Libertarians issue warning to Tea Partiers

Press release issued Sept 10 by LPHQ:

WASHINGTON – Looking toward the 9/12 Tea Party events in Washington, DC, Libertarian Party executive director Wes Benedict issued the following warning to Tea Partiers: “Republicans are trying to fool you again.”

“There are two kinds of Tea Partiers,” said Benedict. “One kind is so blinded by its hatred of Obama and Democrats that it cannot see fault with Republicans. It’s the other kind the Libertarian Party is reaching out to.”

Libertarian Party staff and volunteers will participate in the Washington, DC Tea Party events on September 12. They will distribute flyers pointing out how the Top 10 Disasters of the 2009-2010 Obama administration mirror the Top 10 Disasters of the 2001-2008 Bush administration.

Benedict continued, “Libertarians have much in common with Tea Party goals of reducing government spending and taxes. While many Tea Party supporters will admit that George W. Bush’s administration grew government, Libertarians want to remind Tea Partiers about previous Republican administrations that loved big government.

“Republican Newt Gingrich and the Contract with America promised to eliminate the Departments of Education and Energy. Yet once Republicans took control of Congress, they failed even to reduce the spending on those departments.

“Republican President George Bush, Sr. remains famous for coining the phrase ‘Read my lips, no new taxes,’ and then raising taxes.

“Republican President Ronald Reagan grew federal government spending to the highest level it had reached since World War II. He also ‘saved Social Security’ by raising payroll taxes.

“Republican presidential candidate Bob Dole was a huge supporter of taxpayer subsidies for corn and ethanol.

“In 1971, Republican President Richard Nixon instituted wage and price controls. That made a group of free-market supporters so angry that they decided to form the Libertarian Party.

“Republicans seem to think we’re idiots. For decades they have paid lip-service to shrinking government, while consistently doing the opposite in office.

“Our fear is that Tea Partiers might say ‘This time it will be different.’ No it won’t. If you vote for Republicans this time, it will just reinforce the message that they can lie to you and grow government with impunity.

“Current Republicans are just as bad as past Republicans.

“This year, Libertarian Party co-founder David Nolan is running for U.S. Senate against Republican John McCain, who famously suspended his 2008 presidential campaign so he could rush back to Washington to bail out the banks.

“Republican leader John Boehner might end up as the next House Speaker, and he voted for George W. Bush’s huge 2003 Medicare expansion.

“John Cornyn, Republican senator from Texas, and current chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, voted for the TARP bailouts.

“Ron Paul is probably the only Republican congressman willing to point out the huge cost of America’s foreign wars and empire building. Other Republicans pretend that spending trillions on the military just doesn’t count as big government.

“With Social Security, Medicare, and military spending making up the vast majority of federal spending, you can’t cut significantly without cutting those. But Republicans refuse to touch them.

“Libertarians welcome the Tea Party movement’s focus on the problem of government growth. However, we are concerned that Tea Partiers might fall for the Republicans’ trickery.

“Republican leaders have brought up distractions like New York City mosques and gay marriage to distract voters from Republicans’ big-government track record. We hope that Tea Partiers will see through the smoke and mirrors.

“While our nation is declining dangerously right now, a turnaround could be straightforward and simple with Libertarian steps like these: 1. Bring our troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan; 2. Stop rewarding failed companies with bailouts; 3. Cut taxes and spending and let the free market work.

“The Libertarian Party is fielding 168 candidates for U.S. House, and 20 candidates for U.S. Senate this year. Win or lose, a vote for a Libertarian sends a clear message for smaller government and more freedom. What message does a vote for John McCain send?”

For more information, or to arrange an interview, call LP Executive Director Wes Benedict at 202-333-0008 ext. 222.

The LP is America’s third-largest political party, founded in 1971. The Libertarian Party stands for free markets and civil liberties. You can find more information on the Libertarian Party at our website.

18 thoughts on “Libertarians issue warning to Tea Partiers

  1. Rocket

    So, here is the one million dollar question: if you cannot vote for Republicans because of GW Bush (who is no longer President), and you cannot vote Democrats because you do not want to see the Soviet Flag over the White House; then who the fuck do you vote for?
    Trust me, if a Libertarian Candidate emerged with something other than Progressivism Light, I would probably vote for them, but that has NEVER happened. The US is the Global Super Power whether we like it or not, and I will be damned to relinquish that title and allow some two bit dictatorship to fill the Global Power Vacuum. Isolationism has never and will never work. So Libertarians, please pull your fucking heads out of your ass, and get a grip on REALITY. If I could rub a magic lamp and wish us a new Government I would, but do not hold your fucking breath. These are your options: you either deal with the current system or pick up a fucking rifle and revolt?

  2. paulie Post author

    Trust me, if a Libertarian Candidate emerged with something other than Progressivism Light, I would probably vote for them,

    LOL. When have ever had a candidate who was “progressivism light”? Who was that? Bob Barr? Ron Paul?

    Isolationism has never and will never work.

    We’re not for isolationism. We support free trade and unrestricted (im)migration, as well as a non-interventionist foreign policy…you know, the same “progressive” policies as those folks who dumped the British Indies Co. corporate welfare tea in Boston Harbor way back when.

  3. Richard Stands

    Whether you prefer a welfare state or a warfare state, it can’t continue. The federal government has been writing more checks than their accounts contain for too long. The U.S. dollar will crash if nothing else stops the bingeing earlier.

    The federal government needs to spend *far* less on both welfare *and* warfare.

    If we don’t want a very hard landing from our borrow-and-inflate-induced high, we’ll vote for the most fiscally conservative candidate, no matter what party.

  4. JT

    Rocket, why are you using the words “fuck” or “fucking” so sparingly? You need to do it at least twice in a sentence to show that you’re serious. Otherwise you sound like a fucking wimp fuck.

    Paulie, I’d guess he’s equating “progressivism” with military non-interventionism since that was what his post was about. How odd.

  5. '..... just look at the activists ' [Lake]

    I am 100% at odds with about every thing that ‘Rocket’ stands for. I can sure under stand the frustration from folks that are fed up with the unresponsiveness of the establishment and then more of the same from the anti establishment peer group.

    In the very end we are all organizations of ‘one’!

  6. Rocket

    Well, I see that I have hurt some people’s feelings by using the word “fuck”. Thanks to a little document called the US Constitution, I could use that word as much as I’d like.

    Anyways, on to the meat and potatoes. The problem with Libertarians is what I call the “minus theory”. It is the idea that “things would be better if (fill-in the blank) did not exist”. The problem with that is you are subtracting REALITY, which is a key piece to coherence. Isolationism has been a theme in the Progressive Movement since its inception. It is rooted in the idea that since the US is “far from” perfect, we must “mind our own business”, and take a diminished role on the World Stage; which has been echoed by your beloved Ron Paul (Progressive Republican). Well, allow me to inject some sanity into the argument: it is impossible to un-invent something. Technology may change, but human nature does NOT! The days of Global Interaction through high tech communications are here to stay. For those Libertarians who are willing to reference Washington’s Farwell Address I ask: do you really think Washington could have imagined a World with nuclear weapons and technology advancements to the point of casual global interaction for every man, woman, and child? Washington’s Farewell Address is not LAW; it was Washington’s OPINION of HIS WORLD upon completion of his terms as President.
    This is the world we are living in: technology has allowed international interaction like no other time in History. As the ONLY SUPER POWER in the World, the US must fulfill the duties of that position by showing the World the application of the American Principles outlined by the Constitution spreading INDIVIDUAL Freedom and Liberty; while also having the ability to defeat the enemy of Freedom: Tyranny. Now by no stretch of the imagination is the US perfect. However, we understand the difference between freedom and tyranny. Our Founding Fathers have set us on a course to create a MORE perfect union by Increasing Individual Liberty. Now the question is does that apply to World or not? Let’s look at History to find out.
    History has displayed that when the US has refused to fulfill the duties of a Global Super Power, and has taken a diminished role (non-interventionist) a GENOCIDE HAS OCCURRED! The Armenian Genocide by the Muslim Turks (1915-1917), the Holodormor (1932-1933), The Holocaust (1938-1945), the Mao Ze-Dong Genocides (China, 1958-61 and 1966-69, Tibet 1949-50), the Cambodian Genocide (1975-1979), the Iraq’s Kurdish Genocide (1988), Rwanda Genocide (1994), the Sudanese Genocide (Present Day), Muslim “Jihad” Genocide of Non-Believers (622 AD- Present Day). How much more clear does it have to be for the Libertarian “challenged”? To allow innocent people to go to slaughter because you are to fucking scared to do anything about it is called “cowardice”. Congratulations to Ron Paul and the like for being fucking COWARDS! Lead, Follow, or get the fuck out of the way. The US Military is 100% volunteer for a reason.
    JT, Wimpy? Place and time, anytime Buddy!

  7. JT

    Rocket: “Well, I see that I have hurt some people’s feelings by using the word “fuck”.”

    Hurt my feelings? LOL. Yes, I often have my feelings hurt by people I don’t know.

    A well-placed curse word in certain contexts can drive home a point. Too many at a time can make you sound like ranting idiot. And after reading your last post, I see that’s pretty much the case.

    Good question, Michael.

  8. JT

    Rocket: “Place and time, anytime Buddy!”

    I forgot to say thank you for the offer, but I only like women. I hope that doesn’t hurt your feelings.

  9. paulie Post author

    Whether you prefer a welfare state or a warfare state, it can’t continue. The federal government has been writing more checks than their accounts contain for too long. The U.S. dollar will crash if nothing else stops the bingeing earlier.

    The federal government needs to spend *far* less on both welfare *and* warfare.

    If we don’t want a very hard landing from our borrow-and-inflate-induced high, we’ll vote for the most fiscally conservative candidate, no matter what party.

    True.

  10. paulie Post author

    I’d guess he’s equating “progressivism” with military non-interventionism since that was what his post was about. How odd.

    Odd indeed, since neither the original progressives (TR, Wilson et al) nor those “progressives” today who are in power (Obama, etc) are non-interventionist.

  11. paulie Post author

    Isolationism has been a theme in the Progressive Movement since its inception.

    Where did you get this amazing non-fact?

    Ron Paul (Progressive Republican).

    LOL

    technology has allowed international interaction like no other time in History.

    All the more reason to keep the naturally bumbling, incompetent government from screwing things up with an aggressive foreign policy. Technology makes Washington’s Farewell Address sentiments even more true and even more important.

    the US must fulfill the duties of that position by showing the World the application of the American Principles outlined by the Constitution spreading INDIVIDUAL Freedom and Liberty; while also having the ability to defeat the enemy of Freedom: Tyranny.

    Yes, and that can only be done through peace and commerce.

    The Holocaust (1938-1945)
    …wouldn’t have happened if the US stayed out of WWI

    the Cambodian Genocide (1975-1979)
    …Again, precipitated by American bombing of Cambodia during the Vietnam War

    Just two of many examples in how interventionism makes the world worse, among countless others.

  12. Kevin Knedler

    Couldn’t agree more with post # 7 and # 8

    After about the 3rd curse word, I turned it off.
    Heaven forbid, we have some professionalism in our daily lives.

  13. Rocket

    “And then conversation was created”! I love Libertarians because you guys fall for the “foreign policy bait” every single time. All you need is some Bush Doctrine, a couple curse words, and you guys are good to boot. Listen, be smarter next time and try to stick to context of the ORIGINAL article, and not some asshole blogger with an opinion, LOL! Hey, Wes your welcome! Take care and let me know if you need anything else.

    Sincerely,

    Rocket

  14. Richard Stands

    If I remember correctly, Ron Paul served in the Air Force and got more support from active duty military personnel than any candidate in the 2008 primaries.

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2007/nov/29/ron-paul/a-military-victory-for-paul/

    I wonder: does global military intervention enhance or undermine security? How much does nation building cost (in lives and treasure)? Can America have a strong, active defense without invading countries and trying to reshape them in our image? Do our military incursions have any undesirable downstream consequences? What are the trade-offs? If government is a bad option for top-down domestic change, why is it a good option for top-down international political change?

    Is defense the same thing as war? Are “true Republicans” pro-defense or just pro-war?

  15. NewFederalist

    Golly people… let’s make Rocket feel at home here. If you are too hard on him he may not come back and share his wisdom with us. I can’t wait until he meets Milnes!

  16. JT

    Richard: “If I remember correctly, Ron Paul served in the Air Force and got more support from active duty military personnel than any candidate in the 2008 primaries.”

    Excellent point. Ron Paul did indeed serve in the Air Force. Maybe all those military supporters realize something many other people don’t.

Leave a Reply

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