in a competitive free market.

Instead, they got forced into slavery by a system that says they cannot exist.  Recourse to law enforcement was difficult, since they’d be deported and their economic status completely destroyed.

Ultimately, those advocating a hard-core anti-immigration pogrom are protectionists who are willing to place millions of hard-working free market competitors in harm’s way by destroying their ability to compete in a free market.

Call it what you want — but it’s not “libertarian.”

US citizens required to get permission to return to US

In Libertarian on June 27, 2008 at 3:10 pm

Under new regulations and procedures announced to take effect over the next month, citizens of the USA will, for the first time, be required to obtain USA government permission in order to return home to their own country from abroad — from anywhere else in the world, by air or sea or land.

On no other aspect of the right to travel is international law more clear than on the right of return to the country of one’s own citizenship: “No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country.” The new regulations are a flagrant violation of the obligations of the USA as a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and other international human rights treaties, as well as a violation of the Constitutional duty of the USA government to treat such treaties as the highest law of the land.

It’s to be hoped that some civil liberties or human rights organization or individual will go to court before the end of this month to enjoin the government from putting these rules and procedures into effect, and that citizens will assert their rights by attempting to cross borders without papers, and suing those goons from the USA Department of Homeland Security who try to stop them. But if that doesn’t happen, here’s what the DHS has promulgated as “final rules” and “procedures”:

Click here to read the entire article by Edward Hasbrouck on The Practical Nomad

Hat tip Brad Spangler

“Classically Liberal” argues that Barr panders to racists and bigots

In Immigration, Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics, Minorities, Politics, Republican on June 27, 2008 at 3:04 pm

From Classically Liberal:

This blog has argued that the reason Barr, Viguerie and other conservatives were trying to take over the (formerly) Libertarian Party was to turn it into a vehicle to attack the Republicans for nominating McCain. They want to strip votes away from McCain on the Right so that he will lose. This, they hope, will bring back the dominance that the far Right previously held in the party, but which they lost out to the neo-cons.

In other words their goal is NOT to build the (formerly) Libertarian Party but to use the party as a means of taking over the Republican Party. The LP is but a tool for their use, which shows the naivety of those Libertarians who argued that having Barr lead the ticket “would build the party”. Of course to accomplish that goal Barr can’t really run as a Libertarian. He doesn’t want the libertarian vote, he wants the conservative vote.

And one result is that we know have the spectacle of a Libertarian candidate playing up immigrant-bashing to pander to the racists that permeate the Right.

Click here to read the entire article.

Hat tip Brad Spangler

Charles Jay interview on “Live From Court Street”

In Libertarian, Politics on June 27, 2008 at 2:50 pm

Jason and Cilla Gatties interviewed Boston Tea Party presidential nominee Charles Jay Wednesday 6/25, on their excellent blogtalk show, “Live From Court Street”.  The archive is available online now.

Haugh’s controversial email re Kevin Barrett

In Libertarian on June 27, 2008 at 3:38 am

Although I contacted the Barrett campaign early today requesting a copy of the email from Sean Haugh, pursuant to their own press release, I still have not heard back from them.

In the meantime, I have been informed by “Galileo”, in an LFV comment, that the following email is the one in question.  Many thanks to Galileo!  :-)

(The original Barrett press release is here. Sean Haugh’s response is here.)

___________________________________________

Sean Haugh wrote:
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 15:31:31 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Fwd: Kevin Barrett and Holocaust Denial
From: “Sean Haugh”
To: “JULIE FOX”

Howdy Julie! It was the Waukesha Freeman. The article will be in tomorrow’s paper.

Here’s my statement which I encourage you to share with the Wisconsin LP:

In almost all cases, as Political Director I support the candidates as nominated by our state parties no matter how I feel about them. I cannot in good conscience do this in the case of Kevin Barrett.

I do not have a problem with him or anyone as a so-called “9/11 Truther.” I accept that people who express skepticism over the official story about what happened that day have a home in the LP. But Mr. Barrett goes well beyond that in two ways:

1) He frequently calls for the mass executions for treason for reporters who wrote articles with which he takes issue. I absolutely will not support any candidate who calls for mass murder of anyone, and am appalled that anyone who considers themselves Libertarian would advocate something so horrific.

2) He has made qualified statements of support for the preeminent Holocaust deniers in North America. I researched this extensively before coming to this conclusion. He seems to be playing both sides of that
fence. I am and will always be totally intolerant of the Holocaust deniers. It’s a blatant racism borne of a deliberate stupidity and I will do absolutely everything in my power to make sure that Holocaust deniers
do not feel they have a home in the LP.

I strongly urge the Wisconsin LP to not nominate Kevin Barrett for US Congress. Regardless of your decision however I will go out of my way to disassociate him from the national LP.

yours in liberty -
Sean Haugh
Political Director

Reminder: George Phillies to appear on LFV Live!

In Libertarian on June 27, 2008 at 1:00 am

George PhilliesOn Friday, June 27th @7:30 pm EDT, Dr. George Phillies will appear on LFV Live! to discuss issues of importance to libertarians.  Topics will include ballot access, and his being named as the LP presidential candidate in New Hampshire due to ballot substitution issues.

Mark your calendars for what is sure to be an interesting and enlightening hour!

Steve Newton warns libertarians about “Freedom Slate ‘08″

In Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Politics, Republican on June 26, 2008 at 11:13 pm

From Steve Newton’s blog, Delaware Libertarian:

It was wrong when Bob Barr, as a sitting member of the Libertarian National Committee, headed a PAC that donated thousands of dollars to Republican candidates who had active Libertarian opponents.

And if you unknowingly donate to Freedom Slate ‘08, you will be doing the same thing.

Eight of the Republican candidates who will receive money from donations to Freedom Slate ‘08 have ballot-qualified Libertarian opponents.

Here are the Libertarians you will be sending money to the GOP to oppose:

Lorenzo Gaztanaga, 2nd Congressional District, Maryland
Thibeaux Lincecum, 4th Congressional District, Maryland
Darlene Nicholas, 5th Congressional District, Maryland
Ronald Owens-Bey, 7th Congressional District, Maryland
Jim Duensing, 1st Congressional District, Nevada
Sean Patrick Moore, 2nd Congressional District, Nevada
Joseph P. Silvestri, 3rd Congressional District, Nevada
Edward Choate, 3rd Congressional District, Tennessee
[These names compiled from the list of ballot-qualified candidates reported in DC Political Report.]

About many of these candidates I know nothing, other than that they are fellow Libertarians who have taken the time and trouble to file for election.

Click here to read the rest of the Delaware Libertarian article by Steve Newton.

Steve also has another very enlightening article explaining more about Freedom Slate ‘08, and why he will not donate to them.

Live From Court Street returns on July 10th

In Entertainment on June 26, 2008 at 10:36 pm

Live From Court Street With Jason and Cilla

Respected Libertarians, Jason and Cilla Gatties, are back with their interesting blogtalk show.  Here’s the description of their next episode.

We’ve recovered from Jason’s Birthday Bash and we now return to our regular format. Join Jason & Cilla for 60 minutes of news, sports, music & entertainment.

Another Candidate For Sean Haugh To “Protect” Us From

In Libertarian Party-US on June 26, 2008 at 9:46 pm

Apparently, Sean Haugh has appointed himself determinant of who characterizes a nutty candidate who is bad for the Libertarian Party.  He says of Mr. Barrett:

From the references you can also see that there’s a community of people out there who are watching and listening to Barrett’s every word. When he says this junk in the future as a Libertarian candidate, every one of these people will have reason to link these noxious sentiments to our party.

Setting all that aside, why would you want to support a candidate that blithely lies to all of you?

For the moment, let’s overlook the fact Libertarian Party member (and presidential/congressional candidate) Ron Paul had had some pretty shocking racist, anti-semitic, and homophobic statements attributed to him… yet still got a hallelujah from the LP National Office when he dropped out of another party’s primary.

I know little of Mr. Barrett.  It appears from the citations that he is prone to some nontraditional and non-LP opinions on 9/11, and as someone who rejects the 9/11 conspiracy theories, I’d certainly be uncomfortable having those views communicated as a Libertarian Party view on the issues.

However, Mr. Barrett’s run with the LP is apparently his first.

Which brings me to one Mr. Kevin Craig of Missouri.  Mr. Craig is a perennial candidate representing the LP in Missouri.

Mr. Craig advocates a “Libertarian theocracy” on his campaign web site.  Unlike Mr. Haugh’s experiences with Mr. Barrett, I didn’t have to browse around a dozen obscure listserves and local papers to find lots of controversial and noxious sentiments.  I just had to go to his own campaign web site.

In poverty and anonymous homosexuality, at least man is his own god. But these would-be gods always cry out to Big Brother to bring paradise. Those who will not acknowledge the Messiah as their King live under the boot of the messianic state.

Another thing I find “morally repugnant” is the civil government telling citizens that two (or more?) homosexuals have a “right” to be “married.”

They have also disregarded God’s intent. Every single person who signed the Declaration of Independence (1776) and the Constitution (1787) believed that homosexuality is contrary to “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.” The rights we have are only those with which we have been endowed by our Creator, who also ordained “marriage,” and who also defined who we can and cannot be “married” to.

Every single person who signed the Constitution would say the government is a child abuser by teaching children that homosexuality is not sinful.

It’s trendy to believe that evil capitalists and industrialists cause “acid rain” and “global warming,” but the MainstreamMedia gets all bent out of shape when Jerry Falwell suggests that homosexuals and the ACLU caused 9-11 or hurricanes. The Bible clearly declares that man’s evil is the cause of climatological disturbances (Deuteronomy 28) or as the lawyers call it, “acts of God.”

Congress should

* “Hate” homosexuality and homosexuals
* Follow God’s Commandments with respect to them

Homosexuals attempt to embezzle sexual satisfaction from God’s business.

The entire creation is God’s enterprise.

God is the Boss.

Homosexuals are disobedient employees.

God hates them.

That’s just a small sampling of the various content Mr. Craig has spread as the Libertarian Party’s campaign message during his Libertarian candidacies.

When I communicated my concern about this problem to then-Executive Director Shane Cory, I was ignored.  When I finally cornered Cory at the Conservative Leadership Conference last year, and asked him about these repugnant statements, he told me that the LP cannot monitor every candidate or centrally control every bad statement that candidates make.

Fair enough.

So why the emphasis on one supposed deranged individual, while on the LP clock, yet no emphasis on Mr. Craig — who has made his controversial and noxious statements *on his campaign web site*?

Craig’s candidacy has been “watched” by a number of people across the blogosphere, and has been used by several Democrats in the past to attack the Libertarian Party.  A quick Google search produces numerous pages of commentary.

If Haugh is not willing to enthusiastically go up against Craig, whose views certainly damage our party’s credibility and are every bit as noxious as those allegedly uttered by Barrett, then he should cease and desist from his activities against Barrett.  From where I am sitting, Haugh’s pogrom looks like politically-expedient grandstanding, not principled defense of the LP from candidate bigotry.

Barr spends over 36K of donations on NASCAR, air conditioning for someone else’s property

In Libertarian on June 26, 2008 at 8:46 pm

The Bob Barr campaign spent $19,000 to install air conditioning (in a building which belongs to someone else and will be used for less than five months), plans to spend over $18,000 in one day at a NASCAR event ($15,000 of that goes to NASCAR), and also wants to sponsor a NASCAR vehicle (a huge expense for a campaign which is hardly breaking fundraising records).

It is unclear why Barr did not lease a building which already had air conditioning, or why the building’s owner is not responsible for that expense.

Yet for some reason, the Barr campaign believes telling donors about their irresponsible use of donations will encourage donors to give him even more money. More specifically, they want to raise $88,000 by next Friday.  Here is the fundraising letter:

Dear friend,

We’re gaining ground. Donate Today!

Great opportunities continue to come our way as the Barr/Root ticket continues to present itself to the American people.

Yesterday, Bob interviewed on *CNN’s Glenn Beck* and today Bob will be on *Bill O’Reilly’s radio program*, “The Radio Factor”.

Bob has also been invited to appear on the Sunday morning program, “*This Week with George Stephanopoulos*”.

Since Monday, we’ve *doubled* our YouTube subscribers and our eCampaign Manager, Martin Avila, tells me that we are quickly gaining ground on other Web 2.0 sites such as Digg.

Last week, we received an invitation to appear at NASCAR’s Coke 400 for their first voter registration drive. Bob would have the opportunity to do photo-ops with NASCAR drivers and crews and speak with fans throughout the day.

We’ve even been given a select spot to put up a “Barr Booth” to hand out t-shirts and materials to hundreds of thousands of NASCAR fans who will be in attendance. We may even have room for a show car wrapped in “Barr ‘08″ graphics if we cover the expense.

As I said earlier, great opportunities continue to come our way.

However, we cannot take advantage of them if we cannot fund the campaign.

Yesterday, I wrote a check for $19,000 to install an air conditioner in our large but modest campaign headquarters. We’ve also spent thousands on campaign products preparing for our online store that will open tomorrow.

Those expenses coupled with travel and staff expenses leave us with very little cash on hand.

We’re to the point now where we can only afford to operate and have to pass on the opportunities that are coming our way. *That’s why I need you to donate today *

Unless we raise a good deal of money very quickly, we’re going to have to pass on what I think is a great opportunity with NASCAR. They need $15,000 for the car expense and we’ll need at least $3,000 for fan materials. That’s in addition to the travel expenses to fly Bob and a few staff members to Daytona to meet with the fans.

That’s $18,000 just for one event.

We need to raise much more money in order to move faster and be much more effective.

That’s why I set a goal this morning to raise $88,000 between today and July Fourth.

This will get us back on track after establishing our campaign headquarters and will give us a small lead so that we can move quickly without having to turn down opportunities due to a lack of funds.

US Supreme Court upholds right to possess and carry a gun

In Constitutional Rights, Courts and Justice System, Law, Libertarian, Second Amendment on June 26, 2008 at 8:13 pm

From ScotusBlog:

The opinion can be downloaded here. Relevant quotes from the majority opinion can be found here, and a replay of our LiveBlog can be found here. Tom’s commentary is here.

Answering a 217-year old constitutional question, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to have a gun, at least in one’s home. The Court, splitting 5-4, struck down a District of Columbia ban on handgun possession. Although times have changed since 1791, Justice Antonin Scalia said for the majority, “it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.”

Examining the words of the Amendment, the Court concluded “we find they guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weaons in case of confrontation” — in other words, for self-defense. “The inherent right of self-defense has been central to the Second Amendment right,” it added.

The individual right interpretation, the Court said, “is strongly confirmed by the historical background of the Second Amendment,” going back to 17th Century England, as well as by gun rights laws in the states before and immediately after the Amendment was put into the U.S. Constitution.

What Congress did in drafting the Amendment, the Court said, was “to codify a pre-existing right, rather than to fashion a new one.”

Justice Scalia’s opinion stressed that the Court was not casting doubt on long-standing bans on carrying a concealed gun or on gun possession by felons or the mentally retarded, on laws barring guns from schools or government buildings, and laws putting conditions on gun sales.

Read the rest of this article on ScotusBlog.

Barr to be on Nebraska ballot

In Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics, Politics on June 26, 2008 at 6:14 pm

From Fort Mill Times

By ANNA JO BRATTON
(Published June 25, 2008)
LINCOLN, Neb. — The Libertarian Party’s presidential candidate will be on Nebraska’s November ballot.

Organizers needed about 6,000 signatures from voters and say they gathered nearly 10,000. The Secretary of State’s office confirms the Party is recognized.

The candidate, former Georgia Congressman Bob Barr, left the GOP in 2006 over what he called bloated spending and civil liberties intrusions by the Bush administration.

The Party hasn’t cracked 1 percent of the national popular vote in a presidential race. But it bills itself as the third-largest party and is on the ballot in at least 30 states.

Barrett asks for Haugh resignation, Part Two: Haugh responds

In Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Politics on June 26, 2008 at 5:10 pm

What follows is an email from Sean Haugh to Kevin Barrett, and copied to others. This email was sent to me by LP Political Director Sean Haugh, in response to my inquiry regarding whether he wished to respond to Barrett’s press release. The email is reproduced here with the specific permission of Mr. Haugh. The only edits I have made is to reformat actual email addresses, to protect those persons from spam.

____________________________________

Subject: Real Quotes from Kevin Barrett
From: “Sean Haugh”
Date: Sun, May 18, 2008 11:34 pm
To: “Kevin Barrett”
Cc: “Jim Sewell”
“Rolf Lindgren”
“Randy Palmer”
dhendrickson3 at wi.rr.com
“‘Mike Mckenna’”
theonelaw at wi.rr.com
“‘John Gatewood’”
“‘Markus Rostig’”
“‘Tim Peterson’”
“Jason Walker”
“Chris Gioffre”
“Terry Gray”
“Terry Gray”
“Tom Ender”
“Ben Masel”
aulibertarians at aol.com
jamaas2001 at yahoo.com
“Adam Dick”
“Corey Scholtka”
“JULIE FOX”
“Linda Sturtzen”
————————————————————————–

Real quotes from Kevin Barrett:

“As a rational person who is not a specialist in the subject of WWII, but who has studied the history of Zionist Big Lies vis-a-vis Palestine, I cannot possibly dismiss the arguments of people like Green, Irving, and even Zundel. And even if the 6-million-deliberately-murdered-for-purely-ethnic-reasons figure is correct — which it very well may be; I have grown agnostic on that after studying the Big Lies of Zionism — I would still have to characterize the Holocaust as it is taught in the US as a hideously destructive myth.”

source: Dylan Avery, director of “Loose Change”
reference:
http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=3620&st=0
Sean’s note: Mark Green, David Irving and Ernst Zundel are three of the most vociferous holocaust deniers.

*

“In fact I may be the only Muslim on earth who does NOT question the basic facts of the standard Western holocaust narrative. But I think the other 1,499,999 Muslims have excellent reasons (from their perspective) for questioning it–yet those reasons, and the Muslim-majority perspective on just about everything, are systematically blacked out and/or lied about in American media and academia. That pisses me off enough that when an asshole like Rabinowitz won’t stop bashing me with his anti-Muslim bigotry, I’m happy to throw the other side’s argument in his face just to pull his chain.”

source: Dylan Avery
reference:
http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?s=d51e71a4179ddda03dea07c4a70f24b6&showtopic=3620&st=20

*

“As the example of Nuremberg suggests, journalists who act as propagandists for war crimes may one day find themselves on the scaffold. You would be well advised to strive for more balanced and accurate coverage in the future.”

source: Kevin Barrett
reference: letters to the editor, The Capitol Times, August 11, 2007

*

“The Capital Times ownership and editorial decision-makers, like those of other mainstream U.S. news outlets, are setting themselves up to be prosecuted as war criminals. By publishing the endless stream of lies that brought us into the Iraqi and Afghan quagmires, without exercising duly diligent skepticism, journalistic decision-makers are following in the footsteps of Joseph Goebbels — a path that ends at the scaffold.”

source: Kevin Barrett, in another letter to the editor, The Capitol Times
reference: http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/2008/03/kevin-barrett.html

*

“Flight 93 is a Goebbels style propaganda flick designed to incite war crimes. The people who made it should be put on trial.”

source: Kevin Barrett’s radio show, 12/23/06
reference:
http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/12/kevin-barrett-calls-for-trial-of.html

*

“O’Reilly doesn’t like that, and neither does the other guys at Fox News. In fact they’re feeling pretty threatened right now and I would be too if I was in their shoes because they’re setting themselves up for complicity in high treason and mass murder charges. When this thing hits the fan, the leadership in our nation’s corporate media may just end up dangling from the end of a rope.”

source: Jim Fetzer’s radio show, October 2006
reference:
http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/10/kevin-barrett-threatens-violence.html

*

“If you are not aware that you’re covering up for that traitor and mass murderer and yes insurance fraudster Silverstein, you’ll figure it out when you’re beside him on the scaffold. I’ll be saving this email as evidence for your trial.”

source: Mark Roberts
reference:
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/semiliterateparanoiacswhofantasizeaboutt

*

“By blinding people to the need to take the only effective action, [Noam Chomsky] is bringing on disaster. If he convinces even one person to do something other than work for 9/11 truth, he may as well have personally murdered all 6 billion people on earth.”

source: Kevin Barrett
reference: http://911blogger.com/node/12772

*

“Amy [Goodman], you will one day find yourself on the scaffold, condemned to hang alongside the other Goebbels-style traitors and mass-murder-coverup-conspirators from the corporate media you pretend to criticize… I stand by the opinion that the support Amy Goodman has given to the worst blood libel in human history, and her ensuing participation in the murder of over a million people in Iraq, Afghanistan and the USA, constitutes complicity in high treason, mass murder, war crimes, and other crimes against humanity.”

[follow-up: In his "apology" to Goodman, Barrett rephrases his sentiments:]

“I stand by the opinion that the support Amy Goodman has given to the worst blood libel in human history, and her ensuing participation in the murder of over a million people in Iraq, Afghanistan and the USA, constitutes complicity in high treason, mass murder, war crimes, and other crimes against humanity. I still expect that one day she and a great many other American media decision-makers will be charged with these crimes and put on trial at a new Nuremburg.”

source: Kevin Barrett
references: http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/2008/03/kevin-barrett.html
http://www.mujca.com/amy.htm

*

“The State Department doesn’t know what it is talking about, but what else is new? Frankly I wonder who wrote this for the State Department. We need to find out because they are going to have to go up there on the scaffold with the other people who planned the attacks and more importantly the people who covered them up. The people complicit in the attacks need to be tried, condemned and sentenced.”

source: Kevin Barrett’s radio show, June 12, 2007
reference:
http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2007/06/more-on-kevin-hang-em-all-barrett.html

*

“As I understand it, the usual penalty for treason is hanging, not death by firing squad. In that case, it is likely that Mr. Bush will be hanged, not shot, for treason. By making this prediction, am I running the risk of
having my clothesline confiscated? I also think that there is a real possibility that Mr. Bush will be electrocuted for the mass murder of 2,500 Americans in the World Trade Center. By stating this, am I risking a court order shutting off my electricity? I also foresee a small but very real possibility that Mr. Bush will die in the gas chamber. Does raising this possibility mean that my gas could be cut off?

“I appreciate the difficulty you guys must be having doing your job right now, with tens of millions of Americans calling for Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and company to be prosecuted and (presumably) executed for 9/11 high treason. With almost half the country believing the official 9/11 story is a cover-up (Zogby poll, May 2006) it won’t be long before an overwhelming majority of Americans joins Mr. Cook in eagerly anticipating Bush’s execution–which will put you fellas in a difficult position. Maybe it’s time to save the country a lot of heartache, and rat out whoever it was in the SS who kept Bush at that school in Florida long after the second plane hit the building.”

source: Kevin Barrett, email to Mike Mikalsen
refrence: http://www.dailytakes.com/?p=825

*

[Sean talking now:] There’s more where that came from. Note that even prominent people within the 9/11 Truth movement itself are reporting these quotes and claiming that Barrett discredits their efforts. From the
references you can also see that there’s a community of people out there who are watching and listening to Barrett’s every word. When he says this junk in the future as a Libertarian candidate, every one of these people will have reason to link these noxious sentiments to our party.

Setting all that aside, why would you want to support a candidate that blithely lies to all of you?

Let us be clear: When Barrett says he has never threatened anyone with execution, that’s a bald-faced lie. He consistently wishes for it and pledges to take action to bring it about. When Barrett says he has never
expressed support for holocaust deniers, that’s another big fat lie. He thinks people have “excellent reasons” for denying the holocaust.

Kevin, I welcome your threatened legal action. Make sure your lawyer reads this email before taking your case.

yours in liberty -
Sean Haugh
Political Director, Libertarian Party

Barrett asks for removal of LP Political Director Sean Haugh

In Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Politics on June 26, 2008 at 1:34 pm

Barrett Asks for Removal of LP Political Director Sean Haugh

For IMMEDIATE RELEASE – May 19, 2008

Asks the National Libertarian Party to Remove Political Director Sean Haugh for Race-Baiting Smear Regarding the Nazi Holocaust of the Jews and Implying that Dr. Barrett may deny the Holocaust

In a verified email sent by LP Political Director Sean Haugh to members of the Libertarian Party of Wisconsin on May 14, Haugh wrote:

“He [Barrett] has made qualified statements of support for the preeminent Holocaust deniers in North America. I researched this extensively before coming to this conclusion.”

Haugh’s statements are reckless and false. There is no legitimate source documenting Dr. Barrett that ever “made qualified statements of support for the preeminent Holocaust deniers”, nor has Dr. Barrett ever denied the existence of the Nazi Holocaust.

In fact, Dr. Barrett founded a non-profit organization called the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth, which brings people of these three great faiths together. Dr. Barrett has also co-edited and co-authored an interfaith dialogue book with Jewish and Christian authors.

Haugh’s statements cheapen the genuine human horror and tragedy felt by the victims and survivors of the Holocaust, where the Nazis exterminated six million Jewish people. When Dr. Barrett compares Bush to the Nazis, it is not a compliment.

It should also be noted that the very concept of Holocaust Denial contradicts 9/11 Truth, as Holocaust Denial denies government mass murder while 9/11 Truth asserts it.

We are appalled that the national LP would be wasting member dues to pay the salary of someone who uses the despicable tactics of Sean Haugh. Haugh’s actions damage the credibility of the Libertarian Party and the Barrett for Congress Campaign.

A copy of Sean Haugh’s email will be made available on request.

We request that the national LP remove Sean Haugh from his position as LP Political Director and that an apology be sent to Dr. Barrett immediately.

Contact:

Dr. Kevin Barrett; 608-583-2132 or kbarrett@merr.com or http://www.barrettforcongress.us

Rolf Lindgren; 608-279-5889 or rolfusaugustusadolphus@yahoo.com

__________________________________

LFV Update: LP Political Director Sean Haugh’s response to an LFV query is here.

Bob Barr’s extremely un-libertarian views on immigration

In Barack Obama, Immigration, Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics, Politics on June 25, 2008 at 3:13 pm

The Libertarian Party’s stance on immigration is quite clear. Bob Barr, on the other hand, is far less libertarian than even the Republicans and Democrats when it comes to immigration.

From Third Party Watch:

The following is a campaign letter from Bob Barr:

John McCain and Barack Obama Plan To Bring Back “COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM

From The Desk of Rep. Bob Barr

Dear Friend and Fellow American,

We’re facing a “new” crisis: BORDER SECURITY.

But really, this is the same crisis we faced last year at this time, when Senators John McCain and Ted Kennedy tried to push their “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” bill on us—supported by Senator Barack Obama!

The American people were able to STOP the McCain-Kennedy bill—but will we be able to stop PRESIDENT McCain (or PRESIDENT Obama) from pushing it through again?

We need to send a strong message to both the Republicans AND the Democrats, to let them know that WE MEAN BUSINESS when it comes to securing the border!

A lack of border security allows foreign criminals, carriers of communicable diseases, terrorists and other potential threats to enter the country unchecked. We must be aggressive in securing our borders while also fighting the big-government “nanny state” that seeks to coddle even those capable of providing for their own personal prosperity.

That’s one of the reasons I’m running for President of the United States—and I need YOUR help to make sure every voter in America will have a chance to send that strong message to both parties! CLICK HERE to donate now.

Last week, there was a closed-door meeting between Republican presidential candidate John McCain and a group of Hispanics. There was NO media allowed—but it DID get reported. And what did the Associated Press report? That “John McCain assured Hispanic leaders he would push through Congress legislation to overhaul federal immigration laws if elected.”

It’s McCain-Kennedy all over again – and now that McCain has the GOP nomination “sewn up,” he’s ready to start pushing it again!

A conservative Hispanic lady named Rosanna Pulido, an original “Minuteman” who has worked hard for years to fight the “pro-illegal immigration” crowd, got into that closed-door meeting, and in her report quoted John McCain as saying, “I was proud to work for Comprehensive Immigration Reform… and if I am elected President I assure you that in 2009 I will ask Congress to pass Comprehensive Immigration Reform.”

Pulido went on to report, “John McCain talked about a debate he was in about enforcing the law, and he says that the ‘other side had a lot of rhetoric… you know what I am talking about!’” Read the rest of this entry »

Steve Newton’s “Forty bucks for four Libertarians”

In Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Politics on June 25, 2008 at 1:39 pm

Forty bucks for four Libertarians on July 4?

Here’s what I would like to propose to my fellow Libertarians, especially those who are skeptical/hostile toward the top of the Libertarian ticket this year.

I’m cheap, and we’ve got a household of six people and two cats to consider, so large political contributions are out of the question.

On the other hand, even I can pry loose a measly forty bucks on Independence Day (or the day before; see below).

And here’s what I plan to do with it:

Send $10 to Dr. Michael Munger to support his campaign for Governor of North Carolina (but I’m sending it to him on July 3, because that’s the date of his money grenade–see the left side of the blog).

Send $10 to Allen Buckley to support his campaign for Senator in Georgia (hoping to offset the Barr PAC’s $3,000+ donations to Saxby Chambliess).

Send $10 to Scotty Boman to support his campaign for Senator in Michigan (if he gets $500 from this, maybe he can go to court to add a “W” to his name, which would be worth at least another 25,000 votes–inside joke, eh).

Send $10 to Jason Gatties to support his campaign for the Board of Trustees of Lake Michigan College (because, as a state-supported professor I really wish our trustees were elected).

You might think that $10 doesn’t make a damn bit of difference to these candidates.

But you’d be wrong.

It’s not even so much the money as the profound message you’ll be sending them that other Libertarians around the nation are watching their races, rooting for them, and want to help build a different kind of national political party.

These, by the way, are my candidate picks, people I’ve researched and can support. Feel free to find your own–but find four candidates around the country that you’re willing to support.

And if you’re flush–or willing to forego the second keg before the fireworks–send them each twenty bucks.

I can’t really think of anything better to do with the money this year.

Surprise — your privacy is even more compromised than you thought

In Civil Liberties on June 25, 2008 at 12:00 pm

Apparently, one may still travel by air without ID, if the TSA is convinced that the ID is lost, and you’re willing to undergo egregious privacy violations.  Consumerist reports on one traveler’s experience:

After filling out the affidavit, Laurie called a service to verify my address. The service needed me to then correctly answer three questions about myself, which Laurie relayed to me. The first was my date of birth, the second was a previous address (which I only got right on my second try), and the third was “You are registered to vote. Which political party have you registered with?” I got all three right, and only then did Laurie clear me to go through security.

Of course, I still had to submit to secondary screening, including a full-body pat-down and total luggage search. Brenda and Laurie stayed with me to make sure the process went as quickly as possible, and were again incredibly helpful and nice. They kept explaining over and over how necessary it was to “verify” who I was, and how times have changed, and how these new regulations must have been as a result of someone trying to get away with something, because there’s always a reason for these thing but they don’t always know what those reasons are. They were so nice and considerate that I waited until the very end before I finally said that I do not agree with the new regulations, but that I was thankful that the two of them acted so professionally and considerately to me. Laurie actually seemed a little dejected when I said this, because I had been playing along the entire time out of fear that I would not appear cooperative otherwise.

I can only imagine what the reaction would be if one answered “Libertarian” or “Green” — especially in states where those parties aren’t “officially recognized.”

One also has to marvel at the amount of sophisticated data that the so-called “service” has collected about travelers.  More than likely, the information is gleaned from credit records — a situation where one in four individuals has serious errors on “their” file.

This makes the cozy relationship between government and data collection companies a lot clearer.  The next time you make a purchase, buy a car, apply for a loan, or go on vacation, your transaction will be reported — possibly inaccurately — into the government’s database.  And if you seek to sue the big corporate credit bureaus for torts such as libel (inaccurately publishing damaging information), you’ll run head-long into federal laws protecting those bureaus from liability.

This cozy corporate-government privacy-busting superstate reminds me of a quote from Italian dictator Benito Mussolini: “Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power.”

In the new American Security State, you are always under suspicion.  Your innocence is never accepted, your guilt, if asserted, never need be proven.  And both big government and big business are working together to ensure your liberties get traded in for their profit.

Scott Boman – on the next “Vortex of Freedom” Radio Show

In Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Politics on June 24, 2008 at 9:55 pm

“Vortex of Freedom” Radio Show – Saturday

6:00PM Eastern

Scott Boman – Candidate for U.S. Senate

Scott Boman, the Libertarian candidate for U.S. Senate from Michigan is the guest. Topics to be discussed include his campaign and issues affecting Michigan.

Call-in Number: (347) 215-7969

A brief history of the Boston Tea Party, part 2

In Libertarian, Politics on June 24, 2008 at 7:10 pm

Being the second part of a self-administered Q&A session (part one here), covering the history of the Boston Tea Party from the end of 2007 to mid-2008.

Q: So, how about a brief recap of what’s happened with the Boston Tea Party since the beginning of 2008?

As of the beginning of 2008, the party still looked moribund, but there were signs of stirring. The new interim chair, Jim Davidson, actively recruited new national committee members, solicited the formation of new affiliates, attended Libertarian and Constitution Party events to network, and tried to inspire real activity. This led to the party’s first major controversy, in which I was at times “the bad guy,” but it also culminated in the nomination of 2008 presidential ticket — the party’s first. As of today, we’re at 150+ registered members and have six bona fide state affiliate organizations, with others forming.

Read the rest of this entry »

Starchild, Gatties, Newton laud Scotty Boman’s U.S. Senate candidacy

In Libertarian Party-US on June 24, 2008 at 6:17 pm

Libertarian candidate for U.S. Senate in Michigan, Scotty Boman, is attempting to mount one of the more active statewide campaigns of 2008, and prominent libertarians — both in and outside of Michigan — are taking notice.

Here is what nationally known libertarian activist Starchild said in endorsing Scotty Boman:

As a fellow libertarian activist and Ron Paul supporter I’m proud to endorse Scotty for U.S. Senate. The people of Michigan are lucky to have the opportunity to vote for a candidate this committed to restoring the Bill of Rights and helping keep the country from moving further down the road toward a police state. Like Ron Paul, he is clearly someone who is in this for the long haul and will not sell out your freedom for money and power.

Jason Gatties, a fellow Michigander, said this:

It gives me great pleasure to offer my endorsement of Scotty Boman for U.S. Senate. Carl Levin is an enemy of Liberty. Scotty Boman will help return real freedom to this country.

Steve Newton went beyond an endorsement and wrote a full-length article at his blog, Delaware Libertarian:

I keep trying to make the point here that there are credible Libertarian candidates out there doing the heavy lifting of trying to turn this into a real political party.

Another one is Scotty Boman, running for US Senate against Carl Levin in Michigan.

Boman is a long-time Libertarian activist, seeking to build on Ron Paul’s momentum, and his positions are strongly in favor of human liberty: get out of Iraq, non-interventionist foreign policy, end the war on drugs, end domestic surveillance, and get the government out of the marriage business.

Read the rest.

Other Boman endorsers LFV readers may be familiar with include Jake Porter and Darcy G. Richardson.

Boman has also won the endorsements of several Michigan county coordinators for the Ron Paul for President campaign, as well as the Ron Paul’s statewide coordinator for Michigan, Leslie Roszman.

Disclosure: I am working with and supporting Scotty Boman for U.S. Senate.

Law School to organize Bush war crimes trial

In Libertarian on June 23, 2008 at 11:23 pm

A conference to plan the prosecution of President Bush and other high administration officials for war crimes will be held September 13-14 at the Massachusetts School of Law at Andover .

“This is not intended to be a mere discussion of violations of law that have occurred,” said convener Lawrence Velvel, dean and cofounder of the school. “It is, rather, intended to be a planning conference at which plans will be laid and necessary organizational structures set up, to pursue the guilty as long as necessary and, if need be, to the ends of the Earth.”

“We must try to hold Bush administration leaders accountable in courts of justice,” Velvel said. “And we must insist on appropriate punishments, including, if guilt is found, the hangings visited upon top German and Japanese war-criminals in the 1940s.”

Click here to read the entire article.

Hat tip Brad Spangler

Army General accuses Bush administration of war crimes

In Libertarian on June 23, 2008 at 11:20 pm

From the Washington Post:

The two-star general who led an Army investigation into the horrific detainee abuse at Abu Ghraib has accused the Bush administration of war crimes and is calling for accountability.

In his 2004 report on Abu Ghraib, then-Major General Anthony Taguba concluded that “numerous incidents of sadistic, blatant, and wanton criminal abuses were inflicted on several detainees.” He called the abuse “systemic and illegal.” And, as Seymour M. Hersh reported in the New Yorker, he was rewarded for his honesty by being forced into retirement.

Now, in a preface to a Physicians for Human Rights report based on medical examinations of former detainees, Taguba adds an epilogue to his own investigation.

The new report, he writes, “tells the largely untold human story of what happened to detainees in our custody when the Commander-in-Chief and those under him authorized a systematic regime of torture. This story is not only written in words: It is scrawled for the rest of these individual’s lives on their bodies and minds. Our national honor is stained by the indignity and inhumane treatment these men received from their captors.

“The profiles of these eleven former detainees, none of whom were ever charged with a crime or told why they were detained, are tragic and brutal rebuttals to those who claim that torture is ever justified. Through the experiences of these men in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo Bay, we can see the full-scope of the damage this illegal and unsound policy has inflicted –both on America’s institutions and our nation’s founding values, which the military, intelligence services, and our justice system are duty-bound to defend.

“In order for these individuals to suffer the wanton cruelty to which they were subjected, a government policy was promulgated to the field whereby the Geneva Conventions and the Uniform Code of Military Justice were disregarded. The UN Convention Against Torture was indiscriminately ignored. . . .

“After years of disclosures by government investigations, media accounts, and reports from human rights organizations, there is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes. The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account.”

Pamela Hess of the Associated Press has more on the report, which resulted from “the most extensive medical study of former U.S. detainees published so far” and “found evidence of torture and other abuse that resulted in serious injuries and mental disorders.”

Click here to read the entire article.

Hat tip Brad Spangler

Angela Keaton threatened for doing her job on LNC

In Libertarian on June 23, 2008 at 10:50 pm

From Angela Keaton’s blog:

Mr. Karlan:

Given that neither you or your mentor M Carling have a law degree nor access to significant funds, you might not wish to continue making threats that you will use state action to silence a committee member who dares to ask questions or report to the membership.

Any further threats of such will be forwarded to my family’s attorney.

Thank you.

Bill Redpath asks Angela Keaton to resign from LNC

In Libertarian on June 23, 2008 at 10:46 pm

From: angela@angelakeaton.com
To: robert.kraus@lp.org
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 16:51:06 +0000
CC: lnc-discuss@hq.lp.org
Subject: [Lnc-discuss] Regarding Mr. Redpath’s Request

Dear Committee Members:

Mr. Redpath just called my office to ask me to “act like a responsible committee member or resign.”

Mr. Redpath, learn your place in the movement. Do not call, write or speak to me unless I address you first. You are not my father, husband, boyfriend or anything other than a volunteer with a title.

Angela Keaton

Touched by government

In Libertarian on June 23, 2008 at 9:46 pm

Why the MSM Irks Me

In Democrats, Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics, Media, Politics, Presidential Candidates, Republican on June 23, 2008 at 8:16 pm

Will Libertarian Bob Barr take conservative votes from McCain?

Jack Cafferty is the typical media elitist.  He thinks that only Democrats and Republicans are entitled to votes and that Bob Barr, Charles Jay, and other candidates are “taking” votes preordained for McCain and Obama.

If you go by Cafferty’s logic, one can assume that John McCain is stealing conservative votes from Bob Barr because many people feel that Barr is more conservative.

The only vote earned is the vote that is casted.

Theory: Carlin’s heart couldn’t take the Russert hoopla

In Media on June 23, 2008 at 3:32 pm

Can you imagine how, if he had lived, George Carlin would have responded to the TEN DAYS worth of 24/7 coverage of “the death that enveloped the nation in grief”???

I’m sure that this was the cause of Carlin’s heart failure.

America had finally reached its zenith of Roman decadence when a neocon statist shill for the Regime was mourned for TEN DAYS PLUS and treated like a widely beloved figure… The shame of the statist media.

I don’t think George Carlin’s heart could take it.

Blogroll update

In Libertarian on June 23, 2008 at 3:00 pm

If you are a regular reader of LFV and have a libertarian blog, please check to make sure we have you listed in our blogroll.  If not, please leave a comment with your url, so I can add you.  :-)

Gene Trosper’s “Bouquets for Bureaucrats”

In Libertarian on June 23, 2008 at 2:42 am

From Libertarian Action:

Politicians and bureaucrats aren’t exactly known as harbingers of happiness. So why not send them a little happiness instead, coupled with a simple message from their constituents?

Libertarians in California, lend me your ears for a moment on this proposition.

Currently, the California State Senate is considering SB 1499, What is this bill, you ask? It would effectively ban those cheerful and colorful mylar balloons that we give to our children and others whom we love during special occasions such as birthdays, anniversaries and graduations. Dour kill joys such as bill sponsor Jack Scott want to take away just one more slice of happiness out of our already stressful lives! You know what I say? Let’s give Senator Jack Scott and his bureaucratic buddies a message by sending a little taste of happiness to their offices with a nice, colorful mylar balloon bouquet!

It won’t cost much to do this. One person can easily send a small mylar balloon arrangement to their State senator — and maybe a bonus bouquet to the ever special Jack Scott! If you like, share the expense among your local LP activists!

Although it’s always nice to bring a little sunshine into someone’s life, this action is not without some seriousness. Each balloon bouquet should be accompanied by a statement as to who the bouquet is from and why it is sent:

Dear Senator X,This is sent to give you a little happiness today, but to also remind you of the happiness you will deny many children and others within California if you vote to ban balloons such as the ones you see right now. We strongly urge you to oppose SB1499.

An alternative message could simply read: “Thank you for opposing SB 1499″, accompanied with a nice “thank you” mylar balloon (H/T to Lady Gaura for the “thank you” suggestion!).

Of course, LP affiliates should also send out a news release announcing this action a few days in advance. If delivering this bouquet locally, be certain to have media presence, because this is a wonderful photo op!

For more information on S(ad) B(ill) 1499, please visit here.

As always, I am glad to assist in any way I am possible to, so feel free to contact me.

–Gene Trosper

UPDATE FROM LADY GAURA IN COMMENTS: “Gene was unfortunately looking at an non-updated website and thought the bill was still in the Senate. In reality it goes before ASSEMBLY Business and Professions Committee on TUESDAY.

“Sorry if that’s short notice– unfortunately I didn’t make it too clear in my blog that inspired Gene with his idea.”

Sometimes I just have to shake my head in amazement at the disinformation which passes as “news” on blogs

In Libertarian on June 22, 2008 at 12:57 am

From Lew Rockwell’s blog:

Some Libertarians are upset that Bob Barr’s PAC still supports neocon Republicans like Saxby Chambliss, Norm Coleman, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, and Jeff Sessions. But why? Surely Libertarians knew they were getting a smart, accomplished public spokesman for gun rights and civil liberties. But on a number of other issues, as everyone surely also knew, he does not agree with, say, the late Harry Browne.

However, George Phillies, one of the former LP presidential candidates, sees financial support for Republicans with Libertarian challengers as a betrayal. Indeed, Phillies–who is on the New Hampshire ballot as a placeholder–is now trying to keep his name there for November, in opposition to Barr. Apparently Massaschusetts–Phillies’s home state–is next. Stay tuned.

Dr. Phillies is not trying to keep his name on the New Hampshire ballot – that state does not allow for ballot substitutions, and that legal situation is certainly not Dr. Phillies’s fault, nor is it a slam at Bob Barr since at the time Phillies’ name was submitted as placeholder, Bob Barr had not even announced his candidacy – nor is Massachusetts “next” since Dr. Phillies contacted the ACLU, and the ACLU is filing suit to force Massachusetts to place Barr on the ballot.

Steve Newton considers editorial about Munger and debates

In Libertarian on June 21, 2008 at 6:34 pm

From Delaware Libertarian:

On today’s editorial page:

By the numbers, Michael Munger has a lot of nerve asking for a microphone at gubernatorial debates.

Numbers of registered voters in North Carolina, that is.

Democrats: 2.6 million.

Republicans: 1.9 million.

Libertarians: 4.

But Munger, the Libertarian Party’s candidate for governor, deserves a place with Democrat Beverly Perdue and Republican Pat McCrory anyway.

The Libertarian Party’s roll of voters, all four of them, is comically low because North Carolina didn’t recognize it until a few weeks ago. The party qualified by submitting petitions signed by more than 100,000 citizens and now is entitled to place candidates on the ballot in November. Before then, people who held Libertarian ideas couldn’t register as Libertarians. Some were among the 1.2 million North Carolinians registered as unaffiliated.

Read the rest of Steve Newton’s blog entry here.

LP encourages US to follow EU’s lead on Cuban policy

In Libertarian on June 21, 2008 at 6:26 pm

June 20, 2008
Contact: Andrew Davis
E-mail: andrew.davis@lp.org

Office: 202-333-0008 ext. 225
Mobile: 202-731-0002

FROM THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY:
EU schools US on practical foreign policy with Cuba

Libertarian Party encourages US to follow the EU’s lead on Cuban policy

Washington, D.C. – As the European Union prepares to lift its limited sanctions on Cuba, the Libertarian Party is encouraging the Bush administration to follow suit. “The United States could learn much from the EU’s decision to lift its remaining sanctions on Cuba,” says Libertarian Party spokesperson Andrew Davis.

“The EU’s decision to remove its last remaining sanctions on Cuba indicates a willingness to work with Cuba on human rights in a non-threatening manner,” says Davis. “Current US policy towards Cuba creates an acrimonious relationship with that country and has done nothing but hurt American businesses and the Cuban people. US sanctions on Cuba have been a costly mistake since the 1960s, and it is time to correct that error. Though largely symbolic, the EU’s decision should set an example for the future of American foreign policy with Cuba.”

The Libertarian Party encourages a practical foreign policy with Cuba that replaces hostile sanctions with free trade and tourism. The Libertarian Party calls for the immediate suspension of all sanctions on Cuba, claiming, “The Cuban people and American industry suffer under such ineffectual policies as the Cuban embargo.”

The Libertarian Party is America’s third largest political party, founded in 1971 as an alternative to the two main political parties. You can find more information on the Libertarian Party by visiting www.LP.org. The Libertarian Party proudly stands for smaller government, lower taxes and more freedom.

For more information on this issue, or to arrange a media interview, please call Andrew Davis at (202) 731-0002.

George Phillies to appear on LFV Live!

In Libertarian on June 21, 2008 at 6:20 pm

George PhilliesOn Friday, June 27th @7:30 pm EDT, Dr. George Phillies will appear on LFV Live! to discuss issues of importance to libertarians, including ballot access, and his being named as the LP presidential candidate in New Hampshire due to ballot substitution issues.

Mark your calendars for what is sure to be an interesting and enlightening hour!

LP Media Director leaves DC for … Atlanta?

In Libertarian on June 21, 2008 at 5:58 pm

From a Barr campaign email, written by former LP Executive Director Shane Corey:

Our staff is coming together strongly as our web team has relocated from California to our campaign hub in Atlanta. I’ve also made the move from Virginia along with the Libertarian Party’s media coordinator, Andrew Davis.

Andrew Davis’s relocation to Barr headquarters, while still being employed by the LP, raises a number of serious ethical questions.

Davis’s salary is paid by LP members, through dues and contributions. The point of having a Media Director is to ensure all party business is handled by a centralized source. The point of having an office in Washington DC is to ensure the LP has the best possible media contacts.

Is it within Mr. Davis’s job description for him to go to work directly for the LP presidential nominee? Who made the decision to relocate him to the Barr offices in Atlanta? What provisions have been made to ensure the confidentiality of information which would be available to the Media Director but should not be made available to the presidential candidate? Is Davis being compensated by LPHQ, the Barr campaign, or both?

It is the responsibility of LP staff to avoid even the appearance of impropriety; yet this appears to be very improper, both from the viewpoint of confidentiality issues, and from the viewpoint of Davis’s salary being paid by LP members, especially when many LP members have made it clear that they do not support the Barr campaign. If he is being compensated by the Barr campaign, it is equally improper given that he was hired to handle media for the party, and not for any specific candidate. After all, there are many other LP candidates, most of whom have more realistic chances of being elected than Barr, and they will almost assuredly be neglected if the Media Director is on site hundreds of miles away to support the Barr campaign in particular.

When was this decision made, and by whom? After all, at the moment we don’t have an Executive Director, though Shane Corey (who now works for the Barr campaign) was until recently the LP ED. Was this decision made prior to Corey leaving LPHQ and, if so, why wasn’t it retracted once Corey resigned his position with LPHQ? Was the LNC informed of this prior to his relocation?

If Andrew Davis wants to work for the Barr campaign, that is certainly his prerogative and I wish him the best. However, if that is his choice – and it appears that it is, given that he has relocated hundreds of miles away from LPHQ – he should resign from his LP staff position, and an interim Media Director hired to ensure that ALL Libertarian candidates are properly represented in Washington DC, until such time as a permanent replacement can be found. Either way, under no circumstances should any LP funds be used for his relocation, whether to Barr HQ in Atlanta, or back to LPHQ in Washington.

UPDATE: I asked some LNC members if they were aware of Davis’s relocation to Atlanta to support the Barr campaign, while retaining his position as Media Director. Angela Keaton responded by saying, “No, of course not. Miller and Phillies told me. I’m not part of the Redpath/Sullentrup/Colley daisy chain. Just a member of the LNC. As the kids would say, I’m so over the LP. As for Davis, he’s very bright and an admirer of Rand. He will be fine. He will make many contributions to the movement. The LP has not crushed his spirit yet.”

US Supreme Court rules on self-representation

In Libertarian on June 21, 2008 at 5:07 pm

From SCOTUSblog:

The Supreme Court ruled by a 7-2 vote on Thursday that a state may require a criminal defendant who suffers from a mental illness to have a lawyer, rather than allowing the individual to act as his own defense counsel, even when the individual is competent enough to be tried.  The decision came in Indiana v. Edwards (07-208).

“The Case for Bob Barr” – Vortex of Freedom Radio

In Libertarian on June 21, 2008 at 2:41 pm

“Vortex of Freedom” Radio Show – Today 6:00PM Eastern

The Case for Bob Barr

While McCain supporters and Obama supporters tell us why not to vote for their mainstream party opponent, Vortex of Freedom will make a case why Bob Barr is the best candidate for President.

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/maditude/2008/06/21/Vortex-of-Freedom

Call-in Number: (347)-215-7969

“Live From Court Street” to interview BTP presidential candidate Charles jay

In Libertarian on June 20, 2008 at 8:38 pm

Jason and Cilla Gatties’ “Live From Court Street” show has been rescheduled.  There will be no show tomorrow, but there will be a special episode on June 25th.

From their site:

We had to cancel the Saturday “Birthday Bash” because Jason actually got a really cool gift, which meant he had to leave town. We apologize for this, but again, we don’t get paid to do this show!

Charles Jay will be our guest this week on a special day & time. We’ll be on for an hour, so get your questions ready for the Boston Tea Party Presidential Nominee.

Happy birthday to Jason from Last Free Voice!

House passes surveillance bill

In Libertarian on June 20, 2008 at 7:09 pm

From MSNBC Breaking News:

WASHINGTON – The House Friday easily approved a compromise bill setting new electronic surveillance rules that effectively shield telecommunications companies from lawsuits arising from the government’s terrorism-era warrantless eavesdropping on phone and computer lines in this country.

The bill, which was passed on a 293-129 vote, does more than just protect the telecoms. The update to the 30-year-old Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is an attempt to balance privacy rights with the government’s responsibility to protect the country against attack, taking into account changes in telecommunications technologies.

Click here to read the entire article.

George Phillies on accusations about his leadership of LPMass

In Libertarian on June 20, 2008 at 1:52 pm

The following is posted with the permission of its author, George Phillies.

To correct certain misleading statements about Massachusetts and region formation, I offer the following, taken in fair part from my report to my State Committee about what happened (hence, referring to me in third person):

Under LNC By-Laws, states may freely and voluntarily group themselves into regions. If your region has 10% or more of the national membership, it is entitled to one regional representative for every 10% of the membership it has. In mid April, Phillies contacted the other state chairs in the New England, New York, New Jersey and region, proposing arrangements. After a month, there had been no responses. Noting that OR, WA, and ID had severed from the CA region, and that local State Chairs were not interested in talking about region formation, the State Committee advised Phillies that we were interested in a region including New England if it also included the western states. We now advance to the National Convention.

New England, NJ, NY and WV tentatively formed a region. We were invited to join, but we had a small delegation on-scene, it appeared the deal had already been made, and the new region had sufficient people that we had no leverage: They had 10% of the membership. Several plausible Regional Representatives were felt by State Comm members on-scene familiar with the background to be inauspicious choices. (Phillies: Actually, one delegate threatened to strangle me if we joined a region that had either of two specified people as regional representative. On reflection, I realized that I would choose to help.) State Committee members on-scene agreed to decline the invitation. Among other things, there are real drawbacks to belonging to a region whose state chairs are not interested in it. Phillies was instructed by State Committee members on-scene that we could join a region, but the region (i) could not be simply the old NE, NJ, NY states, and (ii) could not include Texas.

Negotiations with OR and WA were somewhat complex. At one point OR was incorrectly led to believe, or so we were told, that we had joined the New England Region, so we drifted out of contact. The southeast states had a double region with two elected Regional Reps, Flood and Barr, but prior to the deadline Florida withdrew, leaving the previously double region with one allowed regional representative. Flood had received more votes than Barr, and Barr withdrew. Florida joined with OR, WA, ID, and HI to form a new region 7. We would have been happy to join this region, and apparently had an invitation to do so, but we learned about the region too late.

We were then told (i) WV joined a different region so NE, NY, NJ needed us in order to form a region, and then separately (ii) New England and points south had formed a double region, so we were not needed, but were invited to join. The Region caucus was simultaneous with Presidential candidates turning in their chits to get into the debate. After learning about (ii), McMahon and Phillies stepped out to find the other state committee members on scene to seek a decision. As soon as we left, the region people were incorrectly told that we had rejected the proposal; they promptly elected a regional representative. At this point Phillies, with the emphatic support of everyone on the MA delegation who knew the out-of-state personalities involved, emphatically declined further invitations to join that region.

For the next two years, we are not a part of any region. Phillies was then asked if he wanted to be elected Regional Alternate for the new Region 7, in which he does not live; he said he was available but that takers in that region should be preferred, and one was chosen.

We are therefore a free independent state, not subservient to any region. While we do not have our own regional representative on the LNC, our legitimate interests are still represented by the At-Large members and the Officers, probably better than in the past.

Reminder: LFV Live! with special guest Angela Keaton

In Libertarian on June 20, 2008 at 1:45 pm

Angela KeatonTonight at 7:30pm EDT, the ever-controversial self-described “Anarchist Bitch” will appear on LFV Live!

Angela Keaton is, of course, a multi-term elected member of the LNC, and in that capacity has repeatedly exposed the Libertarian National Committee, its inner workings, and its actions and practices, much to the chagrin of many of its other members.

Recently, right here on LFV, LNC Secretary Bill Sullentrup repeatedly called her a “brat”, and suggested she resign from the LNC to save them all the “trouble”. When she’s ruffling feathers to that extent, she must be doing something right.

This is a show you won’t want to miss!

New Hampshire formally places Phillies on the ballot; state does not allow replacement of Presidential candidate

In Libertarian on June 20, 2008 at 1:07 pm

George Phillies for President 2008

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Phillies Files Declaration of Intent

Concord, New Hampshire, June 19: Libertarian Party of New Hampshire Presidential candidate George Phillies has filed his candidacy papers with New Hampshire Secretary of State William Gardner. “Being nominated for President is the highest honor a political party can bestow on one of its members,” Phillies said, “and I will do my utmost to show that New Hampshire’s trust is not misplaced.”

Speaking of the National Libertarian Party, which separately nominated a different Presidential candidate, Phillies said: “The New Hampshire Party has been collecting signatures for me since Spring 2007. Unfortunately, the people of New Hampshire in their wisdom do not permit political parties to replace their Presidential candidate. I was chosen as the candidate, and so I must remain.”

Phillies says his campaign will emphasize an immediate end to the Iraq War, termination of warrantless wiretaps of most telephones with criminal prosecution of the wiretappers, and massive cuts in Federal spending of all sorts. “The people of New Hampshire pay far more in Federal taxes than they get back. The only way to fix the system is to leave your hard-earned money where it belongs, in your wallet,” Phillies said.

The New Hampshire Party has already completed petitioning for Phillies and other candidates, including U.S. Senate Candidate Ken Blevens of Bow, New Hampshire, Congressional candidates Robert Kingsbury of Laconia and Chester LaPointe of Swanzey, as well as candidate for Governor Susan Newell of Winchester.

To support the George Phillies campaign, please visit http://ChooseGeorge.org/donation today.

To arrange an interview or obtain a short quote from the candidate, contact:

Carolyn Marbry, Press Director pressdirector@phillies2008.org
(510) 276-3216
George Phillies for President 2008 http://ChooseGeorge.org

Barr Has Bipartisan Appeal…

In Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Politics on June 20, 2008 at 12:17 pm

…at least in Georgia, where the LP ticket is polling at unprecedented levels due to Barr’s notoriety there.

Most interestingly, his 5.6% polling performance pulls strongly from both Democrats (5.0%) and Republicans (7.5%), underscoring the appeal of the Libertarian Party to both sides of the “political spectrum.”

With McCain and Obama polling within the margin of error against each other, the Libertarian Party may be close to attaining the “light switch” power I’ve long advocated it needs — the ability to “flip the switch” towards one old party or the other, and gaining policy compromises and concessions in exchange for how it chooses to flip the switch.

In Georgia, Barr could run hard against McCain on taxes and the war, or against Obama on social issues and the war.

Hat tip to Delaware Libertarian for pointing out the survey.

Present Your Papers, Comrade!

In Civil Liberties, Constitutional Rights, Libertarian on June 20, 2008 at 11:34 am

One of the old-fashioned expectations that most Americans had was absolute freedom of movement within the country, without government checkpoints, “paper checks,” or other such nonsense.

Alas, in the era of the New Security State, the “internal passport” once mocked by Americans as a Soviet abomination is becoming a reality for numerous Americans.

For example, if you fly domestically, you used to be able to fly without presenting a government-approved form of ID — albeit with the caveat that you’d be subjected to “more extensive searches.” That option ends this Saturday, when a government-issued REAL ID-style driver’s license or other “official ID” will be required to travel domestically by air.

That’s right — without your government-issued mandatory ID (which often involves the taking of fingerprints, as in Texas, and may soon require biometric information as well), you may not travel long distances domestically.

Lest some Ron Paul states’ “rights” advocates step in, it’s important to note that local government is getting even more draconian than the feds. In numerous cities across the country, including theoretically federally-administered Washington DC, entire neighborhoods are being closed up and blocked — with all traffic being directed through a central checkpoint. Individuals must present a form of ID to “prove” they “belong” there, and their entry and exit is left to the sole discretion of the police. Don’t have your “papers?” You’re not getting in (or out).

These situations beg a few questions to be asked of the security statists:

1) The federal government has instituted a massive, draconian entry and exit requirement for all foreign nationals, requiring photographs and fingerprints to be taken at entry. These new requirements, we’re told, “keep us safe from terrorists and criminals.” So if no terrorists or criminals may enter the country due to this incredible system, why are individuals *already in the USA* subject to these internal passport controls? Didn’t the magical draconian border controls already shut all dangerous people out of the United States?

2) How does an ID check “enhance security?” If one has a piece of plastic with a name and photo on it, how does that ensure that he/she isn’t going to attempt violent behavior? Conversely, who are individuals who value their privacy in terms of movement and activities suddenly “suspicious?”

3) Why should we trust local, state or federal government to protect our privacy rights, when you’re already using these internal passports to violate our constitutional right to freedom of movement between states — not to mention our Fourth Amendment rights to freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures? What form of “probable cause” can be invoked to shut off entire sections of a city, or the country, unless an individual undergoes a draconian search and interrogation?

House approves $165.4 billion for war, with no deadlines for withdrawal

In Libertarian on June 20, 2008 at 12:39 am

From MSNBC Breaking News:

WASHINGTON – The U.S. House Thursday approved enough new money to wage wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for another year, while abandoning attempts to set deadlines opposed by President Bush for withdrawing American combat troops.

By a vote of 268-155, the House approved $165.4 billion for the two wars, with most of the money going to Iraq. But lawmakers were expected to reduce that funding level to $161.8 billion in a subsequent vote in order to make room for some other spending initiatives.

Click here to read the rest of this article.

ACLU agrees to represent LPMass

In Libertarian on June 19, 2008 at 10:13 pm

From Ballot Access News:

On June 19, the Massachusetts ACLU agreed to represent the Libertarian Party in court, over the failure of the Massachusetts Secretary of State to let the Libertarian Party substitute its actual presidential candidate, Bob Barr, for the party’s stand-in presidential candidate, George Phillies.

Click here to read the entire post.

McCain, gas prices, and the Enron loophole

In Libertarian on June 19, 2008 at 7:28 pm

I couldn’t get the video to post here, but the link is http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22425001/vp/25252591#25252591

New addition to the blogroll: anarchy is not a dirty word

In Libertarian on June 19, 2008 at 2:32 am

http://freemarketanarchist.wordpress.com/

From republican to libertarian to anarchist- a natural progression for the somewhat intelligent

I’ve long questioned man’s desire to control another through governmental coercion. Right, left, up or down on the political spectrum matters for nothing as representatives on all sides attempt, albeit in different ways, to control their fellow men by theft and regulation. For several years I associated with the Libertarian Party because I thought it might be a group working toward the dissolution of such coercion. But, after watching some of my fellow party members be corrupted into becoming that which we were supposed to be fighting, I recognized that any person or group attempting to change the system from the inside will undoubtedly sell out to play the political game. Nowhere was that more evident than the Libertarian Party national convention hosted in May in the fine city of Denver.

It was not without a little heartache that I concluded that political parties- even the LP- are the antithesis of a free heart and mind and I left. Of course, I didn’t leave the many friends that I made over the years; I just left behind the silliness of ballot access fund raising drives and water board/ dog catcher electoral successes.

My time within the LP wasn’t wasted though. I evolved to my present position because of those years of reading and study and today understand that the ideal world would be one of free market anarchy. Please don’t misunderstand me. I fully recognize that some people would want some sort of governing and I support the right to that through a voluntary association. But, it is a violation of my right to live in liberty if you force your form of government upon me and I just can’t live with that contradiction anymore.

So, here I am with a new blog. I may still write from time to time at my old libertarian site because I do believe that libertarianism and anarchism are not incompatible. (If you knew how many people to whom I explained anarchy after they researched the beginning of the LP…) I hope you enjoy it here and visit often but it won’t be something I write my congressman over.

1.
pauliecannoli said, on June 18th, 2008 at 9:22 pm

I’ve been an anarchist since 2000.

I might have left the LP long before now except for two things

1) I became a life member in 2000 (a few months before becoming an anarchist)

2) It’s a major client for work.

Between those two things, I keep getting dragged back to try to make it better, and am continuously disappointed.

I had a pretty evolved plan to concentrate my efforts in what I thought would be a more productive direction, but they fell through right after Denver.

Those two more or less simultaneous disappointments had me in a pretty bad funk for a few weeks. I’m just now getting back to the point where I can even work.

“Bob Barr: Smells Like A Republican” Music Video

In Libertarian on June 18, 2008 at 11:22 pm

Actually to the tune of “Since You Been Gone” by Kelly Clarkson (don’t ask me how I know that, LOL) instead of “Smells Like Teen Spirit” by Nirvana, but pretty damn funny anyway.

Why Libertarian candidates don’t get the attention they want

In Libertarian on June 18, 2008 at 9:01 pm

Brian Miller wrote a piece earlier on whether the Libertarian Party is a real political party. My question in return is whether the Libertarian campaigns are real campaigns.

For example, in the course of that article, he covered an aspect of the Munger campaign.

We claim to be passionate for liberty — yet when one of the LP’s strongest candidates in North Carolina is being unfairly excluded from public debates that were set up for the benefit of the old party candidates, the same legion of folks who have hours to comment on LP blogs couldn’t muster more than two dozen e-mails between them to challenge this state of affairs.

Brian was referencing a post on Steve Newton’s blog, which stated

What is both surprising and appalling, however, is the fact that the Libertarian blogosphere has virtually blacked out Dr Munger’s campaign as well.

I would posit that it is neither surprising nor appalling that Munger got little coverage in the Libertarian blogosphere, since his campaign and supporters apparently made little to no effort to send out press releases, or otherwise inform bloggers about the issues with his campaign. I covered the ballot access lawsuit involving Munger only because I saw an AP article on it, but as far as I was aware, there was no other issue to cover. In fact, until today I was completely unaware that Munger had wanted a letter-writing campaign, or that he had been left out of the polls when he was an obvious spoiler.

I get “as-it-happens” comprehensive Google Alerts for the keyword “libertarian”; on the average day, I get 25-50 alerts, most with multiple entries, on the word appearing in all manner of media, from blogs to press releases to videos. I review every single one of them, to see if there is something which needs to be covered on LFV. I also subscribe to RSS feeds for multiple libertarian and third party blogs. (While I occasionally read Steve Newton’s blog, it is not in my subscriptions because it is a personal blog in addition to being a libertarian blog.) I spend hours each day, going over all the information I have received through the automatic notification system I have set up for libertarian issues. I do this for one reason, and one reason only: to gather information of interest for readers of Last Free Voice.

The campaigns’ job, if they want to make sure they will be covered on LFV or any other blog, is to provide bloggers with the information they want covered. If campaigns do not provide me with said information, they have no justifiable reason to complain, and they can blame no one but themselves if LFV doesn’t cover it. After all, I am not a mind-reader, and no one can reasonably expect me to follow every single state or local libertarian campaign, in addition to all the research I already do every day to try to make sure our readers are informed. I do have the right to a life outside LFV, after all.

Campaigns can contact me easily, since my dedicated email address is located on the front page of this blog. Just to be clear, it is on the right-hand column, third item down, “Have A Hot Tip?”, and my dedicated email address for LFV tips is enm.lastfreevoice@gmail.com; in fact, I have made it a point to tell readers to save my LFV email address in their contacts, in case they need to contact me.

Many people send me articles or information they want posted on LFV. Many are campaigns and/or activists, while others are not. I am extremely easy to get along with, as I think every single one of those people would attest. In the last few days alone, I have posted press releases for a wide range of candidates and issues, including Steve Kubby’s development of a new medical marijuana pill, Jason Gatties’ birthday campaign fundraiser (happy birthday, Jason!), and Robert Milnes’ announcement that he is seeking the Green Party nomination. In fact, those last two items were posted today alone.

All anyone has to do, in order to get coverage for their Libertarian campaign or candidate on LFV, is to send me the information or press release. Had the Munger campaign (or one of its supporters) wanted LFV coverage for a letter-writing campaign, or anything else, all they had to do was send me what they wanted posted, and it would have been posted as soon as I received it.

My viewpoint is therefore that Libertarian candidates, campaigns, and their supporters need to do a better job of getting out their message, as opposed to expecting coverage to come to them, then complaining and hurling insults when they don’t get the coverage they desire. Candidates, campaigns, and their supporters cannot just assume that I (or any other blogger) will know about any particular campaign issue; instead they must be proactive, and take it upon themselves to make sure bloggers get that information. Email is free, so all it would cost them to get the word out is a few minutes of their time. Apparently it wasn’t very important to the campaign or any of its supporters, if they weren’t willing to expend those few minutes to inform the bloggers of the situation. It is therefore more than a little disingenuous for them to now blame the bloggers for their own failure.

Is the Libertarian Party a real political party?

In Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Politics on June 18, 2008 at 3:46 pm

I’m not sure I can answer the question in the headline.

On one hand, a member of the LP, speaking out on any controversial issue, can expect a cacophony of responses to that issue… ranging from how principled and brave he or she is, to a condemnation of his pseudolibertarian statist little black heart.

On the other hand, we are in the ballot in most states, right?

Yet, apparently the campaign organization isn’t quite sure how it’s going to get on the ballot in certain states, and the annual report sent out by the former executive director lost money — rather than raising money for the ballot access effort.

We’re all about freedom and transparency — but when one LNC member started posting snippets of the typical exchanges on the super-secret LNC discussion list, her position gets threatened.

We’re all about bringing freedom to the masses and being a better choice for the average American — yet the vacation plans of an LNC member’s girlfriend are apparently a major consideration in where our upcoming convention is being held.

We claim to be passionate for liberty — yet when one of the LP’s strongest candidates in North Carolina is being unfairly excluded from public debates that were set up for the benefit of the old party candidates, the same legion of folks who have hours to comment on LP blogs couldn’t muster more than two dozen e-mails between them to challenge this state of affairs.

So I guess I’ll settle on this answer.  The Libertarian Party is what you make of it.  Some people want us to be an effective political force that has a meaningful effect in moving America towards a position of greater liberty through successfully electing candidates and passing ballot initiatives.

Others seem to view us more as a platform for, ummm, “radical self-expression” — regardless of where that takes the organization.

And there’s a third group who just seem to like being the biggest goldfish in a little ol’ fishbowl.

I’d posit that whether we’re in business four or eight years hence will be dependent on which group of people manages to wrestle some degree of influence on the party by showing up at conventions and engaging in meaningful activism as a Libertarian (not a Republican or member of some other party).

It’s your party.  It’s up to you, as an individual, to make it real, in the real world.

Technical problems

In Libertarian on June 18, 2008 at 3:01 pm

JR Enfield was just kind enough to take the time to contact me, and tell me the dot com url (lastfreevoice.com) is going up and down.  The wordpress account (lastfreevoice.wordpress.com), however, is unaffected.

As explanation, I am in the process of changing domain servers in anticipation of bringing the new, full site online soon.  Hopefully the domain will be fully settled into the new server by tomorrow, and we’ll be back to normal, never to have that problem again.  :-)

Toastmaster critiques Root convention speech

In Libertarian on June 18, 2008 at 12:13 pm

The following is excerpted from the Toastmasters & Etc blog.

Make It Clear You’re Joking

First, Root started off by announcing that his daughter (I think that’s who it was at least) would be president in 2028, after he’d been President for 8 year and some other member of the Root family had been President 8 years. I started laughing out loud – at him, not with him. Maybe Root was saying this tongue and cheek, but the joke was lost on me. I really think he was serious. When I think of Libertarians, they don’t exactly seem like the type to get behind a family dynasty running the country. So not only did he not make the joke clear, he forgot his audience.

Avoid Clichés (Like the Plague)

After that, he said this wasn’t a typical political stump speech. Something to the effect that it was coming from the heart. It was different. Ugh.

Don’t Make Your Sap Story the Centerpiece

The body of Root’s speech was about how he was in Vegas while his mother was dying in New York in the 90’s. He received a call that she was about to go, so he jumped on an airplane and hoped he’d make it to get to say goodbye. He was sure his mom would hold out for him, since she was a Root, she was a fighter. He got to the hospital room, she was still alive, he held her hand for thirty seconds, then she died.

It sounds poignant the way I wrote it and I guess it was the way it played out in real life. But Root totally overpowered the story and it took a few minutes to get through it, wasting valuable time. It was manipulative even by manipulative Toastmaster speech contest standards. Maybe I’m being too cynical, but it came off as ghoulish to me.

Then came the whammy. He started shouting something to the effect of, “I’m Mother Root’s son and I’m strong too and I should be President because of it.” That seemed to be his main argument for the nomination.

Click here to read the entire article.

LP Conn lists Phillies as their presidential candidate

In Libertarian on June 18, 2008 at 10:55 am

The LP of Connecticut has its Presidential Petition online in PDF format.

They have listed George Phillies as their Presidential candidate, and Richard Lion as their Vice Presidential candidate.

Warren “Bones” Bonesteel: Open Letter to Political Activists, regardless of party or affiliation

In Libertarian on June 18, 2008 at 10:36 am

The following was sent to LFV by the author, Warren “Bones” Bonesteel, and does not necessarily reflect the views of Last Free Voice or its contributors.

Open letter to political activists, regardless of party or affiliation:

=====

“And how we burned in the camps later thinking: What would things have been like if every operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain wether he would return alive and had to say goodbye to his family? Or if during periods of mass arrests people had not simply sat in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall a half dozen people with axes, hammers pokers or whatever was at hand…”

- Alexander Solzhenitsyn
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksandr_Solzhenitsyn

=====

A lot of people think life is all about their own ideology or beliefs. Their world-view is completely defined by those beliefs. Under ideal circumstances, that’s perfectly alright. Under less than ideal circumsatances, such habits of thought are a danger to everyone. Take present day America, for example. Most people don’t care a damn about reality as long as their own ideology isn’t attacked…and as long as they are not among those who are physically harmed. In America, many liberals and conservatives actually advocate the intervention of government in limiting the rights of their ideological opponents. Both ideologies have experienced more than a little success in advancing those efforts. In both camps, some go so far as to lobby the government to physically harm or otherwise restrict the activities and speech of their ideological opponents. That seems a bit counterproductive – if, indeed, everyone’s true goal is maintaining personal liberty and freedom in America.

The problem is, left, right or center, agnostic or capital “B” believer, when the government takes the other guy’s rights away, the government has just taken your rights away from you. Regardless of who’s in the White House or who controls Congress, when you allow the government to physically or financially harm or otherwise restrict the freedoms of others, there is nothing left that prevents the government from doing the same to you. Absolutely nothing.

Currently we have in Denver a local city and county civilian agency – financed by the federal government – so that said civilian agencies can purchase military grade weaponry, supplies, logistics and training from federal military and security forces and agencies in order to provide ’security’ for a civilian population during a normal, civilian, political and social process. That thought should give anyone pause, regardless of ideology or belief. If federally trained and supplied local civilian agencies offer harm to liberal Democrats during a normal civilian political process, everyone in America – .regardless of ideology or belief – should be very, very afraid of their government.

I definitely agree with some of your rhetoric. The system has to change. I’m not certain that I agree with some of your tactics, but the system has to come down before change begins. Indeed, it will come down. The only questions are “When?” and “How bad will it get?”

From my own research, I can say without a doubt that world-wide civilization is about to collapse.* The old paradigm is at an end. We have one to five years before it all changes, and that process of change will not be peaceful.

In the long term, what replaces the old paradigm will be a classical liberal or classical libertarian society. In the short term, we may be stuck with a temporary, but complete tyranny. The only question I have about all of this is this one: “How many people are going to die?”

This is our responsibility.

This is the conundrum:
Only we can limit the damage. Only we can struggle for freedom.

What price are we willing to pay?

—-
*Example: Google: ‘X-waves and civilization.’

(Disclosure: I currently list myself among radical libertarians. I dream of a benign, libertarian ‘anarchy,’ while keeping my feet firmly planted in pragmatic reality.)

S.

Warren “Bones” Bonesteel
Author and Researcher
Sgt USMC 1976-1983
55 Crestview Drive
Rapid City, SD 57701
(605) 348-2830
wrsteel@blackhawke.net

Jason Gatties Press Release: “The Gift of Freedom”

In Libertarian on June 18, 2008 at 10:24 am

For Immediate Release:

Saint Joseph, Mi- The Committee To Elect Jason Gatties will open the “donation” section of the campaign site this Saturday. Why Saturday? Because Saturday marks Jason’s 33rd birthday! You can give the “Gift of Freedom” by donating to Jason’s campaign efforts this weekend. We would accept any donation amount, but imagine the difference a few $33 donations could make for a candidate fighting for freedom on a shoe string budget.

Jason is one of only two Libertarian Party candidates in the State of Michigan who will run in a non-partisan race this November, with the other being Robert Roddis’ campaign for Justice of Michigan’s Supreme Court. Jason will be involved in a “elect 3″ race and will face off with 3 current incumbents. Realistically, Jason has the best chance to be the only Michigan Libertarian elected this November, but we could sure use your help.

Jason Gatties is seeking the office of Lake Michigan College Board of Trustees, which is a 6 year term. Jason is calling on the Board to become more fiscally responsible when it comes to the day to day operations of the school, including privatization of non-academic services. Jason has also criticized the current Board’s lack of communication with staff, students & the general public.

So this Saturday, if you can afford to do so, please visit http://www.votegatties.org and consider giving Jason a special “gift” and rest assured, your “Gift of Freedom” will be used for the best possible resources.

Priscilla Gatties
Campaign Manager
The Committee To Elect Jason Gatties
http://www.votegatties.org

Robert Milnes’ Declaration of Candidacy for the Green Party Nomination

In Libertarian on June 18, 2008 at 10:22 am

I know it is late in the election cycle and time is getting short. But I believe that there are only two possible alternatives to the Democratic and Republican parties’ duopoly. One is a populist or centrist independent or party or eccentric rich person like Perot, Reform party, or Bloomberg. Evidently this is not going to happen. The other is an inclusive progressive like Teddy Roosevelt and the Progressive Party. My campaign is trying to duplicate as much as possible that race of 1912. Roosevelt lost to the Democrat 42%,27%,23%. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election%2C_1912 I believe the maximum possible inclusive progressive vote is about 40%, which would make the three way race 40%,30%,30%. This is worth a try. I was hoping to win the Libertarian Party nomination as The Libertarian Vote/Cato Institute study is about 13%. see: www.Cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6715 I was hoping to get the Boston Tea Party nomination in order to build full ballot access upon that. Now I am hoping to go to Oklahoma to get on the very difficult ballot there. Perhaps I can get Indian help for that. Then I hope to go to Chicago to try to win the Green Party nomination & build upon that to full ballot access. In order to win a ticket must have full ballot access AND a sufficiently large possible voter pool. The inclusive progressive plurality vote is that. I urgently need campaign support to accomplish all this. It has been reported that the Green Party candidates have had difficulty raising campaign contributions sufficient to get federal matching funds. See: www.opednews.com/articles/One-Man-s–Green–is-Anoth-by-Babette-Hogan-080615-120.html I submit that this is because it is difficult to support a candidate and party that is almost assured to lose in the general election. But now we have a strategy and reasonable possibility of winning a close election this time. LET’S TRY IT! Here is what you can do: Go to www.robertmilnes.net and click Make a Donation. From there go to link: www.robertmilnes4president2008.com and click Volunteer. Here is what I need: 1. A campaign manager and other campaign volunteers. If there is sufficient support, volunteers could become paid positions. 2. A southern woman libertarian vice-presidential candidate to complement the ticket. 3. Sufficient support to get to Oklahoma & then Chicago & then California. 4. Help with ballot petition signatures. LET’S TRY IT! WE ARE IN TO WIN! Please forward & spread the word.

United Liberty on the downside of Ron Paul write-ins and the upside of Barr’s record

In Libertarian on June 18, 2008 at 1:13 am

This was posted at United Liberty. The code there says it is by Shana Kluck, although I got an identical email signed by Austin Wilkes. I am posting this for discussion purposes, not necessarily endorsing Barr. I know this disclaimer will be ignored by some Barr haters, just as my disclaimer on TPW that I was not necessarily taking a stance by posting Marc Montoni’s questions was ignored by some Barr supporters. -p


When Ron Paul was asked by Reason Magazines’s Dave Weigel about write-in ballots, he had this to say-

I don’t think that’s very productive,” Paul said of a write-in campaign. “They could do it, of course, but in most of the states it won’t count. If they can change the rules in a primary and not count all the votes, imagine what they could do with write-in votes!”

Marc Gallagher at LibertyMaven.com chronicles the discussion going on at RonPaulForums regarding who Ron Paul supporters plan on voting for-

What is most interesting, at least among the Ron Paul faithful who frequent Ron Paul Forums, is that in a forum poll asking “Who will you vote for?” with over 200 respondents about 34% said they’d be writing in Ron Paul (second place). The winner of the poll was Bob Barr with about 39%. In a distant third was Chuck Baldwin with 21%. Perhaps also of note is that Barack Obama received more votes (9) than John McCain (3). Ralph Nader was last with 2 votes.

Ron Paul’s penchant for bringing together a wide political spectrum of supporters is both a blessing and a curse. It is a blessing when the candidate is Ron Paul. Once Ron Paul exits the race, his free thinking voters split apart. They can unite behind a message, but veer apart when deciding who should carry that message.

Gallagher goes on to explain why he has chose to support Barr-

Read more about the shiny side of Barr’s record below.

  • “In the 107th Congress when Ron Paul stood up for our sovereignty against the United Nations (Roll Call votes 245 and 246), it was Bob Barr who supported him … just as Barr supported Paul in cutting corporate welfare by limiting funding for the Export-Import Bank.”
  • “Barr is a co-sponsor of H. Res. 197, ‘Stop U.N. Gun Ban.’”
  • “Barr supports H.R. 2615 ‘Stop National Medical ID and the Patient Privacy Protection Act.’”
  • “Barr is a leading defender of civil liberties. He introduced legislation that forces the National Security Agency’s Project ECHELON to provide a full accounting to the Congress of their covert monitoring of millions of phone calls, faxes, and emails.”
  • “He led the fight against National ID Card proposals and introduced legislation in 1998 to check the federal government’s abuse of wire-tapping laws — including the use of roving wiretaps — and also opposed governmental interception of cellular phone calls.”
  • “He introduced legislation to mandate that the federal government issue ‘Privacy Impact Statements’ every time it issues a new rule or regulation.”
  • “He was a chief sponsor of a law to limit abuses of the civil asset forfeiture statutes.”
  • “He fought against OSHA regulations and to limit small business vulnerability to frivolous labor litigation.”
  • “He is a board member of the National Rifle Association, and a staunch defender of the right of Americans to own and use firearms. He has introduced and sponsored legislation to block litigation against gun manufacturers for the acts of their customers and to limit any background checks and mandate they be conducted ‘instantly.’”
  • “Barr has succinctly advocated the principle that while criminals must be punished to the full extent of the law, their civil liberties must be protected with even more vigor.”
  • “He is a staunch defender of American sovereignty and opposes the executive branch’s overzealous use of our military abroad he even filed suit against President Clinton’s war in Kosovo without congressional approval.”
  • “He is a fierce critic of the United Nations — and to a lesser degree NATO — and has consistently supported efforts to withdraw U.S. membership from the United Nations.”
  • “He co-sponsored a committee amendment to withdraw the U.S. from the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.”
  • “Since his first day in Congress back in 1995, Barr has tirelessly fought to eliminate the Internal Revenue Code, supported the “flat tax” proposal, and consistently supported passage of a constitutional amendment requiring a two-thirds supermajority of Congress to raise taxes.”
  • “He was an early supporter of lowering the capital gains tax and recently he introduced legislation to provide tax credits for educators: public, private, and home school.”
  • “More than any other member of the Georgia delegation, Congressman Barr has parted with the Republican majority to vote against bloated “pork barrel” spending.”
  • “He has continually fought the unconstitutional [McCain/Feingold] ‘campaign finance reforms.’ Defending our fundamental rights, he has filed a lawsuit to prevent implementation of the recently passed legislation.”

(Source)

These are some of the reasons Liberty Maven is supporting Bob Barr for President. The added benefits are that he has name recognition, he has the potential for pulling in more disaffected conservatives than other candidates, and he is getting the requisite media attention for spreading the liberty message to the masses.

With Liberty & Justice For All… with Exceptions.

In Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Politics on June 17, 2008 at 8:27 pm

I’ve always been rather concerned about the direction the Libertarian Party has been heading over the last several years. I was attracted to the party because of the strong stand it took in favor of the sovereignty of the individual – every individual – not just Americans. With the nomination of Bob Barr, the LP seems to have become the party of liberty for some people – only if it will “get us elected.”

Suddenly we hear fascist terms like “illegal immigrants” and “state’s rights” coming from so-called ‘Libertarian’ Party candidates. Whatever happened to supporting the rights of all individuals? What happened to our principles?

Libertarianism is the belief that each individual has total and complete sovereignty over her/his own life. As sovereign individuals we have the right to do whatever we want to do in our pursuit of happiness so long as we never infringe on the rights of others. Why, then, the rhetoric about deporting “illegals?” Is there even such a thing as an “illegal” human? And what about “state’s rights?” When is it moral for the state to do something that is it not moral for an individual to do?

I guess I’m just confused. I thought I was a member of a pro-liberty party. When I woke up from the dream and realized it was a nightmare, I decided it was time to do something about it.

Enter, the Liberty Party. Right now we’re just a Massachusetts group. Perhaps we’ll become the latest chapter of the Boston Tea Party. All I know is that I could no longer be a member of a political party that believes in supporting a candidate that supports the rights of “states” over the rights of individuals.

Perhaps one day the real libertarian message will win the day once again and will be the official party platform of the LP. Maybe I’ll rejoin at that time. But until then, here is a little competition to help the market make a better product.

Rep Ted Poe of TX gives Congress hell about new light bulbs

In Libertarian on June 17, 2008 at 6:07 pm

Inquiring minds wants to know: is Aaron Starr really Angela Keaton’s father?

In Libertarian on June 17, 2008 at 5:03 pm

Posted at
Anarchist Bitch



LB is a master of photoshop hate.

Luka Skywalker meets her father, Darth Herr Vader.

LOL. Very mean, but very funny. But, the real question: could it be true?

People’s Front For Libertarian Judaea

In Libertarian on June 17, 2008 at 4:36 pm

The Boston Tea Party has nominated Presidential candidate Charles Jay and VP Candidate Tom Knapp. The BTP hopes to be on the ballot in about ten states this year, and more in years to come.

Robert Milnes, who was defeated for the BTP nomination, vowed to fight on as an independent candidate for POTUS:

Well, everybody, I concede my defeat in BTP. & yes, time is short. However I am going to continue an independent campaign. I still need your support. I hope to get enough support to go to Oklahoma & try to get Indian voter registration and ballot petitioning. Then go to Chicago to try to get the Green nomination. Then on to CA to help my disabled friend get squared away & try what has worked before: camping & gold mining in the National Forest, to shake depression. From there I can still run an internet campaign. I had Starband ISP before. This time I’d like to try ATT/MagicJack with laptop. I still need a campaign manager & southern woman libertarian vp to complement the ticket. Tom & Tamara have declined. & I need a laptop! So go to robertmilnes.net & spread the word. Remember, Bob Milnes is no Teddy Roosevelt. & Bob Milnes is no Bob Dole. But Bob Milnes will do better than second place-with less! & Bob Milnes does not have E.D.! & Bob Milnes is still in to win!

Meantime, Jim Casarjian-Perry has left the Libertarian Party, calling LP nominee Bob Barr a two faced liar, and has filed official paperwork with the state to create a new Liberty Party in Massachusetts.

And, yes, lest anyone forget, Bob Barr is still running for POTUS as the nominee of the Libertarian Party.

Finally, I’ve heard a rumor that Arkansas LP Chair Gerhardt Langguth, who is the only known Imperato supporter in the LP, plans to put Imperato on the ballot as the LP POTUS candidate in Arkansas.

I think competition is a good thing in politics, just like in business. However, before we head too far down that path, here is a glimpse at what the future of libertarian political parties might look like.

UPDATE!

TPW reports

Libertarians decided not to pick the punk rocker who, in The New Yorker’s words, “looks like one of the good guys in ‘Braveheart,’ a brawny warrior with terrifying hair.” But Fran Powers has a back-up plan:

“I have to be more personal, I have to be more myself,” he said. “The Libertarians just want to talk dogma. That was my undoing.” But he had no intention of dropping out of the race. He was planning, he said, to start a new party, called the Free Party, “as in, the free party—get it?”

Peter Orvetti asks: “How do they do it?”

In Libertarian on June 17, 2008 at 3:25 pm

At IPR, Peter Orvetti asks

In keeping with IPR’s mission of “providing a forum for the intelligent discussion” of alternative parties and candidates in addition to providing news coverage, today I have a question for such candidates: How do you do it?

This is something I have often wondered while watching Libertarian Party national nomination races, as folks like Michael Jingozian, Christine Smith, Daniel Imperato, Michael Badnarik, Barry Hess, etc. etc., criss-crossed the country attending state conventions. Other parties’ candidates like Kat Swift have done the same. What I’m wondering: How do folks without a big organization behind them, without a big pile of money, and with the need to earn a living and hold a job, manage to find the time and resources for these long efforts?

I would love to hear from such candidates and those who were involved in, or closely followed, such campaigns.

My reply:

Not a candidate, but I went to about 15 LP state conventions for Kubby (way more than he was able to go to unfortunately).

How I do it: Step one, I have a job where I make my own hours (gathering signatures) and I finance most of my own travel.

Step two, I usually pick conventions which are near where I am working. Since I travel for work anyway, that allows me to cover some ground.

Step three, I ask for money. I got several contributions for the Kubby campaign (I was also promoting the Radical Caucus, and some of them gave me money) but as I mentioned, my own contributions to myself were more than the rest combined. Probably by more than an order of magnitude.

Step four, I share resources. That means things like riding in a van with Chris Bennett, his wife and kids. It means things like sleeping on the floor in a motel room with several other people after I asked around at the convention who may be able to arrange something like that for me (Chuck Moulton, Jim Davidson, and others were helpful on many occassions). It even means getting help from other campaigns, like when George Phillies gave me a ride from MA to CT, or let me use his suite in Denver to store my bags and get cleaned up.

Step five, I get freebies. Most of the conventions let me in for free. A few also paid for my meals and/or motel rooms. Some of the rides didn’t charge me anything.

Step six, I economize. When I can’t get a ride, I usually go greyhound. The only convention I flew to was Denver.

Step seven, I help out. For example, I helped Julie Fox with setup at Wisconsin, and she helped me out by comping my convention fee, motel room and lunch. She also gave me a ride from Illinois to Wisconsin.

Using these methods I was able to attend

2007 AL, GA, TN, NC, FL, MA, NH, Pittsburgh LNC meeting

2008 CA, NV, NY, CT, KS/MO, WI, MN, AL, local and state exec comm meetings in AZ, IL, MA, UT, and Denver.

By the way, anyone want to share a room for the Green convention in Chicago (or put me up if you live there)? I’d ask for a ride, but I don’t know where I’ll be coming from – maybe Alabama. Contributions would also be appreciated.

All your LP multiple personality disorders are belongs to us

In Libertarian on June 17, 2008 at 3:11 pm


Commenting
at IPR about a LP press release, Tom Knapp says:

From the shiny new LP platform:

“Protecting the environment requires a clear definition and enforcement of individual rights in resources like land, water, air, and wildlife.”

and

“While energy is needed to fuel a modern society, government should not be subsidizing any particular form of energy. ”

So why an LP press release talking about “our” natural resources … and supporting handing them over as a corporate subsidy so that “we” can increase oil production?

Roses are red,
Violets are blue,
The LP has multiple personality disorder
And so does the LP.

Hint: Socializing risk while privatizing profit is NOT “the free market.”

Good point.

Photoblog of historic same-sex marriage scene in San Francisco

In Libertarian on June 17, 2008 at 1:08 pm

Jacqueline Passey’s brother Jameth has been photoblogging the excitement in California at San Francisco City Hall, as LGBT couples are finally are allowed to marry; he is also photoblogging the protests, which include the Westboro Baptist Church, best known for its “God Hates Fags” motto.  The blog is definitely worth a look.  Here is my favorite photo thus far:

BTP fraud exposed

In Libertarian on June 17, 2008 at 12:36 pm

As previously noted, the Boston Tea Party’s online nomination convention was interrupted by someone who made multiple accounts on the same IP, and fraudulently voted.

Thanks to LFV’s own Vortex of Freedom, the “whodunit” has been solved. It turned out to be an attempt to alter the results of the convention by some folks in a forum at a site called ourcampaigns.com. More specifically, it was done by a self-described “libertarian socialist” who goes by the name “Rice Beckons“, who is listed on that site as a Democrat and wants to one day run for local office. According to her blog (and as seems apparent from her photo) “Rice Beckons” is a vile little girl, not yet old enough to vote but apparently old enough to commit a felony or two.

Her original plan was to cast all of the fraudulent votes for Robert Milnes, in an attempt to humiliate him. The plan was then changed to cast the fraudulent votes for NOTA.

Lest those incriminating posts disappear down the memory hole, I am reproducing them after the “more” mark.

Read the rest of this entry »

“Crusty right winger” Barr has “little following”, says US News and World Report

In Libertarian on June 16, 2008 at 4:51 pm

The Libertarian Party has already endorsed former Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia, a crusty right winger, as its presidential nominee. But Barr has little following compared with Paul, a previous Libertarian candidate who has not endorsed the Georgian.

Read the entire article here.

Sullentrup threatens Angela Keaton

In Libertarian on June 16, 2008 at 4:45 pm

Although he has absolutely no authority whatsoever to do so, LNC Secretary Bill Sullentrup has told elected LNC At-Large Representative Angela Keaton to resign, with a veiled threat that her resignation would “save [her] and the rest of [the LNC] the trouble.”

The trouble of what, Mr. Sullentrup? Do tell.

The following documentation is on Angela Keaton’s blog.

*************************************

Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 06:53:07 -0700
From: starrcpa@pacbell.net
To: lnc-discuss@lp.org
Subject: Re: [Lnc-discuss] Mail Ballot, Give-or-Get Program

So, let me get this straight.
If, say, Dan Karlan, Bill Redpath, Jim Lark and several others tell me to go ahead and disclose to others how much we gave and raised, this motion basically prohibits us from doing so.
I wonder if anyone else is as troubled by the philosophical implications of this motion as I am.
Aaron Starr

*************************************

RE: [Lnc-discuss] Mail Ballot, Give-or-Get Program‏
From: Keaton (angelasssskeaton.com)
Sent: Mon 6/16/08 2:19 PM
To: Aaron Starr (starrchamber@pacbell.net); LNC Discuss (lnc-discussssslp.org)

Mr. Starr:

First, no one pays his accountant for philosophical insights. Stick to the matter at hand. Second, the appeals to name dropping don’t work with those us beyond the age of 13. If Messrs. Karlan, Redpath and Lark wish to shave their heads and stick them in ant hills, will we add that to the policy manual? Finally, where was the push for this last term? Oh, of course, we wouldn’t want a radical to outshine the oh so rich and attractive moderates hence the applying of other people’s solicitations to your little friend’s totals.

Really, I’ve had enough. If any of you are qualified to be on an actual board of directors, please knock yourselves out. Don’t diddle the rest of us.

Keaton

************************************

rwsully@charter.net
Sent: Mon 6/16/08 2:29 PM
To: Keaton (angelasdfasdfaangelakeaton.com)

Angela,

<Really, I’ve had enough.>

I gathered as much.

So why don’t you resign? Save yourself and the rest of us the trouble.

Rasmussen Poll Data

In Politics on June 16, 2008 at 4:26 pm

Here is where it gets tough for Bob Barr and the Libertarian Party.  Polling companies like Rassmussen are giving polls with the only options for President being Barack Obama and John McCain.   The poll among Arkansas voters show that 8% prefer “some other candidate.”

Why do people give such credence to polling firms?  I remember a class action lawsuit filed by the LPPA and LP candidates Richard Piotrowski and Betsy Summers against Quinnipiac College.  The college accepts federal money for student tuition and is supposed to be unbiased in politics.  Excluding candidates on the ballot constitutes as bias according to the law suit.  I haven’t heard anything about the suit since it was filed.

The longer polls exclude Bob Barr, the harder it will be for him (as well as for downticket candidates.)

 

Suspected fraud in BTP online convention voting

In Libertarian on June 16, 2008 at 4:00 pm

In the Boston Tea Party’s online convention, there is some very serious concern about fraudulent voting.

It appears that some people may be creating multiple accounts – one seems to have as many as 12 accounts from the same IP – so they can vote multiple times; it appears those votes were cast for “None of the Above”, causing a situation wherein the top candidate for the VP slot was tied with NOTA.  The site has therefore been closed to registration at this time, and the suspicious votes have been disallowed.

Of course, there are undoubtedly some legitimate votes for NOTA, especially since members can vote for more than one candidate for each office.

However, there is concern that the party is losing out on legitimate members, by closing new member registration during the voting; and it appears that under the Bylaws, the party cannot close to new membership during the convention, though it has been done as an emergency measure since it is believed the site is under attack.

Unfortunately, a number of the new users are both attracted to the poll because something is happening here, and are apparently visiting parts of the site to indicate reflection on the candidates and issues. Thus, we are being screwed out of legitimate new members by the action of this vicious little spammer.

Voting will continue until 9 pm EDT tonight.  At present, assumably after the suspected fraudulent votes have been disallowed, the results are as follows:

Presidential candidates: 37 votes cast so far

Charles Jay 68% (25 votes)

None of the Above 32% (12 votes)

Robert Milnes 14% (5 votes)

Vice Presidential candidates: 33 votes cast so far

Thomas L. Knapp 58% (19 votes)

Todd Andrew Barnett 30% (10 votes)

None of the Above 27% (9 votes)

Chris Bennett 18% (6 votes)

Steve Kubby: “Miracles Happen”

In Libertarian on June 16, 2008 at 2:27 pm

The following is published with the permission of Steve Kubby.  All I can really say is, WOW!!!

Miracles Happen

by Steve Kubby

So far, 2008 has been one of the most incredible years of my life. One miracle after another has come my way, transforming my life before my very eyes. It’s all happened so fast that I haven’t had a chance, until now, to write you and share all the good news.

In the first six months of this year, I’ve seen my legal status go from convicted felon to all charges being dismissed and my record wiped clean. That’s a miracle I never thought I’d live to see.

This May, I participated in the Libertarian Party’s Presidential Debate, televised live to the entire nation on C-SPAN. Although I was up against former US Congressman Bob Barr and US Senator Mike Gravel, I did well and many people told me I actually won the debate. Although I did not win the nomination, I accumulated a great deal of political assets within the party and I’ve made many wonderful new libertarian friends.

But there is even more exciting news to share!

This year, I discovered a process for producing a new kind of cannabis medicine. Miraculously, I’ve developed a simple, highly effective pill for my own personal use that provides a uniform, time release dosage and has an onset of just 30 minutes. The key is a bioactive matrix that makes the cannabinoids in the pill much more available for sublingual uptake. Naturally, I use only whole plant extracts from organically grown plants.

This year, the emerging market for cannabinoid medicines is estimated a $1 billion. There are only two companies in this market, Cannasat, worth about $12 million and GW Pharmaceuticals, worth over $100 million. Based upon research and consultations with world authorities, I believe my new medicine will easily out perform the products currently being produced or tested.

Winning government approval for my new medicine won’t be easy, but I have assembled a world class team to accomplish just that. Included in our team is a former CEO of a pharmaceutical company and a 20 year Chief Science Officer from a top pharmaceutical company, who specialized in taking new drugs through the FDA process.

I’m also in the process of launching a new company called CALYX Pharmaceutical to research and develop my discovery. My new libertarian friends, some of whom are quite successful, are helping me and we are all very excited about capturing an emerging billion dollar market.

Of course there is much more to this story than I can tell you here, but if you’d like to know more, just drop me a line.

I’ve always felt blessed to have friends and family like you. Now I feel doubly blessed and rewarded for my faith and persistence. You’ve seen me through the dark times, I hope you’ll join me in celebrating the good times ahead.

BTW, I still support the full legalization of cannabis. My medicines will be targeted for those patients who cannot tolerate, or wish to avoid, smoking or vaporizing.

Barr vs. Paul On The Issues: Barr Comes Out Ahead

In Civil Liberties, Constitutional Rights, Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Personal Responsibility, Politics on June 16, 2008 at 4:29 am

After reading a great hue and cry about my comments supporting our Party’s ticket in 2008, many people compared Bob Barr unfavorably to other Libertarians (as well as Ron Paul) on a whole host of issues, including DOMA and immigration.  So let’s look at the individual candidates and see who is closer, today, to the Libertarian Party platform on two issues often invoked by self-described “principled purists” when attacking the Libertarian nominee.

Immigration

The LP platform says that “Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders.”  Where do Bob Barr and Ron Paul stand on this?

Barr says that “we must be aggressive in securing our borders while at the same time, vigilantly fighting the nanny state that seeks to coddle even those capable of providing for their own personal prosperity.”  He proposes an approach identical to the LP platform — maintaining control over the borders to allow peaceful people in, while denying entry to criminals.

Ron Paul, in contrast, favors the imposition of visas, including demanding that federal bureaucrats “track visa holders and deport anyone who overstays their visa.”  He also complains that open borders will “allow up to 60 million more immigrants into our country, according to the [arch-conservative] Heritage Foundation.  This is insanity.”  He advocates an end to citizenship by birth, a concept of American law since the beginning of the Republic.  He also ran one of the most anti-immigrant television advertisements in the Republican primary.

Most Libertarian candidate of the two on immigration: Bob Barr.

The Defense of Marriage Act, Marriage Equality, and Sexual Freedom

Bob Barr co-sponsored and authored the Defense of Marriage Act.  Ron Paul supports DOMA and declares that he would vote for it in its entirety.

The Libertarian Party platform says that “Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the rights of individuals by government, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships.”

Barr has advocated a repeal of the DOMA provisions that force the federal government not to recognize same-sex marriages performed by states that do recognize them.  In his nomination speech at the Libertarian National Convention, he declared that “The Defense of Marriage Act, insofar as it provided the federal government a club to club down the rights of law abiding citizens has been abused, misused and should be repealed. And I will work to repeal that.”  This position moves the federal stance on this issue significantly closer to the Libertarian Party platform.

Ron Paul, in contrast, has declared that “I would have voted for the Defense of Marriage Act… to ensure that no state would be forced to recognize a ’same sex’ marriage license.”  That’s directly opposed to the Libertarian Platform.

On the California same-sex marriage ruling, Barr released a press release applauding the California Supreme Court’s ruling, stating that “The decision in California is an illustration of how this principle of states’ powers should work.”

In contrast, Ron Paul has declared his undying opposition to same-sex marriage in his own state (in opposition to the LP platform), stating that “If I were a member of the Texas legislature, I would do all I could to oppose any attempt by rogue judges to impose a new definition of marriage,” effectively nullifying the equal protection clauses of the state and federal constitutions.

Worse still, Paul strongly supports state governments as sex police, declaring on the floor of the House that “the State of Texas has the right to decide for itself how to regulate social matters like sex, using its own local standards” — a position that no serious libertarian could possibly take.

Most Libertarian candidate of the two on these issues: Bob Barr.  By far.

Now, you may be wondering why I am focusing on these two issues.  It’s mostly because so many purists for Paul have attacked the LP (and Barr) on the basis of his positions on immigration and DOMA, while ignoring their own preferred candidate’s positions.

Many have lectured me, declaring that “conservatism isn’t libertarianism” and other 50 cent cliches, while ignoring the fact that their own ideal candidate is more conservative on these issues — to the point of citing conservative groups like Heritage on hot-button social issues.

I could continue comparing the records of the two candidates in this regard on many more issues, and on most of them, Barr will not come out waving the white flag based on the Libertarian Party platform.

In short, if you’re proposing that Ron Paul is the antidote to conservatism as represented by Bob Barr, you need a remedial course in the positions of the two candidates.  It’s time for Ron Paul partisans to drop their “revolution” pipe dream and take an honest look at the Libertarian Party’s candidate and positions — while also honestly acknowledging their own tone-deafness on many areas of personal liberty crucial not only to American libertarians, but all American citizens.

Angela Keaton continues to give ‘em hell

In Libertarian on June 16, 2008 at 4:01 am

From LNC member Angela Keaton’s blog.

Standards apply, except when they don’t‏
From: Keaton (angela@xxxxton.com)
Sent: Mon 6/16/08 1:45 AM
To: Stewart Flood (xxxnet); lnc-sssslp.org
My dear, Mr. Flood:

Of course resumes are confidential. No resumes were revealed. Some of us are aware of standard hiring and firing practices Unfortunately, judging by the disposition of the former ED’s tenure, Messrs. Colley, Redpath, et al., do not. (READ: In a real political party, Cory would have had his rump handed back to him.)Nothing was “broadcast” by me except to subtly drive home the points that first, Mr. Colley neglected to mention that the first candidate he listed was a central member of the Reform Caucus, a fact that given the current tensions might would be worth noting; second, that the Radicals should defer to the reformers on hiring so that they can have a free hand to implement their ideological and strategical agenda; finally, that given our entrance on the world stage, we should expect external and internal scrutiny.

If you can’t handle a little criticism from a menstruating retired titty dancer, I shudder to think what you would do on Anderson Cooper.

Keaton
basium meus ass

BTP VP race includes LFV contributors

In Libertarian on June 16, 2008 at 3:49 am

LFV has two contributors in the Boston Tea Party VP race: Chris Bennett, and Thomas Knapp.  At this point, the winners appear to be Charles Jay (P) and Tom Knapp (VP).  However, so far only 18 people have voted, so that could still change dramatically.

The Presidential candidates are Charles Jay and Robert Milnes.  The VP candidates are Chris Bennett, Tom Knapp, and Todd Andrew Barnett.

If you are a BTP member (joining requires only registering with the site) and are so inclined, head on over and give our contributors (or the candidate of your choice, as the case may be) some vote love.  Polls will remain open until 9 pm EDT on Monday.

Angela Keaton continues the battle re Executive Director search

In Libertarian on June 16, 2008 at 2:14 am

From LNC member Angela Keaton’s blog.

ENM observation: I can understand why they might want to keep Executive Director resumes from being made public, but there is no reason why the LNC members – elected to represent and protect the members’ interests – should not see the resumes.  This really makes me wonder what they are trying to hide.

___________________________________

Re: [Lnc-discuss] A Reminder: LNC’s role‏
From: lnc-discuss-bounces@hq.lp.org on behalf of Keaton (bitchxxxxangelakeaton.com)
Sent: Sun 6/15/08 6:49 PM
To: Scott L. (xxxxxxearthlink.net); lnc-discussxlp.org
Excellent idea. Let’s post all the resumes to the LP.org and we will let the membership vote on who will get paid to insult the membership, ignore the principles and cater to the officers’ whims.

http://angelakeaton.com/2008/06/15/its-the-15th-of-month/


From: xxxxxxarthlink.net
To: lnc-discussxlp.org
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2008 11:16:00 -0700
Subject: Re: [Lnc-discuss] A Reminder: LNC’s role


“The activities of the Libertarian National Committee are not for the benefit of the committee but for the membership of the Party. Executive session is limited and specific to internal matters regarding hired personnel and possible pending litigation.

We owe a debt to Dr. Ruwart for suggesting that the other committee members be allowed to see the resumes.

Keaton”

Ms Keaton:

I can think of one reason right off the top of my head why the viewing of received ED resumes should be restricted to the ED Search Committee and the Chair: some job applicants don’t want their employer to know they are looking for a new position. I am sure there are other valid reasons that applicants would not want their resumes to be even semi-public.

I would like to know why Dr. Ruwart, Ms. Keaton, and maybe Mr. Wrights want ED applicant’s resumes, or at least their names, to be available to the membership and/or the LNC, yet these same LNC members do not want even the other members of the LNC to know how LNC members are doing in the Give or Get Program. I would think that if you are in favor of full disclosure, you would be very happy for the membership to see the Give or Get totals.

Scott Lieberman

Angela Keaton calls BS on LNC re search for ED

In Libertarian on June 15, 2008 at 6:45 pm

From LNC member Angela Keaton’s blog:

It’s the 15th of the month

You know what that means: Anarchist Bitch celebrates the arrival of her menses with an extra special bitchy email to the LNC Discuss List. My sweet lord, you know there are going to be four emails from Dan Karlan on our policy manual, a demand for silence from one of the alts, a request to Bill Hall from staff and Sullentrup grumbling about PMS.

A Reminder: LNC’s role‏
From: Keaton (angelaATTTangelakeatoncome)
Sent: Sun 6/15/08 5:43 PM
To: Michael C Colley (xxxx); lnc-discuss@lp.org
[Admiral Colley's comments on the keeping the ED search closed to the membership have been deleted per request.]

The activities of the Libertarian National Committee are not for the benefit of the committee but for the membership of the Party. Executive session is limited and specific to internal matters regarding hired personnel and possible pending litigation.

We owe a debt to Dr. Ruwart for suggesting that the other committee members be allowed to see the resumes.

Keaton

Steve Kubby recommends….

In Libertarian on June 15, 2008 at 2:20 pm
  • http://www.libertyforall.net/?p=1335
  • Steve Kubby says, “This is a fantastic article and I strongly recommend it as a concise guide to understanding and defending your liberty.”

    New Ron Paul conspiracy theory

    In Politics on June 15, 2008 at 6:12 am

    Apparently, some incredibly insane Ron Paul fans believe that he hasn’t really bowed out of the presidential race, that his Web site has been hacked, and that everyone has fallen for a big hoax.

    Says Lew Rockwell:

    A few people are refusing to accept the fact that Ron has dropped out of the presidential race, and are writing me about it. They claim I’ve fallen for an MSM lie, that the ex-campaign website — with its beautiful thank-you message and photo of Ron — has been been hacked, that Ron’s new Campaign for Liberty is not the successor and replacement for his presidential effort. Folks, the presidential campaign office has been closed, the staff let go, the phones, etc. transferred, and the FEC forms filed. The presidential effort is over, through, done, kaput. There is, of course, much exciting work to do for peace, civil liberties, free markets, and sound money, now and in the future. But no more electoral politics!

    When the MSM implied that some Ron Paul fans were loony, I thought I knew what they meant.

    This “theory” takes the cake as the most ludicrous in the history of human thought.

    “Vortex of Freedom” Radio Show Rescheduled

    In Libertarian, Politics on June 15, 2008 at 3:51 am

    I was ready to host the show when my internet connection went out. My switchboard and my chat room closed up as I was ready to get on the air. The links I needed for material were unavailable. I went on for about 15 minutes before the switchboard popped back up. The switchboard did not work when I needed to click on sound files. It closed back up two minutes later and I have been without internet until now. I will be hosting tomorrow’s show from a cafe with Wi-Fi so this should not be an issue for tomorrow.

    “Vortex of Freedom” Radio Show – Sunday 4:00PM Eastern

    The Future of America

    Does America have a future? Can either John McCain or Barack Obama save us? Or is America’s future doomed? Vortex of Freedom takes a look at the issues and offers his opinion on the mainstream candidates as well as the third party candidates.

    Listen to Vortex of Freedom on internet talk radio

    Call-in Number: (347) 215-7969

    Angela Keaton: “LNC 2010: Your Hawaiian Vacation”

    In Libertarian on June 15, 2008 at 3:13 am

    The following was posted on Angela Keaton’s blog, and has been posted with her permission.

    ENM commentary: Is it just me, or does having a convention in Hawaii sound like a foolish idea given that many if not most libertarians either don’t want to fly, or can’t afford a trip to Hawaii? Also, given that the LP appears to be teetering on the edge of not even being able to meet payroll and normal operating expenses, it seems like a poor financial decision as well.

    ____________________________

    Ship of Fools

    Hat tip to Muddy, LadyGaura and LB.

    An actual email from M Carling dated May 28:

    I advocated that the 2008 and 2010 conventions be negotiated at the same time, because it’s just about as easy to get two quotes from a hotel as to get one. For reasons that have never been revealed to me, the Convention Committee decided not to do that. It took over a year of asking every month before I could even get a straight answer (finally last December) from anyone that the Convention Committee was not actively negotiating for the 2010 convention. Then Bill Redpath asked me if I would try to negotiate contracts for 2010 and 2011/2012. I took the RFP that the Barry Dively had used to get bids for 2008, updated it for 2010 and 2012, and sent it to the appropriate folks in Austin, Charleston, Cleveland (IIRC), and Pittsburgh. Austin never responded to either email or voicemail. The others responded that they had heard that we had already signed a contract for Austin, and I had a difficult time convincing them that that was a false rumor. After a few months, Nancy Neale asked to be in the loop and I tried to include her despite limited responsiveness on her part. I also asked Bill for permission to get help from Barry Dively, to which Bill enthusiastically agreed. Barry convinced Bill and me that we were so close to the 2008 convention that it would be better to wait until after the convention when we had hard attendance numbers to show.

    I think Austin would be a great venue for a presidential convention, perhaps in late 2011. For 2010, I think we would get a better deal from a venue nearer the size we need. Our attendance numbers in 2006 and 2008 make us less interesting to the Austin Hilton. We would need to convince them that our numbers will be like 2004.

    May is low (cheap) season for convention hotels in Hawaii. People want to go to Hawaii when it is winter in the midwest and during summer vacations. Honolulu has many hotels with convention facilities
    of the right size for us and they are competitive. It’s generally easy to talk one’s spouse (often not an LP member) into going to Hawaii. We’ve never had an LNC meeting there and they are the most isolated of our state parties.

    Aaron Starr’s response dated May 29:
    I just mentioned to my significant other the prospect of Hawaii as a site for a future convention and she proceeded to get giddy and do cart wheels. I concluded that perhaps this was a demonstration of approval. I’m wondering whether the prospect of a trip to Hawaii commonly draws similar exhibitions of exuberance from others.

    Why I’m Voting Barr-Root, And Why You Should Too

    In Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US on June 15, 2008 at 12:19 am

    I am a Libertarian Party partisan.

    What does it mean to be a Libertarian Party partisan?

    It means having a sincere, facts-based belief in the platform of the LP — and a strong belief that LP candidates, broadly speaking, are better for America than the candidates of other parties: Democrat, Republican, Green, Constitution, etc.

    It also means understanding the unspoken agreement of the Libertarian Party — that as a party, we have our internal debates and discussions, work them out in convention, and then unite around our candidates and the values of the platform that they stand for.

    In Denver, we had a number of improvements to our party platform, including strengthened language on sexuality/gender/parentage and the role of government in abortion (nil.) These were victories for liberty, and for Americans everywhere.

    We also nominated Bob Barr and Wayne Allyn Root as our presidential and vice presidential nominees.

    I intend to vote for the Libertarian ticket, and promote it over the candidacies of the Democratic Party, Republican Party, and Constitution Party, because in election 2008, the Barr-Root ticket is indisputably the best choice for America.

    I am perfectly aware of the objections to the candidacy. I am aware of the concerns that many Libertarians have against the individual candidates, and I share them. But I could hardly expect the LP to unite around my preferred candidate, George Phillies, if I’m not prepared to have the same attitude to other Libertarian candidates.

    Similarly, how could Ruwart, Kubby, Gravel, or Smith supporters have expected Libertarians to support their candidate if they’re not willing to extend the same courtesy to those who they otherwise don’t support?

    The reality is, they couldn’t. Read the rest of this entry »

    The Challenge

    In Libertarian on June 14, 2008 at 9:02 pm

    One of the things I do when I have time is use the “tag surfer” option on WordPress. I like to take a Republican blog and a Democratic blog and reply with a radical libertarian perspective. I do that by picking out one of the falsehoods and correcting them in a civil and respectful manner. When they bark back that Libertarians “don’t have a chance,” I remind them of all the chances their party has had and they are batting “zero.”

    The challenge over the next 24 hours is to find a blog from each party and follow the exercise above. It might be hard to find one that praises a candidate (We’re not the only ones who think they’re bad), so they resort to attacking the candidate from the other wing of the Republicratic Party.

    Good luck! :)

    Steve Kubby: “Does the Constitution Party actually support the Constitution?”

    In Libertarian on June 14, 2008 at 6:39 pm

    The following article is posted with the permission of the author, longtime Libertarian activist Steve Kubby.

    Does the Constitution Party actually support the Constitution?

    Judging by their own Seven Principles, it is evident that the Constitutional Party does NOT believe in upholding defending the US Constitution, as it is currently written.

    Take a look at their own words and decide for yourself:

    1. Life: For all human beings, from conception to natural death;

    This seems reasonable and makes good sense — unless you happen to be a woman and you have the notion that you, not the State owns your body

    2. Liberty: Freedom of conscience and actions for the self-governed individual;

    Huh? This lofty definition of “Liberty” is toothless. REAL Liberty is FREEDOM from GOVERNMENT

    3. Family: One husband and one wife with their children as divinely instituted;

    Whoa! This sounds like the Constitution party wants to hijack the government to institute a right wing theocracy based upon fundamentalist interpretations of the Christian Bible

    4. Property: Each individual’s right to own and steward personal property without government burden;

    What does this mean? Can the State still take your property if you are caught growing marijuana? Yeah, I thought so

    5. Constitution: and Bill of Rights interpreted according to the actual intent of the Founding Fathers;

    Many of the Founding Fathers intended that slavery remain legal and that women should never vote. Is that the intent we want

    6. States’ Rights: Everything not specifically delegated by the Constitution to the federal government is reserved for the state and local jurisdictions;

    WRONG! Neither states, nor local jurisdictions have ANY “Rights” whatsoever, under the US Bill of Rights. RIGHTS only belong to PEOPLE and cannot be separated, alienated or otherwise transferred to the State. Only “Powers” can be transferred to a state and that is the point to the 9th and 10th amendments.

    7. American Sovereignty: American government committed to the protection of the borders, trade, and common defense of Americans, and not entangled in foreign alliances

    The US government has repeatedly demonstrated that it cannot protect the borders, provide for the defense of Americans, nor can our government avoid becoming entangled in foreign alliances. The Constitution provides an effective means for protecting Americans and it is called the Second Amendment.

    High schooler makes Libertarian video for class

    In Libertarian on June 14, 2008 at 5:51 pm

    Hat tip Jason Gatties

    From LFV Mailbag: New “transpartisan” group formed

    In Libertarian on June 14, 2008 at 5:36 pm

    National “transpartisan,” group for peace and sanity formed.

  • http://www.nysun.com/national/group-forms-to-head-off-war-on-iran/79667/
  • Barr/Root plus all LP candidates and activists should promote group objectives heavily nationwide this month!

    New Element Discovered

    In Libertarian on June 14, 2008 at 4:54 pm

    Scientific Journal of America June 1, 2008

    Research has lead to the discovery of the heaviest element yet known to science. The new element, Governmentium (Gv), has one neutron, 25 assistant neutrons, 88 deputy neutrons, and 198 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 312.

    These 312 particles are held together by forces called morons, which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons. Since Governmentium has no electrons, it is inert; however, it can be detected because it impedes every action with which it comes into contact. A minute amount of Governmentium can cause a reaction that would normally take less than a second to take from four days to four years to complete. Governmentium has a normal half-life of 2-6 years; it does not decay, but instead undergoes a reorganization in which a portion of the assistant neutrons and deputy neutrons exchange places.

    In fact, Governmentium’s mass will actually increase over time, since each reorganization will cause more morons to become neutrons, forming isodopes. This characteristic of moron promotion leads some scientists to believe that Governmentium is formed whenever morons reach a critical concentration. This hypothetical quantity is referred to as critical morass. When catalyzed with money, Governmentium becomes Administratium, an element that radiates just as much energy as Governmentium since it has half as many peons but twice as many morons.

    Original author unknown

    Angela Keaton to appear on LFV Live!

    In Libertarian on June 14, 2008 at 4:44 pm

    LNC member Angela Keaton has graciously agreed to appear on LFV Live! this coming Friday, June 20th, at 7:30 pm EDT.

    We will be discussing general libertarian issues, and it is sure to be a fun and interesting time.  Make sure to mark the date!

    LibertyMix: 2 Years Has Passed & Still No Answers

    In Libertarian on June 14, 2008 at 3:54 pm

    June 6 should go down in Libertarian history as LibertyMix Day — the day Libertarians remember that not all the crooks are in the major parties.

    I just read an interesting post by Greg Dirasian over at smallgov.org written on the 2 month Anniversary of – “The Release of the Beast”. Meg used to post about this frequently here at LFV and many thought she was being too harsh, but I think she was just being vigilant. It has been 2 years now, and still no answers. Do recent events make this look even more questionable?  Hell yeah they do. Read Greg’s analysis here.

    Advertisement for LP Executive Director

    In Libertarian on June 14, 2008 at 3:04 pm
    Executive Director Posted Jun 13
    Libertarian Party, Washington, DC

    Libertarian National Committee Seeking Executive Director

    Seasoned professional with background in non-profit management & fundraising experience, who has an understanding of Libertarian Principles wanted for Executive Director.

    Job Description:

    - Chief Operating Officer of the Libertarian Party. Reports to the Chair, Libertarian National Committee (LNC)

    - Directs, coordinates and administers the activities of staff at LNC headquarters in Washington DC. Recruits, trains and develops staff of 10-12 with full and part time employees plus interns

    - In coordination with the Treasurer, develops and executes the annual budget (in excess of $1.7M)

    - Solicits major donor participation in funding Party operations

    - Directs the execution of effective fundraising through direct mail, web and donor development

    Outreach:

    - Represents the Party in the DC community; acts as a spokesperson

    - Nurtures effective working relationships with news media, think tanks and state Party affiliates

    Compensation: as negotiated with LNC Chair; great benefits package

    Please submit resume to LNC Search Committee at: EDSearch@LP.org

    The Libertarian Party is America’s third largest political party, founded in 1971 as an alternative to the two main political parties. The Libertarian Party proudly stands for smaller government, lower taxes and more freedom. The Libertarian National Committee is an equal opportunity employer, and does not discriminate against any employee or applicant on the basis of race, creed, color, age, sex, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, religious affiliation, disability, or any other classification considered discriminatory under applicable law.

    The Case for Robert Capozzi for LP Executive Director

    In Libertarian on June 14, 2008 at 2:34 am

    The following was written by LNC member Angela Keaton:

    __________________________________________

    Investor relations executive and libertarian writer Robert Capozzi has applied for the position of national executive director. Capozzi, editor of one of the first libertarians webzines The Free Liberal, emerged in recent years as one of the Reform Caucus’ most effective spokesmen. Last year he was elected by the LNC to sit on the platform committee where he played a key role in the Directional Principles draft.

    His libertarian roots run deep. Capozzi was an undergraduate at SUNY Buffalo when he wrote for the now defunct Inquiry and interned at the Libertarian Review. His mother, college instructor, Audrey Capozzi is well regarded by her fellow members of both LPNY & LPFL and is quite close to some of the most influential east coast radicals. As one top anarchist leader put it, “Audrey’s good stuff.”

    Capozzi is not without his weaknesses. He lacks the activist background of a Wes Benedict or a Marc Montoni, two of the party’s leading former state executive directors. As an unapologetic egghead (”I’m a theoretical asymptotic anarchist,”) he could easily alienate the working class voters that anti-prohibitionist Loretta Nall, the Dondero Libertarian Republicans, and the Grass Roots Caucus have targeted as part of a real world libertarianism. Further, while he enjoys the banter of the libertarian basement blogs, he has not provided satisfactory answers to many of the philosophical challenges issued by Radical Caucus leader Susan Hogarth.

    Why should anarchists and other radicals give Capozzi a chance at our top administrative slot? The Reform Caucus members have demanded that we give their approach a fair hearing. We did. They won their case in Denver. I don’t envy them as for now we, the entire delegation of the LPUS, demand they produce the goods. Other than current treasurer Aaron Starr, I can’t think of any reformer more qualified than Capozzi to put those plans into action.

    Greetings

    In Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US on June 14, 2008 at 2:24 am

    I am honored to be asked to join the “Last Free Voice” team.  I look forward in learning and sharing thoughts of liberty with fellow libertarians.

    Reminder: LFV Live show tonight

    In Libertarian on June 13, 2008 at 9:34 pm

    LFV Live airs tonight from 7:30 to 8:30 EDT.

    Our guest will be Michael from Vortex of Freedom, and we will be taking questions from listeners.

    The call-in number is (646) 478-4638

    Man sues Home Depot after getting glued to toilet seat

    In Libertarian on June 13, 2008 at 9:00 pm

    From The Smoking Gun:

    JUNE 13–A St. Louis man claims that he was injured last year after being glued to a toilet seat in a Home Depot and is suing the retail giant for negligence. Haywood Rosales, 31, charges that during an August 2007 visit to a Home Depot in Florissant, Missouri he used a store bathroom and came into contact with a toilet seat “covered with adhesive,” according to his Circuit Court lawsuit. Rosales’s lawyers told TSG that their client did not notice the adhesive before sitting down and that he used his cell phone to alert his wife, with whom he was shopping, after realizing “he was glued to the toilet seat.” A copy of Rosales’s June 11 lawsuit, first reported by Courthouse News, can be found below. When Rosales stood up, the complaint asserts, he “received cuts, bruises, and tearing on his buttocks and thighs,” and subsequently “endured the embarrassment, pain, and suffering of the initial injury and its concomitant treatment.” Rosales, who claims he was “rendered unable to work” by his injuries, is seeking in excess of $25,000 in damages. Rosales’s lawyers said their client sued Home Depot after the retailer’s insurer “summarily rejected” a claim. In November 2005, a Colorado man filed a similar lawsuit against Home Depot, alleging that he was so fused to a toilet seat that paramedics had to remove the seat from the toilet to get him out of the store bathroom. After almost two years of litigation, the Colorado case was dismissed after a federal judge ruled that Home Depot did not have prior “actual or constructive knowledge” of the dangerous toilet, nor was the glue prank foreseeable. Rosales’s lawsuit refers to the earlier incident, charging that Home Depot should have recognized that “there would be a strong possibility that instances of copycat behavior would occur.” (4 pages)

    You can read the very sticky lawsuit on The Smoking Gun.

    Originally posted on Adventures in Frickintardistan.

    LP overspending may affect payroll, normal operating expenses

    In Libertarian on June 13, 2008 at 8:37 pm

    From LNC member Angela Keaton’s blog.
    ___________________________________

    (Editor’s note: Last term I voted to keep the contents of the LNC Discuss list private. The motion which was seconded by me was rejected during an LNC meeting. At Anarchist Bitch, we respect the ownership of one’s words. As such, Hardy Macia and Michael Colley often mark their correspondence as private. It will remain such as will the work of acting executive director Robert Kraus and our attorney Bill Hall.–AK)

    LNC Treasurer Concerned with Major Shortfall: Can the Barroot ticket make up the difference?

    Aaron Starr reported this morning that:
    As you may recall, at the June 5 meeting we had funds after paying payables of $122K. The amount remaining after unspent encumbrances amounted to $85K. We authorized additional encumbrances of $55K at that time, bringing our funds available figure down to only $30K.

    Looking at the spreadsheet, it appears that during the next week, we spent $28K more than we took in, but we can only attribute $5K of this to spending on ballot access. This meant that we only had $6K available once we exhaust the remaining encumbrances.

    With the approval at the June 11 meeting of $33K of new encumbrances, we now have a deficit in funds after encumbrances of $27K. This means that if we were to spend all of our encumbrances today, we would have issued $27K more in checks than we have cash in bank.

    This concerns me obviously. If we incur these expenses, they do not create the sort of payables where payment can be easily delayed. Petitioners expect to be paid promptly or they will simply walk away.

    If we spend this money and do not increase our incoming revenues quickly, we run the risk of not being able to meet our obligations for payroll and other expenses required for normal operations.
    Starr is currently in China and cannot be reached for comment.

    Angela Keaton: “Darth Accountant”

    In Libertarian on June 13, 2008 at 8:21 pm

    The following is reproduced from Angela Keaton’s blog, with permission of the author.  Angela Keaton is a multi-term member of the Libertarian National Committee (LNC).

    ______________________________________

    Dr. Ruwart is too much of a gentlewoman to address Starr’s disrespectful non-response.

    I’m not.

    Dr. Ruwart is the best known of all our committee members.  Secure and accomplished, she needs nothing by her name.

    As for transparency,  Mr. Starr would do well to note that while he may be the controller of a billion dollar corporation according to his lp.org bio, his employer is serving a two year prison sentence for tax fraud, intimidating witnesses, and intimidating a federal agent. Granted that makes Haas a hero in my book, to the ”respectable” people with whom some of you are so enamored, this is a taint.

    Dr. Ruwart already had her movement ticket punched.  As for me, it’s not my lot in life to cater to the petit bourgeois sensibilities of the treasurer and his cadre.

    There is nothing stopping the Starr Chamber* from raising money or winning elections. Endless yapping about how our educational mission or “povertarians” keep you from doing anything is not a reason; it’s an excuse.

    Keaton

    *Thanks, Team Seebeck.

    Angela Keaton: “Membership in LP”

    In Libertarian on June 13, 2008 at 8:15 pm

    The following is reproduced from Angela Keaton’s blog, with permission of the author. Angela Keaton is a multi-term member of the Libertarian National Committee (LNC).

    ___________________________________________

    From: Keaton (angelaATangelakeaton.com)
    Sent: Fri 6/13/08 9:39 AM
    To: Jim Casarjian-Perry (jimATcasarjianperry.com); wredpathAThis.com; michaelATangelvisiontech.com; rwsullyATcharter.net; starrcpaATpacbell.net; chairATlptexas.org; nxxxx3@ATxx.com; rleewrightsATgmail.com; maryATruwart.com

    Jim,

    Yes, the LP has become an objectivist dystopia where whatever is good, decent and select is verboten and whatever is mediocre, common and repulsive is glorified.

    I understand that you can’t place much confidence in officers who imagine that the deeply troubled and usually unemployed M Carling should be given a position of authority while the editor of the highly regarded Rational Review is deemed unfit to sit on our Platform Committee.

    Take the long view. Radicals for Capitalism just came out in paperback. Read, digest and remember that if the party can survive Andre Marrou, it can survive a possible Root indictment, our leadership’s male menopause and that thick legged hillbilly girl they tried to put on the LNC, Mattson, her name was or something. I don’t know. All those Christian types married to their uncle cousins look the same to me.

    Peace,

    Keaton

    UPDATE from same source:

    Wayne Root just called me.  He doesn’t feel he has been mistreated by the Barr campaign.  He says he has been doing many local interviews each day.  He also believes that there is no investigation pending with regard to the sale of his company.

    He expects to be on the Barr ‘08 site any day now.

    R. Kelly found not guilty on all counts

    In Libertarian on June 13, 2008 at 8:02 pm

    Not at all surprisingly, R&B singer R. Kelly has been found not guilty of all 14 charges involving sex with a 13-year-old girl, and child pornography.

    Though the prosecution had over a dozen witnesses who said Kelly was the man in the videotape and that the girl was only 13 at the time, both Kelly and the alleged victim denied it was them on the tape, and the man on the tape did not have the same large mole which Kelly has on his back.  The alleged victim, now an adult, was not called as a witness.

    After six years of preparation, a month-long trial and spending millions of taxpayer dollars, the prosecution simply failed to prove its case, and as a result the jury came to a verdict in only a few hours of deliberations.  Kelly had faced a potential 15 years in prison if convicted.

    The high-profile charges caused serious damage to Kelly’s career, as many assumed him to be guilty.  It is unknown whether Kelly will pursue a malicious prosecution case against the state of New York.

    Tim Russert dead at 58

    In Libertarian on June 13, 2008 at 7:44 pm

    NBC just interrupted programming with breaking news that “Meet The Press” moderator Tim Russert died today, from an apparent heart attack.  He was only 58 years old.

    Soldier who threw puppy off cliff discharged

    In Libertarian on June 13, 2008 at 3:21 pm

    Infamous SOB (and no, I do not mean “son of a butcher” a’la WAR) David Motari has finally been discharged (assumably dishonorably) from the Marines. For those of you unfamiliar with this situation, here is the video which got him in trouble.

    Warning: if you are easily upset by animal cruelty, DO NOT watch this video.

    My question is, what the hell is going on in that man’s head, that he thinks torturing and killing a puppy is okay?

    Here is his explanation:

    And this is the shit if I have to put up with everywhere I’ve gone today. Believe me, I’ve heard it all. The thing that you guys don’t understand is that you’re not out there.

    What, you expect me to carry a stray sick dog from patrol 10+ miles back to camp with me. Did you know that we’re not supposed to have dogs? Did you know that there isn’t medicine available for animals out there? So what the fuck do you want me to do with it. It was going to die a slow and horrible death.

    Sorry you guys saw that, but it wasn’t supposed to ever been shown. Usually what happens is we shoot them. I was being “creative” that day and decided to throw the dog instead. If i could take it back, I would. Either way, I did the dog a favor. Sorry if you can’t understand that.

    Actually, we understand completely why you threw a puppy off a cliff and laughed about it. You are a psychopath. See? That wasn’t at all hard to understand. As for “what the fuck do you want me to do with it”, let’s try a simple “not throw it off a cliff, Shit For Brains.”

    The only thing left to ponder is whether Motari intentionally killed innocent human beings in Iraq and Afghanistan. I can’t help but assume he did, since those who get their jollies by torturing animals also tend to torture people. Read the rest of this entry »

    Bob Barr on the Fed: Not encouraging

    In Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics on June 13, 2008 at 2:44 pm

    Here’s what Bob Barr said on the Glenn Beck radio show in response to a question about the Fed:

    If I could wave a magic wand and the Federal Reserve Bank would disappear tomorrow, I would do so. It’s a group of unelected governors that are not answerable to or accountable to the people of this country and yet they wield considerable influence over the economy by basically setting rates at which banks and other financial institutions can loan money. And they have built up, you know, huge reserves themselves that they can then dole out as they’re doing — as they did recently with Bear Stearns to prop up as failing, what they see as failing investment houses, for example.

    What we’re on the verge of right now, Glenn, through this federal government monkeying around with the mortgage business, both directly and indirectly, is to have the federal government now set a “One size fits all” mortgage criteria for the country. That would be disastrous. It would stifle risk-taking, it would stifle the independence of small mortgage houses and mortgage banks and would simply create further problems down the road. What we need to be doing is tackling government spending. That is the root of all evil, so to speak. We need to get a handle on federal spending, we need to start reducing the economic footprint and, you know, all the other footprints of the federal government if we want to talk about them, and get the federal government out of running our economy. It was never intended to be the job of the federal government to run the economy.

    Let’s take a look at the statement:

    “If I could wave a magic wand and the Federal Reserve Bank would disappear tomorrow, I would do so.”

    You don’t need a “magic wand.” You just need Congress to pass a law repealing the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, and then you, as president, need to sign it. What’s with the “magic wand” talk? You’re much more likely to need a “magic wand” to repeal the 16th amendment, which would not take away Congress’s ability to assess an income tax, contrary to Barr’s understanding. In fact, only a “magic wand” could do that.

    This one sentence basically tells me all I need to know about Barr, RE: the Fed, but I’ll continue.

    “It’s a group of unelected governors that are not answerable to or accountable to the people of this country and yet they wield considerable influence over the economy by basically setting rates at which banks and other financial institutions can loan money.”

    This “unelected governors” talk — as if it would be okay to have a fiat-money issuing central bank cartel if only its governors were elected by the people — is B.S. In fact, the central bank’s “independence” is actually better than the alternative. What is Barr saying here, that he thinks the government, instead of its proxies at the Fed, should have even more control over the money supply?

    And what does he mean that they “basically” set the rates at which banks and other financial institutions can loan money? The Fed sets the discount rate and if they really want to set the federal funds rate, they can do that too. There’s really no “basically” about it.

    “And they have built up, you know, huge reserves themselves that they can then dole out as they’re doing — as they did recently with Bear Stearns to prop up as failing, what they see as failing investment houses, for example.”

    The Fed doesn’t need to have “reserves” — it has the legal authority to create money out of thin air! To the extent that they have “build up reserves,” I guess that’s good, since at least they’re not inflating by creating more money.

    “What we’re on the verge of right now, Glenn, through this federal government monkeying around with the mortgage business, both directly and indirectly, is to have the federal government now set a ‘One size fits all’ mortgage criteria for the country. It would stifle risk-taking, it would stifle the independence of small mortgage houses and mortgage banks and would simply create further problems down the road.

    This reminds me of the embarrassing LP press release saying that “for the first time” the government was enacting price controls on food. The government has been “monkeying around” with the mortgage business towards “one size fits all” since the creation of the FHA, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, etc. This is nothing new.

    “What we need to be doing is tackling government spending…”

    Yes, change the subject. Mr. Beck’s question was about the one institution that makes all of that government spending possible. If you want to curb government spending, then look to the Fed! Don’t divert the question about monetary policy to an answer involving fiscal policy — that’s like saying “we need to do something about this heat!” when asked about fixing the air conditioner.

    Bernanke admits, celebrates connection between fiat money and war-making

    In Uncategorized on June 12, 2008 at 7:01 pm

    While dedicating the new Kansas City Fed building, Bernanke said:

    “Considering the Federal Reserve’s history, this location is a most appropriate site for a Federal Reserve Bank, with its new neighbor being the National World War I Museum at Liberty Memorial. Those who have an appreciation of U.S. history know that the Federal Reserve played an important role in support of the funding of the First World War and that the war forced the early Federal Reserve to contend with an uncertain global environment with wide-ranging monetary and economic ramifications.”

    For once, a truth teller at the Fed.

    Boston Tea Party to hold presidential debate online

    In Libertarian on June 12, 2008 at 5:01 pm

    For Immediate Release
    June 12, 2008

    Boston Tea Party to hold presidential debate on Internet radio

    Candidates for the Boston Tea Party’s 2008 presidential and vice-presidential nominations will debate on “Internet radio” this Saturday, June 14. Douglass Gaking of the IndyTruth Show will host the debate, which is scheduled for live broadcast from 7-9pm Eastern on RPI Radio at www.rpiradio.com.

    Three candidates are also competing for the Boston Tea Party’s vice presidential nomination. Tom Knapp is the founder of the party and currently running for U.S. Congress in Missouri’s 2nd district as a Libertarian. Todd Andrew Barnett is the Vice Chairman of the party’s national committee and a member of the Free State Project. Chris Bennett is formerly a candidate for the Libertarian Party’s executive director and vice presidential nomination.

    Two candidates will compete for the Boston Tea Party’s presidential nomination in an online convention on Sunday, June 15. They are Charles Jay, who is already the nominee of the Utah-based Personal Choice Party, and Robert Milnes, who previously sought the nomination of the Libertarian Party.

    The Boston Tea Party was started in 2006 as an alternative to the Libertarian Party. It’s unique platform consists of only one sentence: “The Boston Tea Party supports reducing the size, scope and power of government at all levels and on all issues, and opposes increasing the size, scope and power of government at any level, for any purpose.”

    All business of the Boston Tea Party is conducted online. The only requirement for membership is endorsing the party’s platform by registering at the web site www.bostontea.us

    .

    ###

    Links:

    http://www.bostontea.us

    http://www.rpiradio.com

    http://www.indytruth.org

    http://www.cj08.com

    http://www.robertmilnes4president2008.com

    http://tomknappforcongress.com

    US Supreme Court to rule suspected terrorists entitled to habeas corpus

    In Libertarian on June 12, 2008 at 4:41 pm

    From SCOTUSblog:

    The Court held 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Kennedy, that the petitioners at GTMO have a constitutional right to petition for habeas corpus and that the DTA/MCA process of D.C. Circuit review from CSRT decisions is not an adequate alternative to habeas. On the latter ruling, as I predicted, the mess of the Bismullah case might have been the straw that broke the camel’s back: “The order denying rehearing [in Bismullah] was accompanied by five separate statements from members of the court, which offer differing views as to scope of the judicial review Congress intended these detainees to have. Under the circumstances we believe the costs of further delay substantially outweigh any benefits of remanding to the Court of Appeals to consider the issue it did not address in these cases.”

    Thus, the petitioners will be able to have habeas petitions considered in district court.

    That’s very, very big news.

    Read the rest of this article here.

    Angela Keaton: “The Bitch Is Back”

    In Libertarian on June 12, 2008 at 3:59 pm

    From Libertarian National Committee Member Angela Keaton’s blog

    Given that the fund raising goals are posted on the new web site I would like it noted I declined to participate this term. Further, committees of political parties are properly styled as committees not boards. As someone who has been a member of and worked for both boards and committees, I could elaborate but it would only make Best Buy counter help like the lipless Chris Farris feel badly about their lot in life.

    I was the second highest fund raiser last time. I realize that I was listed as third but that’s because Mr. Cory gave the points to Mr. Carling who claimed another’s fund raising solicitation as his own. Of course, the LNC does not require much of its members, such as upholding ethical standards.

    “Excuse me, ma’am, would you prefer that I see you naked, or grope you?”

    In Libertarian on June 12, 2008 at 3:27 pm

    From Yahoo News:

    Security scanners which can see through passengers’ clothing and reveal details of their body underneath are being installed in 10 US airports, the US Transportation Security Administration said Tuesday.

    A random selection of travellers getting ready to board airplanes in Washington, New York’s Kennedy, Los Angeles and other key hubs will be shut in the glass booths while a three-dimensional image is made of their body beneath their clothes.

    The booths close around the passenger and emit “millimeter waves” that go through cloth to identify metal, plastics, ceramics, chemical materials and explosives, according to the TSA.

    While it allows the security screeners — looking at the images in a separate room — to clearly see the passenger’s sexual organs as well as other details of their bodies, the passenger’s face is blurred, TSA said in a statement on its website.

    “People have no idea how graphic the images are,” Barry Steinhardt, director of the technology and liberty program at the American Civil Liberties Union, told AFP.

    The ACLU said in a statement that passengers expecting privacy underneath their clothing “should not be required to display highly personal details of their bodies such as evidence of mastectomies, colostomy appliances, penile implants, catheter tubes and the size of their breasts or genitals as a pre-requisite to boarding a plane.”

    Besides masking their faces, the TSA says on its website, the images made “will not be printed stored or transmitted.”

    “Once the transportation security officer has viewed the image and resolved anomalies, the image is erased from the screen permanently. The officer is unable to print, export, store or transmit the image.”

    Lara Uselding, a TSA spokeswoman, added that passengers are not obliged to accept the new machines.

    “The passengers can choose between the body imaging and the pat-down,” she told AFP.

    Click here to read the entire article.

    Hat tip Stupid Evil Bastard

    SEB: 97-year-old woman can’t vote due to Voter ID Act

    In Libertarian on June 12, 2008 at 3:19 pm

    From Les over at Stupid Evil Bastard:

    In 2004 voters in Arizona passed a law that requires all citizens of the state to provide some form of ID in order to be able to cast a ballot. This law is turning out to be a problem for some of the older citizens who no longer have valid drivers licenses and who were born prior to the use of birth certificates. People like Shirley Preiss of Surprise, AZ:

    “I’m a legal American,” Preiss said. “I’m born here. Born and raised in America.”

    The Arizona law was approved by voters in 2004 as Proposition 200 on that year’s general election ballot. It requires voters to produce specified types of identification when casting ballots at polling places and to provide proof of citizenship when registering to vote either for the first time or in a different county.

    Preiss was born in 1910 in Clinton, Ky., before birth certificates were issued. She said she no longer has a driver’s license and never had a passport.

    “You can see my mother’s not a national threat,” said her son Nathan Nemnich. “Been voting since 1932.” Nemnich produced the files documenting his attempts to get her registered.

    “A delayed birth certificate,” he said. “You have to have witnesses. Everybody’s dead.”

    When the family tried to get school records from Tennessee, they found out the school no longer exists.

    “We’re talking about something that is so precious, that right to vote, “said Linda Brown of the Arizona Advocacy Network. “How many hurdles are OK to jump through? How many barriers are we going to accept?”

    Read the rest of Les’s blog article here.

    Kucinich Articles of Impeachment

    In Libertarian on June 12, 2008 at 2:55 pm

    The Dennis Kucinich Articles of Impeachment against George W. Bush are now online.

    In PDF format, it’s 65 pages long, and contains 35 articles.

    Steve Kubby: “Does the punishment fit the crime?”

    In Libertarian on June 12, 2008 at 2:26 pm

    NASHVILLE, Tenn. – On March 7, 2008, the Tennessee Board of Probation and Parole denied a parole requestof a former teacher imprisoned for having sex with a Warren County student.

    Pamela Rogers, who once taught at Centertown Elementary School, has six years left on her prison sentence. Tennessee authorities consider this woman to be a dangerous criminal who must be kept in cage.

    This is the second time parole was denied for Rogers who admitted to a sexual relationship with a 13-year old.

    In February, a parole officer denied her request for early release from the Tennessee Prison for Women in Nashville.
    Rogers is serving a 10-year sentence for sexual battery by an authority figure.

    Rogers’ next chance for parole is in 2014.

    Don’t you feel safer knowing that criminals like Pamela Rogers are behind bars?

    Jason’s “Live From Court Street” episode on Sunday!

    In Libertarian on June 12, 2008 at 10:35 am

    Jason and Cilla Gatties have a cool blogtalk show called “Live From Court Street“, and have a show coming up on Sunday, 6/15 at 2:00 pm EDT.

    Their show is one of the best on blogtalk, in my opinion, so be sure to check it out!

    We return to our usual Sunday time slot with the latest news, sports & entertainment reports. Please set your bookmarks and tune in live at 2pm Eastern.

    Lookin’ for love in all the wrong places…

    In Libertarian on June 12, 2008 at 12:22 am

    posted at
    http://radicallibertarians.blogspot.com/

    George Bush recently sent a video message to the US troops fighting in Afghanistan:

    “I must say, I’m a little envious,” Bush said. “If I were slightly younger and not employed here, I think it would be a fantastic experience to be on the front lines of helping this young democracy succeed.”

    “It must be exciting for you … in some ways romantic, in some ways, you know, confronting danger. You’re really making history, and thanks,” Bush said.

    He added, “Boy do I regret missing out on all the romance and adventure during the Vietnam War! I totally chickened out! I guess, deep down, I’m just afraid of love. That, and landmines.”

    Loretta Nall on Hating Wal-Mart

    In Libertarian on June 12, 2008 at 12:01 am

    posted by Loretta Nall at
    http://nallforgovernor.blogspot.com/2008/06/i-hate-wal-mart.html

    I HATE Wal-Mart

    I really do.

    This has been a tough week financially for my family so I had to ask my mom to loan me a few bucks til payday so we’d have gas money.

    She went to Wal-Mart in Talladega and bought a Wal-Mart Money Gram from the Wal-Mart Money Center. She filled in all of the necessary info and popped it in the mail to me. It arrived today.

    So, I have a cheap dinner all planned in my head for the family tonight and gas money left over. I pick my husband up from work and break the devastating news that he will have to endure a Wal-Mart stop before he can make it home.

    We go into the Wal-Mart in Alexander City to get the money order cashed at the Wal-Mart Money Center. I waited in line for oh say 25 minutes before I finally get to the desk. When I get up there and present my money order I am told that Wal-Mart Money Center cannot cash a Wal-Mart Money Gram because that Wal-Mart Money Gram is made out to me and not to Wal-Mart.

    I said, “Huh? Wal-Mart sold this money order to my mother who then sent it to me. What do you mean you won’t cash your own Money order?”

    Stupid Wal-Mart Bovine: “Well its made out to you…not us.”

    Seriously Irate Loretta Nall: “Yeah but your company issued the money order. Why on earth would someone buy a money order from Wal-Mart and then turn around and make the money order out to Wal-Mart?

    Stupid Wal-Mart Bovine: “Well she should have left the payee part blank. It’s like a third party check now.”

    Seriously Irate Loretta Nall: “Yeah…like you are gonna buy a money order and fill in everything but who it is payable to and pop it in the mail. You’d do that right? It is nothing like a third party check at all because YOU KNOW the money is there because I wouldn’t have this money order that WAL-Mart Money center issued if she had not paid for it. This can’t be right. Call me a manager.”

    Stupid Wal-Mart Bovine calls a Customer Service Manager, which is nothing more than a glorified cashier, and not a manager at all. It just so happened to be one that I never cared for when I worked in that hell hole. She starts spouting off the same nonsense about it has to be made out to Wal-Mart.

    Stroke Level Loretta Nall: “So, what you are saying is that Wal-Mart only cashes money orders that they issue if they are made out to Wal-Mart? Why would anyone buy a Wal-Mart money order and then make the damn thing out to Wal-Mart? Does Wal-Mart explain all of this when they sell these money orders? Do they tell customers that they should send blank money orders in the mail? No one in their right mind would send a blank money order in the mail. The Post Office cashes the money orders they issue. I don’t understand why you won’t honor your own money order.”

    CSM Bovine: “Yadda yadda ydadda the rules …blah blah blah.”

    She started getting that smartass tone to her voice and I had to give her a refresher course in good customer service, as in “Don’t get smart with me you bitch I pay your salary.” I didn’t say bitch but it was strongly implied. I also reminded her that she is NOT a MANAGER, which is what I requested, and I still wanted to see a manager…not a cashier.

    When the manager whose name was ‘Nannie’ showed up I could take no more. I just turned around and left before my fractured nerves caused me to lose it and pummel every-fuckin-body in the store.

    So, tonight we are eating Ramen donated by a friend who we gave a ride home and tomorrow we will be riding on fumes.

    Goddamn I HATE WAL-MART and after today I don’t believe I will ever shop there again if I can avoid it.

    Steve Kubby: “Free at last, free at last, great ganja heaven, I’m free at last!”

    In Libertarian on June 11, 2008 at 4:16 pm

    The following is posted with the permission of its author, Steve Kubby. Steve is, of course, a longtime medical marijuana activist who is alive today, according to his doctors, due to the medicinal qualities of marijuana.

    I’m pleased to report that all charges against me have been dismissed and my record has been expunged.

    I am a free man with a clean record.

    Yes, you read that right, thanks to the incredible support of my fellow libertarians, I not only survived, I PREVAILED!

    Because of those who cared enough to help me and my family, I survived an indictment for 19 criminal counts amounting to a minimum of 40 years to life in prison. That indictment was backed by a $10 million grant by the US government to put me, and the medical marijuana revolution, behind bars.

    For the crime of passing and then attempting to utilize a law that police, prosecutors and judges all hate, I faced the wrath of the DEA, California Attorney General, IRS, State of Nevada, CPS, Immigration Canada, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and the Placer County DA.

    Upon my voluntary return to the US, under a 30 day departure order, not deportation as widely reported, I was pulled off a plane and roughed up by heavily armed officers from Homeland Security, US Immigration, and US Customs.

    Two days later I was in solitary confinement in cell number 420 (cops humor is suppose, but that really was my cell number), pissing blood, suffering horrible pain from my damaged kidneys, and cut off from the world. But you didn’t forget me and you came to the jail where you shook the jail walls with billowing clouds of MARIJUANA SMOKE!

    Even my former wife, Rebecca Maidman, pitched in and raised several thousand dollars to purchase the Marinol that kept me alive through my ordeal.

    Oh, how I wish you could have seen how they came to me and told me their phones were all tied up! The medical complex can’t do a thing because of the constant ringing of phones! The entire jail complex is on HIGH ALERT because we have no phone communications!!! WORST of all there was MARIJUANA SMOKE in the PRISON VENTILATION SYSTEM!!!

    Yes, I wish you could have seen their faces when they came and told me that the San Francisco Board of Supervisors had passed a resolution calling for me to be released immediately. Truly, they looked like deer caught in the headlights. (Actually, these were all big deputies, so it was more like hippos caught in the headlights.)

    Most of all, I wish you could have seen Placer County Sheriff Ed Bonner, coming to visit me in jail and greeting me with a big smile and a warm handshake. Bonner told me straight up that he thought medical marijuana was a fraud, but now he knows it is real and that law enforcement is going to have to obey the new law.

    It’s sad that anyone should have to go through something like this, especially when someone has followed the rules and changed the law. However, as Dennis Peron, the true author and driving spirit behind Prop. 215, recently told me, “It is our suffering that changes the world.”

    To which I can only add, “It is libertarians like you, supporting those of us on the front lines, who make real change possible!”

    ElfNinosMom for Vice President?

    In Libertarian on June 10, 2008 at 7:05 pm

    Robert Milnes, recently a candidate for the presidential nomination of the The Libertarian Party, has now been nominated and seconded for the presidential nomination of the Boston Tea Party. For anyone who has not been keeping up with the comments, Milnes proposes a progressive alliance consisting of himself as the presidential candidate, and a woman to run for VP. It seems that the woman he has set his heart on for now is our very own ENM, as Independent Political Report relays in the following
    post
    :

    Also I have asked ENM ElfNinos Mom to be a vice-presidential place holder at least for this ticket. I await her reply. Pursuant to that I hereby place ENM in nomination for vice-president for BTP.

    ENM declined, but LFV bloggers Tom Knapp and Chris Bennett have accepted nominations to run for the VP spot, along with Todd Andrew Barnett.

    Besides Milnes, Charles Jay is also seeking the nomination, to be held online June 15.

    Barr on HuffPo: “I was wrong about the War on Drugs – it’s a failure”

    In Libertarian, Libertarian Politics on June 10, 2008 at 5:44 pm

    Hat tip Steve Kubby.

    From The Huffington Post:

    I’ll admit it, just five years ago I was “Public Enemy Number 1″ in the eyes of the Libertarian Party. In my 2002 congressional race for Georgia’s Seventh District, the Libertarian Party ran scathing attack ads against my stand on Medical Marijuana.

    Today, I am their presidential nominee and will represent libertarians at the top of the ticket on November 4th.

    Huh?

    That’s right, Bob Barr, formerly the War on Drugs loving, Wiccan mocking, Clinton impeaching Republican is the presidential nominee for the Libertarian Party.

    Now, you may be asking how this happened and my answer is simple: “The libertarians won.”

    For more than three decades, the Libertarian Party and small “l” libertarians have done their part to prove to America that liberty is the answer to most of the problems that we face today. Over the past several years, I was one of the many people influenced by this small party.

    Whether through the free market or by simply allowing families to make their own decisions regarding the education of their children, libertarians have taught us that liberty does truly work.

    In stark contrast, when government attempts to solve our societal problems, it tends to create even more of them, often increasing the size and depth of the original problem. A perfect example of this is the federal War on Drugs.

    For years, I served as a federal prosecutor and member of the House of Representatives defending the federal pursuit of the drug prohibition.

    Today, I can reflect on my efforts and see no progress in stopping the widespread use of drugs. I’ll even argue that America’s drug problem is larger today than it was when Richard Nixon first coined the phrase, “War on Drugs,” in 1972. Read the rest of this entry »

    Kucinich presents Articles of Impeachment yesterday in Congress

    In Libertarian on June 10, 2008 at 12:00 pm

    LP Founder David Nolan on Steve Kubby Show tonight!

    In Libertarian on June 10, 2008 at 12:45 am

    Call in and speak to David Nolan, the founder of the Libertarian Party.
    Tonight at 6PM PST on BlogTalk Radio (646) 378-1107
    http://www.blogtalkradio.com/SteveKubbyShow

    Another high profile case involving a teen who cried rape, with different results

    In Libertarian on June 9, 2008 at 10:17 pm

    Another Florida case has arisen, in which there is a controversy regarding whether a man should be charged criminally for having sex with an underage girl.

    The previous post about Alisa Dean, the 13-year-old Florida teen whose sexual shenanigans caused two men to go to prison, is here.

    This second case involves a 15-year-old Florida teen named Crystal Shinkle.  Crystal posted a video on YouTube, asking that someone “help” her after a prosecutor declined to bring charges.  In this case, it appears that man not only had sex with her, he also allegedly provided her with drugs and allegedly made threats against her and her family.  Here is the video:

    You can read the investigation documents on The Smoking Gun.  It appears the prosecutor believed that Crystal gave informed consent.

    Did the prosecutor make the right decision?

    The Importance of Strategy

    In Libertarian on June 9, 2008 at 6:28 pm

    posted at
    http://aynrkey.blogspot.com/2008/06/importance-of-strategy.html
    by Ayn R Key

    At the 2008 Libertarian Party convention, the Reform Caucus beat the Libertarian Caucus. Mainstream libertarians are not represented on the 2008 Libertarian Party presidential ticket. It would have been a good move on the part of the Reform Caucus to sponsor a unity ticket with a prominent member of the Libertarian Caucus in the Vice Presidential Candidate slot. Failing to think strategically the Reform Caucus wanted their victory over the Libertarian Caucus to be thorough. Now the result is a weakened candidate. There is much discontent within Libertarian Party ranks over this ticket.

    Bob Barr is campaigning for votes outside the Libertarian Party. What he is neglecting is that he should be campaigning for votes inside the Libertarian Party as well. The Reform Caucus has, by choosing victory over strategy, alienated a large portion of the Libertarian Party. The reaction from the candidate himself has been “I’m the candidate so you will vote for me.” The reaction from the Reform Caucus has been to accuse everyone who hasn’t warmly and happily embraced the ticket of being sore losers, wanting to destroy the party, et cetera. The truth is that by placing victory at the convention over strategy, the Reform Caucus is more guilty of trying to fracture the party than the disenfranchised Libertarian Caucus is.

    Barr does need to spend time advertising to the base. He is neglecting that duty, relying on “you have to vote for me” to get the votes from the base. Libertarians are notorious for rejecting calls for “you have to vote for me” as a substantial portion of libertarians are converts from major parties and those converts realized that they don’t have to vote for the candidate of the party. It doesn’t matter that the hated other party will win if the candidate for the party is just as bad. That’s not to say that Barr is as bad as Obama or McCain – he most certainly is not as bad as them. The question resolves to is he good enough to get the vote of those who will actually analyze a candidate instead of showing blind party loyalty.

    Do you agree with this analysis of the facts?

    ISIL’s Vince Miller needs your help

    In Libertarian on June 9, 2008 at 3:19 pm

    via http://freestudents.blogspot.com

    Here is your chance to do something good.

    Vince Miller, the founder and president of the International Society for Individual Liberty has been hospitalized with pneumonia. He was very weak when taken in and his oxygen levels were so low, due to his lungs being congested with fluid, that he was at high risk of heart failure.

    Vince has been a tireless worker in the trenches to further social and economic freedom. He has done so with little desire for recognition or reward.

    Vince, who will be 70 in a few months, was not able to get insurance due to his age. So the hospital bills will come out of his meager pocket.

    Hospital care has been excellent and the hospital has not hassled him regarding payments in any way. But some of his friends would like to take up a collection to help with these bills. Because his condition was so serious he is still in the hospital and has been since last Thursday. We know the quality of care that he has received doesn’t come cheap. So far we don’t have a figure from the hospital but we anticipate it will be substantial.

    I’m asking my readers to consider helping out with this hospital bill. You can do so two different ways. One is that you can call Jim Elwood at 1 800 326 0996 and tell him you’d like to make a donation to Vince’s expenses. ISIL can process a credit card donation directly on your behalf. As a charity donations through ISIL do qualify for tax credits. Or you can go to the ISIL website and make an on-line donation. Just be sure to go down to the button that says “general donation” otherwise the funds are earmarked for other purposes and can’t be used.

    A large number of my readers are, like myself, advocates of private charity. Here is a good opportunity to put your money where your mouth is. Those who also advocate state charity can just pretend they got a tax increase and donate as well. The advantage for them is that this donation, unlike their tax proceeds, won’t get siphoned off for waging war, funding the war on drugs, paying to strip people of their civil liberties, etc. The donation is 100% guaranteed to pay for the actual medical care required by someone in need.

    We know the cost will be in the thousands. We just don’t know how many thousands. Even small donations add up quickly and I doubt any reader here actually couldn’t make at least a $25 donation. Clearly substantial donations will be needed to pay for this medical care but any donation is greatly appreciated. Thanks, please do what you know is right.

    Labels:

    A few Denver pics

    In Libertarian on June 8, 2008 at 8:20 pm

    pics by – GE, I think?

    Send me more if you got ‘em….

    Andy with Glenn “Kane” Jacobs

    The infamous badge

    Mary Ruwart and me

    Ahoy, prepare to be boarded!

    Barr accepts Imperato’s endorsement

    Global Cooling by Steve Kubby

    In Libertarian on June 8, 2008 at 4:07 pm

    The following is posted with the permission of its author, Steve Kubby. Steve is, of course, a longtime libertarian activist, the mind and spirit behind Prop 215 (which legalized marijuana for medicinal use in California), and recent LP presidential hopeful.

    “Paleoclimatic records show that large, widespread, abrupt climate changes have affected much or all of the earth repeatedly over the last ice-age cycle as well as earlier – and these changes sometimes have occurred in periods as short as a few years.”
    — National Academy of Sciences, 2002

    The Green Party appears to be married to the idea of Global Warming. However, I believe the evidence points to just the opposite – Global Cooling.

    The key to understanding what is happening with our climate is the melting of the polar ice cap, which now allows travel for the first time in recorded history, between Europe and Asia. Truly, this is the biggest global event of the past 10,000 years.

    That’s because an open ocean in the Baffin Bay area will allow the violent arctic hurricanes that occur in that region to have more energy available to spin up to greater velocities. The concern is that a full-blown hurricane in the arctic could disrupt the entire planetary weather system. The distribution of glaciers during Ice Ages strongly suggest a pattern of extreme orthographic precipitation, brought on by some mysterious change. Could arctic hurricanes be the trigger that launches the next Ice Age?

    In my view, the appearance of warm water in the polar regions, accelerated by the change in albedo from snow to water, and culminating in full-sized arctic hurricanes, could severely disrupt the normal jet stream patterns, allowing for a massive temperature correction otherwise known as an Ice Age.

    Until recently, scientists considered any theory of catastropic change to be heresy. However, science has undergone an astonishing paradigm shift and now accepts the compelling evidence that Earth has already begun a catastrophic change:

    “An example of an extremely quick climate change came during a period of time known as the Younger Dryas, which happened right after the last ice age ended, about 12,000 years ago. The Younger Dryas itself lasted about 1,000 years. What we didn’t know until recently was just how quickly the Younger Dryas started and stopped. In a period of less than 50 years, the climate from the eastern US and Canada to much of Europe went from climate conditions much like today’s, to frigid readings more like the Ice Age, at least a ten degree Farenheit change. That’s how it stayed for a thousand years – and then the climate flipped back to normal in as little as 20 years.”

    Greenpeace has released a classified study, prepared for the Pentagon, that warns of increasingly unstable and violent weather. This Pentagon Weather Report paints a grim picture of the Gulf Stream failing to deliver warm water to the North Atlantice, triggering widespread weather disasters:

    “A world thrown into turmoil by drought, floods, typhoons. Whole countries rendered uninhabitable. The capital of the Netherlands submerged. The borders of the US and Australia patrolled by armies firing into waves of starving boat people desperate to find a new home. Fishing boats armed with cannon to drive off competitors. Demands for access to water and farmland backed up with nuclear weapons. ”

    Weather scientists are realizing that a major shift in the climate has taken place, marked by a 250 per cent increase in violent hurricanes in the North Atlantic and the first ever hurricane was recorded in the South Atlantic.

    The idea that the Earth has been molded by sudden, catastrophic climate change is something that scientists have resisted for many decades, according to a scientific analysis of the past few decades of climate research by Spencer Weart, Director of the Center for History of Physics at the American Institute of Physics. In an article published by Physics Today, Weart explains how weather scientists have historically refused to comprehend the evidence before them supporting rapid climate change. Each new discovery keeps shortening the time in which massive global climate changes are recognized and understood to have occurred. Shocking new evidence from Greenland now confirms that rapid global climate change has occurred on Earth in as little as five years, or less. In fact, Cal Tech scientist, Jason Saleeby reports major climate shifts have been documented to have occurred in as little as two years.

    BTW, even if Global Warming were a proven fact, I would still oppose paying one penny to the government to fix it. Unfortunately, we can expect governments across the planet to engage in a tsunami of environmental tax scams, led by misguided and misinformed Greens, that will further burden all of us and accomplish nothing.

    The real solution to the global climate change that we now find ourselves in, is to get the government out of the way, and let the free market develop solutions that must actually work, in a competitive economy, in order to succeed.

    See details at: http://kubby.com/GlobalStorming/polarcyclones.html

    George Phillies concession speech with notations

    In Libertarian on June 8, 2008 at 1:01 am

    There has been some disagreement regarding what Dr. George Phillies did and did not say during his concession speech. To put an end to those disagreements, I am providing two versions.  The first is a transcript of his words, while the second is a transcript with Dr. Phillies’ notations regarding intent.

    First, here is the verbiage of George Phillies’ concession speech:

    Fellow libertarians!

    Thank you very much for the last two years. It’s been a wonderful time.

    I’ve already given you my advice.

    I’m disappointed to note that not one person has asked me to endorse someone they wanted to lose.

    Well, that’s true.

    I will not speak ill of a fellow Libertarian.

    I will thank and acknowledge Senator Mike Gravel who, when he was a Democrat, gave our *party* the courtesy of debating a Libertarian. I will thank Wayne Allyn Root for entering and giving you time to take his measure and see if he was good or bad.

    I will express — I think it’s the gratitude of many of us — very good things to Mary Ruwart and to Bob Barr for entering the race to do what they thought was best for the party.

    Now, I have two things to say, one as state chair, and one to the audience as much as to anyone else.

    And the thing I must say as state chair, because I would be remiss not to say it, is that a voting majority of my state committee is neopagan. I have to make that point. Those of you who know why, know why I have to do it.

    Now I want to make the important point:

    The enemy is not here. The enemy is out there.

    The enemy is not our fellow Libertarians.

    The enemy is the far left Democratic Party of Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and — let’s get it right for once — Lyndon LaRouche.

    The enemy is not our fellow Libertarians.

    The enemy is the conservative death policy of George Bush, George Wallace, John Sununu, and Lester Maddox, the conservative bigotry philosophy that is against our country.

    We are the Libertarians. We are the party of the future.

    Here is the same speech, with Dr. Phillies’ notations in italics and parenthesis.

    Fellow libertarians!

    Thank you very much for the last two years. It’s been a wonderful time.

    I’ve already given you my advice. (Which you did not take.)

    I’m disappointed to note that not one person has asked me to endorse someone they wanted to lose. (After all, we just established that Libertarians listen to my advice and do something else. No one tried to profit from this pattern.)

    Well, that’s true.

    I will not speak ill of a fellow Libertarian. (That is a statement about the next few paragraphs of the speech, no more, no less. I say something nice about each of my four surviving opponents. Contrast is meant with the prior concession speech of Christine Smith, who was pointedly critical of one of her opponents. Note also that I did say something nice about all four of my opponents, contrary to claims in a certain historically anti-Libertarian news source that I ignored two of them.)

    I will thank and acknowledge Senator Mike Gravel who, when he was a Democrat, gave our *party* the courtesy of debating a Libertarian. I will thank Wayne Allyn Root for entering and giving you time to take his measure and see if he was good or bad.

    I will express — I think it’s the gratitude of many of us — very good things to Mary Ruwart and to Bob Barr for entering the race to do what they thought was best for the party.

    (Now I have in fact said something about equally nice about each opponent.)

    Now, I have two things to say, one as state chair, and one to the audience as much as to anyone else.  (’The audience’ is the television audience.)

    And the thing I must say as state chair, because I would be remiss not to say it, is that a voting majority of my state committee is neopagan. I have to make that point. Those of you who know why, know why I have to do it.

    (Note that I said State Committee, not Delegation. And at this point I do remind delegates that if they nominate a candidate who ten years ago tried to organize an Army pogrom against the Wiccans, they will face consequences.)

    Now I want to make the important point:

    The enemy is not here. The enemy is out there.

    The enemy is not our fellow libertarians.

    (I should have said ‘my fellow libertarians’, because I am speaking to the video audience, but I did not.)

    The enemy is the far left Democratic Party of Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and — let’s get it right for once — Lyndon LaRouche.

    The enemy is not our fellow libertarians.

    (And now as a closer the core message of my speech, because the last words are the most remembered)

    The enemy is the conservative death policy of George Bush, George Wallace, John Sununu, and Lester Maddox, the conservative bigotry philosophy that is against our country.

    We are the Libertarians. We are the party of the future.

    Reminder: LFV on “Vortex of Freedom” today

    In Libertarian on June 7, 2008 at 9:43 pm

    At 6pm EDT, LFV will be on the Vortex of Freedom show. ElfNinosMom, Paulie Cannoli, and G.E. Smith will be appearing to discuss libertarian issues.

    The link to listen live is here.

    UPDATE:  Many thanks to Vortex of Freedom for having us on the show!  For those of you who couldn’t listen live, it was quite interesting.  We took calls from listeners who asked some excellent questions, and discussed the Barr and Root nominations, Ron Paul, ballot access, and the convention, among other things.  I have invited Michael from VoF onto our show next Friday at 7:30, to return the favor; hopefully he will be available!

    LFV’s own Jake Porter gets his foot in the door of the news business

    In Libertarian on June 7, 2008 at 2:27 pm

    Press release from Jake Porter Media:

    Saint Joseph Telegraph | June 5, 2008

    Jake Porter, a May 2008 graduate of AIB College of Business in Des Moines, IA. took over this week as the new Business Manager for the Saint Joseph Telegraph.

    Porter, 20, formerly of Princeton, MO. will also be serving the paper as Web Master.

    Porter’s recent position was Chief of Staff for George Phillies, an unsuccessful candidate for the Libertarian presidential nomination.

    “I’m looking forward to getting acquainted with the city and meeting the people of St. Joseph,” Porter said.

    “I can see a need for a strong weekly paper in St. Joseph and intend to do my part to see the Telegraph expand and better serve the people.”

    Congratulations, Jake!

    My Anti-War on Drugs letter in Houston Chronicle

    In Drug War, Media on June 7, 2008 at 1:49 pm

    Here, in response to this.

    Were Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff truly concerned about the crime wave in Mexico, he would encourage Congress to end the repugnant, corrupt and failed war on drugs.

    The only thing criminalizing a product accomplishes is making crime more profitable.

    NIGEL WATT
    Houston

    Remember, people: write letters to the paper. It takes you five minutes to have your thoughts sent out to hundreds of thousands of people.

    LPMass to sue for candidate substitution?

    In Libertarian on June 7, 2008 at 1:50 am

    The following is reproduced with permission of its author, Dr. George Phillies. “Bennett” refers to LFV’s own Chris Bennett. The donation offer is open to anyone who contributes to LPMass at the http://www.LPMass.Org web site, either to the Federal or state account.

    I regret to report that the Secretary of the Commonwealth’s office has just reversed its stand on candidate substitution for President and Vice President in Massachusetts. Last fall, they said it was allowed; they now say it is mostly forbidden.

    I have contacted the ACLU, and spoken to their lead attorney. I have informed the National Party and the Barr campaign leadership. The National Party, which has now agreed to pay the bulk of the petitioning effort, believes that ‘continue with current drive and try to change the ruling’ is the way to go, so that is what we are doing. If the process of changing the ruling goes through, Phillies/Bennett is replaced with Barr/Root. If not, our ticket in Massachusetts this year will be Phillies/Bennett. In either case, Bob Underwood will be on the ballot.

    If you use the distributed forms to collect signatures, remember that each raw signature is worth $1.70 to the National Party. Also, any money that you donate at LPMASS.ORG for ballot access will be matched, up to another $5000 in matching funds. I’ve already put in $1300 of my own money on spec–I gave it as matching funds, but put it in when needed even though it has not yet been matched.

    And, remember, every donor gets a choice of either of my novels, in .rtf format, as a free gift to you to show my gratitude for your generosity.

    A brief history of the Boston Tea Party, part one

    In Politics on June 6, 2008 at 8:19 pm

    Since the Boston Tea Party seems to be coming back to life (and into the internal conflicts that tend to characterize third parties), and apropos of recent discussions with GE, now seems like a nice time to briefly reprise the party’s existence from the perspective of its erstwhile founder. I’m going to do so as a self-administered Q&A.

    Q: What’s with the name?

    I don’t remember when I first came up with the name “Boston Tea Party,” but it was one of those “wow, that sounds like a really good name for … well, something” moments, and I registered the domain name not long after (a whois search shows that date as May 3rd, 2006).

    At that point, I wasn’t thinking of using it to describe a “real” political party. My first thought was that it would be interesting to set up a web-based advocacy site and maybe even make a few bucks — people who were pissed off at their congresscritter would be able to drop in and pay a small fee to have a teabag, with their complaint printed on the tag, mailed to said politician.

    Q: OK, well, things changed. What things were they, and how did they change?

    It’s no secret that what prompted me to launch the BTP as an organization rather than as a project was the Libertarian Party’s 2006 national convention in Portland, Oregon. However, the details are probably a little more … detailed … than many might surmise.

    Read the rest of this entry »

    George Phillies on Global Warming

    In George Phillies, Global Warming, Libertarian on June 6, 2008 at 2:36 pm

    The following is posted with the authorization of its author, Dr. George Phillies.

    That cesspit of lunacy termed American conservatism continues to kick up claims that there is no global warming. Unfortunately, right wing nonsense is now infiltrating press releases allegedly from our national committee.

    Conservative lie #1): Global Warming stopped in 1998. So here is the graph courtesy http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/info/warming/

    There is an averaged trend line (black) and there are year to year fluctuations (year numbers are the red and blue lines). 1998 is the red line sticking way way up, the line that does not match neighboring lines at all.

    The trend is overwhelmingly visible, with flatness until around 1920, and then trending up with shorter and long term bounces around the trend.

    Of course, if you are an American conservative, you take 1998 as ‘typical’ and say ‘we’re getting colder again’ which is clearly not the case.

    Oh, why do we get these bounces from the trend? The air holds heat. The ocean holds about a thousand times more heat. The deep ocean is shielded from the air. Change how the shallow ocean is stirred, and you will change how heat exchanges between ocean and air. This cools air all around the world, or heats air all around the world. The La Nina and El Nino Pacific events are examples of this mixing effect. These events last around a year, are unpredictable in advance, and cause some of the bumps you see in the above graph.

    Conservative Lie #2) If you can’t predict weather, you can’t predict climate. To predict my climate, you need to predict that Worcester gets around 4″ of rain a month, more in some months, less in others. To predict weather, you needed to predict that, for this June, 3″ fell on one day, and *which day* the 3″ fall would occur. Obviously getting the day right is harder than getting the month right.

    Conservative Lie #3) We can’t measure climate change. I call the reader’s attention to the marvel of modern 18th century science, the thermometer, a device that measures temperature quantitatively. Around the world are vast numbers of people recording and reporting the weather. Earth satellites measure much of the rest of the globe. Careful averages–some areas have fewer measurements than others–eliminate fluctuations, smooth out day to day changes, and give accurate measurements of the temperatures of the whole earth, with precision visible in the above graph.

    I could go on, but the short message is that climate change denial is wrong and dangerous, both to our country and our party. Denial is dangerous to our country, because it leads us to take bad decisions as private citizens and entrepreneurs. Denial is dangerous to our party, for the same reason that homophobia is bad for our party: The younger generation will reject us, even as the younger generation is rejecting that sinkhole of bigotry that is American conservatism.

    Young teen’s sexual shenanigans puts two men in prison

    In Libertarian on June 6, 2008 at 2:18 pm

    A 13-year-old girl’s sexual shenanigans have put a second man behind bars. Morris Williams, 22, told the judge he thought the girl was 18-years-old, but he found out Tuesday that ignorance is not a defense.

    Morris Williams’ mother wailed as he went off to jail. The judge asked for media not to show 13-year-old Alisha Dean’s face in court, but her pictures are all over her MySpace page and they portray a sexy, 19-year-old divorced woman.

    “She told me she had just turned 18,” Williams said.

    Williams said Dean picked him up on the street and after a few conversations they had sex. When he heard she was not 18, he went to her father.

    “He was like ‘well, she’s 13,’” Williams said of a conversation with Dean’s father.

    Williams said he never did it again, but Dean has done it before with 24-year-old Darwin Mills. Mills was sentenced to five years in prison. Dean’s father wanted Williams to join Mills there.

    “One of the reasons for the law is the fact that minors have poor judgment,” said Jerry Dean, the girl’s father.

    Williams’ father believes the jail sentence sends the wrong message to Alisha.

    “I guess we just sit back and count how many after this,” Henry Smith asked after his step-son was sentenced to jail.

    Dean’s family admits Alisha still stays out late and has yet to delete her misleading MySpace page. Williams will serve six years probation with the first year in jail. The other five years he will have to wear an ankle monitor. His attorney says he will come back to court to ask again for a shorter sentence.

    Source: WFTV

    When Alisha tricked the first man into believing she was old enough to consent to sex, she was only 12 years old. Now, a year later at 13, another man is in prison for believing Alisha’s lies.

    What do you think should happen in cases like this?

    Electing Libertarians

    In Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Media, Personal Responsibility, Politics on June 6, 2008 at 6:20 am

    A few years ago I came up with a consulting firm dedicated to help Libertarian candidates win elections. This year I really wanted to be on a presidential candidate’s team but due to who we nominated, I am in the process of reviving Liberty Consulting. However, I will continue to help Illinois Libertarians with our ballot access drive to put the Barr/Root presidential ticket and our US Senate candidate Larry Stafford on the ballot. The extent of my participation with the Barr/Root campaign will be limited to just voting for them.

    First we need compile a list of Libertarians who are running for elected offices. I have already committed to helping Tom Knapp’s congressional campaign in any aspect that I can. I may volunteer for one other campaign during this election cycle. My consulting firm will not be a one-man show. I need some dedicated, practical, well-spoken, experienced Libertarians to help me with this venture. I need a fund raiser, a public relations representative, an opposition researcher, and a webmaster. But first I need a candidate willing to let us help with their campaign. I would like to form a team by July 15th. Anyone who is interested drop me an e-mail at chrisbennett2008@yahoo.com

    Famed prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi wants Bush tried for murder

    In Libertarian on June 5, 2008 at 3:55 pm

    "The Prosecution of George W. Bush"Vincent Bugliosi has prosecuted 106 felony jury trials, most famously the trial of the Manson Family, and he only lost one.  Now, the legendary prosecutor and author of “Helter Skelter” (the best-selling true crime book in history)  has written a scathing new book in which he explains why Bush should be prosecuted for murder in the deaths of thousands of American soldiers, and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi citizens.

    What follows is an excerpt from the book, which is available for purchase on Amazon:

    How has George Bush reacted to the hell he created in Iraq, to the thousands of lives that have been lost in the war, and to the enormous and endless suffering that the survivors of the victims — their loved ones — have had to endure?

    I’ve always felt that impressions are very important in life, and other than “first impressions,” they are usually right. Why? Because impressions, we know, are formed over a period of time. They are the accumulation of many words and incidents, many or most of which one has forgotten, but which are nonetheless assimilated into the observer’s subconscious and thus make their mark. In other words, you forgot the incident, but it added to the impression. “How do you feel about David? Do you feel he’s an honest person?” “Yeah, I do.” “Why do you say that about him? Can you give me any examples that would cause you to say he’s honest?” “No, not really, at least not off the top of my head. But I’ve known David for over ten years, and my sense is that he’s an honest person.”

    I have a very distinct impression that with the exception of a vagrant tear that may have fallen if he was swept up, in the moment, at an emotional public ceremony for American soldiers who have died in the war, George Bush hasn’t suffered at all over the monumental suffering, death, and horror he has caused by plunging this nation into the darkness of the Iraq war, probably never losing a wink of sleep over it. Sure, we often hear from Bush administration sources, or his family, or from Bush himself, about how much he suffers over the loss of American lives in Iraq. But that dog won’t run. How do we just about know this is nonsense? Not only because the words he has uttered could never have escaped from his lips if he were suffering, but because no matter how many American soldiers have died on a given day in Iraq (averaging well over two every day), he is always seen with a big smile on his face that same day or the next, and is in good spirits. How would that be possible if he was suffering? For example, the November 3, 2003, morning New York Times front-page headline story was that the previous day in Fallouja, Iraq, insurgents “shot down an American helicopter just outside the city in a bold assault that killed 16 soldiers and wounded 20 others. It was the deadliest attack on American troops since the United States invaded Iraq in March.” Yet later in that same day when Bush arrived for a fund-raiser in Birmingham, Alabama, he was smiling broadly, and Mike Allen of the Washington Post wrote that “the President appeared to be in a fabulous mood.” This is merely one of hundreds of such observations made about Bush while the brutal war continued in Iraq.

    And even when Bush is off camera, we have consistently heard from those who have observed him up close how much he seems to be enjoying himself. When Bush gave up his miles of running several times a week because of knee problems, he took up biking. “He’s turned into a bike maniac,” said Mark McKinnon in March of 2005, right in the middle of the war. McKinnon, a biking friend of Bush’s who was Bush’s chief media strategist in his 2004 reelection campaign, also told the New York Times’s Elisabeth Bumiller about Bush: “He’s as calm and relaxed and confident and happy as I’ve ever seen him.” Happy? Under the horrible circumstances of the war, where Bush’s own soldiers are dying violent deaths, how is that even possible?

    In a time of war and suffering, Bush’s smiles, joking, and good spirits stand in stark contrast to the demeanor of everyone of his predecessors and couldn’t possibly be more inappropriate. Michael Moore, in his motion picture documentary Fahrenheit 9/11, captured this fact and the superficiality of Bush well with a snippet from a TV interview Bush gave on the golf course following a recent terrorist attack. Bush said, “I call upon all nations to do everything they can to stop these terrorist killers. Thank you.” Then, without missing a single beat, he said in reference to a golf shot he was about to hit: “Now watch this drive.”

    Before I get into specific instances of Bush laughing and having fun throughout the entire period of the inferno he created in Iraq, I want to discuss a number of more indirect but revealing incidents that reflect he could not care less about the human suffering and carnage going on in Iraq, or anywhere.

    1. The first inkling I got that Bush didn’t care about the suffering or anyone, not just those dying in Iraq, was from an article in the September 22, 2001, New York Times just eleven days after 9/11. Though 3,000 Americans had been murdered and the nation was in agony and shock, the man who should have been leading the mourning was, behind the scenes, not affected in the tiniest way. The article, by Frank Bruni, said that “Mr. Bush’s nonchalant, jocular demeanor remains the same. In private, say several Republicans close to the administration, he still slaps backs and uses baseball terminology, at one point promising that the terrorists were not ‘going to steal home on me.’ He is not staying up all night, or even most of the night. He is taking time to play with his dogs and his cat. He is working out most days.” So right after several thousand Americans lost their lives in a horrible catastrophe, behind the scenes Bush is his same old backslapping self, and he’s not letting the tragedy interfere in the slightest way with the daily regimen of his life that he enjoys.

    In fact, he himself admitted to the magazine Runners World (August 23, 2002) that after the Afghanistan war began: “I have been running with a little more intensity . . . It helps me to clear my mind.” (In other words, Bush likes to clear his mind of the things he’s supposed to be thinking about.) Remarkably finding time in the most important job on earth to run six days a week, Bush added: “It’s interesting that my times have become faster . . . For me, the psychological benefit [in running] is enormous. You tend to forget everything that’s going on in your mind and just concentrate on the time and distance.” But even this obscene indulgence after 9/11 and during wartime by the man with more responsibility than anyone in the world wasn’t enough for Bush. He told the magazine: “I try to go for longer runs, but it’s tough around here at the White House on the outdoor track. It’s sad that I can’t run longer. It’s one of the saddest things about the presidency.” Imagine that. Among all the things that the president of the United States could be sad about during a time of war, not being able to run longer six days a week is up there near the top of the list.

    A New York Times article not long after 9/11 (November 5, 2001) reported that Bush had told his friends (obviously with pride) that “his runs on the Camp David trails through the Maryland woods have produced his fastest time in a decade, three miles in 21 minutes and 6 seconds.” USA Today (October 29, 2001) reported that Bush used to run 3 miles in 25 minutes and now he was “boasting to friends and staffers” about his new time, and was “now running 4 miles a day.”

    So with his approval rating soaring to 90 percent in the wake of 9/11 — and with his being the main person in America whose job required that he be totally engaged every waking hour in working diligently on this nation’s response to 9/11 — Bush, remarkably, was working diligently on improving his time for the mile. I ask you, what American president in history, Republican or Democrat, would have conducted himself this way?

    2. One thing about Bush. He’s so dense that he makes remarks an intelligent person who was as much of a scoundrel as he would never make. They’d keep their feelings, which they would know to be very shameful, to themselves. On December 21, 2001, just a few months after 9/11 — a tragedy that shocked the nation and the world in which 3,000 Americans were consumed by fires, some choosing to jump to their deaths out of windows eighty or more stories high — Bush, who could only have been thinking of himself, told the media: “All in all, it’s been a fabulous year for Laura and me.” He said this because that is exactly the way he felt. What difference does 9/11 make? I’m president. I love it, and Laura and I are having a ball.

    Indeed, on January 20, 2005, right in the midst of the hell on earth Bush created in Iraq — when the carnage there was near its worst and American soldiers and Iraqi citizens were dying violent deaths every day — Bush, referring to himself and his wife, told thousands of partying supporters at one of his nine inaugural balls: “We’re having the time of our life.” Can you even begin to imagine Roosevelt in the midst of the Second World War, Truman during the Korean War, or LBJ and Nixon during the Vietnam War, saying something like this?

    3. Does it not stand to reason that if Bush were suffering over the daily killings and tragedy in Iraq, he would be working every waking hour to lessen the mounting number of casualties as well as find a way to satisfactorily end the terrible conflict? I mean, as president, that’s what you’d expect of him, right? Isn’t that his job? Yet we know that although Bush is still in office, he has already spent far more time on vacation than any other president in American history. For instance, by April 11, 2004 (he was inaugurated January 20, 2001), he had visited his cherished ranch in Crawford a mind-boggling thirty-three times and spent almost eight months of his presidency there.

    Although the office of the presidency follows the president wherever he goes twenty-four hours a day, and at least some part of every day on vacation, no matter how small, was spent by Bush attending to his duties as president, we also know that Bush’s main purpose when he goes on vacation, obviously and by definition, is to vacation, not work. CBS News White House correspondent Mark Knoller, who travels with Bush and keeps track of such things, told me that as of January 1, 2008, in Bush’s less than seven years as president, he visited his ranch in Texas an unbelievable 69 times, spending, per Knoller, “all or part of 448 days on vacation there.” As amazing as this is, Bush also made, Knoller says, 132 visits to Camp David during this period, spending “all or part of 421 days there,” and 10 visits to his family’s vacation compound at Kennebunkport, Maine, spending “all or part of 39 days there.”

    So the bottom line is that of a total of approximately 2,535 days as president, most of them during a time of war, Bush spent all or a part or 908 days, an incredible 36 percent of his time, on vacation or at retreat places. Hard to believe, but true. Nine hundred and eight days is two and a half years of Bush’s presidency. Two and a half years of the less than seven years of his presidency in which his main goal was to kick back and have fun. You see, the White House digs, with a pool, theater, gymnasium, etc., weren’t enjoyable enough for Bush. He wanted a more enjoyable place to be during his life as president. *

    My position in life is infinitely less important than Bush’s, yet during the above same period of Bush’s presidency, I not only worked much longer hours every day than Bush, I worked seven days a week, never took one vacation, and only took three days off to go to the desert with my wife to celebrate our fiftieth wedding anniversary. If it had not been for the anniversary, I wouldn’t have even taken those three days off. I realize I take working to an extreme, living by the clock each day, always looking up to see how much time I have left, working from morning to morning (retiring usually around two in the morning and starting my day at ten in the morning). Still, it is striking to consider that in seven years, I took 3 days off and Bush, the president of the United States, took 908. Even Americans who lead a more normal life than I, even fat-cat corporate executives, haven’t taken anywhere near the time away from their work that Bush has. Indeed, I think we can safely say that even though Bush has the most important and demanding job in this entire land, he has irresponsibly taken far more time off from his job to have fun during the past seven years than any worker or company executive in America!!! Is Bush, or is he not, a disgrace of the very first order?

    George Phillies: “So where am I?”

    In Libertarian on June 5, 2008 at 11:43 am

    The following is written by, and published with the permission of, George Phillies:

    Since I am getting inquiries:

    My Liberty Congressional Political Action Committee has migrated to a new bank and a new Treasurer, Carol McMahon. You can be sure: When the Liberty Congressional PAC funds a Federal candidate, that candidate is a real libertarian, not a Democrat or a Republican. We will by and by have a web page for contributions, but at the moment paper mail reaches me at George Phillies, 48 Hancock Hill Drive, Worcester MA 01609.

    I have some hope for the future of the Libertarian political movement. Note the new front page at http://www.LibertyForAmerica.com.

    My new magazine Liberty For America may be out next week. For electronic subscriptions, I will be mailing PDFs for free. Just send me your email address.

    The Daily Liberty http://www.TheDailyLiberty.com is posting segments from my book Funding Liberty, which is more au courant than one might have hoped. You can buy the whole thing at http://www.3mpub.com/phillies.

    I am glad that some people liked my convention speech. Most of you realized that the speech was televised, was phrased for a general audience, and were happy to help create scenes of wildly cheering Libertarians. For an exclusively Libertarian Party audience I would have phrased things differently. I will eventually post the text, and the text with commentary. One part of that speech turned out to be in part in error.

    Finally, I am working on books…

    “…This chapter presents a phenomenological description of the viscoelastic properties of polymer solutions. An {\em ansatz} that predicts the shapes of the major viscoelastic functions is presented. The predictions of the {\em ansatz} are compared with experiments and found to describe them well. …”

    Six plank suggestions for the Boston Tea Party

    In Constitutional Rights, Libertarian Party-US on June 5, 2008 at 12:14 am

    The Boston Tea Party seems to have found its ticket — Charles Jay and Tom Knapp — and it is working on a platform. I recently joined the BTP and offered six suggestions on constitutional and monetary issues. Your feedback is appreciated.

    1. The Boston Tea Party acknowledges that the 14th amendment was never properly ratified, is illegitimate, and all ensuing legislation based upon the 14th amendment, including the Supreme Court’s “incorporation doctrine,” is null and void.
    2. The Boston Tea Party calls for the repeal of the 16th amendment, and a new amendment to the Constitution limiting the scope of Congress’s powers of taxation to proportioned taxes assessed to the states.
    3. The Boston Tea Party calls for the repeal of the 17th amendment, which gave us the direct election of senators. U.S. Senators should be elected by their state legislatures in order to best represent the interests of the individual states versus the federal government, as the framers intended.
    4. The Boston Tea Party calls for a Free Trade Amendment to the Constitution, revoking Congress’s powers to assess tariffs, duties, or other taxes on imports, and barring embargoes, sanctions, quotas, and other restrictions on free trade absent a formal declaration of war against the named country. This amendment would render all current trade agreements null and void and prohibit the negotiation of new ones, henceforth.
    5. The Boston Tea Party calls for the abolition of the Federal Reserve, and the liquidation of the Federal Reserve System and all federal-government assets, excluding those few necessary for legitimate constitutional functions, for the purpose of paying off the national debt and redeeming all outstanding Federal Reserve Notes, pro-rata.
    6. The Boston Tea Party calls for the full legalization of competing currencies and the abolition of unconstitutional legal-tender laws. Under the Constitution, only the states may declare legal tender, and they are limited to choices of gold and silver.

    Note: Membership in the Boston Tea Party in no way excludes someone from membership in the LP, nor does it preclude support of the LP presidential ticket. I do like having the BTP as a back-up option for a write-in vote that will be counted, though. And I think it will be fun to help fashion a truly libertarian platform, without the statist “reformers” raining on our parade.

    LFV to appear on Vortex of Freedom radio show

    In Libertarian on June 4, 2008 at 11:43 pm

    Vortex of FreedomThree Last Free Voice writers – ElfNinosMom, Paulie Cannoli and GE Smith – are honored to have been invited to appear as guests on the Vortex of Freedom Radio Show on blogtalk.  The show is scheduled for one hour, and will start at 6:00 pm EDT on Saturday, June 7th.  The topic will be libertarian issues in general.

    Be sure to set a reminder so you can tune in!

    Dr. George Phillies: “Arizona, Land of the Two Libertarian Parties”, Part Five (Appendix)

    In Libertarian on June 4, 2008 at 8:00 pm

    I am honored to have been given permission by Dr. George Phillies to post a full chapter from his excellent book, “Funding Liberty” , right here on Last Free Voice. I will be posting Chapter 17, “Arizona, Land of the Two Libertarian Parties”, in multiple entries. This is the fifth and final installment, which contains the appendix to this chapter. Part one is here. Part two is here. Part three is here. Part four is here.

    Dr. Phillies has a doctorate in Physics from MIT, and is a Professor of Physics and Game Design at the prestigious Worcester Polytechnic University. A longtime Libertarian activist, Dr. Phillies is currently the Chairman of the Massachusetts Libertarian Party, and was a popular candidate for the Libertarian Presidential nomination for 2008 where his concession speech – pointing out that the enemy is outside the Libertarian Party – has been hailed as one of the greatest moments (and most inspiring speeches) of the 2008 Libertarian Convention.

    A link to purchase this book, as well as to purchase other books by Dr. George Phillies, is at the bottom of this entry.

    _______________________________________

    Appendix

    The Non-Initiation Oath

    A significant part of the Arizona debate has referred back to the non-initiation of force Oath, which the National Party and some, but not all, state parties require of their members. The Oath, which dates back to the founding days of the Libertarian Party, is an agreement that Party members will not support the initiation of force to resolve social or political issues.

    The difficulty is that there is a lack of unanimity, to put it mildly, as to what this statement means. During my last National Chair campaign, I listened to many Libertarians as they explained their interpretation of the Oath to me.

    The author of the statement is the Party’s Founder, David Nolan. Nolan has repeatedly said publicly that the oath is an agreement that we are a political party, and we are out to attain change through the peaceful use of orthodox political processes. No more grandiose interpretation was intended. In understanding the oath, one was supposed to recall the context of the times in which they were written. In 1972, left-wing anti-war activists were planting bombs, several each day, in government offices and other places across the United States. The Capitol Building itself was repeatedly attacked. The intent of the oath was to make clear that the Libertarian Party was not associated with the radical left revolutionaries of that period.

    Within the Libertarian Party, one readily encounters a second interpretation of the Oath, namely that the Oath requires one to oppose any political action that could be termed ‘initiation of force’, with this phrase being very broadly interpreted. In particular, after an extensive exegesis, ‘opposition to initiation of force’ is taken to require one to oppose taxation and the products of taxation. Indeed, some Party members who support this interpretation claim that one can logically derive all moral conclusions from the non-initiation principle, a matter discussed in the Appendix to the Appendix.

    A significant complication is that phrases very much like those in the Oath are attributed to the writings of Ayn Rand, where precisely these interpretations are invoked. Rand—a mid-twentieth century author and philosopher —was an active opponent of the Libertarian Party who condemned involvement in the Libertarian Party by her followers. It is my understanding that Nolan maintains he was not thinking of her words when he wrote the Oath, and therefore that her phrasings do not inform the meaning of the Oath that he wrote.

    Within the Libertarian Party one also encounters many Libertarians who take an third interpretation of the Oath, an interpretation that precisely contradicts the second interpretation. In the third interpretation, it remains the specific duty of government to prevent the initiation of force, and therefore Libertarians mandatorily must support collection of taxes to maintain a justice system, a constabulary, and a military. If the second interpretation borders on support for anarchism, the third interpretation holds that anarchism is fundamentally incompatible with Libertarian beliefs. It is my impression that the three sides are similar in level of support within the LP, but not equally bellicose in expressing their faiths.

    Under unfavorable circumstances, discussions between Libertarians who believe these interpretations can consume all the time of a Libertarian group, leaving absolutely no time for political activity. The National Party faced up to this question once. At an early National Convention delegates subscribed to the ‘Dallas Accords’, which in essence said that: We are so far from needing to settle the question that we shouldn’t argue about it.  Partisans of the two sides agree not to use their statements to shut the other side out of the Party.

    APPENDIX TO THE APPENDIX

    The Axiom of Choice and Goedel’s Incompleteness Theorem

    It is almost certainly the case that you should skip this section. It had little to do with the rest of the book.

    However, once upon a time I almost tried to become a professional mathematician. There is a specific issue that I find sufficiently annoying that I am going to discuss it here. You really want to turn ahead to the next chapter now.

    In short, one occasionally encounters assertions from some libertarians that all moral decisions can be ‘logically derived from the non-initiation principle’. My thesis here is that the phrase ‘logically derived’ as invoked in the previous sentence is a process of religious faith whose properties are fundamentally antilogical: They are indubitably logically inconsistent with the process ‘logically derived’ that most readers encountered in plane geometry.

    Skip to the next chapter. This is your last warning.

    I am going to omit almost all mathematical details, so what I have to say reduced to four paragraphs.

    First, we have the ‘Axiom of Choice’. What does the Axiom of Choice say? Suppose I form a collection of objects, all of which have some property. For example, I could make a list of all human women. According to the Axiom of Choice, I can then choose a representative person from that list, and we have agreement that ‘this person is a woman’. Now, given several interesting medical issues involving unusual chromosomal sorting, genetic defects, and the wonders of modern gender alteration surgery, there can be a range of opinions as to who belongs on that list. Sometimes one realizes that the definition of the list is incomplete or unambiguous. That doesn’t matter; definitions are in the end arbitrary. There is no claim that I can identify every single person on the list. The Axiom of Choice only claims that, for any list chosen to include all objects with a particular property, I can choose a representative object, which is prominent in no way except that it is an example of the objects on the list.  Thus, I can choose a representative woman, who with respect to her membership on the list is distinguished only by being a human female.   There is no implication that the object is typical in any sense.  I may choose an average woman.  I may choose the richest woman in the world.  However, when discussing her, I am allowed only to refer to her as being female, not to her as being average or well-to-do.  Similarly, when I choose a representative triangle, that triangle might or might not be a right triangle, but nothing in the proof can take advantage of the triangle’s being or not being a right triangle.  The Axiom of Choice, once you understand it, sounds fairly obvious, except that it also applies to lists that have an infinite number of members.

    Second, the Axiom of Choice is the basis of modern mathematical proofs. Modern proofs do not resemble the proofs that most readers saw in plane geometry. Modern proofs work by examining counterexamples. I give a simple case. Suppose we have a theorem ‘the sum of the internal angles of a triangle is 180 degrees’. A counterexample disproves the theorem. If I can show you a single triangle whose internal angles do not add to 180 degrees, I have disproven the theorem as stated. How in modern mathematics do I prove the theorem? I announce ‘consider a triangle whose angles do not add to 180 degrees’. I just invoked the Axiom of Choice. I selected a representative triangle with these particular properties and no others. Now I examine other properties of this odd triangle, and derive a contradiction, for example that the alleged triangle must have at least four corners. That’s a contradiction; by definition triangles only have three corners. Therefore, I have shown that any triangle that is a counterexample to the theorem ‘the sum of the internal angles of a triangle is 180 degrees’, is self-contradictory.  It therefore does not exist. Ergo, all triangles must obey the theorem. Note that I have just proven the theorem without showing for even one triangle that the sum of the internal angles is 180 degrees.

    Third, until early in the last century the objective of mathematics was to reduce all results to logical derivations from a few axioms. Along came the German mathematician Kurt Goedel. Goedel proved, using the Axiom of Choice, that except in trivially simple logical systems you cannot produce a simple set of axioms that describe all mathematical results. That is, in any complicated mathematical system there are an infinite number of statements that are true, but that cannot be derived from any simple set of axioms using orthodox logic.* Alternatively, Goedel showed that excepting truly trivial logical systems all complete logical systems have an infinite number of independent axioms.

    Fourth, we now return to the statement that all moral decisions can be logically derived from the non-initiation principle, which may be phrased as an axiom: ‘any act that violates the non-initiation principle is immoral’.  Any moral question may be phrased as a theorem ‘this action does not have the property immoral.’ Morality is not mathematically trivial. Ergo, from the Axiom of Choice and the Goedel Incompleteness Theorem there are actions that are moral or that are immoral that cannot be logically proven to be moral or immoral from any short set of axioms. Claims that one can logically derive all moral conclusions from the Non-Initiation Principle are claims that an entire nontrivial logical system can be derived from a single axiom.  Such claims are mathematically incompatible with the properties of mathematical logic, and must be recognized as non-logical statements of faith.

    FOOTNOTE TO THE APPENDIX TO THE APPENDIX

    *The Axiom of Choice could be in error. There are several truly remarkable mathematical results that do not look entirely reasonable that have been derived using the axiom. There is an alternative to the axiom that I have seen given several names, e.g., constructivism, which holds that proof by showing the falsity of counterexamples is invalid.  Valid proofs must advance by positive calculation. For example, suppose you want to claim that you can take a sphere, cut it into five parts, and reassemble your five pieces into two new spheres, each, by the way, having the same volume as the initial sphere.  To do so via constructivism you must specify the cuts. [No, that is not an arbitrary example; it is a very important example.] With the Axiom of Choice you can prove that you can slice a sphere into five parts and reassemble them into two spheres, each having the volume of the original sphere.

    See, I told you that you should skip to the next chapter.

    _________________________________________

    Click here to buy “Funding Liberty” by Dr. George Phillies.

    Click here to browse other titles by Dr. George Phillies.

    Breaking News: California Supreme Court denies stay of gay marriage decision

    In Libertarian on June 4, 2008 at 6:02 pm

    SAN FRANCISCO – California’s highest court on Tuesday refused to stay until after the November election its decision legalizing same-sex marriage in the state.

    Conservative religious and legal groups had asked the California Supreme Court to stop its order from becoming effective until voters have the chance to weigh in on the issue.

    An initiative that would amend the state constitution to ban gay marriage has qualified for the ballot. Its passage would overrule the court’s decision.

    The Supreme Court says its ruling will be final at 5 p.m. on June 16.

    Read the rest of this MSNBC breaking news article here.

    Robert Milnes reaches out to Native Americans

    In Libertarian on June 4, 2008 at 5:53 pm

    The following is posted with the authorization of its author, Robert Milnes. I have edited its layout for easier readability.

    To Oklahoma Tribe contacts,

    Greetings. I have obtained your email addresses from websites listing U.S. government recognized Tribes. Please allow me to introduce myself. I was a candidate for the Libertarian Party nomination for president. Now I have decided to proceed as an independent. As such I have great interest in Native American issues. You can see this on my website: http://www.robertmilnes4president2008.com

    As you may know ballot access is a very important issue in American politics. Your state is very difficult for third party and independent ballot access. About 43,000 registered voters’ signatures on a petition are required. 85,000 is considered recommended in the event of disqualifications. These are due by July 15. The Green Party convention is July 10-13. I would like to get the GP and/or the Boston Tea Party nominations etc. But failing that I will try to get on as many ballots as possible.

    To get on the Oklahoma ballot would be a great accomplishment; the GP and LP may very well fail. I am asking with this letter for your support in getting on the Oklahoma ballot and as many others as possible. I would be willing to pay premium wage for signature gathering. However unfortunately I have not as yet received sufficient campaign funding to do that. If you would be willing to help and publicly state so, that could be a strong factor in my getting campaign support. So I am asking for your public announcment of support for my candidacy and help with signature gathering. I look forward to your kind reply.

    Sincerely,

    Robert W. Milnes.