Proposed LNC motion expresses ‘disappointment’ with Ron Paul; invites endorsement of Barr/Root

As reported earlier, the LNC is in a deadlock between two resolutions responding the Snubgate. Mary Ruwart’s resolution would apologize to Ron Paul, whereas party Treasurer Aaron Starr’s resolution expresses “disappointment” in Paul, insults the other third-party candidates, and “invites” Paul to endorse Barr/Root.

Below is the text of the Starr motion:

The Libertarian National Committee is disappointed to learn that you have recently urged those in the freedom movement to vote for the likes of Ralph Nader, Cynthia McKinney and Chuck Baldwin, none of whom truly grasp the meaning of Liberty.

More than before, we remain committed to our nominees for President and Vice President, Bob Barr and Wayne Root. We believe both of them boldly present the ideals of limited government, lower taxes, lower spending, and more freedom to the American people.

We invite you to restore your commitment to Liberty by supporting the only candidates on the ballot this year who understand the Constitution and are prepared to restore our republic to what the Founders believed.

Toward Liberty,

The Libertarian National Committee

56 thoughts on “Proposed LNC motion expresses ‘disappointment’ with Ron Paul; invites endorsement of Barr/Root

  1. G.E. Post author

    You are right that it’s Rachel H.’s, but Ruwart is considered the leader behind that effort. She’s the one who would be delivering the apology.

    IT’S TOO LATE, PEOPLE.

  2. Mike Gillis

    “the likes of” Nader, Baldwin and McKinney…

    Because scummy and borderline racist pro-war war neocon Wayne Root or his boss and author of the Defense of Marriage Act and former drug warrior Bob Barr are just PERFECT!

  3. G.E. Post author

    svf – You have to be kidding me. If I say that you don’t truly grasp the meaning of liberty, am I not insulting you? If I say that someone else should be my friend only, and not yours (and two others’) that’s not an insult?

    The sycophancy is really over the top.

  4. inDglass

    To say that none of these three candidates “truly grasp the meaning of Liberty” is nonsense. Just read a column or two by Chuck Baldwin and see if he grasps the concept of freedom in our constitutional republic.

  5. Sivarticus

    A big part of me wants to see the LP keep bashing Ron Paul to just put it out of its misery already. The LP is part of the problem. We need a new third party that can unite libertarians, constitutionalists, independents, disaffected conservatives, and maybe even elements of the reasonable left as well.

  6. amyb31416

    I don’t think I could possibly be more disgusted with the LNC.

    Let’s just say that I’ll never join the LP, with the likes of Bob Barr, WAR, Aaron Starr and the rest of these arrogant clowns.

  7. G.E. Post author

    Unfortunately, paulie, I think it does.

    But hey, we should be trying to recruit Amy to our newly formed Jeffersonian Caucus.

  8. amyb31416

    “But hey, we should be trying to recruit Amy to our newly formed Jeffersonian Caucus.”

    What’s this that you speak of?

  9. svf

    You have to be kidding me. If I say that you don’t truly grasp the meaning of liberty, am I not insulting you?

    Nope… that’s just good ol’ fashioned campaign rhetoric.

    THIS, however, is insulting to me…

    What an Establishment shill you are… suck on that, shill… Please kill yourself… You P.C. Nazi trolls should START YOUR OWN BLOGS…

    etc., etc., etc. You could teach Mr. Starr a lot about the fine art of insult.

  10. G.E. Post author

    I never disputed those were insults. I’m sure I could find where you insulted me and/or IPR first if I cared to look.

  11. paulie cannoli

    Unfortunately, paulie, I think it does.

    They may be the dominant fraction right now, but they are only a fraction. They barely won in Denver, and there is a healthy opposition wing on the LNC. Many state and local LPs are not on board with them.

    I suspect they may be on the outs in the LP after November.

    I am not for junking the LP, just opening up other avenues at the same time. There is some value to working both inside and outside major parties; we should use every possible avenue.

  12. svf

    I’m sure I could find where you insulted me and/or IPR first if I cared to look.

    constructive criticism: yes… .

    insults: I sincerely hope not (but I can’t guarantee it…)

  13. G.E. Post author

    I unilaterally apologize to you for insulting you as I did, even if it were (at least according to my perception) retaliatory.

  14. G.E. Post author

    J.G. – They’re more hostile to Ron Paul and real libertarianism than Stato, tReason, and the bad wing of the LP combined. And very much more statist. They consider Barack Obama a “libertarian Democrat” — that’s all you need to know.

  15. svf

    G.E. — apology accepted. you should perhaps make that an “open apology” to a whole bunch of other people who post here while you’re at it.

    shit, man, David Foster Wallace killed himself. for fuck’s sake. all this bickering, no fucking point to it.

  16. G.E. Post author

    Open apology is offered and I’m trying to do better. Please judge me on my behavior from this point forward and I shall do the same.

  17. svf

    I’m trying to do better

    you, me, and everyone else (our friend Bob Barr included, we hope…)

    that’s the reason to get up in the morning, I think, otherwise it’s just petty bullshit.

    pardon the existential riff, this DFW thing has me fucked in the head…

    peace. PEACE.

  18. Hugh Jass

    G.E.,

    I also recall reading Reason articles arguing that Rudy Giuliani, Bill Richardson, and Larry Craig were libertarians. Geez, those guys have even easier standards that Dondero!

  19. Trent Hill

    I think you could make an arguement that Bill Richardson is one of the most libertarian democrats right now–but that doesnt say much.

  20. G.E. Post author

    Yeah… He’s about two clicks to the statist side of George Phillies.

    Before I (thankfully) caught the Ron Paul bug, I was pulling for Bill Richardson big time. I thought he had a “realistic” shot while Paul didn’t.

    But Trent: Ask Gary Johnson what he thinks of Bill Richardson’s libertarian credentials!

  21. G.E. Post author

    Giuliani IS a libertarian by the Stato/tReason rationale: He loves abortion, he cross dresses, and he follows the discredited Larry Kudlow school of economics.

    Now shutting down the strip clubs in NYC is hard to live with, but Rudy G makes up for it for his constant mockery of Ron Paul.

  22. inDglass

    I think we need to change our approach to how we run candidates. Let’s stop trying to operate through exclusive, top-down organizations like the LP which foster corruption and fuel division in our movement. Let’s run independent candidates and work through non-exclusive parties like the Boston Tea Party that can endorse candidates and provide resources to get them elected. I also like what I CAN is doing to support independent candidates.

    It is interesting to note that Nader has had the most successful ballot access for third party presidential candidates, and he is running as an independent. With the efforts of everyone in this movement behind a fusion candidate or Ron Paul-like candidate, we could even top that in 2012.

    While I like a lot of what I see happening in the LP here in my state, I doubt I will officially join or be involved in the next national convention. Especially at the national level, it is headed in the wrong direction. I struggle to see it in a positive light at this point. If I run for office in the future, I will likely do it as an independent.

  23. Trent Hill

    “But Trent: Ask Gary Johnson what he thinks of Bill Richardson’s libertarian credentials!”

    Oh–Iv no doubt he’d kill me for saying so,haha. I want Johnson to run for President in 2012.

  24. pshdsa

    Once you come to the realization that Repubs and Dems are different flavors of the same tasteless office function layer cake, you want to find an alternative. There is no alternative. 3rd string political parties are only interested in gaining 2% of the vote or more. Urp, slop, bring me the mop. Like it or not, without unity among the plethora of wannabe political parties, we’ll never have a team good enough to play in the majors. Ron Paul is saying this. He wants a viable political party that can legitimately threaten the two party system. He ought to be followed, not bashed by narrow minded adamants. As long as you keep to your sectarian ways, anybody who votes third party IS throwing away his vote. A person likes to feel his vote is doing something real. The heck with moral victories. I wish Ron Paul were a write in candidate in every state. Anyone with half a brain knows how popular Ron Paul is, so why did the LP leaders shoot themselves in the foot? You don’t criticize Ron Paul and keep votes. This year I am not voting Libertarian. I will vote for either Ralph Nader (as a real protest) or Chuck Baldwin, who really deserves our vote.

  25. VTV

    Sigh…

    Let’s not just stick it in and break it off. Lets make sure we reach in with a pair of vice grips and wiggle it around inside there first.

    Idiots.

  26. svf

    Who’d be better, Johnson or Goldwater, Jr.?

    Johnson. Forget Barry Jr. He’d be a disaster. You’d be pining for the good ol’ days of the Barr ’08 campaign.

    It just doesn’t seem like Gary’s gonna jump back in the political fray, though… we can at least hope…

  27. hogarth

    As reported earlier, the LNC is in a deadlock between two resolutions responding the Snubgate.

    I suspect this is a mischaracterization. It’s much more likely that the LNC is dithering about doing anything vs doing nothing than that it is ‘deadlocked’ between two different motions.

    The dithering is probably good at this point. This whole apologizing to Paul/bitching at Paul thing is weak. The LNC should *first* pass a resolution agreeing to the 4 points of C4L, *then* take time to consider whether to censure Barr and/or Root for being such lousy candidates and pulling such stupid stunts.

  28. svf

    take time to consider whether to censure Barr and/or Root for being such lousy candidates and pulling such stupid stunts.

    innocent question… has the LNC ever censured — or even formally considered censuring — its presidential candidates in the past? just wondering what, if any, precedents have been set for this proposed action.

    it seems the “outrage” bar(r) would need to be set rather high to justify such a thing, but who knows…

  29. svf

    I should add that I’ve been “involved” with the LP since 1996 and don’t recall any such action related to Browne I, Browne II, or Badnarik… plenty of infighting and accusation, but nothing on the level of official “censure…”

    but I certainly don’t claim to know all the details and my knowledge of pre-1996 LNC activity is fairly sketchy.

  30. Trent Hill

    I’d prefer Gary Johnson. He was a pretty popular governor,and thus has a fundraising and polling base to start with,plus a state that is virtually gauranteed to him. He’s also less radical and thus more appealing to the wider view of libertarians and conservatives–but still has a distinct appeal to Lew Rockwell-type Libertarians and paleoconservatives, whose respect he garnered by backing Ron Paul.

  31. Coming Back to the LP

    There should be no censure of Barr. He did the right thing. Ron Paul has been a drag on the movement for liberty since the deadweight of his newsletters came out.

    At that point his fundraising dropped off seriously. At that point the support of his activists began to drop as well. And, at that point, no matter what his statements had been before, Ron Paul’s ability to run a major campaign by switching to the LP or run independent ended.

    This was the legacy of Ron Paul’s association with his devious buddy at the Mises Institute. Their plan had been to suck in the dixiecrats, racists and other rightwing loonies as donors, so the rhetoric was twisted to lure them in.

    Even Ron Paul’s campaign in 2007 seems to have begun as an attempt to fatten his mailing list and bring in more money for the Paul money machine.

    As far back as the early 1980s, before his LP presidential campaign, Ron Paul demanded $100,000 per year payment and a ownership of a list of all donors to a group he signed fundraising letters for.

    Yes, Ron Paul stands for a mix of constitutional, conservative and often even libertarian principles and he is usually consistant. But, his primary motivation has always been building the Ron Paul bank account.

    Has anyone ever received a donation FROM Ron Paul for a Libertarian campaign of any kind?

  32. Coming Back to the LP

    I would support the Starr motion if it opened with a lukewarm apology and then ended with the Star wording as is. The opening should be along the lines of:

    “The Libertarian National Committee is saddened that relations between you and the Libertarian Party may have been injured over recent events concerning your recent press conference on September 10, 2008 and our Presidential Candidate, Bob Barr’s decision not to attend. We wish to assure you that we appreciate all that you have done for the movement for Liberty, your recent campaign for President, and indeed, your 1988 campaign when you carried the banner high for the Libertarian Party. Many of our members have and continue to be among your most fervent supporters. We are sincerely indebted to you for all you have done.

    It was never the intent of the Libertarian Party, the Barr for President campaign, nor Bob Barr to insult you or your supporters in any way.

    We do have different interests at heart, however, as individuals and groups often do. In this case it was not in the interest of the Libertarian Party, nor the Barr for President campaign, nor, in our view, in the interest of the future of the freedom movement for us to stand together in a group whose whole purpose of coming together was to drain support away from our Party and our Presidential campaign in 2008 and pass it to the other three non-libertarian candidates present. Under such circumstances, in our view, it was inadvisable for our candidate to attend.

    (now, finish with the Starr letter above … delete “recently” in the first sentence.)

  33. José C

    ” . . .but Rudy G makes up for it for his constant mockery of Ron Paul.”

    This is because in a debate Ron Paul suggested we were (USA) responsible for the September 11 attacks. Dr. Paul , a government conspiracy (FBI, CIA, Secret Service, . . .) perhaps?

  34. G.E. Post author

    Regardless, Susan’s weak motion of passing a B.S. resolution affirming the “We Agree” statement is worthless. Barr himself already signed up. The SNUB is the issue. Who cares if the losers on the LNC affirm the points? Especially now… It’s way too late.

    Good luck with the future of the LP.

  35. Michael Seebeck

    Let’s clear up some things:

    1. Hawkridge just presented the motion, but she did NOT write the letter. I know who did, as do many others, but until those persons indicate to me it is OK to say so, they will remain anonymous as far as I am concerned.

    2. Pshdsa is right on, with the caveat that IMTCO a wasted vote is also a vote cast for a mjaor-party candidate in 99.6% or so of the time (there are always a select few exempt from that).

    3. The resolution hogath refers to is out there but AFAIK it hasn’t been moved or seconded. As with the censure motion, I know who wrote that one as well, and the same terms apply.

    Not trying to be smug or uppity, here, please understand that. Just stating facts and a little opinion, while exercising source discretion.

  36. Michael Seebeck

    Clarity part 2: hawkridge presented the censure motion, not the Starr letter. Starr spewed his own trash.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *