Murkowski’s libertarian credentials

Former Ron Paul legislative staffer Bradley Jansen posted an op-ed on Nolan Chart this Thursday outlining some of Senator Lisa Murkowski’s libertarian credentials.  According to Jansen, she stood with Senators Sununu, Hagel, and Craig frustrating the Bush administration’s attempts to trample on civil liberties.

“My strongest impression of the senior senator from Alaska was her steadfast communion with Sens. John Sununu (R-NH), Chuck Hagel (R-NE), and Larry Craig (R-ID) against the extension of the USA PATRIOT Act despite strong pressure from President Bush, Karl Rove and party chairman Ken Mehlman. The GOP’s libertarians, as the press referred to them at the time, stood firm demanding greater privacy and civil liberties protections as well as greater government oversight requirements.”

Jansen goes on to articulate a pragmatist vision for Libertarian Party strategy and advocate letting Murkowski run on the LP ballot line.

“The Libertarian Party of Alaska has the opportunity to meet with a sitting senator and potentially put one of their own in the upper chamber of Congress.  …  Will the LP take the dead end path or take a step to grow the party and convert more members?”

You can read the rest of the op-ed here.

Most libertarian bloggers and commenters have been arguing against nominating Murkowski.  (For example, Libertarian Party Executive Director Wes Benedict told The Daily Caller: “[M]y understanding is that she voted for the TARP bailout and that is just insanely un-Libertarian.”)  Jansen is one of the first libertarian pundits to jump to Murkowski’s defense and take a deeper look at her record for signs of a libertarian streak.

For Senator Lisa Murkowski to get the Libertarian Party nomination for U.S. Senate, she would need to jump through two hoops before the September 15th substitution deadline:

  1. the current LP U.S. Senate nominee David Haase would have to withdraw from the race
  2. the Alaska LP board would have to appoint Lisa Murkowski to fill the vacancy

According to Politico, David Haase met with Murkowski earlier this week.  Haase’s key issues are the federal reserve and national debt.  He pitched his proposal The People’s Bailout to Murkowski in the meeting.  Early indications are he is likely to step aside.

Alaska LP board members include:

  • Scott Kohlhaas (Chair)
  • Harley Brown (Vice-Chair)
  • Rob Clift (Secretary)
  • Stephen Merrill
  • Erinn Marshburn

Chair Scott Kohlhaas has been repeatedly quoted saying he doesn’t think it will happen.  Vice-chair Harley Brown dramatically declared in late August “More than likely — 99 percent — there’s no way Murkowski is going to be our nominee. I don’t see that happening, honestly.”  Two board members are also big Joe Miller supporters. Kohlhaas, Brown and Clift are Libertarian state representative candidates. The Anchorage Daily News recently reported Haase might be willing to lobby the board on Murkowski’s behalf.

Stakes are large.  A poll commissioned by Murkowski supporter Andrew Halcro suggests she would win the general election in a three way race.  Having a big-L Libertarian in the U.S. Senate could be a game changer for the Libertarian Party.  Additionally, as a sitting U.S. Senator Murkowski is in a position to immediately introduce libertarian legislation addressing ballot access, monetary policy, gun rights, marijuana, or other policy reforms.  Finally, Eric Erikson of RedState gossiped in late August that Murkowski may be willing to hand the Alaska Libertarian Party a sizable chunk of her +$1 million warchest.

Alaska U.S. Senate poll

  • 37% – Lisa Murkowski (L)
  • 31% – Joe Miller (R)
  • 19% – Scott McAdams (D)

If Murkowski fails to secure the LP ballot line, there is speculation that she will run as a write-in candidate.  No one has been elected to the U.S. Senate by write-in since Strom Thurmond in 1954.  Richard Winger discussed the mechanics of a Murkowski write-in campaign at Ballot Access News.

The most comprehensive behind the scene coverage of the Alaska LP’s flirtations with Murkowski come from Robert Stacy McCain at The Other McCain and Eric Dondero at Libertarian Republican.  Of course Independent Political Report has also been covering this situation.

The Other McCain

Libertarian Republican

Independent Political Report

This entry was posted in Libertarian Party on by .

About Chuck Moulton

This fall I'll be starting a Ph.D. in Economics at George Mason University. My other degrees are a J.D. from Villanova Law School and a M.A. in Economics from San Jose State University. I am licensed to practice law in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and California. In my spare time I am involved with the Libertarian Party. I served as Vice-Chair of the Libertarian National Committee during the 2006-2008 term. In 2004 I ran for U.S. Congress in Pennsylvania district 13. I also spend a lot of time playing bughouse and chess on the Free Internet Chess Server where my handle is knighttour.

205 thoughts on “Murkowski’s libertarian credentials

  1. Eric Dondero

    Trust me, you guys only know half the story. When this is all said and done, this will go down as one of the most truly bizarre and intensly interesting stories in the entire 35-year history of the Libertarian Party.

    Stay tuned…

  2. AroundtheblockAFT

    Make a deal: if elected Senator, she hires Jacob Hornberger as her speech writer and Don Ernsberger as her Chief of Staff.

  3. Jeff B.

    One problem: Murkowski is not a “Big L libertarian” to begin with.

    To introduce libertarian legislation, she would have to believe in libertarianism — meaning she has to give up almost everything she believes in and change her philosophy. I don’t see that happening.

  4. Gene Berkman

    I think the Alaska LP should leverage this in another way. They should approach Joe Miller, point out Murkowski’s opposition to extending the Patriot Act, and ask where he stands.

    They should also ask him if he supports legalizing marijuana, and bringing the troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan. (we still have 50,000 advisors in Iraq – three times the number of advisors we had in Vietnam before the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution)

    Joe Mill’er’s election could be on the line, depending on how he responds to Libertarian concerns.

  5. Ross Levin

    Great summary of the situation. Personally, I think the LP should seriously consider giving her the ballot line. I appreciate that maybe if it were a Democrat and the Green Party I might feel differently, but if they can get some solid concessions from Murkowski (and granted, I’m not sure how they would make sure she holds up her end of the deal), it might be worth it to have a US Senator.

    Of course, it’s a VERY thin line that must be walked. On the one hand, the Libertarian Party has very limited power in its current state. On the other hand, if it gets too close with the Republicans and compromises too much, it might end up going the way of the Populists, who latched onto the Democrats in 1896, only to disappear because of that. (Although then look at the Progressive Party in Vermont who might not be as far from the Democrats as the Libertarians are from the Republicans, but they’ve still managed to walk that thin line with a certain degree of success.)

  6. JT

    Ross: “I appreciate that maybe if it were a Democrat and the Green Party I might feel differently…”

    Why might you feel differently if the Democrat were willing to give some concessions to Greens?

    Ross:”…(and granted, I’m not sure how they would make sure she holds up her end of the deal)…”

    They couldn’t.

  7. Jimmy

    Well, if Bob Barr can be the LP presidential nominee, Senator Murkowski can be the LP senate nominee as far as I am concerned. I’d trust her much more than Barr any day of the week.

  8. Dan Reale

    A wet finger in the wind is not a libertarian credential.

    At best, sure, she may have the “L” next to her name. But she’ll never be one of our own.

    In a best case scenario where we decide, “Hey, let’s win just to win and for nothing else”, the only saving grace is that the candidate in question doesn’t actually get to do the damage because he lost. In fact, such a candidate goes down in flames as he should. Unfortunately, that also has the effect of decreasing membership, donations and involvement.

    I can appreciate the impassioned, shortsighted cries to recruit all the RINOs we can, but the purpose of the LP is to get people elected FOR THE EXPRESS PURPOSE of implementing libertarian policies. Getting power is one thing, and an important thing, but it’s useless to us if we can’t aim it in a Libertarian direction because a non-libertarian had her hands on the controls.

    And we wouldn’t even be talking about this if we’d simply not wasted most of the effort on or playing footsie with the GOP for all these years.

  9. JT

    Ross: “I would feel differently because I’m not a Libertarian but I am (at least nominally) a Green.”

    That’s not really an answer though. You said the Libertarian Party should seriously consider backing a Republican for U.S. Senate if Libertarians get concessions from that candidate. So why wouldn’t you say the same thing about the Green Party backing a Democrat for U.S. Senate if Greens get concessions from that candidate? Are you saying that the Libertarian Party should do something that you wouldn’t want the Green Party to do?

  10. Mik Robertson

    @3 That is not a bad idea. Ultimately this will be up to the Alaska LP, and whatever they decide will be the way things go.

  11. Jason Gatties

    My question is, assuming she gets the LP spot and wins, will she run as a Libertarian again in 6 years?

  12. Robert Capozzi

    I don’t know enough about the L scene in AK, but it sounds as if Haase may step aside regardless as a way to force the AKLP’s hand.

    Were that to happen, that has to force the executive committee’s hand, if I have this scoped properly. They could appoint no one, a back bencher, or Murkowski.

    I can imagine Murkowski would be indicated ONLY if it were very deftly handled.

    We’ll find out soon enough.

  13. Hugh

    I thought the AKLP committee put this nonsense to rest! Nominating Murkowski on an electability argument would take Bob Barr 2008’s place as the worst mistake the Libertarian Party has ever made. If they’re going to make decisions based entirely on political expediency (and don’t pretend this is anything but this; the only argument in favor of Murkowski is that she may have had objections to that PATRIOT Act she voted for anyway), why not just join the Republicrats to begin with?

  14. JT

    “Two board members are also big Joe Miller supporters.”

    What is this?? If you’re a big supporter of any Republican candidate when there’s a Libertarian candidate in a race, you have no business being in a state LP leadership role. Should this even need to be said? It makes me sick.

  15. Andy

    I think that it is a really sad state of affairs in the Libertarian Party that this is even being discussed. Lisa Murkowski is NOT a libertarian. Yes, she may vote in a libertarian direction SOME OF THE TIME, but this does not make her a libertarian. One website went through a list of issues and rated Lisa Murkowski as being with libertarians 70% of the time on economic issues and 30% of the time on social issues. The bottom line on Lisa Murkowski is that she is NOT even close to being a consistent defender of liberty and she has ZERO record as a libertarian activist.

    Anyone in the Libertarian Party who would even consider running this woman as a Libertarian Party candidate should not hold any leadership positition in the party and should not be a candidate for any office.

  16. Michael H. Wilson

    RE Andy @ 17. How many people on the LPNC could be classed as 100% libertarian? Are they all on board when it comes to ending the Drug War. I’ll bet not.

    Anyhow it would be more interesting if the senator sent $1000 to national for a membership and then stood on the floor of the senate and announced her change in party affiliation. Now that would be fun.

  17. Andy

    “Michael H. Wilson // Sep 11, 2010 at 12:24 am

    RE Andy @ 17. How many people on the LPNC could be classed as 100% libertarian? Are they all on board when it comes to ending the Drug War. I’ll bet not.”

    Some of the people who are on there should not be on there.

    Having said this, I don’t think that a candidate necessarily has to be a 100% / 100% libertarian. In fact, I think that there’d be some debate within the party over just what exactly a 100% / 100% libertarian is. However, a person should certainly be mostly libertarian to even be considered as a Libertarian Party candidate. When I say mostly libertarian, I mean in the 90 percent and higher range.

    Lisa Murkowski is NOT mostly libertarian. Yes, she votes in a libertarian direction SOME OF THE TIME, but she is clearly far from being a consistent defender of liberty. A person who kinda sorta advocates some freedom some of the time, but who will sell out freedom other times, is NOT a libertarian.

    Lisa Murkowski is a Republican opportunist that wants to — USE the Libertarian Party for her own purpose. She doesn’t really give a rat’s ass about the party or about individual freedom.

  18. Be Rational

    Well now, let’s look at this another way.

    Perhaps Lisa Murkowski has been a libertarian opportunist using the Republican Party for her own purposes. Perhaps she was just afraid to come out of her closet and take more libertarian positions on the issues. (Doubtful, but … ) or Perhaps she has really been slowly evolving into a libertarian and is now ready to change parties and announce her new found beliefs to the world. The LP has to be open to new converts and new members – even from the ranks of elected pols.

    So … If she did come out and announce on the floor of the Senate that she is changing her affiliation to Libertarian …

    And … If she did announce that she had sent in $1000 or more to become a lifetime LP National member …

    And … If she did give a good speech giving her reasons for being a libertarian and agreed with the ideas of abolishing all taxes on income, ending the war on drugs, non-intervention as a foreign policy etc. – showing for all the world to see that she is, now at least, in agreement with the LP platform …

    And … if she went out of her way to support other (qualified, presentable, active) LP candidates …

    And … if she did announce that she would work for fair ballot access and would work with the LP to build OUR party and work for the principles of liberty …

    Then … Yes. The Alaska LP should welcome her and give her the LP line for Senate for November.

  19. JT

    Michael: “Anyhow it would be more interesting if the senator sent $1000 to national for a membership and then stood on the floor of the senate and announced her change in party affiliation. Now that would be fun.”

    It would also be more interesting and fun to have the first Libertarian in Congress vote for bills (such as TARP) that reduce liberty instead of expand it, right?

  20. JT

    Be Rational, if you seriously think all of those “Ands…” are a possibility here, then you’re IRRational.

  21. Be Rational

    JT, I think that all those ifs are quite unlikely, nearly, but not quite impossible. But, we need to set some parameters as to what would qualify Murkowski or other converts to the LP to become LP standard bearers and gain our nominations and ballot positions. It seems a bit irrational just to say “NO” without indicating what it would take for us to say “yes.”

  22. Robert Capozzi

    hugh: If they’re going to make decisions based entirely on political expediency (…), why not just join the Republicrats to begin with?

    me: If expediency and opportunism advance liberty, I’m for it. If they do not, then I’m not.

    It’s murky whether Murkowski on the L line advances liberty. I trust that the AKLP is considering this gambit through that lens.

    My lean (with limited information) is that she doesn’t unless terms can be struck that DO advance liberty.

  23. George Phillies

    Murkowski’s most important feature is that she is a sitting Republican Senator.

    If we run her, absent a prior record of having changed parties to Libertarian, a record it is too late to acquire, we line ourselves up with the Republican R’s

    That’s the Republican Racists who think America should be all-white
    The Republican Ranters who attack New York Community centers
    The Republican Reactionaries who want to state’s rights so they can repeal a woman’s right to choose, a person’s right to marry, or an African-American’s right to vote.
    The Republican Retards who deny that global warming is extensive and man-made.

    That’s not a good place to be.

  24. Be Rational

    GP,

    That’s an awfully wide brush, I’m surprised you can even lift it … and your own post seems a bit of a rant.

  25. Mik Robertson

    @24 It seems a bit irrational just to say “NO” without indicating what it would take for us to say “yes.”

    I agree, and in this case it is up the Alaska LP to decide what parameters it will use.

  26. Andy

    “Perhaps Lisa Murkowski has been a libertarian opportunist using the Republican Party for her own purposes.”

    Her record does not indicate this.

    “Perhaps she was just afraid to come out of her closet and take more libertarian positions on the issues.”

    This would mean that she’s a coward. A person who is too much of a coward to stand up for liberty is not a person that the Libertarian Party should have as a candidate.

  27. Philinak

    Lisa isn’t the Libertarian that she professes to be. While attending the Republican convention in 2008 I heard Lisa talk about how she was behind the National ID program. I reminded her that we already have immigration laws and programs in place to deal with potential immigrants to the US. It wasn’t being followed at that time and a new program certainly wasn’t going to solve the issue but it was going to affect all of the law abiding citizens of the US.

  28. Eric Dondero

    George, you sure you’re a Libertarian? You’re sounding awfully America-hating Leftist scumbag there. I mean, I’ve always like you personally. But you’re no coming across as a Leftwing Looney Tune. Even defending liberal causes like Al Gore’s maniacle Global Warming scheme? Sheesh!

    George, I hate to say this, but you might be more comfortable in the Green Party. Doesn’t seem there’s anything libertarian about you at all.

  29. JT

    Michael: “Never know how this is going to play out do we JT. But fun to speculate ain’t it?”

    Of course we can’t predict the future. But we can use the past as a pretty good indicator of what’s likely and what’s not, right? And what’s *not* is Murkowski suddenly voting in a libertarian direction on all the congressional bills she has the opportunity to vote for. That *should* be easy for any actual libertarian in Congress, because there are *never* bills brought to the floor that would end the Drug War, repeal the Income Tax, phase out Social Security, or move us toward liberty in any radical way. Yet her voting record is still very mixed (just like many other Republicans and Democrats in Congress).

    JT, I think that all those ifs are quite unlikely, nearly, but not quite impossible.

    Okay, they’re not *impossible*; they’re just wildly improbable. Better?

    Be Rational: “GP,

    That’s an awfully wide brush, I’m surprised you can even lift it … and your own post seems a bit of a rant.”

    Yeah, he does that a lot.

    Dondero: “George, I hate to say this, but you might be more comfortable in the Green Party. Doesn’t seem there’s anything libertarian about you at all.”

    I think he might be more comfortable there, too. But you’re wrong about there being nothing libertarian about him. On all social issues, he’s definitely libertarian and in agreement with the vast majority of LP members.

  30. Eric Dondero

    I’m not so sure about George any more, even on social issues. I mean we all know he’s for extra rights for Gays, government-funding of abortion, and kicking conservative speakers off of college campuses, all leftwing causes.

    How does he stand on the Nanny-State? Seat Belt laws? We never hear George addressing that issue. Perhaps it’s too practical and too “blue collar” for him to worry about. Affirmative action? Is he in favor of abolishing quotas for college admissions and in hiring?

    It’s easy for a lefty libertarian to adopt arcane lefty civil liberties issues like “CIA wiretapping,” that nobody gives a flip about.

    But what about rightwing civil liberties like overturning affirmative action?

  31. George Phillies

    @35

    extra rights for gays…don’t know anyone who wants such things, though that is usually hatemonger right codewords for homophobic bigotry.

    kicking speakers off campuses…oppose

    Seat Belt Laws. See following. 1998 is from one of my web pages. 2007 is the LAMA platform which I substantially wrote.

    1998:
    http://cmlc.org/issues3.htm

    The government has no legitimate business in the bedrooms of consenting adults. We support an immediate end to all laws restricting private, personal behavior between consenting adults. We oppose seat belt laws, compulsory motorcycle helmet laws, and compulsory car airbag laws. These choices are best left to the individual.

    2007
    Platform Passed by the 2007 Convention

    The Libertarian Association of Massachusetts stands for Peace, Freedom, and Prosperity.

    The Libertarian Association of Massachusetts calls for the repeal of the Massachusetts compulsory health insurance law.

    The Libertarian Association of Massachusetts endorses new and future pro-freedom initiatives being brought to the voters and urges Libertarians across Massachusetts to support their passage.

    The Libertarian Association of Massachusetts condemns the Bush Administration’s war of aggression against Iraq and calls for its immediate end, and calls for the immediate withdrawal of the Massachusetts National Guard to Massachusetts.

    In accord with existing Federal Law, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts should move vigorously to replace its National Guard with a State Defense Force whose service is limited to the boundaries of the Commonwealth.

    The Commonwealth of Massachusetts cannot long endure a huge underclass of people whose civil liberties and civil rights have been lost to the war on drugs. There should be a general pardon of all persons who were convicted of violating state laws defining nonviolent drug crimes.

    Laws requiring the use of personal protective equipment intended primarily to protect the user, such as Motorcycle Helmets and Automobile Seatbelts, should be repealed, because protecting people from their own actions is not a fundamental purpose of government.

    Mindful of the rights clearly provided for in the Bill of Rights, the Libertarian Association of Massachusetts calls for the repeal of all Massachusetts permit laws and other restrictions on the right of law-abiding adults to keep and bear firearms and other weapons.

  32. Hugh Jass

    Eric @ 32:

    I never thought I would see the day when Eric Dondero and I are in agreement. It seems that Dr. Phillies is forgetting that his home state of Massachusetts was effectively practicing that heretical “states’ rights” when they passed gay marriage in spite of the Federal DOMA law. Or maybe he’s forgetting about all those states that passed medical cannabis laws or anti-REAL ID laws in spite of the federal government. I would like to know if Dr. Phillies believes that the people behind Proposition C are racist? And what is Dr. Phillies’s opinion on that East Anglia scandal?

  33. George Phillies

    @38

    Oh. bullfeathers. The Massachusetts Courts — not ‘passed’ ruled on rights of contract in our state Constitution. DOMA was *then* passed, and claimed that other states do not have to recognize marriage contracts created in Massachusetts.

    Ditto the Medical Marijuana laws and the more extensive Massachusetts law change *state* law, and have no effect on Federal law. If you use pot in Massachusetts, it is still illegal under Federal law, and the Federal authorities may still arrest you. There is no states rights issue here.

    The alleged East Anglia Scandal is the conservative big lie technique at work.

  34. Gene Berkman

    I don’t understand why George Phillies thinks party affiliation is so important. Lisa Murkowski’s stands on issues disqualify her from party support, but it is possible for a Republican to defend liberty – it is just rare.

    If a Republican candidate defends liberty and opposes the war, Libertarians should support such a candidate. I don’t think Murkowski qualifies under that rubric, but her party affiliation is the least of her problems.

    There were libertarians before The Libertarian Party was founded.

  35. realpolitik anarchist

    Would the communist Phillies quit the LP if the AkLP nominated Murkowski?

    That is a potential benefit that should not be overlooked when calculating whether this gambit would be worthwhile.

  36. Andy

    “Gene Berkman // Sep 11, 2010 at 5:35 pm

    I don’t understand why George Phillies thinks party affiliation is so important. Lisa Murkowski’s stands on issues disqualify her from party support, but it is possible for a Republican to defend liberty – it is just rare.

    If a Republican candidate defends liberty and opposes the war, Libertarians should support such a candidate. I don’t think Murkowski qualifies under that rubric, but her party affiliation is the least of her problems.

    There were libertarians before The Libertarian Party was founded.”

    I totally agree with Gene.

  37. George Phillies

    @40

    That’s because you do not appear to have a clue why we have political parties in this country.

    Supporting random people who are actually members of other parties only weakens the long term effort, even when the other people are libertarian-leaning.

  38. Andy

    “George Phillies // Sep 11, 2010 at 10:08 pm

    @40

    That’s because you do not appear to have a clue why we have political parties in this country.

    Supporting random people who are actually members of other parties only weakens the long term effort, even when the other people are libertarian-leaning.”

    I believe in principle over blind loyalty to a political party, including the Libertarian Party (which I’ve been a member of since 1996).

  39. Andy

    My reason for not supporting Lisa Murkowski has nothing to do with her being a member of the Republican Party. I don’t support Lisa Murkowski because she is too far from being a libertarian for my taste.

    If Lisa Murkowski were a Ron Paul type of Republican then I’d support her, but the fact of the matter is that she is not.

  40. Thomas L. Knapp

    Andy,

    It’s not a matter of “blind loyalty.” It’s a matter of deciding what you want, deciding what it takes to get it, and then sticking to that.

    If you believe that electoral politics is a viable means to libertarian ends, AND

    if you believe that a discretely, exclusively libertarian political party is a necessary vehicle for exploiting that means, THEN

    endorsing candidates of the opposing parties is a bad idea.

    It’s counter to your interests and it communicates to the people you’re trying to persuade that you’re stupid, dishonest or both.

  41. Andy

    “Thomas L. Knapp // Sep 11, 2010 at 10:39 pm

    Andy,

    It’s not a matter of “blind loyalty.” It’s a matter of deciding what you want, deciding what it takes to get it, and then sticking to that.”

    Political parties are just labels. It is the principles that matter.

    There are some people in the Libertarian Party for whom I would not cast a vote. Case in point: Bob Barr. I did refused to vote for him. I cast a write in vote for Ron Paul instead.

    Mindlessly supporting candidates just because of a party label is stupid.

  42. Buck Turgidson

    If gadfly George Phillies would quit the LP if AKLP nominates Murkowski. Please nominate Murkowski!

  43. Hugh

    @39,

    DOMA was passed under the Clinton administration. Massachusetts legalized same-sex marriage in 2004, so your dates don’t match up. And I was referring more to California which is trying to legalize mariajuana altogether. Do you think that Prop 19 advocates are racist? Also, you never gave your opinion about Proposition C, so am I to assume that you suppor the Obamacare monstrosity against those “racist” Missourians? You also deny that scientists were manipulating their data to hype global warming?

    Also, I find it fitting that George Phillies fails to mention SB1070 as an example of racism (an act which I actually oppose). Is this due to Dr. Phillies’s record of opposing free immigration and free trade? Since Dr. Phillies feels free to slander supporters of “states’ rights” as racists (regardless of the context), would it be inappropirate of me to point out Phillies’s xenophobia in opposing freedom of contract with Mexicans and Chinese people?

  44. Dondero is NO Insider

    Dondero: “Trust me, you guys only know half the story.”

    It’s pathetic, how Dondero tries to create the false impression that he’s some top LP political “insider” who knows the secrets of every state LP, and even the secrets of GOP senators.

    In reality, Dondero is widely regarded as a joke in LP circles. He knows no more about what’s going on in the LP, or GOP, or in Senate races than he can read on blogs or see on C-SPAN — same as every other political outsider.

    Hey Dondero, gathering paid petition signatures and running a blog doesn’t mean you know squat. It’s been a long time since you worked for, and were fired by, Ron Paul.

  45. Jill Pyeatt

    George, you don’t have to defend yourself against Dondero. He has his own brand of Libertarianism that looks much different than 98 % of the rest of ours.

  46. paulie

    George, you sure you’re a Libertarian?

    Phillies is a lot more libertarian than Dondero.

    Even defending liberal causes like Al Gore’s maniacle Global Warming scheme? Sheesh!

    Climate change science is not a political cause, regardless of what some people on either “side” try to make of it.

    George, I hate to say this, but you might be more comfortable in the Green Party.

    Dondero sounds like he would be more comfortable in the Republican Party. Oh wait, he already is.

  47. paulie

    Dondero: “George, I hate to say this, but you might be more comfortable in the Green Party. Doesn’t seem there’s anything libertarian about you at all.”

    JT: I think he might be more comfortable there, too. But you’re wrong about there being nothing libertarian about him. On all social issues, he’s definitely libertarian and in agreement with the vast majority of LP members.

    P: Also on peace/military spending/imperialism, which is Dondero’s real concern (Dondero’s on the big government side). As for economic issues, while Phillies is not as radical as myself or many LP members, he’s certainly for smaller government than what we will get anytime soon from Dondero’s Republicans such as Palin, McCain, Giuliani, Romney, Schwarzenegger, et tedious cetera, and for far smaller government than most Green Party active members support.

  48. paulie

    I’m not so sure about George any more, even on social issues. I mean we all know he’s for extra rights for Gays, government-funding of abortion, and kicking conservative speakers off of college campuses, all leftwing causes.

    We know no such thing. He’s for equal, not extra, rights for gay people, which makes him more libertarian than Dondero, who was going around falsely telling thousands of people that marriage equality would mean that churches would be forced by the government to perform gay marriages. I don’t think George supports government funding for abortions or kicking any speakers off campus, although he is free to correct me if I’m wrong.

    How does he stand on the Nanny-State?

    Anti-prohibition/drug war, unlike Dondero’s Republicans, such as all of those listed in one of my preceding comments and almost all others.

    Affirmative action? Is he in favor of abolishing quotas for college admissions and in hiring?

    I would imagine probably yes. I know I am. The government has no business classifying people by the pseudo-scientific concept of “race.”

    It’s easy for a lefty libertarian to adopt arcane lefty civil liberties issues like “CIA wiretapping,” that nobody gives a flip about.

    Many millions of people give a flip about it. And so should everyone else. Why would anyone want to live in an Orwellian “1984” nightmare of being constantly surveilled by government bureaucrats? For the illusion of safety, which government is completely incompetent to deliver? Talk about nanny state…it doesn’t get any more nanny state than living our entire lives on the nanny regime’s baby monitors.

  49. paulie

    Dondero: “Trust me, you guys only know half the story.”

    It’s pathetic, how Dondero tries to create the false impression that he’s some top LP political “insider” who knows the secrets of every state LP, and even the secrets of GOP senators.

    In reality, Dondero is widely regarded as a joke in LP circles. He knows no more about what’s going on in the LP, or GOP, or in Senate races than he can read on blogs or see on C-SPAN — same as every other political outsider.

    Hey Dondero, gathering paid petition signatures and running a blog doesn’t mean you know squat. It’s been a long time since you worked for, and were fired by, Ron Paul.

    In this case, however, he does have some inside information, since he is (or was) up in Alaska, working as Alaska LP Chair Scott Kohlhaas’s campaign manager for state legislature.

  50. paulie

    Would the communist Phillies quit the LP if the AkLP nominated Murkowski?

    That is a potential benefit that should not be overlooked when calculating whether this gambit would be worthwhile.

    Let’s be real here…Phillies is far from being a communist, and whether he quits the LP is not an issue that has any bearing on us potentially having the first Libertarian elected to Congress under the LP banner being someone who may well introduce anti-liberty legislation and/or be the difference maker on votes which will expand the size and scope of government – in the wrong direction.

    If that comes to pass, what supporter of liberty can support the LP ever again?

  51. paulie

    If gadfly George Phillies would quit the LP if AKLP nominates Murkowski. Please nominate Murkowski!

    So if nominating neo-nazi Tom Metzger would cause George to quit the LP, would you be in favor of that too?

  52. paulie

    “Two board members are also big Joe Miller supporters.”

    What is this?? If you’re a big supporter of any Republican candidate when there’s a Libertarian candidate in a race, you have no business being in a state LP leadership role. Should this even need to be said? It makes me sick.

    The original source on that is Dondero, who also said that Wes Benedict is a Miller supporter because Benedict said the AkLP should not give a ballot line to Murkowski. By that logic I am also a Miller supporter.

    However, I know that I’m no Miller supporter, and I don’t believe Wes is a Miller supporter. Thus any claim that Alaska LP board members are Miller supporters is automatically suspect.

    But it may be true, given that the Alaska LP has continuously run candidates that then endorse their opposition and other Republicans since at least 2006 (Toien and Haase, who have endorsed Ted Stevens, McCain and Palin) and since Kohlhaas has Dondero for his campaign manager.

  53. Be Rational

    Paulie @ 53, 54, 55 57, 58

    Nice job. Well said.

    And does George Phillies support repeal of the income tax and abolition of the IRS? Drastic reduction in the size and scope of the government?

    Sounds pretty libertarian to me. Of course, as we all know, there can only be one perfect libertarian. Each one of us has to compare the others to that standard of perfection and decide how tolerant we should be of the foibles of the others.

  54. George Phillies

    “Climategate” was a fabrication of our far-right-wing politicians, in which they took emails out of context, failed to check if the actual analysis was right or wrong, failed to notice obvious issues with their claims, and in general resorted to the long-winded obfuscation.

    With respect to Proposition C, I’ve not heard of it.

  55. Robert Capozzi

    gp26: If we run her, absent a prior record of having changed parties to Libertarian, a record it is too late to acquire, we line ourselves up with the Republican R’s

    me: Seems like that horse’s already out of the barn. Ls generally are perceived as lining up with conservatives, sometimes differentiated ones, to some extent.

    I don’t happen to believe that all Rs are racists, bigots, etc. Many aren’t.

    I would agree that if Murkowski runs on the L line, it would be ANOTHER example of Ls lining up with Rs. In an ideal situation, we could build the LP entirely without any perceived association with the Rs (or the Ds, for that matter). There would be no legacy philosophical perspectives and voting habits. People would contemplate political decisions with a blank slate, and arrive at decisions for liberty and against coercion.

    Unfortunately, we don’t have an ideal blank slate.

    Opportunities arise. AKLP will decide whether this opportunity is in the interest of liberty, or not.

  56. George Phillies

    Of course, one could imagine…but there is not enough time…Murkowski would change parties, and submit legislation — a whole pile of it — implementing each segment of the Party Platform, hopefully with rational transitioning including. That’s why there is a Cognressional Legislative Service.

    Transitioning? For example, you want to move the nuclear weapons ownership someplace else in the Federal government *before* you shut down the Department of Energy and sell its contents, or someone will point out that you are selling off the entire nuclear weapons stockpile.

  57. Thomas M. Sipos

    “Dondero’s Republicans such as Palin, McCain, Giuliani, Romney, Schwarzenegger, et tedious cetera,”

    Don’t forget that Dondero is also an enthusiastic supporter of Democrat Joe Lieberman.

    Lieberman is as socialist as any Democrat, but that’s fine with Dondero, because Lieberman is pro-war.

    In 2006, Dondero tried to get the Connecticut LP to endorse Lieberman, after Lieberman lost the Democratic primary.

    So you see, Dondero even supports Democratic socialists, provided they’re imperialist socialists.

  58. Robert Capozzi

    be rational: Each one of us has to compare the others to that standard of perfection and decide how tolerant we should be of the foibles of the others.

    me: Or simply respect that others have a different perspective. That may not be a “rational” stance, but it seems a heckuva lot more healthy. Consider that our ability to discern “perfection” is rather limited — haven’t you ever changed your mind, recognizing that your former stance was ill informed or based on poor judgment?

  59. Robert Capozzi

    tk: If you believe that electoral politics is a viable means to libertarian ends, AND if you believe that a discretely, exclusively libertarian political party is a necessary vehicle for exploiting that means, THEN endorsing candidates of the opposing parties is a bad idea. It’s counter to your interests and it communicates to the people you’re trying to persuade that you’re stupid, dishonest or both

    me: This may hold (I’m skeptical) IF one buys the word “exclusively.” Even if you include “exclusively,” I don’t think I agree. If the LP of TX endorsed Ron Paul for Congress, for ex., I am not sure that it communicates that Ls are “stupid, dishonest or both.” I may well communicate that in the case of Ron Paul, TX Ls find his views enough in line with theirs that he merits their endorsement. It may communicate to R voters that if they like Ron Paul, they may like the LP.

    While exclusivity is essentially in the LP’s national bylaws, virtually all voters are not aware of the exclusivity clause. (Indeed, such inside baseball matters are not common knowledge, just as the bylaws of the R or D parties are widely known. Almost no one cares about such things.)

    My take is that clause should be struck, although as a practical matter I would like to see the LP cross-endorse sparingly and very selectively. If cross-endorsing stands a reasonable chance of advancing liberty, I’d suggest it is indicated. In most cases, it’s likely not indicated.

  60. Jose C

    “Two board members are also big Joe Miller supporters.”

    What is this?? If you’re a big supporter of any Republican candidate when there’s a Libertarian candidate in a race, you have no business being in a state LP leadership role. Should this evenneed to be said? It makes me sick.

    The barn door has been left open and the horse is long gone. Some in party leadership have supported candidates of another political party. They have urged party members to support candidates of another political party. They have worked behind the scenes to make sure a Libertarian candidate is not nominated because a Republican they support should not have a Libertarian taking votes away from the Republican. This happened in California many years ago. If some can hint around supporting Republican Ron Paul in the last Presidential election how can this surprise us. It can’t! It is too late. We have sold out long ago. It also makes me sick but it is too late. The damage has been done.

  61. Be Rational

    RC @ 68

    Actually, my comment was meant to be a slightly humorous allusion to the fact that most L’s and their disagreements stem from the self identified viewpoint of his or her combination of libertarian positions as being perfect of ideal and then judging others according to their distance from this ideal. Those who are too far away are therefore NOT libertarian, according to their own personal viewpoint. But, those same non-libertarians may be just fine from someone else’s perspective.

    So, Phillies and Dondero attack each other for being non-libertarian. Bob Barr or Ron Paul may or may not be close enough to someone’s own position so they may or may not be libertarian enough.

    Each of us has a view of the libertarian quadrant and how big it is or should be, who is in it and who isn’t. For some, there is a big tent and others tolerate very few deviations. Many have issues that are deal breakers or litmus test issues. Yet, somehow, we have to try to aggregate all of this into a funtioning electoral machine that can nominate, fund and elect candidates and bring about electoral change.

    For me, Ron Paul, Bob Barr, Robert Capozzi, David Bergland, George Phillies, and the late Murray Rothbard are all inside the libertarian quadrant.

    Dondero and Murkowski are outside. Rand Paul used to be inside, but what I’ve heard of his shifting campaign statements may have moved him out of the libertarian quadrant.

  62. Robert Capozzi

    be rational, thanks. I think I like the sentiment you express. I’d certainly agree that your L list’d be mine, too, if I thought it was useful to think in “quadrant” terms.

    However, I don’t. Mostly, I consider whether the next decision advances liberty or not. If I do, then I support it; if not, not.

    If I lived in Rand Paul’s state, I might vote for him, even if I don’t consider him to be L. Were Dondero to be a viable candidate somewhere for something, I might vote for him, even though I disagree with him strongly, esp. on f.p. Depending on the outcome of AKLP’s deliberartions and assessments, it COULD be that putting Murkowski on the L line advances liberty; if so, I’d support the move, despite strong disagreements on Murkowski’s voting record.

    I am, in short, Gumby. 😉

  63. Be Rational

    RC,

    I can agree generally with your voting sentiment as well.

    There are candidates who might be close enough to libertarian, and the best option in a given race where there was no LP candidate, whose election would be better than a victory by their opponent, so that I could vote for them, even though I would not support that candidate as an LP candidate. However, in many races there is no one good enough so that it is better to vote for no one for that particular office.

    As to Murkowski, the actual topic of this thread, she would have to do things as I’ve previously mentioned to earn a spot on the LP line. She doesn’t have to be perfect, but she has to get in the ballpark and on the same team.

  64. Hugh Jass

    Lest I be mistaken, I believe that Dr. Phillies is much more of a libertarian than Eric Dondero claims to be.

  65. Eric Dondero

    Here’s a little historical factoid. (Never thought I’d see the day where I agreed with Gene Berkman on something):

    Roger MacBride, 1976 Libertarian Party Presidential candidate served two terms in the Vermon State Legislature as a Republican, 1966-70, and ran for Governor that year as a Republican. Roger used to tell the story of how he would describe to the media in his governor’s run, how he was a “libertarian.” But back then nobody knew what that meant.

    Exit question: Since there was no Libertarian Party invented at the time Roger was in the Legislature, was he still an elected libertarian? His beliefs were exactly the same in 1966 as they were in 1976.

  66. Eric Dondero

    Hilarious that someone above says that Joe Lieberman is a “Democrat Socialist,” at the same time he’s getting bashed all over the media for being one of the “centrists” pushing for an extension of Bush’s tax cuts. The Left is crucifying him (and Nebraska’s Ben Nelson) for this.

    Oh, and btw, in 2006, Ned Lamonte ran TV commercials attacking Lieberman for “supporting Bush’s tax cuts, wanting to end affirmative action, and supporting school vouchers.”

    Which is it? The guy gets hammered from the Left, and hammered from some Libertarian purists. I’d say, he’s the best that could be hoped for from far-left Connecticut. Not a libertarian by any stretch. But halfway decent and reasonable on some economic issues.

  67. JT

    Dondero: “Since there was no Libertarian Party invented at the time Roger was in the Legislature, was he still an elected libertarian?”

    It depends on how he voted on bills and which ones he sponsored/co-sponsored while in office. It doesn’t depend on whether he called himself a libertarian or not.

  68. Eric Dondero

    “He who worketh hardest for the libertarian movement, is doth the most libertarian.”

    Old Chinese proverb:

    Man who claim to be a liberarian, but sit behind computer screen and bitch and complain about others who do all the work for libertarian movement, is not a libertarian.

    Quote from Eric Dondero:

    You are judged on your libertarianism by your dedication and hard work for the cause of liberty. On that score, the most libertarian individuals in the United States include: Paul Jacob, Scott Kohlhaas, Leon Drolet, Scott Tillman, Crystal Jurzinsky, Aaron Starr, and myself. (Not necessarily in that order.)

  69. JT

    Lieberman isn’t a socialist or a Democrat. I wouldn’t say he’s good from a libertarian perspective either.

  70. Eric Dondero

    JT, that’s already explained in the post above. Again, Roger MacBride was the exact same individual in 1966 (including his votes in the VT legislature), as he was in 1976.

    He was Rose Wilder Lane’s maternal grandson for gosh sakes. He hung out with Ayn Rand, Isabel Paterson and his Grandma in NYC and Connecticut throughout the late 1950s and 60s.

    To even question Roger’s dedication to libertarian values is sacreligious.

    Again, the question stands? Since Roger MacBride was a REPUBLICAN legislator from 1966 to 1970 before the Libertarian Party was even invented, and had a voting record reflecting libertarianism, would he be considered an elected “libertarian”?

  71. Eric Dondero

    Good point JT. Lieberman is no longer a Democrat. He cut all ties with the Democrat Party last Spring, officially. He is no longer designated as an “Independent Democrat,” but simply as a straight-out Independent.

    You’d think this blog with the name Independent Political Report, would be a little more supportive of him. After all the only other “Independent” in the Senate – Sanders, still has an official tie with the Democrat Party, whereas Lieberman does not.

  72. Thomas L. Knapp

    Andy,

    You write:

    “Mindlessly supporting candidates just because of a party label is stupid.”

    And I didn’t say otherwise.

    But, partisan electoral politics is a competitive sport and a team sport. Team “leaders” have both fiduciary obligations, and obvious reasons for those obligations, to their teams.

    Tony LaRussa wouldn’t get to remain manager of the Cardinals after holding a news conference saying that he’s going to play his third string next week because he backs the Cubs for the National League pennant; nor would Albert Pujols keep his contract if he announced that he’d be sitting out a couple of games because he’d like to see the Reds go to the World Series.

    The rank and file members/voters owe a party nothing. They’re free to grab another team’s jersey, paint themselves another team’s colors, and wave their big foam fingers for whomever they want.

    Party “leaders” — officers and committee members — on the other hand, need to decide which fucking team they’re on and be on that team.

  73. Eric Dondero

    From 71: For me, Ron Paul, Bob Barr, Robert Capozzi, David Bergland, George Phillies, and the late Murray Rothbard are all inside the libertarian quadrant.

    Correction: That should read LEFTWING Libertarian Quadrant. All the individual named by bogus name poster @ 71 except Barr and Capozzi are thoroughly LEFTWING Libertarians, certainly NOT representative of the broader libertarian movement.

  74. Michael H. Wilson

    @ 80 Eric wrote: “He was Rose Wilder Lane’s maternal grandson for gosh sakes”. Eric you may want to check that statement out. I do not believe that is correct.

    @ 78 Eric wrote: “You are judged on your libertarianism by your dedication and hard work for the cause of liberty. On that score, the most libertarian individuals in the United States include: Paul Jacob, Scott Kohlhaas, Leon Drolet, Scott Tillman, Crystal Jurzinsky, Aaron Starr, and myself. (Not necessarily in that order.)” So I guess all of us who volunteer on weekends or whenever are just a bunch of putz’ eh? In other words you’re fuckin’ nutz

  75. Eric Dondero

    Michael, it is indeed correct. I served as Roger’s political aide from 1991 to the very day of his death in 1995. I was with him in his final weeks.

    Roger was a close friend of mine. Believe me, I know his personal history.

    Ms. Lane adopted Roger in the 1950s, legally, when they were living in Connecticut. Greenwich I believe? Roger was the heir to the Little House on the Prairie fortune. He co-produced the Little House series on NBC in its first two seasons, before Michael Landon fired him. Roger wrote a series of 5 books sequels to the Little House series.

    Oh, and in case you’re not aware, Rose Wilder Lane was the daughter of Laura Ingalls-Wilder.

    Get it?

  76. Eric Dondero

    Interesting factoid:

    Roger MacBride died at his South Miami beach mansion of a massive hemorage in early 1995. He died alone, one night after his male partner left him alone at his request.

    The home was then purchased months later by Barry Gibb of the famous BeeGees.

    Gibb died of a massive heart attack in that home, in the very same room Roger died, two years later.

    Bizarre to say the least.

  77. Eric Dondero

    Michael, yeah, your help is appreciated. But if you’re not a fulltime balls-to-the-wall libertarian activist you’ll never make the top 10.

    I’ve given up more than one good paying job to ensure that Libertarians get elected to office (at very low pay, and many times at no pay at all, sleeping on sofas and on floors in sleeping bags), and to ensure that libertarian ballot initiatives make the ballot. Ditto for Paul Jacob, Tillman, Drolet, and the others.

    If you don’t sacrifice for Liberty, you don’t get to call yourself a Top Tier Libertarian.

    Sorry. I know the truth hurts.

  78. Robert Capozzi

    ed, yes, MacBride was an elected libertarian R. He wasn’t yet a L, as there wasn’t such a thing in that time frame.

    Whether he was the “same guy” in 1967 and 1976, I dunno. My guess is some of his views may well have changed, and they may have changed more between ’76 and ’95.

    He was a R, then L, then R, but most of his life he was for liberty.

    I’m not sure what the point is, though.

    I’m also not sure why you don’t consider me a left-wing L, but thanks. It’s true that I am not a pacifist, but I am, I think it’s fair to say, more dovish than you are, more dovish than say Root. I’m not sure where Barr stands on foreign policy these days, but I’m happy to be viewed in his camp. But I’m certainly more left-liberal (for lack of a better term) than he is on civil liberties matters. I’ll answer to moderate L, if labels are absolutely necessary.

  79. Be Rational

    Interesting that Dondero thinks Ron Paul is a leftwing libertarian.

    As for contributions to the LP, the fact that Dondero caused the LP to fail on several ballot drives in 2008 and aided the forces of the statist Republicans in those states and on many other occasions would certainly exclude him from the list of those who work for the cause of liberty.

    And the late Roger MacBride was a personal friend of mine. He was the adopted grandson.

  80. Michael H. Wilson

    Eric you clarified my point. McBride was the adopted grandson. He was not by any stretch of your imagination a blood relative and your original statement left that idea out there for others to misunderstand.

    BTW I have spent two weekends out there working for the LP in the last month and am sitting here writing our news letter and I am not special by any stretch. There are plenty of other people working in what time they have for this movement so be thankful for their efforts and don’t give us this crap that there is a special group at the top.

  81. Robert Capozzi

    br: Interesting that Dondero thinks Ron Paul is a leftwing libertarian.

    me: Eric may clarify, but he defines “leftwing” in a non-standard way, is my understanding. It seems to mostly revolve around foreign policy and those who don’t support an aggressive stance against the jihad are left wing. Since Dr Paul doesn’t, that makes him left wing, even though Dr. Paul is widely perceived a man of the right by most.

    Some Ls didn’t support the Iraq War, but did support forceful action in Afghanistan (in 02), so I guess Dondero is more forgiving of us. I think! 😉

  82. Michael H. Wilson

    Btw I didn’t quite finish my comments above @ 90. Many people who can don’t do enough but there are others who do more than most. Some have gone to prison for the movement and I cannot compare to what they have given up for the cause nor do I think Eric can.

    On Friday Marc Emery was sent to the FCI at Lompoc for distributing cannabis seeds but the real reason and it is in the government’s own statement is because of his political activities working for legalization of cannabis. They wanted to shut down him and his efforts at the cause. I have to wonder how many people Eric’s list of his top ten list have done the same?

    How many Eric?

  83. Eric Dondero

    Michael, you are indeed correct. There is nobody in this movement who has sacrificed more than Paul Jacob. My friend Paul, as you most assuredly know, spent 6 months in a fed peniteniary for refusing to register for the Draft in 1985. (Ron Paul and Ed Clark testified at his trial.)

    I barely escaped a similar fate. The SS was instituted in 1980, same year I joined the Navy. I got out after a 4-year enlistment in 1985 with an honorable.

    Well, they hadn’t planned on Veterans registering for the Draft. And they had no idea what to do with me.

    I refused to sign the card, even though I was clearly under 25. I told them in explicit terms to “shove it up their ass,” and that I’d be more than happy for them to come try to throw me in jail. The head of the S.S. at the time even got on the phone with me, and pleaded with me to sign the card. I told him “Fuck off and die,” in those exact words.

    Needless to say, they backed down.

    Fast forward years later, working as Senior Aide to US Congressman Ron Paul I won an appointment for my local Draft Board – Houston Region. I still serve today. And am one of three know Libertarians who serve in the Selective Service. One of the others ironically, is our very own Thomas L. Knapp US Marine Corps Veteran in the St. Louis Region.

    Eric Dondero, 20-year Federal Appointee
    Selective Service Board, Houston Region

  84. Eric Dondero

    Michael, I put Paul Jacob at the very top of the list of Libertarian activists in the Nation. He is without doubt Number One.

    (I am probably Number Two, though Scott Kohlhaas may challenge me for that spot, and have a legitimate claim.)

  85. Eric Dondero

    Michael, Emery is a Canadian. So, I’m not sure he’s in the same category of us American Libertarians. Besides, he’s quite the off-the-charts Lefty on foreign policy. Excellent on free enterprise, and civil liberties. But an absolute nutcase Socialist Leftwinger on defending America and American values.

  86. Eric Dondero

    Capozzi, right you are. If you supported the War in Afghanistan, and opposed the War in Iraq, however misquided on Iraq, you’re still a “middle-of-the-roader” Libertarian in my book, and quite rational and reasonable.

    My former boss Ron Paul opposed both the War in Iraq and the War in Afghanistan, which eventually led to my resignation from his staff after 12 years of service.

    Ron Paul is a definite Leftwinger Libertarian. Thankfully his son Rand is not, and is solidly a Rightwing Libertarian. I wish I could trade my Congressman Ron Paul here in south Texas for Rand. But sadly, Rand comes home to Lake Jackson only for the occasional visit.

  87. Michael H. Wilson

    I met Paul years ago when I was collecting signatures.

    How about Jim Lewis or Steve Kubby? What about Brian Epis? I think he has been fighting this for ten years or more.

    Does any of the time these people have spent in prison even register with you??? How many others have spent time in custody?

    And don’t get on your high horse with me over a draft card. I never signed on either.

  88. JT

    Dondero: “To even question Roger’s dedication to libertarian values is sacreligious.”

    It should be obvious that I was making the general point that it doesn’t matter whether any politician calls himself or herself a libertarian; it only matters if they consistently act to reduce the size and scope of government. I can’t say whether or not someone was an elected libertarian if I don’t know personally what his or her actual voting record was while in office. I’m sorry, but I don’t judge that based on who someone’s grandma was.

    Dondero: “Again, the question stands? Since Roger MacBride was a REPUBLICAN legislator from 1966 to 1970 before the Libertarian Party was even invented, and had a voting record reflecting libertarianism, would he be considered an elected “libertarian”?”

    And again, if he voted consistently on economic and social issues against expanding or in favor of reducing (depending on what the bills said) the state government, then yes. Obviously, to be an elected libertarian you don’t need to have been a candidate of the Libertarian Party. You DO need to vote consistently in favor of less government authority both economically and socially, unlike most of the Republicans that you probably consider libertarians.

  89. Eric Dondero

    Jim Lewis yes. But he’s long since dead. Steve Kuby, most certainly. Never heard of Brian Epis.

    Irwinn Schiff for sure! Sorry, forgot to include him on the list. He’s still in the Pen, so he could be considered even higher than Paul J. on sacrificing for the movement.

  90. Eric Dondero

    JT, libertarianism is not just judged on one’s voting record, or one’s positions on the issues.

    The way to judge someone’s right to use the label libertarianism is threefold. Think of a three-legged chair.

    First leg is issues-stances, voting record, survey scores like NTU.

    Second leg is whether or not that person chooses to call themselves a “libertarian.” I put a lot of stock in this one. I have little sympathy for those individuals who shy away from the libertarian label.

    Third leg is activism on behalf of the libertarian movement and libertarian causes. Petition drives, campaigns, fundraising, event coordination, newsletter editing, website managing ect….

    A person who is 100% libertarian on the issues is still not a real libertarian in my book, if all they ever do is get on-line and argue, and mouth off, but wouldn’t know a clipboard if it smacked them upside the ass. The person who may only be 70% libertarian on the issues, yet collects 5,000 signatures for the Libertarian Party, to me is 1000 times more LIBERTARIAN than that lazy-ass fuck.

  91. JT

    Dondero: “Michael, I put Paul Jacob at the very top of the list of Libertarian activists in the Nation. He is without doubt Number One.

    (I am probably Number Two, though Scott Kohlhaas may challenge me for that spot, and have a legitimate claim.)”

    Being a “libertarian” and being a “libertarian activist” are two different things. The first just refers to what one thinks; the second refers to what one thinks and does.

  92. Eric Dondero

    Alas, you are indeed correct JT. And the latter trumps the former.

    Nothing worse than an armchair “libertarian” who may be 100% pure on the issues, but doesn’t do jackshit for the movement. That person has no right to call themselves a “libertarian” in my book.

    Again:

    He who worketh hardest for the libertarian movement, and sacrifices the most, doth have the most right to claim thyself a libertarian.

    (How’s that for poetic?)

  93. JT

    Dondero: “A person who is 100% libertarian on the issues is still not a real libertarian in my book, if all they ever do is get on-line and argue, and mouth off, but wouldn’t know a clipboard if it smacked them upside the ass.”

    Again, the concept “libertarian” refers to an overall political perspective. When pollsters ask people whether they’re conservative or liberal, they’re not asking whether or not those people do work for conservative or liberal campaigns and initiatives. They’re asking, “what’s your general attitude on political issues?” Someone who’s asked might be the long-time president of a liberal or conservative organization or might only be a fan of Thom Hartmann or Rush Limbaugh. It doesn’t matter as to whether they’re a conservative, liberal, or libertarian.

    Also, I’ll definitely take any politician who consistently votes to reduce to size and scope of government over any politician with a mixed record who calls himself or herself a “libertarian.”

  94. Robert Capozzi

    ed: Ron Paul is a definite Leftwinger Libertarian.

    me: It appears I understand your categorizations. Dr. Paul certainly is not “leftwing” — in the widely held sense — on many issues: abortion and immigration spring to mind. For me, he represents the constitutionalist libertarian school well. He’s quite a bit different than abolitionist anarchists, for example, who would likely also be “leftwing” in your model.

    Interestingly, I can’t think of a strains of hawkish (rightist, in your book) Ls offhand, but there probably are some.

    The differences seem larger on the dovish side of things, although there probably are some differences on right L world over abortion, possibly immigration.

    Right (hawk) Ls seem more interested in real politics, for non-obvious reasons. That may partially explain why the sub-schisms are less pronounced.

  95. Michael H. Wilson

    @ 103 Eric writes; “He who worketh hardest for the libertarian movement, and sacrifices the most, doth have the most right to claim thyself a libertarian.

    (How’s that for poetic?)”

    Asinine!

    I knew a woman of about 80 years of age who had very damn little but she gave money every year to the LP.

  96. Hugh

    Interesting, so Dondero’s categorization of left vs. right is their stance toward the warfare state? I suppose I should have known based on Dondero’s history that that is really the only issue he cares about.

  97. Eric Dondero

    Robert, there’s lots of Leftwinger Pro-Lifers. Look at Nat Hentoff.

    You can’t judge Ron Paul as leftwing or rightwing on the abortion issue.

    You can judge him on Pro-America, Anti-America. If one supports American values they are “Rightwing.” If they oppose Americanism they are decidedly Leftwing.

    RP is absolutely Americanist on Economic issues, and on 90% of Civil Liberties. On Foreign Policy about as far leftwing as you can get. So, he’s a wash. A “50%-er” if you will.

  98. Eric Dondero

    Michael, correction. I do agree with you. Perhaps I should’ve been more clear, and complete.

    David Koch doesn’t petition for Libertarian Party ballot access, or for property rights initiatives. Yet he donates millions of $$$ to libertarian efforts. Thus he has earned his libertarian stripes.

    Yes, money is one way to contribute to the cause, just as valid and valued as grass roots activism.

  99. Eric Dondero

    Hugh, we will never have economic liberties, nor civil liberties if the Islamists take over our country and impose Sharia Law. So yes, I do care about foreign policy the most. All our liberties stem from our basic liberty to live free from oppression from other nations, and other invading forces. Today, the only threat we face from abroad is Radical Islam. (Well, a tiny bit from Mexican drug cartels too.)

  100. Eric Dondero

    BTW Capozzi, Ron Paul is a leftwinger on the death penalty too, opposed to it.

    But you’re right he gains some rightwing points on his tough on immigration stance.

    Again, he’s a wash.

  101. Eric Dondero

    Some examples:

    RIGHTWING LIBERTARIANS: Sarah Palin,
    Glenn Beck, Pamela Geller, Geert Wilders, Ted Nugent, Neal Boortz, Larry Elder, Gene Simmons, Tammy Bruce, John Hospers, Jack Wheeler, David Harsanyi, Kristin Davis, Roger Stone, Howie Carr, Wayne Root, Rand Paul.

    LEFTWING LIBERTARIANS: Justin Raimondo, Lew Rockwell, Eric Garris, Gene Berkman, George Phillies, Michael Badnarik, David Boaz, Wes Benedict, David Nolan, Mary Ruwart, Barry Hess, Ernie Hancock, Alex Jones, Angela Keaton.

    TRUE MIDDLE-OF-THE-ROADER LIBERTARIANS: Dave Nalle, David Koch, Nick Gillespie, Matt Welch, Bob Barr, Mark Rutherford.

  102. Timothy Yung

    Holy shit is this the same Eric Dondero who was Ron Paul’s former chief of staff. Way to backstab a friend. Anyways on foreign policy we have to stop invading other countries and nation-building. This is spreading our military forces too thin. So Ron Paul’s foreign policy agenda will make our nation more secure. We had Bin Laden in a corner until Bush decided to invade Iraq. Go after Al-Qaeda but stop nation-building and stop being the world’s military bitch. We have to stop babying South Korea, Germany, Japan, Israel, and Taiwan and let them defend themselves.

  103. Eric Dondero

    Umm, he backstabbed me Timothy. I got him elected to Congress in 1996, busted my ass for him, left a good life in Tallahassee, Florida and moved to Texas, cause he was running as a Libertarian Republican, and pro-defense. Then as soon as he was safe in his seat 4 years later he turned on his Veterans in his staff, and his pro-defense supporters and became crazy anti-War.

    The people of the 14th CD elected Ron Paul to Congress originally cause he told them he was pro-defense, and pro-America. Then after 9/11 he changed. And those of us who originally sacrificed for him, felt betrayed.

  104. Eric Dondero

    Timothy, your foreign policy views are hopelessly simiplistic and naiive. It’s not just Al Qaeda. We are at War with worldwide Islamo-Fascism. You get rid of Al Qaeda, another radical Islamist group under another name will rise up. Hell. It’s already happening. Look at Al Shabaab.

    It’s not just Al Qaeda and Bin Laden that’s the problem. It’s Hezbollah, Hamas, Iran, and Radical Islamists trying to take over Europe from Copenhagen to Amsterdamn. Wake up!

  105. Eric Dondero

    Timothy, we decided to invade Iraq, cause Saddam Hussein was harboring Al Qaeda terrorists like Zarcawi, and playing host to two Al Qaeda terrorist training camps – Answar Al-Islam in the north, and Salman Pac 20 miles south of Baghdad. Get your facts straight dude.

  106. Hugh Jass

    Eric @ 110:

    You’re truly delusional if you think that Muslims overseas present a greater threat to our freedoms than the ruling cabal in Washington DC. Are the evil Islamists the ones who wiretap our conversations without a warrant, force us to pay trillions of dollars on debt they have acquired, devalue our dollar through counterfeiting, and imprison Americans for using their bodies the way they wish? At best, Islamists and interventionists are equally guilty of killing civilians, torturing people, and asserting the power to execute American citizens without due process.

  107. Hugh Jass

    The “Islamists” pose about as much of a threat to our freedoms as the Communists posed to the freedoms of Germans in the thirties.

  108. Timothy Yung

    Eric, radical Islam is worse now than before. We did not bring democracy and freedom to Afghanistan and Iraq. In Iraq women and Christians have less freedom than they did under Saddam. http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/19/leaving-iraq-an-iraqi-christian/
    Millions of Christian Iraqis are leaving because the government is cracking down on them. In Iraq and Afghanistan we have puppet governments that are installing Sharia law. In Afghanistan the puppet government only has control over Kabul the rest of the country is controlled by the Islamist Northern Alliance. The tribal leaders in Iraq who we bribed during the surge are forcing women to wear covers over their heads.

  109. Eric Dondero

    “Wiretap our conversations without a warrant”??? Get real. Do you know anybody, who knows anybody who has ever had their wires tapped without a warrant?

    Arcane, bullshit made-up “civil liberties” that nobody cares about.

    Too bad you don’t care as much for practical civil liberties issues THAT ACTUALLY HAS AN AFFECT ON PEOPLES’ LIVES, like seat belt laws, drinking age laws, and Muslim attempts to outlaw booze in Philadelphia, and bars/taverns in Tennessee.

  110. Eric Dondero

    I stand corrected. It was Maurice Gibbs not Andy Gibbs of the BeeGees brothers who died in Roger MacBride’s home in 2003. And the home was purchased a couple years after Roger’s death by Maurice Gibbs.

    He died in the same room as Roger 5 years after he purchased the home.

  111. Eric Dondero

    Oh my God! You didn’t just say that Timothy Yung. You are entirely fucked in the head if you think that Iraqis have less freedom now than they did under Saddam Hussein.

    Dude, you are complete and utter asshole. Fuck you. You’re like a goddamned traitor to liberty. How fucking dare you!

    Even the most hardened leftwinger America-hater would never make an outrageous statement like you just made.

    Any Leftwing Libertarians out there agree with Timothy the fuckface here? Anyone want to come to his defense and agree that Iraqis have less freedom now than under Saddam Hussein.

    That’s like saying life was better for the Cambodians under Pol Pot than under the imperfect government they live under today.
    Or, Jews were better off under Hitler, than in today’s Germany under Merkel.

    My gosh, you’re an asshole Timothy. Fuck you! Fuck you! Fuck you! Fuck you! You should be absolutely ashamed for saying such a thing.

  112. paulie

    With respect to Proposition C, I’ve not heard of it.

    Missouri’s effort to opt out of Obamacare. I worked on a similar issue in Colorado.

  113. Eric Dondero

    Ask a Kurd if they would like Saddam Hussein back in power?

    Do you realize how many Kurds Saddam Hussein gassed to death in the 1990s? Estimates range from 200,000 to 500,000. He attempted to systematically slaughtered an entire race of people.

    Look at some of the photos Timothy fuckface. Go ahead. Google – Kurds gassing Saddam Hussein under Images. Look closely at those photos.

    You fuck. If I ever see you, I will literally spit in your face. You genocidal Hitler-ite Nazi bastard.

    HOW FUCKING DARE YOU DEFEND SADDAM HUSSEIN. HOW FUCKING DARE YOU!!!! ASSHOLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  114. Eric Dondero

    Just Googled “Timothy Yung.” No such person exists. Must be Paulie again using a bogus name.

    Hey Timothy Yung if you actually exist call me now 979-848-4575. Cell phone’s right by my side.

  115. paulie

    the most libertarian individuals in the United States include….Scott Kohlhaas,

    ROFL. Maybe if he paid Andy he could start claiming to be a legitimate libertarian again.

  116. paulie

    You’d think this blog with the name Independent Political Report, would be a little more supportive of him.

    IPR as a blog takes no stances, the sole exception that I know of being our editorial against the “Top Two” system. Individual writers do have views (which vary quite a bit between us), but we try to keep them out of the posts and confined to the comments.

  117. Eric Dondero

    Paulie, Scott has always paid me in full. And his checks have never bounced.

    Perhaps if you guys hadn’t murdered that puppy dog in the forest, people might have more respect for you all. Just saying…

  118. Hugh Jass

    It shows Mr. Dondero’s lack of an argument that he has to resort to calling his opponent “fuckface”. The poster wasn’t defending Saddam Hussein, he was making an observation that the American invasion has deteriorated an already bad situation. While Mr. Dondero may try to appeal to emotion by inciting his execution of the Kurds, such a one-sided view neglects to mention the >100,000 killed either by U.S. troops or by the Islamist insurgents that the American invasion metasticized (keep in mind that that is a conservative estimate of the death toll), not to mention the 5000 American troops killed after being sent into harm’s way in Iraq and Afghanistan. Also, since Mr. Dondero is so gung-ho about invading Iran, I find it surprising (well, not really) that he supports the American invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan that have turned those countries into Iranian client states.

  119. paulie

    From 71: For me, Ron Paul, Bob Barr, Robert Capozzi, David Bergland, George Phillies, and the late Murray Rothbard are all inside the libertarian quadrant.

    Correction: That should read LEFTWING Libertarian Quadrant. All the individual named by bogus name poster @ 71 except Barr and Capozzi are thoroughly LEFTWING Libertarians, certainly NOT representative of the broader libertarian movement.

    Bergland is right down the middle. Rothbard voted for Strom Thurmond, Richard Nixon and Pat Buchanan, so I wouldn’t say he was a leftist. At best, he had a strategy of cooperating with the left for a short time – late 1960s – just as he later had the “paleo” strategy of cooperating with the far right in the early 1990s.

  120. paulie

    but an absolute nutcase Socialist Leftwinger on defending America and American values.

    Translation: those who oppose big government spending when it comes to the military are the socialists, while those who support lots and lots of big government spending are the non-socialists. Yeah. LOL.

  121. George Phillies

    @89

    Now, I rank Mr. Dondero’s efforts to prove that there is a fascist wing of the libertarian movement as being less plausible than Robert Milnes’ claim that PLAS can work; the latter only fail in the arithmetic.

    However, the suggestion that Dondero caused ballot drives to fail in 2008 I find seriously less than believable, given the facts known to me. Indeed, if Eric had been deployed to CT and RI, as opposed to working very hard in NH, we might have had ballot access in those states.

  122. Eric Dondero

    Huge Ass, “100,000 Iraqi deaths” according to far leftist America-hating media sources like Daily Kos, NY Times, Washington Post, and Moveon.org. Stop trying to pass off leftwing talking points as “facts.”

    Next you’ll be quoting Michael Moore and Code Pink.

  123. Eric Dondero

    @ 138

    Well, jeez, thank you George.

    As I’ve always said, you’re totally wrong on foreign policy but the finest of gentelman on a personal level.

    Hat tip to you my fine Sir.

  124. paulie

    Hugh, we will never have economic liberties, nor civil liberties if the Islamists take over our country and impose Sharia Law

    Yes, 3 million Muslim Americans (including the many non-radical ones who don’t follow Sharia Law themselves) will force Sharia Law on 300 million non-Muslims. ROFL.

  125. Eric Dondero

    I’m taking a leave from this thread.

    Got to get back to working on my most excellent website – 1,000 unique visitors a day.

    Be happy to debate any of you leftwinger libertarians – except fuckface Timothy Yung – over at LibertarianRepublican.net

    Bye…

  126. Daniel Surman

    @Eric Dondero I am pretty sure Paulie is not impersonating “Timothy Yung”. In fact, it is easy to find results if you add “libertarian” at the end of your search.

  127. paulie

    RIGHTWING LIBERTARIANS: Sarah Palin,
    Glenn Beck, Pamela Geller, Geert Wilders, Ted Nugent, Neal Boortz, Larry Elder, Gene Simmons, Tammy Bruce, John Hospers, Jack Wheeler, David Harsanyi, Kristin Davis, Roger Stone, Howie Carr, Wayne Root, Rand Paul.

    Most of those are not even close to being libertarians of any sort. Kristin Davis I would say is more left wing, since her top issues are all civil liberties issues (gay marriage, marijuana, sex workers rights) — although she does have that stupid view on the non-mosque that’s not at Ground Zero, but overall I still like her. Wayne has become much more libertarian in the last couple of years, I like him too regardless of what a lot of my fellow radical libertarians think. A few of these people I don’t know much if anything about their views.

    LEFTWING LIBERTARIANS: Justin Raimondo, Lew Rockwell, Eric Garris,

    None of those are leftwing. All lean right on some issues, such as immigration and/or abortion, that divide libertarians.

    Gene Berkman,

    Dunno.

    George Phillies,

    George does emphasize left-leaning issues. I’ll grant that one.

    Michael Badnarik,

    Not so much, he’s closer to the Constitution Party than to anyone on the left.

    David Boaz, Wes Benedict, David Nolan, Mary Ruwart, Barry Hess, Ernie Hancock, Alex Jones, Angela Keaton.

    Mostly centrist libertarians, except Mary and Angela. Jones is more of a Constitution Party type than a libertarian.

    TRUE MIDDLE-OF-THE-ROADER LIBERTARIANS: Dave Nalle, David Koch, Nick Gillespie, Matt Welch, Bob Barr, Mark Rutherford.

    Mostly right-libertarians, except Rutherford perhaps.

  128. paulie

    The people of the 14th CD elected Ron Paul to Congress originally cause he told them he was pro-defense, and pro-America.

    Which he is. Military adventurism, stirring the world’s hornets nests, and imperialism are anti-defense and Anti-America. Those policies make us less secure, and since they lead to wars and terrorism, they also lead to destruction of civil and economic liberties as well. Nothing promotes domestic tyranny/police state and economic nationalization more than war.

  129. paulie

    Islamo-Fascism.

    Islam is not very compatible with fascism. Fascism seeks to overthrow established tradition and authority and supplant them with an all-powerful central state – to a slightly less radical extent than communism does, but strongly in that direction. Fascists tend to oppose traditional religion, but they are more incrementalist in opposing it than Communists are. Islam, for its part, is much more compatible with a decentralized social order based around merchants and extended families.

  130. Gene Berkman

    In response to 144:

    Speaking for myself, I think in reality libertarianism is non-euclidean, based on certain fundamental principles which are widely accepted at an abstract level, but routinely betrayed by politicos of “right” and “left.”

    Given that, however, in the 1970s “right-wing libertarians” were distinguished by our commitment to laissez faire capitalism. We sometimes made common cause with the left against the Vietnam War and the draft. But even mainstream figures such as Milton Friedman cooperated with liberals against the draft.

    I am pro-choice on abortion, I favor non-discriminatory marriage, and I support a relatively liberal policy on immigration. I oppose war but I recognize there are authoritarian and totalitarian regimes that pose a threat to American freedom, so I think national defense is necessary.

    On economics, I accept Austrian School views but I sell books on economics by Friedman & other Chicago school economists. So yea, by 1970s standards I am a right-wing libertarian.

  131. paulie

    cause Saddam Hussein was harboring Al Qaeda terrorists

    That’s not even logical. Hussein was a secular dictator, the exact type that Al Qaida considers traitors to Islam and would behead any time they could. But, America’s invasion of Iraq was certainly the biggest recruiting spur groups like Al Qaida ever got.

  132. paulie

    “Wiretap our conversations without a warrant”??? Get real. Do you know anybody, who knows anybody who has ever had their wires tapped without a warrant?

    Yes. Everyone.

  133. paulie

    Do you realize how many Kurds Saddam Hussein gassed to death in the 1990s?

    Most likely: none. The best evidence is that it was the Iranians, not the Iraqis, that used the chemical weapons in that warzone.

  134. Gene Berkman

    Paulie @ 133 says
    “Rothbard voted for Strom Thurmond, Richard Nixon and Pat Buchanan, so I wouldn’t say he was a leftist. ”

    Not to quibble, but he was not actually able to vote for Strom Thurmond in 1948 – Thurmond was not a qualified candidate in New York.

    In 1973 I visited New York, and I asked Rothbard how he voted in 1972. He told me that he refused to register because then he could be called for jury duty. I assume he registered to vote later after he became involved in the Libertarian Party. But he said he did not vote in 1972.

    “At best, he had a strategy of cooperating with the left for a short time – late 1960s – just as he later had the “paleo” strategy of cooperating with the far right in the early 1990s.”

    That is true, but Rothbard’s alliance with the left was motivated by his acceptance of left-wing views on foreign policy and the history of the Cold War. He kept those views even after denouncing the left.

    In the 1960s critical scholarship on American foreign policy was dominated by left-wing writers, and many of them – including Gabriel Kolko – did valuable research, but Rothbard was often uncritical in accepting some of their more controversial assertions.

  135. paulie

    Just Googled “Timothy Yung.” No such person exists. Must be Paulie again using a bogus name.

    Nope, not me at all. Timothy is correct (or at least in the correct direction) on foreign policy issues, but we disagree quite a bit on social issues.

  136. paulie

    Paulie, Scott has always paid me in full. And his checks have never bounced.

    So, you’re luckier than other people he has stiffed for thousands of dollars.

    Perhaps if you guys hadn’t murdered that puppy dog in the forest, people might have more respect for you all. Just saying…

    Us guys did no such thing.

  137. Timothy Yung

    Wow Eric Dondero accused me of being a fake person because my name did not show up on Google. Just because my name did not show up Google does not mean I am a fake person. Btw I added you on Facebook and hope you respond to me soon. I am not famous I am just a regular guy commenting here.

  138. paulie

    such a one-sided view neglects to mention the >100,000 killed either by U.S. troops or by the Islamist insurgents that the American invasion metasticized (keep in mind that that is a conservative estimate of the death toll),

    A more realistic estimate is over a million…and another million plus, half of them children, killed by the effects of the bombing and embargo in the preceding decade. “Worth it” according to the genocidal Madeleine Albright.

  139. Timothy Yung

    Eric Dondero might think that if you are not a celebrity you don’t matter. There are many people who are not found by Google search.

  140. paulie

    Paulie @ 133 says
    “Rothbard voted for Strom Thurmond, Richard Nixon and Pat Buchanan, so I wouldn’t say he was a leftist. ”

    Not to quibble, but he was not actually able to vote for Strom Thurmond in 1948 – Thurmond was not a qualified candidate in New York.

    I recall reading him say that he voted for Thurmond. It may have been a write-in. I’ll look it up again if I don’t forget.

  141. paulie

    In 1973 I visited New York, and I asked Rothbard how he voted in 1972. He told me that he refused to register because then he could be called for jury duty. I assume he registered to vote later after he became involved in the Libertarian Party. But he said he did not vote in 1972.

    Hmmmm…I’m trying to recall my source on that one. It may have been Brian Holtz. I’m not sure on that one, so for the time being I’ll concede it. Did he endorse Nixon or advise other people to vote for him?

  142. paulie

    And does George Phillies support repeal of the income tax and abolition of the IRS?

    Not too sure on that one. Possibly not.

    Drastic reduction in the size and scope of the government?

    I’m not sure what you consider drastic. Certainly more drastic than almost any Republican and Democratic politicians 🙂

  143. realpolitik anarchist

    Some notes for Eric D Rittberg, Judeo-Fascist:

    1. The NSA (and its UKUSA partners) is now wiretapping virtually every phone call in the country, without a warrant. So, to name one person, I would name — Eric D Rittberg.

    2. The million people dead in Iraq since 2003 are less free than they were under Saddam Hussein.

    3. The Answar Al-Islam camp was in the northern portion of Iraq which had been protected by American air power since Sir Poppy Bush KBE’s first Iraq war… it was there under the good offices of the US/UK, not Saddam.

    4. Spitting is a form of assault and a violation of the non-aggression principle. You have excommunicated yourself from the LP via your vile violent rants here on this thread.

    Hope this helps.

  144. paulie

    Daniel,

    @Eric Dondero I am pretty sure Paulie is not impersonating “Timothy Yung”.

    If you have any doubts, check the IPs. Eric frequently accuses various people of being me, including famously and hilariously the Judaeophobe Mike ‘disinter’ Nelson.

  145. Timothy Yung

    For the record this is the first time I have ever been even accused of being left-wing. I consider myself a paleo-con although I am certainly more libertarian than Mr. Republican Libertarian.

  146. Hmmm ...

    There needs to be a 5th dimension on the Nolan chart for the ranting, off their meds, crazies: Dondero and Milness can be grouped together in the far off wacko region of the political spectrum. They should team up on the ultimate PLAS fusion dream ticket. Adding loonies to the fusion totals could make it a winning plurality.

  147. Andy

    “On that score, the most libertarian individuals in the United States include: Paul Jacob, Scott Kohlhaas, Leon Drolet, Scott Tillman, Crystal Jurzinsky, Aaron Starr, and myself. (Not necessarily in that order.)”

    There’s no way in hell that RIPOFF ARTIST / FRAUDSTER Scott Kohlhaas belong on that list. Scott Kohlhaas is a liar and a con man who should be run out of the Libertarian Party.

    He ripped myself and 3 other petitioners off in Nebraska back in 2006 (although I paid two of them out of my own pocket). This is a DOCUMENTED FACT. In addition to ripping off petitioners, he also ripped off Libertarian Party donors. He raised money and that money did not go for anything for the Libertarian Party, it went to line Scott Kohlhaas’ pockets. I’m not talking about his agreed upon commission, I’m talking about money that was well beyond that. He basically STOLE money from the donors. He is a LIAR and THEIF and a total piece of shit. TO HELL WITH SCOTT KOHLHAAS! Anyone who backs up this piece of shit lying scumbag is a FOOL. Scott Kohlhaas is NOT a Libertarian. He’s a total phoney. He’s an initiator of fraud and therefore NOT a libertarian. Scott Kohlhaas is a LINO (Libertarian In Name Only).

    Click this link to read the LNC meeting minutes which provide documentation of how Scott Kohlhaas ripped off petitioners and LP donors during a petition drive in Nebraska in 2006 (note that in addition to this I’ve got mp3 files of phone coversations with Scott Kohlhaas which provide further smoking gun evidence against him):

    http://www.lp.org/archives/lnc20070721.pdf

    Scott Kohlhaas (along with his partner in crime) Sean Haugh SCREWED UP ballot access in 2008. The Libertarian Party most definetely could have been on more than 45 ballots (note that in 2008 the Libertarian Party had its WORST ballot access since either 1988 or 1984 depending on how you want to count it) and the primary reason for it is due to the corrupt and inept way that Scott Kohlhaas and Sean Haugh ran ballot access. Sean Haugh was eventually fired as the LP’s Political Director (too late unfortunately) and he was also recently fired from Free and Equal for ripping off a bunch of petitioners in Texas and Georgia and for helping to cause two candidates to fail to make the ballot in Georgia. Scott Kohlhaas deserves the same fate.

    Seriously, anyone reading this, do not donate one penney to snake-in-the-grass Kohlhaas. Avoid him like the plague. He’s a toxic loser with all the sincerity of Bill Clinton.

  148. Lieberman is PRO Affirmative Action

    Dondero is wrong to say that Lieberman is anti-affirmative action.

    Lieberman opposed affirmative action in the 1990s. But he flip-flopped on the issue when he ran as Gore’s running mate in 2000.

    I don’t know if Lieberman has since flop-flipped back to being anti-affirmative action.

    The important thing, from Dondero’s perspective, is that Lieberman is consistently pro-war.

  149. Andy

    “Jones is more of a Constitution Party type than a libertarian.”

    I’ve heard Alex Jones refer to himself as a libertarian on multiple occassions. He’s also called himself an independent, a truth seeker, a freedom fighter, and a constitutionalist. I’ve heard him make a few statements that sound like an anarchist but he’s never called himself an anarchist. I don’t think that he really has a political party, although he has made positive statements about the Libertarian Party and the Constitution Party, and he has on occassion endorsed candidates from both of those parties, and of course has has also endorsed Ron Paul in the Republican Party.

  150. Andy

    “However, the suggestion that Dondero caused ballot drives to fail in 2008 I find seriously less than believable, given the facts known to me. Indeed, if Eric had been deployed to CT and RI, as opposed to working very hard in NH, we might have had ballot access in those states.”

    I’ve NEVER heard of Eric Dondero causing any petition drive to fail.

    On the other hand, I do KNOW for a FACT that Scott Kohlhaas and Sean Haugh both have done things that caused petition drives to fail.

  151. Dondero is a "Saddam Libertarian"

    It may be that Dondero is a “Saddam Libertarian.”

    True, Saddam likely wiretapped his population. But Dondero would agree with Saddam that wiretapping is no big deal.

    However, Saddam did not impose Sharia law — and more importantly, I don’t think Saddam’s Iraq had seat belt laws.

    Saddam scores high in the libertarian quadrant of Dondero’s political litmus test.

  152. Thomas L. Knapp

    @176,

    Not surprising — Dondero spent a couple of years working for Saddam’s regime in the 1980s (seconded by the US government via its navy), then managed to combine his work for Saddam with his work for Ron Paul to qualify for a government pension.

  153. Andy

    “Indeed, if Eric had been deployed to CT and RI, as opposed to working very hard in NH, we might have had ballot access in those states.”

    The LP made it in NH and RI in 2008. It failed in CT and ME (as well as WV, DC, LA, and OK).

  154. Andy

    “However, Saddam did not impose Sharia law — and more importantly, I don’t think Saddam’s Iraq had seat belt laws.”

    I’ve heard that there were no laws against smoking in restaurants and bars in Iraq under Saddam as well. So I suppose that Saddam had a “libertarian streak.” (Sarcasm)

  155. Andy

    “Eric Dondero // Sep 12, 2010 at 7:16 pm

    Paulie, Scott has always paid me in full. And his checks have never bounced.”

    Ripoff petition coordinators/proponents/fundraisers don’t rip everybody off all of the time, they rip some of the people off some of the time.

    Consider yourself lucky if Scott Kohlhaas never ripped you off. Others (such as myself) were not so fortunate. Just because he hasn’t ripped you off (at least not yet) it does not mean that he has not ripped off other people, because he has.

    “Perhaps if you guys hadn’t murdered that puppy dog in the forest, people might have more respect for you all. Just saying…”

    Neither Paul or myself were ever even accused of murdering a dog. Gary was accused, but ZERO evidence was ever presented that he actually did. In fact, the only evidence that ever surfaced actually suggested that he did not kill a dog. I explained this to you at the LP National Convention a few months ago. The entire story about this dog supposedly being murdered is very shakey. The time frame when this event supposdely took place changed multiple times and other details were either sketchy or non-exsistent.

    Gary has been acting like a jerk lately, but this does not make the above allegation true. I suspect that Roger made it up.

    Of course, NONE OF THIS HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH SCOTT KOHLHAAS RIPPING US AS WELL AS LIBERTARIAN PARTY DONORS OFF.

  156. Michael H. Wilson

    Eric @ 124 wrote: “He died in the same room as Roger 5 years after he purchased the home”.

    Go to Wikipedia and read this:”Maurice Gibb died at a Miami Beach, Florida, hospital on 12 January 2003 of complications resulting from a twisted intestine (volvulus)”.

    As I recall the doctor took out all but 18 inches of his intestines. Ya might wanna check your facts.

  157. Gene Berkman

    Paulie @ #162 – Rothbard did not endorse Nixon or urge people to vote for him. In the final issue of Outlook Magazine before the election, he wrote that he looked forward to the repudiation of George McGovern, mainly because McGovern supported quotas.

    Throughout 1972 he clearly opposed Nixon as we all did, and floated rumors about Sen Mark Hatfield challenging Nixon in the Republican primaries. Then he floated a rumor that Sen Proxmire might run. In the Libertarian Forum right before the election, he came close to endorsing John Schmitz, the American Party candidate.

  158. paulie

    I’ve heard Alex Jones refer to himself as a libertarian on multiple occassions. He’s also called himself an independent, a truth seeker, a freedom fighter, and a constitutionalist. I’ve heard him make a few statements that sound like an anarchist but he’s never called himself an anarchist. I don’t think that he really has a political party, although he has made positive statements about the Libertarian Party and the Constitution Party, and he has on occassion endorsed candidates from both of those parties, and of course has has also endorsed Ron Paul in the Republican Party.

    He’s certainly not an anarchist. One of the clips you were playing the other day had him saying that he would close the borders and not allow in any immigrants.

    Even more recently you played something where he was saying the LP is corrupt. I think his views are closer to CP than LP.

  159. paulie

    I’ve NEVER heard of Eric Dondero causing any petition drive to fail.

    Jake claims that Shane Cory was taking advice from Dondero on how to run West Virginia, which included not giving LP paper to the Nader petitioners until it was too late and not bringing in other pros that Jake recommended, as well as expecting Jake to come in with unrealistic numbers. If this is true, Eric is partially at fault for WV. I can’t vouch for whether this is true myself, although I haven’t known Jake to lie, to my knowledge.

    Persisting with the WV project, especially after the deadline was over, tied up petitioners in WV who should have been in New England sooner, in which case Connecticut and Maine would not have failed. For that matter, they could have kept me in New England and not failed, although that has nothing to do with Eric. Alternatively, Jake should have gone to Connecticut, where he had experience petitioning before, not Alabama with us. Although Eric was not directly involved, the unrealistic expectations he created for Jake in WV caused the falling out that caused him to be disinvited from CT.

    Since Kohlhaas is buddies with Dondero, it is certainly possible that Dondero was in the loop for some of the bad decisionmaking on petition management in 2008. I’m not sure to what extent.

  160. paulie

    It may be that Dondero is a “Saddam Libertarian.”

    True, Saddam likely wiretapped his population. But Dondero would agree with Saddam that wiretapping is no big deal.

    However, Saddam did not impose Sharia law — and more importantly, I don’t think Saddam’s Iraq had seat belt laws.

    Saddam scores high in the libertarian quadrant of Dondero’s political litmus test.

    Hussein was also a military man, which made him even more libertarian. LOL.

  161. paulie

    I’ve heard that there were no laws against smoking in restaurants and bars in Iraq under Saddam as well. So I suppose that Saddam had a “libertarian streak.”

    That would cinch it!

  162. Robert Capozzi

    wow, someone gave advice that led to “failure.” Show me someone who’s not been associated with a failure and I’ll show you a saint.

    Politics involves “failure” all the time, esp. L politics. Reliving the failure over and over and over again will not change the historical fact.

    Get over it!

  163. paulie

    Stupid advice that led to predictable failure. Better?

    And, yes, I’ve failed plenty of times at many things. Not claiming any superiority here.

  164. Robert Capozzi

    Unless it was a case of purposeful sabotage, “predictable” is a matter of opinion, yes?

    Campaigns are hasty operations, and haste often leads to mistakes of judgment. A healthy situation allows the mistake maker to acknowledge that mistakes were made so that we can learn from them. Advice, of course, is different from the decision and it maker.

    I guess gotcha politics don’t allow for creating a healthy environment.

  165. paulie

    There are some things that are monumentally stupid and predictable, yes. Expecting Jake to get 400+ signatures every day while not letting him know about locations that had been secured would fall in that category. So would any number of other roadblocks he got thrown in his way. So would not giving LP petitions to Nader circulators who were ready, willing and able to circulate them, with an incredibly tight deadline, or refusing to fly in experienced petitioners who were ready, willing and able while expecting inexperienced local people to produce solid numbers, contrary to all past history and experience. Shifting people that were badly needed in New England to a state that was overflooded with petitioners, leaving the LP petition there done way ahead of time and only Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party left on our boards.

    These are all things that demonstrate severe incompetence. I have no evidence that any of it was deliberate, but simply “getting over it” does nothing to fix the problem for next time.

    The question that was raised, not by me, and discussed by several people was whether Mr. Dondero played a role in any of these decisions. I am saying that he did play a role, but I’m not sure how big of a role. I’m just covering the facts, not saying what you should deduce from them.

  166. Thomas L. Knapp

    “Unless it was a case of purposeful sabotage, ‘predictable’ is a matter of opinion, yes?”

    No, not really.

    It is “predictable” — as a matter of fact, not of opinion — that if there’s no gas in your tank your car won’t run. That’s true whether you forgot to fill up or someone siphoned the tank empty to steal your gas.

    The LP has a history with ballot access. It has, among its leadership, in its rank and file, and among those who provide it services as volunteers or contractors, people who are qualified to make statements as to what ballot access results are “predictable” given particular circumstances.

    Paulie is one of those people. If he says a ballot access failure was “predictable,” it is more than a matter of opinion. It’s at least a matter of expert opinion, and very likely a claim of fact.

  167. paulie

    You’d have to be pretty paranoid to think it was deliberate sabotage. But even paranoids have real enemies:

    From: Eric Dondero, INTERNET:ericdondero@yahoo.com
    To: Steve Dasbach, SteveDasbach
    Date: 4/30/01 5:04 PM
    RE: Re: [RLC-National] The LP in Crisis … again, ho hum.

    “We could deal them a fatal blow.” … Michael, Michael, Michael??? … “Could.” That is the subjunctive form of the verb “can.” … Why would you use “could.” … Please reform your comments. The proper verbage which should be utilized in this instance is “must,” as in “we must deal the Libertarian Party a fatal blow.” … We are now in a state of all-out war with the LP. Though it could be argued that we, Chuck, a couple others and I, might have provoked them. They have declared war on the Republican Party with this latest salvo. … It’s time for the weak of heart amongst us, (don’t read these following names – Phil Blumel, Paul Jacob, that guy in New Jersey who is always talking about “cooperating with LPers”), to step aside. … The bombastic corps will now lead. We need to fatally strike the LP where it hurts. They are the enemy. Much more so than the Democrats or Moderate Republicans. … Let’s kick their asses, Braveheart style!

    — “Michael L. Sensor” wrote:
    In the interest of opposition research, here is the latest “crisis” fundraising email from the National Libertarian Party. … They are weak, very weak… it wouldn’t take much to deal them a fatal blow. Harry Browne’s quixotic plan to engage in extensive litigation against the FEC to challenge campaign finance laws — in which he wants to embroil the LP as a “litigation partner” — may do just that.

  168. Robert Capozzi

    tk, yes, without gas, and no filling stations within X miles, it’s predictable that a car will not make a destination, barring a miracle.

    Expert opinions have their value.

    I don’t care to get in the weeds of just how predictable failure was in this case…I was making a different point. It sounds as if poor judgment was exercised. Perhaps the OTHER experts should not have been engaged, or should not be engaged in the future if there has been no willingness to ‘fess up…dunno.

    One mistake is, to me, forgiveable as long as it’s copped to. A pattern of mistakes is also forgiveable, but fool me twice, shame on me!

  169. paulie

    Nothing’s been copped to by anyone involved with the LP’s ballot access failures in 2008, nor has Kohlhaas taken any responsibility for the events in Nebraska in 2006 and his repeated avoidance of communications interspersed with false promises to pay over the following year.

    While it is true that several individual LNC members paid the original balance due after a year, the pain, suffering, actual and opportunity costs this unexpected delay produced means that in our view that only took care of the interest, and Kohlhaas is still liable for the principal.

    Far from this having any consequences for him, he was promoted to national ballot access director for 2008, and created inequitable pay rates, expense deals and conditions that put us at a major disadvantage for that whole year, costing us many additional thousands of dollars.

    Since then, he has continued to call potential clients and try to keep us from being employed, often with success, while he is still getting deals with the LP himself, with no consequences at all.

  170. Eric Dondero

    CLARIFICATION: If I implied in any way that Andy was responsible for the death of that dog in the Alabama woods, I fully retract that.

    As for Gary, the question remains open, very open indeed???

  171. paulie

    Texas, not Alabama, allegedly. I certainly had nothing to do with it either.

    Gary did threaten to do it (after Roger called up his employers to get him fired, threatened to sic the IRS on him and get his drivers license suspended….none of which was the dog’s fault, however), but I seriously doubt he carried it out.

    He was not anywhere near there, the time when it allegedly happened kept changing, and Roger would have screamed bloody murder right away, not months later.

    Gary did stiff Andy out of about $10,000 so I am less sure about his innocence in the dog thing than I was before, but I still don’t think he did it.

    Saying “us guys” did that, as if I was somehow involved, is way beyond ridiculous.

  172. paulie

    Thanks for the suggestion, but we are not in a position to pursue legal action. That often requires being available for court repeatedly in one place, costs that we may not be able to front or recover, and other problems.

    Also, I’m not sure there is any absolute proof, although we’ve been told this from numerous sources.

  173. Robert Capozzi

    pc, yes, jurisprudence is not a synonym for justice…it’s a rough approximation at best.

  174. Andy

    “He’s certainly not an anarchist. One of the clips you were playing the other day had him saying that he would close the borders and not allow in any immigrants.”

    That’s not what he advocates. His position is that immigrants should come in legally and that they should not be able to get on welfare. He’s made similiar comments to Ron Paul in that if there was no welfare state there could be more immigration.

    “Even more recently you played something where he was saying the LP is corrupt.”

    He said that some people at the top of the LP are corrupt. I certainly agree that there are some corrupt people in the LP. This does not mean that the entire party is corrupt or that the philosophy is bad though.

    There is also some corruption in the Constitution Party (and Alex Jones would probably agree with this statement).

    “I think his views are closer to CP than LP.”

    I’ve heard him say on multiple occassions that the war on drugs should be ended. He’s also said that gambling and prostitution should be legal (even though he’s personally against those things). I’ve also heard him come out in favor of abolishing taxation. These are all libertarian statements.

  175. Andy

    “Politics involves ‘failure’ all the time, esp. L politics. Reliving the failure over and over and over again will not change the historical fact.”

    Ignoring failures instead of learning from them will lead to more failures in the future.

  176. Andy

    “Eric Dondero // Sep 13, 2010 at 3:01 pm

    CLARIFICATION: If I implied in any way that Andy was responsible for the death of that dog in the Alabama woods, I fully retract that.”

    The dog story comes from Texas, not Alabama.

    “As for Gary, the question remains open, very open indeed???”

    Yes, the question remains open, however, Roger needs to come out with some actual evidence to back up his claim. He’s had 3-4 years to do so and yet he has not presented any evidence that connects Gary to this supposed incident. The fact that the date of the alleged crime kept changing and the fact that no evidence was ever presented (even when I asked for it) leads me to believe that the story was likely made up by Roger.

  177. Andy

    Here’s an article where it says Alex Jones calls himself a libertarian.

    http://www.slate.com/id/2215826/

    Exert from the article:

    “One of the places to which Poplawski turned, according to his best friend, Edward Perkovic, was Alex Jones. In the realm of conspiracy, Jones defies the traditional left-right paradigm. When I described his site as ‘far right’ in an article recently, I was inundated with indignant e-mails. Jones might have made his chops with documentaries about the Waco siege, but he views himself as a libertarian, not a right-winger.”

  178. paulie

    That’s not what he advocates. His position is that immigrants should come in legally and that they should not be able to get on welfare. He’s made similiar comments to Ron Paul in that if there was no welfare state there could be more immigration.

    Incorrect. He specifically said that he supports a moratorium on legal immigration. You must have missed that part, but I heard it clear as day.

Leave a Reply

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