PLAS Open Thread

To all who frequent the comments section of this site. This thread is for those who seek to discuss a Progressive Libertarian Alliance Strategy. All discussion relating to this matter must be kept within this article. We here at IPR will vigorously moderate any comments that deviate from this standard.

Commenters who consistently post upon a single topic in a variety of threads will face limitations in their ability to post at IPR.

170 thoughts on “PLAS Open Thread

  1. pete healey

    The place to begin with a PLAS is with PR, or proportional representation. While there are those who believe that “progressives” are the real majority and just don’t realize it yet, just as there are Libertarians who believe they represent “the true will of the people”, for the time being they are both minority opinions in the public-at-large.
    The natural place to join together is where systemic reform would provide a place for us even as we remain relativelly small minorities. That place is in a proportional election system.
    This strategy has the further advantage of reduciing the power and influence of money in elections simply because it no longer takes a plurality of votes to win seats, but only the proportion you can win over by argument and debate.

  2. At last!

    Commentators … “who consistently post upon a single topic in a variety of threads will face limitations in their ability to post at IPR.”

    Finally.

    Thank you.

  3. Gene Berkman

    The best approach to deciding on the viability of PLAS would be to try it in a local election or an election for state legislature.

    If a Green Party candidate is elected with Libertarian support, and after a couple years in office the local Libertarians feel that the elected Green has promoted liberty, that would be an argument for trying PLAS in other elections.

    If a Libertarian is elected with support from Greens, and proves to be so committed to opposing war and infringements on civil liberties that the Greens support his or her re-election, that would also be a plus for PLAS.

  4. wolfefan

    Gene has it right. PLAS may actually be viable in certain places, but with respect Robert Milnes hasn’t shown any willingness to try to identify those places and build from there. He thinks calling a press conference and running for President with Mary Ruwart is all that needs to happen.

    If only it were so easy…

  5. NewFederalist

    Since Libertarians and Greens have virtually nothing in common at a local level (counties and cities did NOT go to war in Iraq/Afganistan) I see this whole thing as stillborn.

  6. Gene Berkman

    NF @ #6 – actually Greens & Libertarians have worked together on some local issues – ending marijuana prohibition for example.

    Also, Libertarians oppose Redevelopment as an attack on private property, but also as corporate welfare. Since Greens oppose corporate welfare, they should join with Libertarians in opposing Redevelopment and Eminent Domain.

  7. Erik G.

    Can we also get a thread for the PR and range/score voting spammers?

    Also, not all green-libertarian strategies should be referred to as ‘PLAS.’ To me, PLAS is the very specific (and insane) strategy advocated by Milnes, and pretending like other green-libertarian strategies are similar to it or associated with it does an incredible disservice to others with a similar approach.

  8. Ross

    Also, local issues: election reform and corruption. And there are certain local environmental issues – like a nuclear plant, for instance, or in my community the townhsip government insists on inane water infrastructure projects and some other stuff like that, where we could work together.

  9. NewFederalist

    #7 and #9- Libertarians don’t trust government while Greens trust government IF it is controlled by liberals/progressives. I say again… there is nothing much in common except the desire for ballot access.

  10. Ross

    NewFederalist – I really disagree. I think the idea of Green trust in government is summed up decently by this quote from the Green Party of Tennesse’s candidate for governor this year:

    My goal is not to overthrow the system but to make it irrelevant by reviving democracy, by making sure that every organization, our church, school, or government is run according to its principles….

    Our patriotic duty today is to make all major American institutions democratic. While we may have much personal freedom to go where we want, work, eat, live where we want, buy what we think we want, change the channel when we want, etc. we have given up our civic and political roles. We do not have the freedom to participate in decisions about war and foreign policy, domestic health and safety, taxes and monetary policy, transportation or environmental protection or education policy. The media, school system, financial system, labor unions, the arts, religious institutions and our political system, even our high courts are now dominated by this centralized corporate wealth. It is an issue that is not even on the agenda of the “suits,” my corporate funded opponents in this race.

  11. Erik G.

    NF @13:;

    Then you remain unconvinced due to your own prejudices. One of the the GP’s ten key values is ‘Decentralization’ for a reason.

  12. Mik Robertson

    Good points Erik and Ross. I agree there are a lot of things the GP and the LP should have in common, but there are some people in both parties committed to not letting those things come through.

  13. Alaska Constitution Party

    There are issues overlaps among all the parties and people. So, decide which issues are important to you, your family, your community and build alliances centered/focused on Common Issues. Maybe we should call this the Ci2i approach, “Common Issues To Individuals”, or Common Issues To Initiatives”, or something like that. This approach is not dependant upon the electoral system in place. It is a transpartisan approach, if you will. Can we Ci2i ?

  14. JT

    Erik: “Then you remain unconvinced due to your own prejudices. One of the the GP’s ten key values is ‘Decentralization’ for a reason.”

    Oh? And how does “universal” health care, education, welfare, business constraints, etc., all backed by the force of central government law, square with “decentralization”??

  15. Erik G.

    JT @19:

    Clearly you haven’t been paying attention to everything I said.

    “This isn’t inherently true. The Greens have merely been infiltrated by progressives for a number of years now.”

    I suppose now we should ask why the LP has, at times, advocated or supported overseas adventurism, or why some in the LP think the party should be ‘pro-life’ on abortion. Obviously, not everyone who has had influence in the LP is very libertarian either.

    Not all Greens support the things you cited, and not all Greens support their enactment by the “force of central government law.” A bunch of disgruntled Democrats who flocked to the party do, however.

  16. Catholic Trotskyist

    Green Party Conservative would have some interesting thoughts here.

    I condemn IPR’s decision to curtail the postings of Ogle and Milnes. Ogle has announced that he will hold off on posting to IPR, but I will take his place in whatever way possible. I am the last bastian of the total free expression which has characterized IPR until now. The Catholic Trotskyist Party is hoping to purchase IPR so that all may be put right again.

    PLAS forever!

  17. JT

    Here’s the difference, Erik: Despite what some individual Libertarians may endorse, the official Libertarian Party platform (and the majority of Libertarians) have never called for “overseas adventurism” or making abortion illegal. All of the things I mentioned above, however, are enshrined in the Green Party platform. I’d love for you to introduce me to the many, many Greens who think the federal government shouldn’t pass laws to effect and enforce them. Somehow none of the Greens I’ve met fall into that category.

  18. Erik G.

    JT: I don’t need a lecture on what the LP has and hasn’t endorsed, as I’ve been a party member for years and even volunteered in the national office for over about 16 months.

    That being said, I suppose you must have missed this:
    “Libertarian National Committee backs “measured” anti-terrorist response” (October 14, 2001)
    “On Sunday, October 7, the United States launched military action against Osama bin Laden, the terrorist believed to be responsible for the September11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The U.S. military also struck military bases controlled by the Taliban regime of Afghanistan,which has sheltered and reportedly assisted bin Laden.While the Libertarian Party has been a consistent voice against reckless foreign interventionism by the U.S. government, we support action against the perpetrators responsible for the terrorist attacks. The vicious and barbaric attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, which bin Laden allegedly masterminded, cost 5,000 innocent Americans their lives. Such horrific crimes cannot go unpunished.A fundamental role of the United States government, as defined in the U.S. Constitution, is to protect American citizens against foreign attack.Therefore, it is proper for the government to take forceful action against terrorists who have already killed thousands of Americans, and who have threatened to kill more. Such criminals must be rooted out and destroyed before more innocent people die. Their training camps and weapons must be eliminated. Their supply infrastructure must be shattered.”

    Also, to continue to assail the Greens is to completely misunderstand their history. There wasn’t a ‘national green party’ before 1996, which is well after frustrated progressives had already started infiltrating the movement. Previously, the Greens had been a heavily (intentionally) decentralized system of state parties. In fact, from the GP US’s own website, I present you the following quotation:
    “The roots of the Green Party and Green movement started to coalesce in the 1970’s with the Values Party in New Zealand and other similar movements. They combined environmental sensibilities and non-violent anarchism into a broader philosophy that refuses the allure of single-issue politics.”

    By 2000, sadly, the Greens’ largest block of influence became disgruntled progressives, and the way they rallied around Nader more or less cemented the national identity of the movement away from its origin. Nevertheless, there are still countless Greens that don’t necessarily favor nationalized healthcare (or other nationalized/centralized solutions), and the fact that you’ve failed to meet any probably is more a reflection of your interactions with Greens than it is reality. I’ve been to numerous Green Party meetings in my lifetime (it jibes well with my geolibertarianism), and I’ve met countless Greens who don’t fit the profile you’re claiming.

  19. JT

    Erik: “JT: I don’t need a lecture on what the LP has and hasn’t endorsed, as I’ve been a party member for years and even volunteered in the national office for over about 16 months.”

    First, that wasn’t a “lecture”; it was just a one-sentence point in response to yours. I wish some of the professors I had in college gave “lectures” like that.

    Second, whether you agree or disagree with that LNC statement (you obviously disagree and I’m not saying I don’t here), there’s still a substantial difference between the LNC saying the U.S. government should respond in the wake of a terrorist attack that kills innocent Americans and the Green Party’s adopted platform calling for the central government to generally enforce the “economic rights” of citizens from cradle to grave. One is a board statement issued after a horrific instance of aggression; the other is an official stance of a party whose candidates (at least the ones for high-profile government positions) have consistently called for the same.

    Erik: “Also, to continue to assail the Greens is to completely misunderstand their history. There wasn’t a ‘national green party’ before 1996, which is well after frustrated progressives had already started infiltrating the movement. Previously, the Greens had been a heavily (intentionally) decentralized system of state parties.”

    The fact that the Green Party itself was a decentralized system doesn’t imply that Greens favor decentralization of *government power*. In some cases they do; in others they don’t. They’re not consistent advocates of decentralization, even if that’s one of their “key values.” One of the official “key values” of the Republican Party is individual liberty.

    Erik: “Nevertheless, there are still countless Greens that don’t necessarily favor nationalized healthcare (or other nationalized/centralized solutions), and the fact that you’ve failed to meet any probably is more a reflection of your interactions with Greens than it is reality.”

    It’s true that I don’t intentionally seek out a great many Greens to engage with. But I can’t help but meet a great many of them because of where I live and some circles I run in. Like I said, I’d love to meet the Greens who think nationalized “universal” health care, education, energy development, etc., is bad government policy, and advocate the decentralized free market as the way to go. If they did, they should be Libertarians instead of Greens.

  20. Ross

    So JT, Greens shouldn’t work with Libertarians on issues like health care, welfare, or environmental regulations (except, perhaps, in those circumstances where “reform” is really just corporatization in disguise and doesn’t advance green values at all, but that’s a more specific discussion). But there are plenty of other issues where we can work together.

  21. Erik G.

    JT @24:

    I can’t help but notice you completely skipped over the part where I noted from the Greens’ *own website* that their movement was originally based on “nonviolent anarchism.”

    I didn’t say the fact that they used to be heavily decentralized was the sole proof that they used to better live up to their own ideals – I merely said in part of noting that these ‘national/federal’ advocacy phenomena that you’re harping on are *recent* developments that weren’t in line with the original movement. Just as the LP could easily see a strong right-wing drift over the next 14 years, the Greens, as a national party, have drifted in the last 14. Nevertheless, there are still many, many Greens who don’t fit the profile you’re trying to paint.

  22. Harry V. Joiner

    Progressives and libertarians can be allied on some issues, such as legalizing the weed.

  23. Robert Milnes

    This comment is my recollection of paraphrasing my commentsinthe US Parliament open thread which was deletedby johnny come lately fascisto-editor Daniel Surman. For violation ofthe policy of segregating commentsabout PLAS to this thread.
    PLAS-Progressive Libertarian Alliance Strategy
    allows the maximum progressive vote bloc estimated about 27% to be added to the maximum libertarian vote bloc estimated about 13% by placing either a progressive or a libertarian on every ballot. This results in a plurality victory in what would be a de facto 3 way race-40% PLAS candidate/30% democrat/30% republican.
    The vote gets maximized when voters realize their real candidate of choice, a progressive or libertarian, can win. So voter education about the Strategy is necessary. Then the voter does not fall back on the old pattern of realizing that since their preferred candidate will lose,(wasted vote) they should thenchose between the next best, either the democrat or the republican.(lesser of 2 evils)

  24. Robert Milnes

    Also I did mention that the 13% came from The Libertarian Vote/Cato Institute,
    The 27% ismy estimate based inpart on the 27% second place Progressive Party vote for Teddy Roosevelt in 19 12. A lso the 36.6 close plurality victory by Allende in Chile with a leftist coalition in 1970.
    The progressive should usually be a Green. If there is no progressive/Green or Libertarian on the ballot,an Independent could be acceptable if shown to be either progressive or libertarian.

  25. Robert Milnes

    A Boston Tea Party candidate would be equivalent to the Libertarian, perhaps preferable.
    Also I mentioned the importance of a fusion executive ticket; One with a progressive/Green and a Libertarian.

  26. Steven R Linnabary

    It is quite possible for Libertarians and Greens to find common ground.

    In 2000 I ran for Clerk of Courts in my county, and was endorsed by the Greens as well as the Reform and Natural Law Parties. I ran on a platform of educating the voters on jury nullification.

    However, I only received 4.9% of the vote. Being outspent 1250/1 (I spent $200, my opponents spent a combined $250,000) might have had something to do with my not getting the 40% that the PLAS proponent claims we would get.

    PEACE

  27. MMP James Ogle [Free Parliamentary]

    @31 The Pot Party is working with the Boston Tea Party, CA-PAR (ss11) Web Page Minister Robert S.[Pot] says he will be updating the web page page, and I will try to tell him about PLAS.

    He also designs http://www.web420.com. We are united with Milnes’ PLAS, in case he needs a new web page, we can host it there for free at the Pot Party page. Just give him the nod.

  28. MMP James Ogle [Free Parliamentary]

    @31 The USA Parliament does not use fusion, but we can elect a multi-party ticket based on votes cast as proof. If you want to practice this year and/or next year, we’ll be glad to put your name (Robert Milnes [Libertarian]) on the 2011 and 2012 ballots.

    In The USA Parliament’s election, #1 is elected president and #2 is elected vice president. Plus we have #s 3 through 100, with plenty of consecutively ranked names as back up at #s 101 and so on.

    If you or anyone wants to test market your name, we certainly welcome your participation.

    Just complete and send this form to get started;
    http://www.usparliament.org/signup.php

  29. MMP James Ogle [Free Parliamentary]

    …we do not use fusion, because you may have your name on the USA Parliament ballot only once, and under one party name.

    Fusion allows a name on the ballot in two places, under two different party names. That is not allowed under the USA Parliament’s rules.
    http://www.usparliament.org/rules.php

    Milnes, we can have your web page on one of two sites; usparliament.org or gonott.com. One of our many web page volunteers can design it, or you may pay a professional.

    It would likely be similar to the Catholic Trotskyist Party’s web site, unless we get another volunteer web site/designer;
    http://www.usparliament.org/ctp.php

  30. Grand Troll Alliance

    Can the subject of a Grand Troll Alliance be discussed on this thread, or should it get a separate thread?

  31. Catholic Trotskyist

    The Grand Troll Alliance should probably be its own thread.
    I am interested in such an alliance, but I won’t participate if it includes the people who post insults to Chelene Nightengael. Not that I agree with her on everything, but I think it’s immoral and wrong what they are doing.

    But all of us who are called trolls, are not really trolls. We are trying to advance important topics, of which PLAS is one. We have to try to develop the best coalition for PLAS. I will try to envision a possible PLAS coalition in my next comment.

  32. Catholic Trotskyist

    The Catholiic Trotskyist Party is considering the possibility of joining PLAS, especially within the context of the USA Parliament. We disagree with the progressive/liebrtarian position on a few social issue, but I think we have enough in common that we could join.

    A coalition between the Green, Peace and Freedom, Libertarian, Boston Tea, Marijuana Party, Pot Party, Socialist Party USA, United Socialism Party, and Catholic Trotskyist Party, possibly with some independents, would be highly likely to obtain a majority in the USA Parliament. (We don’t need to worry about the 27+13 electoral formula for this because the system is completely different).

    I am also considering the possibility of a more right-leaning coalition between the Libertarian, Constitution, Pro-Constitution American Independent faction, American Centrist, Defender of the Republic, and Catholic Trotskyist parties, among others. Negotiations should continue. Robert Milnes, you are welcome to participate in these negotiations; you could join as an independent or maybe form a new PLAS party for yourself for the time being. Or you could join the Catholic Trotskyist Party.

  33. Hmmm ...

    @40 Don’t we already have two new threads for stupid comments?

    You should stay on topic.

    Explain PLAS to us all. Enlighten us all with your superior wisdom. Show us the way. Lead us oh master.

    Soon everyone will stop coming to this thread. The entertainment value will cease. So, take your shot. You’ve got an audience. Sell your ideas about reaching out in a broad alliance to reach enough open minded voters who can see the benefits of a balanced program of moderate, center libertarian views combined with moderate, sensible progressive views.

    Don’t give silly, numbers. Pitch the program. Sell the dream.

  34. Robert Milnes

    @42, yes, people willsoon stop coming to this thread. That’s theidea/intent. Segregation-out of sight out of mind.
    Sounds likeyou already are sold.
    What I could add is that the Centenial of TR’s try for ProgressiveParty victory-1912- is a good opportunity for an inclusive progressive movement togain traction.
    A chance to win instead of lose again.-Indefinitely. Another 100 years?

  35. MMP James Ogle [Free Parliamentary]

    Robert, a very good idea. We need to recruit.

    A female Progressive Party candidate for president.

    A Female/Milnes [Progressive/Libertarian] in 2012. PLAS! Progressive Libertarian Alliance Strategy!

    I GoNotted a female Progressive candidate, and came up with Cynthia McKinney [Green].

    McKinney/Milnes [Green/Libertarian]?

    There was also an article “Why More Female Candidates Lose”.

    The basic problem, is there is not structure for teamwork, and they can’t work as a team without it.

    It goes way beyond just having a P and a L. My team over in the US Parliament Open Thread realizes that. We want to work with PLAS.

    How about if the US Parliament were to rent PLAS for a few months. How much?

  36. MMP James Ogle [Free Parliamentary]

    …I wonder if one could pay McKinney [Green] to speak at the Libertarian Party convention, for example, in a possible PLAS. Then, when we cast the votes, we use the USA Parliament’s ballot…and she gets one of the 100 “seats”.

    See what I mean? Simple.

  37. MMP James Ogle [Free Parliamentary]

    Hey Milnes…you still alive? Hey how about if I give you some free ads in different regions of the USA Parliament’s pages? Then if anyone is interested in PLAS, they can contact you.

    If anyone else wants a free ad, email me or call from the Contact page on usparliament.org

  38. Catholic Trotskyist

    James, what about Vanessa Morley (Defender of the Republic)? She has been talked about as a possible presidential candidate. Does she fall within the PLAS area, or is she too right-leaning?

    a Catholic Trotskyist candidate probably wouldn’t be a good PLAS candidate for President because of our position on abortion, but we could be part of the parliamentary coalition.

  39. MMP James Ogle [Free Parliamentary]

    I don’t know if she’d self-categorize as a “progressive”… but we could ask her. You mean like Moreley/Milnes [Defender of the Republic/Libertarian? DotRLAS? Robert may not like that, and it’s probably off-thread. We could get censored.

  40. wolfefan

    Hi Robert –

    While there have been some insults, I’ve seen a number of people offer genuine ideas for and critiques of PLAS. How have our views evolved in response to these observations? Do you have any different perspective on how to implement PLAS or what it might look like as a result of these thoughts?

  41. Robert Milnes

    wolfefan, Did you mean How have your(my) views evolved?
    Agreed, there has been several genuine ideas & critiques. Several people have expressed interest.
    Several things could be done.e.g.
    All interested people should contact the LP & GP to urge their cooperation on this.
    A fusion ticket should be agreed on.
    The conventions being verification by nomination on the agreed upon ticket.
    If you think my candidacy should be the ticket, support my candidacy.

  42. MMP James Ogle [Free Parliamentary]

    I nominate Robert Milnes to be president of the United States. Meanwhile, to help his campaign, I also nominate him as PLAS Minister in the USA Parliament if he doesn’t mind.

    Robert, you’re #1, you’re PLAS Minister.

    PLAS Minister [Robert Milnes [Libertarian]

    If you want to change the name (for example GLAS), no problemo.

    I will be updating the web page. How do you like it? I think nominating your name for president of the US is a good idea.

  43. Anonymous

    PLAS is with The USA Parliament Cabinet.

    Some people have had their posting permission revoked by IPR, the SF Chronicle, Ballot Access News, the Election Science Google Group, to name a few.

  44. paulie

    To my knowledge no one has had posting permission revoked by IPR as far as I know.

    There’s an automated spam filter that catches some legitimate posts by mistake.

    When people let us know about it, rather than wrongly assume that they are being intentionally filtered, we can usually fish their comments out.

  45. Anonymous

    Paulia wrote:
    “To my knowledge no one has had posting permission revoked by IPR …”[snip, snip]

    Bullshit!!

    The Populist/Socialist and Green/Tea ticket has been censored and deleted.

    Frey/Barr for President,
    David Frey and Roseanne Barr

  46. paulie

    I don’t know who Paulia is. Maybe seeing things that are not there explains your problem.

    And I have no idea what this means: “The Populist/Socialist and Green/Tea ticket has been censored and deleted.”

    No one has had posting permission revoked as far as I know. James Ogle is still free to post at IPR, if that is what you are talking about. However, discussion of the US Parliament has been restricted to the US Parliament thread so as not to choke off discussion in other threads.

  47. Daniel Surman

    As far as I know I am the only contributor who has recently removed any posts. Nobody has been banned from posting- I only removed a few posts which were not in the proper place.

  48. Robert Milnes

    OK, everybody. I want something done about this bullshit situation here at IPR. Separate threads. It is unnecessary. It is an excuse to screw with me and PLAS. Let’s get rid of this fool remedy.
    Now, I have 2 websites up.
    http://www.robertwmilnes.com
    http://www.robertwmilnesforpresident.com
    I am trying to get a campaign contributions button on the latter fron donortownsquare.com
    You can go there to volunteer to help my campaign and/or get on an email list.
    To donate to me personally go to the former. There is a paypal button there.
    Obviously I need website assistance.etc.
    If you want to try PLAS, get involved.
    I also would like my name put in for nomination to the BTP ticket. My comment to that effect was removed from IPR comments on that thread.

  49. Robert Milnes

    I realize I often comment negatively about third party/independent candidates. Mostly that they are losers. But there is more to it than that. I have great respect for them. Especially when compared to political writers and commenters. Candidates ave stepped up to te plate. They are in the trenches. Especially for third party/independents, it is no picnic. I know because I am one. So for this reason I call upon IPR to establish a policy that any third party/independent candidate should be able to write in comments anything they want anytime they want.
    Apply this to me and PLAS. Stop this separate thread policy.

  50. Robert Milnes

    There was an interesting and productive comment conversation about BTP>PLAS on the Duensing run or LP nomination thread-until paulie IPR thoughty police diverted everybody here.
    Asshole.
    Everybody, if we want to get our shit together & try this we need to be uninterrupted in our collective train of thought.
    Tom K. made some very interesting comments about BTP>PLAS possibilities which paulie had declared impossible-a progressive getting on the BTP ticket. & DWP was negative too. Until Tom commented I was unccertain how that would be accomplished giving radical libewrtarian intransigence & stubborness.
    How would Gravel/Ruwart-a possible fusion ticket, have been not possible? Did everybody just patronize old timer Gravel?

  51. Robert Milnes

    I would like to start a campaign/PLAS blog on my new website. I need some help with that.
    I’m only fair to midlin’ with this newfangled interweb stuff.

  52. Thomas L. Knapp

    RM@ 64,

    “Tom K. made some very interesting comments about BTP>PLAS possibilities which paulie had declared impossible-a progressive getting on the BTP ticket. & DWP was negative too.”

    Paulie and Darryl predicate their claim on the notion that a progressive couldn’t endorse the BTP’s platform.

    The author of the BTP’s platform disagrees.

  53. Thomas L. Knapp

    @69,

    We were expecting 10-12 inches of snow in St. Louis. Looks like we got more like 3-4 inches instead, although we’ve probably got a few more hours before the cell completely clears the area.

    Windy, yes, and a bit brisk (16 degrees Fahrenheit right now), but the blizzard never materialized as advertised.

  54. paulie

    until paulie IPR thoughty police diverted everybody here.
    Asshole.

    Not my decision Robert, it was a group decision by all IPR writers. Don’t blame the messenger.

  55. paulie

    How would Gravel/Ruwart-a possible fusion ticket, have been not possible?

    It would not be possible in the BTP because of Article 4 of the BTP bylaws, which can not be amended, which says that all candidates endorsed by the BTP must endorse the BTP platform, which also can’t be amended. Gravel can’t endorse that platform, and if he could, he would be just another libertarian, not a progressive.

    And it would not be possible in any other party because Dr. Ruwart would not agree to run with Senator Gravel, just as she did not agree to run with Congressman Barr.

  56. paulie

    The author of the BTP’s platform disagrees.

    Please explain.

    “The Boston Tea Party supports reducing the size, scope and power of government at all levels and on all issues, and opposes increasing the size, scope and power of government at any level, for any purpose.”

    I understand that someone who agrees with that can be called a progressive, but Milnes’ idea is to unite the voting blocs commonly called progressive and libertarian today by putting one of each on a ticket. One of the distinguishing characteristics of people known as progressives is their belief in increasing the size, scope and power and government in the economic sphere, is it not?

    So if you run both a P and VP candidate that agrees with the above statement, you are asking the larger part of the coalition – progressives – to support two libertarians just by calling one of them a progressive? Did I misunderstand?

    To take the specific examples offered, Mr. Milnes is in favor of increasing certain aspects of the size, scope and power of government. So is Mike Gravel. So was Teddy Roosevelt. If you, or Mr. Milnes, can come up with an example of a real life progressive who would suit the P part of PLAS while honestly endorsing the BTP platform, please tell me who that would be.

  57. Thomas L. Knapp

    Paulie @73,

    “One of the distinguishing characteristics of people known as progressives is their belief in increasing the size, scope and power and government in the economic sphere, is it not?”

    1) In my surveys of people who call themselves “progressives,” I’ve been unable to find any distinguishing characteristics which apply to the whole set.

    2) I’ve attended “progressive” events that were more laissez-faire in content and tone than, say, a Cato policy briefing. Two that come to mind were Green Party events on agribusiness gene patents and nuclear energy.

    “If you, or Mr. Milnes, can come up with an example of a real life progressive who would suit the P part of PLAS while honestly endorsing the BTP platform”

    The word “honestly” appears nowhere in the requirements. It would be up to the BTP’s convention delegates to decide for themselves whether or not a progressive’s endorsement of the platform was honest, just as it would be up to progressive voters to decide whether or not a candidate calling hirself a progressive was one or not.

  58. paulie

    @ 68 ROFL…that is awesome

    Mr. Milnes, if I can use that image as the headliner for your blog, I’ll give you one hour of free help on setting it up.

  59. paulie

    “One of the distinguishing characteristics of people known as progressives is their belief in increasing the size, scope and power and government in the economic sphere, is it not?”

    1) In my surveys of people who call themselves “progressives,” I’ve been unable to find any distinguishing characteristics which apply to the whole set.

    2) I’ve attended “progressive” events that were more laissez-faire in content and tone than, say, a Cato policy briefing. Two that come to mind were Green Party events on agribusiness gene patents and nuclear energy.

    So, progressives don’t by and large want to increase the size, scope and power of government of any issue or set of issues?

    “If you, or Mr. Milnes, can come up with an example of a real life progressive who would suit the P part of PLAS while honestly endorsing the BTP platform”

    The word “honestly” appears nowhere in the requirements. It would be up to the BTP’s convention delegates to decide for themselves whether or not a progressive’s endorsement of the platform was honest, just as it would be up to progressive voters to decide whether or not a candidate calling hirself a progressive was one or not.

    Please unpack this. Are you saying that you believe Mr. Milnes, Sen. Gravel or some other real life “progressive” person you can name can convince the BTP’s convention delegates that said candidate is for reducing the size, scope and power of government on all issues, at all levels and at all times, without substantially changing their current views?

    If so, please name the person who could do that.

    For bonus points, please explain how or why this person would be any more appealing to mainstream progressive voters than any past libertarian candidate. But only if and when you’ve answered the first part.

  60. Thomas L. Knapp

    Paulie @ 77,

    You write:

    “Are you saying that you believe Mr. Milnes, Sen. Gravel or some other real life ‘progressive’ person you can name can convince the BTP’s convention delegates that said candidate is for reducing the size, scope and power of government on all issues, at all levels and at all times, without substantially changing their current views?”

    I’m not saying any such thing.

    I’m saying exactly what I’ve been saying: That contra yourself and Darryl, the BTP’s bylaws do not prohibit either “fusion” candidates or “progressive” nominees.

  61. paulie

    Jeez. Gotta parse my words carefully with Tom Knapp. Let me try again.

    Mr. Knapp, do you believe Mr. Milnes, Sen. Gravel or some other real life ‘progressive’ person you can name can convince the BTP’s convention delegates that said candidate is for reducing the size, scope and power of government on all issues, at all levels and at all times, without substantially changing their current views?

    If you answer in the affirmative and name such a real life person, please explain how or why this person would be any more appealing to mainstream progressive voters than any past libertarian candidate.

  62. Thomas L. Knapp

    Paulie @80,

    I’m not familiar enough with the current active membership of the BTP to answer that question.

    However, last time I looked, that membership had elected a Venus Project member / advocate of a “resource-based economy” / current or former Gravel campaign worker to the BTP’s national committee.

    And before that, the BTP nominated an endorser of Gravel’s “National Initiative for Democracy” for Vice-President of the United States.

    Those two data points tell me that there’s no insuperable barrier to a “progressive” persuading the BTP’s membership that he or she honestly endorses the party’s platform.

  63. paulie

    However, last time I looked, that membership had elected a Venus Project member / advocate of a “resource-based economy” / current or former Gravel campaign worker to the BTP’s national committee.

    Fair point. However, I think that was an “elect several out of…” race. Not the same thing as picking one as the presidential nominee.

    And before that, the BTP nominated an endorser of Gravel’s “National Initiative for Democracy” for Vice-President of the United States.

    Was this person in favor of increasing the size, scope or power of government on any issue, for any reason?

    Those two data points tell me that there’s no insuperable barrier to a “progressive” persuading the BTP’s membership that he or she honestly endorses the party’s platform.

    Well, I suppose any platform and bylaws is only as good as the people interpreting what they mean. Point taken.

  64. Thomas L. Knapp

    >> And before that, the BTP nominated an
    >> endorser of Gravel’s “National Initiative for
    >> Democracy” for Vice-President of the United
    >> States.

    > Was this person in favor of increasing the size,
    > scope or power of government on any issue,
    >for any reason?

    In my opinion, no, he wasn’t. But that’s precisely the relevance.

    Some members argued that endorsement of the N4ID did, in fact, entail endorsing increasing the size/scope/power of government.

    The candidate in question argued otherwise, and was nominated.

    All that those administering the bylaws can realistically do is include/exclude candidates for endorsement/nomination on the basis of their formal endorsement of the platform, or their failure to make such a formal endorsement.

    If the formal endorsement is there, it’s up to the convention delegates (in the case of presidential and vice-presidential nomination) or the national or state committee (in the case of candidate endorsements) to evaluate the candidate’s honesty in endorsing the platform and hir competence in interpreting it vis a vis actual policy recommendations.

    In theory, there’s nothing standing in between Nancy Pelosi and the BTP’s presidential nomination except:

    1) Her desire to have it;

    2) Her willingness to state that she endorses the BTP’s platform;

    3) Her ability to find two members (one could be herself) to nominate and second her; and

    4) Her ability to convince a majority of BTP members voting in convention that she honestly supports the platform and that her positions accord with it.

  65. Robert Milnes

    Tom, spin maestro par excellance, thank you for taking on paulie on this issue & wrestling him into submission.
    If it was me, he would have sat on me & discussion over!
    BTW, everybody, the endorser of Gravel’ NI4D & BTP vp nominee aformentioned- none other than TOM himself!

  66. paulie

    Don’t get too excited, Robert.

    Tom gets a technical point that the actual interpretation of who is honest if and when they say they support the BTP platform is up to those who choose to participate in the convention.

    However, you’d still have to persuade them, and I don’t think you can.

    Look at your track record of persuading people so far.

    And even if you did – – it wouldn’t get you much.

    They still don’t have any money, and even if they change their bylaws and allow themselves to raise some, they don’t have much of a base to raise it from.

    So, for 2012, realistically speaking it will be as it was in 2008 – their presidential candidate will be getting them ballot access more than the other way around.

    If it so happens to be you…good luck with that.

    BTW, everybody, the endorser of Gravel’ NI4D & BTP vp nominee aformentioned- none other than TOM himself!

    Yep, I knew that.

  67. Robert Milnes

    Unfortunately paulie’s assessment of the situation is pretty accurate.
    Even if I get the BTP nomination.
    I’ve gotten very little support so far.
    But, it’s not over till its over.
    If I get some support, I will be able to do a lot more.
    I repeat-if BTP nominates a fusion ticket AND gets on sufficient ballots, it can win.
    Because come Nov 2012 voters will have a viable third alternative.
    Progressives will vote BTP rather than dem. or Green.
    Libertarians will vote BTP instead of rep or LP.
    Greens & Libertarians downticket will get voted for also.
    We need the 35 million that is now otherwise probably going to Ron nPaul.
    We need more BTP ballot access & campaign fundraising.
    Campaign assistance, manager, web, research etc.
    If you would like to give PLAS a fair try, join the effort asap.
    NOW would be nice.

  68. Christ Elected PLAS Minister

    Reposted from US Parliament Open Thread as per Request by Honorable Paulie:

    Deputy PLAS Minister Robert Milnes [Green] wrote: “[…]If you would like to give PLAS a fair try, join the effort asap. NOW would be nice.”

    Honorable Deputy PLAS Minister Milnes [Green]…I have joined PLAS, and our central Prime Minister Roseanne Barr [Green Tea] has elected Dashus Christ [Roseannarchist] as PLAS Minister.

    I am trying to contact you to help your campaign, but I don’t have your email address or phone number.

    If you could second your name [on the BTP site], PLAS Minister Christ, and all other names nominated for president and vice president on the Boston Tea Party site, that would really help.

    I’ve done a lot on this end for your campaign for PLAS, but we need some reciprocal cooperation. Your name isn’t going to go anywhere, if you don’t at least second your own nomination.

    Best,
    –James

  69. Porn Again Christian

    I think you may well form a strategic alliance with the Psycho-Lunatic Asylum Strategy and the Mormon Maoist Shining Path to create a better veterans mental health clinic in or around Barstow, California, governed by a 100-candidate patient-selected and ranked system. That sounds like a totally achievable goal, actually.

  70. Porn Again Christian

    You mean there is already one there?!

    Damn.

    I always have good ideas and then find out someone beat me to them.

  71. Fun K. Chicken

    It says

    The Twenty-six Deputy Cabinet Ministers

    Deputy Speaker Minister Tina [Roseannarchist]
    Deputy PLAS Minister Robert Milnes [Left Anarchist]
    Deputy Speaker Minister James Ogle [Free Parliamentary]
    Deputy IRS Minister Don J. Grundmann [Constitution]
    Deputy Senate Minister Jan Tucker [Peace and Freedom]
    Deputy Labor Minister Starchild [Libertarian]
    Deputy Foreign Minister Orion Karl Daley [Balanced]
    Deputy Foreign Minister Aarde Atheian [Libertarian]
    Deputy Communications Minister Jim Doyle [Republican]
    Deputy Defense Minister David Frey [Socialist USA/California]
    Deputy Economics Minister Lawrence Samuels [Libertarian]
    Deputy Communications Minister Zachary Scott Gordon [American Libertarian]
    Deputy Economics Minister Byron Stephens [Libertarian]
    Deputy Economics Minister Ralph Hoffmann [Democratic-Republican]
    Deputy Communications Minister Vanessa Morely [Defender of the Republic]
    Deputy Economics Minister Dr. Loveless [National Barking Spider Resurgence]
    Deputy Communications Minister Alex Plewniak [Libertarian]
    Deputy Foreign Minister Dennis Davidsmeyer [Democratic]
    Deputy Foreign Minister Tony Dunsworth [Libertarian]
    Deputy Economics Minister William Johnson [Republican]
    Deputy Labor Minister Rhys Scarlett [United Socialism]
    Deputy Economics Minister Kirk Joseph [Independent]
    Deputy Labor Minister Matt Lemmons [United Socialism]
    Deputy Communications Minister Markham Burton [Democratic]
    Deputy Speaker Minister James Anthony [LEAP]
    Deputy Communications Minister Michael A. Cluley [America First]

  72. Mashed Potato with a Twist

    It sounds like you will have to contact them if you don’t want your name listed. Posted on the US Parliament thread:

    The Promise of Democracy // Feb 6, 2011 at 3:54 pm

    To Honorable Robert Milnes [Left Anarchist]:

    I apologize for nominating your name for PLAS Minister, and then Prime Minister Roseanne Barr [Green Tea] elected Dashus Christ [Roseannearchist] as PLAS Minister, thus making your name lower ranked and Deputy PLAS Minister.

    It’s no problemo if you want your name removed. I tried contacting you but I couldn’t get in touch.

    Just let me know, your name will be removed and the next highest names will automatically be elected in your stead.

    Peace,
    –James

    PS I put you as Left Anarchist, and if you wish to stay on I can make your name categorized with a more exact party/category that you wish.

    139The Promise of Democracy // Feb 6, 2011 at 3:55 pm

    http://www.usparliament.org/exec-1.php

  73. Robert Milnes

    No,paulie. I’m not goingto feed intoyour fool system.
    Counterrevolutionary coddler.
    I see that you deleted some of my comments on the Colborne thread.
    Asshole.
    Fuck Ron Paul & Gary Johnson.

  74. NewFederalist

    Bob- if you are going to boycott IPR who do you appoint to answer questions on this thread? I suggest Catholic Trotskyist… he (or she) seems like an intelligent and stable individual.

  75. C. Al Currier

    Robert Milnes // Feb 19, 2011 at 4:47 pm
    NF, several of my comments here have been deleted.
    I call for a boycott of IPR.
    Starting with me.
    I’m outta here.

    C. Al Currier // Feb 20, 2011 at 5:59 pm
    “I call for a boycott of IPR. Starting with me. I’m outta here.” –Robert Milnes
    A boycott oughta be more than a few hours. Looks like a ‘regressive’ boycott to me.

    paulie // Feb 20, 2011 at 6:25 pm
    As far as I know Mr. Milnes has not been back. Good wishes to him wherever he lands next.

    Are you outta here yet?

  76. paulie

    Since the time he has announced his boycott, Mr. Milnes has stuck to it, except for the two messages above where he is attempting to stay in touch with New Federalist outside of IPR. Best of luck to him wherever he lands next.

  77. Robert Milnes

    C. Al Currier, who are you?
    Govt.agent?
    CI-Confidential Informant?
    GOP operative?
    Maybe working for Root?
    Maybe a Ronulan Paulnut?
    Piece of shit.
    Maybe I’ll come back just to dog you.
    Paulie, you know who this is. Why do you let people stick it to me?
    Oh, you stick it to me at every opportunity.
    Nevermind.
    Hypocrite.
    “Best of luck…”
    How can you wish me luck after dogging me for years?

  78. paulie

    I’ve always wished you good luck, Mr. Milnes.

    I just don’t agree with your views, don’t feel like discussing them yet again, and the rest is all just IPR policy as requested by most of our other writers and readers.

    I’ve never harbored you any ill will. I do occasionally get annoyed and crack a joke or several, but for the most part I genuinely hope for nothing but good things for you.

    As far as I know, C. Al Currier is either a real name or a consistent screen name. I would advise Mr. Currier to quit needling you, if he cares about my advice.

  79. Robert Milnes

    NF, ok, good.
    paulie, don’t you see, moron?
    If I was just a lunatic nobody, like you keep saying, why would this guy be so interested in what I’m up to here?
    I probably caught the FBI in the early 70’s as a known associate of Dr. McFarland and John Davenport.
    The government knows me very well.
    & there is a lot to know besides PLAS.
    Who knows when you caught them.

  80. Robert Milnes

    Right, paulie, you just club me with IPR policy & whining commenters.Justified. Except the policy sucks.
    Kind of like every time Root mentions he was LP vp nominee in 2008 he clubs the real libertarians. Fait accompli.

  81. C. Al Currier

    Robert Milnes,
    I have no goals of being a poster or commentor at Independent Political Report. I have simple goals of just reading it for information about third parties. I consider the titles of the articles to be very important. Sometimes I read the article subject. Occassionally I read the comment section.

    Who am I? I am a reader of IPR.

    As a reader of IPR, I don’t want to see your dumb comments, insults or threats each and every time I make the mistake of reading the comment section. As I reader of IPR, if you insist on insulting and threating whoever or whenever you want with your comments, I plan to come to IPR and complain in the comment section. I consider your threat of a boycott of IPR to be a threat and a promise. But more than that, it’s just another dumb comment you did not have to put on this site, and another dumb comment that I should not have had to read.

  82. Robert Milnes

    Interesting.
    Black’s Law Dictionary, definition of threat: An expression or declaration of intention to injure or do harm.”
    “I consider your threat of a boycott of IPR to be a threat and a promise.”
    -Why would a simple reader of IPR with no other ambitions or agenda, & who only occasionally reads the comments, be so interested in & emotionally invested in what I say or do here?

  83. Robert Milnes

    & why use the words threat & promise?
    I can hear the brainstorming session.
    ey we want Milnes out of IPR. Shut up. What better way than to call his boycott a promise to not write anymore
    & he was convited of threat bymail. Let’s call a boycott a threat. Maybe it will stick. Get him banned. Maybe legal action.
    Yuk, yuk.
    I think you will find a boycott is a recognized legitimate action.
    I also think you will find IPR is loaded with CI’s, provocateurs, agents, researchers etc.
    Generally under intensive surveillance.
    LP too.
    & that is what I accuse you of, Currier.
    On the other hand, paulie & Root are probably just dupes.

  84. Robert Milnes

    I never told anybody this. While in FCI Butner, I wrote the Soviet Embassy.
    While on federal parole, I wasn’t allowed to leave the District of NJ without permission. I took a bus to Washington, DC. Went into the Soviet Embassy & requested to speak to someon about asylum. They were polite but said no.
    Then I went to the Chinese Consulate in NYC. They were not sopolite & asked me toleave. Not a peep from my parole officer.
    I do not think it is possible that the U.S. government did not know or find out that I did that.
    The FBI would be chomping at the bit to violate my parole.
    But, remember, my case was on the front page of the Philadelphia Inquirer.
    What is this guy doing at these diplomaticc buildings?
    Never heard anything about it.

  85. Robert Milnes

    Also I wrote later the Soviet Embassy.
    I said if they found me -hook me up with-a girlfriend with a very high I.Q., I would defect.
    After that my dad & I went to the beach at A.C. There was a large formation of military aircraft that went right overhead.
    Then we went to the most N.E. point of the island & onto a jetty. There was some sort of speedboat coming towards us. Then a low flying helicopter went out towards the speedboat.
    Never heard anything more about this stuff either.
    Coincidence?

  86. Robert Milnes

    Around this time there were some very unusual military maneuvers along the Delaware River in Gloucester, NJ. Landings etc.
    That was little more than a stone’s throw from my house.
    Another coincidence?

  87. Robert Milnes

    I’d say the government knows full well PLAS is viable. They probably worked out that scenario and others years ago via supercomputer election results & demographic & census studies.
    That’s probably how the liberals pursued the acceptable black man liberal democrat strategy. To get a win for liberals in the White House via Obama.
    How did Kennedy come to endorse Obama & give him a dog? Chicago is nowhere near Hyannis Port.
    Deval Patrick was Plan B.
    War Games>< Political Games.

  88. C. Al Currier

    “I also think you will find IPR is loaded with CI’s, provocateurs, agents, researchers etc.
    Generally under intensive surveillance.
    LP too. & that is what I accuse you of, Currier.”

    I plead guilty to being a provocateur, agent, and researcher.

    I’ve had lot’s of problems at embassies before also. US embasies. I couldn’t find one in Sana, Yemen. Got stuck at an airport in Bahrain, UAE. Made numerous trips to the US embassy in Bangkok TH. All I had for money was some Yemenese Ryals which were not accepted as legit money. I had to bribe (camera/jewelery, etc.) my way around from airport to airport with airline tickets that had wrong info along with a US Passport without a proper work visa. It was hard to find people who spoke English.

    Mr. Milnes, can I call you Bobby?

    You can call me Mej-ah-noon (arabic) or Maganon (yemenese gypsy dialect) or Ba-Ba-Bah-Bo (Thailand). Those are all nicknames that mean the same thing.

    When I was in those countries, I walked alot. In Yemen, I pretty much walked from the Red Sea to the mountains. I’d like to say I got paid for it, but the bookeepers and bosses of the company were drunks and screwed up alot. All I got was a handful of Yemenese Ryals and a screwed up Passport and a screwed up airline ticket.

    Back to your bocott. When ? Can I suggest that you take a hike?

  89. Robert Milnes

    paulie, once again you don’t get it. What has happened to me with this character is the same thing that happened to Nolan’s Resolution. Daily surveillance reports feed into a think tank. There it is analyzed. Recorded. Response decided. I the case of Nolan’s Resolution, the agent/CI/informant supplies the info. The Think Tank works on it. It was decided to Amend the resolution to reinforce the position of non-libertarians infiltrating & controlling the LP, rightists particularly Root. In this Currier instance , coming back with threat & promise, feeds the mantra to be used against me.

  90. Robert Milnes

    Radical libertarians, I call for an intensive investigation into exactly what happened to The Nolan’s Resolution and then to The Nolan himself i.e. the exact circumstances of his death I say the resolution went to a think tank via infiltrators into the LP, particularly the LNC. & Nolan was murdered or manslaughter. I offer my assistance.

  91. Robert Milnes

    Obviously if such an investigation is not under the complete control of radical libertarians, it’s findings should be considered unreliable at best. Starting with the police and medical examiner’s reports.e.g if he was being drugged as part of a covert operation & overdosed, that might have been called by the medical examiner an accidental overdose. Whereas it actually should be called homicide/manslaughter.

  92. Catholic Trotskyist

    Robert, I hope you will stay at IPR. I disagree with PLAS only because I’m a social conservative and I think it needs to include the Constitution Party, and I disagree with your lack of interest in US Parliament. But I still think PLAS should happen and will try to support it in some way. If you do leave, good luck with everything.

    Al, this is the PLAS thread; do you get that? If you don’t want to read these kinds of comments, go to a different thread.

  93. C. Al Currier

    Catholic Trotskyist // Feb 24, 2011 at 4:12 am
    RE: Al, this is the PLAS thread; do you get that? If you don’t want to read these kinds of comments, go to a different thread.

    I ususually don’t read the comments at IPR. I walk hither, tither, thither and fro, no where near a computer. Time flies. Sometimes a month or two goes by and I don’t even read IPR. I don’t call those periods a ‘boycott’. I have other things to do. It doesn’t mean I don’t care. It doesn’t mean I’m 100% apathetic. That’s just how it goes. If Bobby wants me to join him in a ‘boycott ‘, he’ll need to get a new seperate post on the subject with ‘boycott’ in the title. Maybe I’ll happen to see it while I’m scanning the titles of the IPR articles. It might take a few months before I see it.

    I take walks, strolls, hikes etc, etc.

    If Bobby doesn’t want to take a hike, can I dedicate a hike to him using his name? I’d like to call it an “Honorary Robert Milnes Hike”. Could take months and months.

  94. Robert Milnes

    Radical libertarians are pathetic.
    paulie likes to club me at every opportunity with the Milnes is not a libertarian stuff.
    Yet I seem to care about things that the radicals should more than they seem to.
    Ron Paul going for another $35 million that comes from libertarians & goes to GOP.
    Rightist domination of LP.>What to do about Root.
    What happened to Nolan’s Resolution…& what happened to Nolan?
    A Strategy to sweep the dems & reps out.
    paulie LOLs PLAS at every opportunity yet when HE talks about left/right(libertarian) cooperation it is a wonderful idea.
    Why can’t paulie & Tom et al see that the progressive vote is about 27%? I guarantee Obama et al understand it.
    Double that for the democratic party because the dems & reps are about 50/50.
    @50% of the democratic vote is The Progressive Vote? Yes. Look at 2008. The dem nomination was a close call between Obama/liberal/fake progressive & Billary/Reagan blue dogs.
    The Democrats play the progressives like a violin.
    Why don’t the anti-war people see The Libertarian Vote/Cato is @13% which is about what Ron Paul got in 2008 so he cannot win even one primary?

  95. Robert Milnes

    I’ve got something to say.
    I’m ver disappointed in Tom. I’m pissed at paulie.
    Tom & I have corresponded for years. I would say it is through those conversations PLAS developed.
    But slowly I noticed he became-I’m not sure what.
    It started with him saying things about my proposals that was not what I said. Positive eugenics became making human experiments & grotesque things.
    & emmigration subsidy became ship blacks to Africa.
    These are distortions ofwhat I actually wrote.
    Deliberate? I guess so because he is not stupid.
    Then he started talking magic turning 1% progressive vote 1% libertarian vote to 40%. & ridiculing it. I explained my rationale. Many times. Again he’s notstupid. How did he not follow this?
    Then I said Ron Paul got more or less The Libertarian Vote 13% in 2008. He said no & actually listed all the states votes. It came to less than 13% but not much less.
    He started talking shit about rather gouge his eyes out than support me-or mine.
    I think it all is from him realizing I’m not a plumb line purist like him therefore all bets are off.
    The radicals are going to have to work with a lot of impure people if they want to win. If they want to get a lot ofwhat they want instead of just about nothing & losing most of the time.
    Progressives, unions even socialists & commies. Many can caucus with the Green Party not the LP but even still they will have a say in an inclusive progressive movement. Especially unions. Every union we can pursuade to caucus with the GP instead of the democratic party would be a huge victory.

  96. Robert Milnes

    Everybody, all I see is the same old crap.
    Paulie is wasting time. Tom has copped out. Ron Paul is going to run again. & why not? There is another $35 million to be had. He cannot & will not win. But so what? Ronulan Paulnuts get their political fix nut. More wasted time & effort.
    Obama is going for $1 BILLION.
    The reactionaries-dems & reps- are going to win again.
    Root/another rightist will be the LP ticket.
    McKinney or some other loser will be the GP ticket.
    An Independent might get enough ballot access to win-like Nader-but will lose.
    Rad/rad will be the BTP ticket.
    Anybody besides me would like to see some change-for REAL?
    The 1912 election centennial is next. It is a perfect opportunity for an inclusive progressive/libeertarian movement to make a try.
    I propose that ANYONE who wants to try this to get it going now.
    If you don’t want to call it PLAS-paulie?-or want to exclude me-start something-a new website?
    If you want to call it PLAS & want me involved, support my campaign or me personally or start a PLAS website.
    But let’s stop wasting time. Do SOMETHING NOW!

  97. JT

    Milnes: “All these years Tom & I were conversing, paulie was ridiculing me & still is. It is getting old.”

    No, it’s not. It’s still fresh and fun.

  98. NewFederalist

    “But let’s stop wasting time. Do SOMETHING NOW”

    Did Nader ever get back to you?

  99. JT

    Ross: “So JT, Greens shouldn’t work with Libertarians on issues like health care, welfare, or environmental regulations (except, perhaps, in those circumstances where “reform” is really just corporatization in disguise and doesn’t advance green values at all, but that’s a more specific discussion). But there are plenty of other issues where we can work together.”

    Sure. And there are plenty of issues where Libertarians can work with far-right conservatives as well.

  100. JT

    I’m only posting on this thread again because Milnes has crawled out from under his rock brought it to the forefront with his recent comments.

    Eric: “I can’t help but notice you completely skipped over the part where I noted from the Greens’ *own website* that their movement was originally based on “nonviolent anarchism.””

    Oh? Did the Green movement ever advocate a free-market economy without government intervention? If so, then merely saying the movement was originally based on “nonviolent anarchism” is meaningless.

    Eric: “I didn’t say the fact that they used to be heavily decentralized was the sole proof that they used to better live up to their own ideals – I merely said in part of noting that these ‘national/federal’ advocacy phenomena that you’re harping on are *recent* developments that weren’t in line with the original movement.”

    Again, did the original Green movement ever advocate a free-market economy? If not, then whatever it lists as its key values and whatever it called its original movement are just words.

  101. Robert Milnes

    If you don’t want to call it PLAS-paulie?-or want to exclude me-Tom?-start something…
    Actually I am in a good position to accomplish a lot with just a little support.
    Web assistance. A modest motorhome to campaign in. Campaign manager.
    I was thinking I could give out some small Teddy bears & have picture taken on the sidewalk.
    I am convinced Teddy Roosevelt can be accepted as a symbol of an inclusive progressive movement which potentially can win in 2012.

  102. Robert Milnes

    JT, 142,143. I recall these from another thread.
    Whether it is clearly elaborated or not, the ultimate goal of the Green party & also Soviet socialism is whithering away of the state>anarchism. A minimalist lassaifaire free market economy/government is a possible outcome. We just do not know until we get there.

  103. Robert Milnes

    NF, I only sent an email to nader.org.
    I’ve had very little success contacting other candidates.
    Corresponded with Karen K.
    Kubby answered an email of mine.
    Gravel’s campaign manager, Skyler McKinley.
    I think it is a Catch 22.
    As long as I’m a long shot, I get little respect.

  104. NewFederalist

    Bob- I don’t agree that PLAS has much merit but it is clear that you are passionate about the concept. All I can say is keep trying to contact someone who already has a media presence and attempt to persuade them that PLAS should be tried. Nader seems to me to be the best prospect but try to think of somebody else like a Dennis Kucinich or someone like that.

  105. JT

    Milnes: “Whether it is clearly elaborated or not, the ultimate goal of the Green party & also Soviet socialism is whithering away of the state>anarchism.”

    Soviet socialism? Well, that worked out well, didn’t it?

    And the millions of Russians killed by the Soviet socialists was just incidental, I guess.

  106. JT

    Me: “Oh? Did the Green movement ever advocate a free-market economy without government intervention? If so, then merely saying the movement was originally based on “nonviolent anarchism” is meaningless.”

    I meant, “If not.”

  107. NewFederalist

    Bob- I see you as a guy who has an idea that he wants tried. That’s all. I have no other agenda. I have said before that I do not agree with your numbers (27% progressive vote based on TR’s showing nearly a hundred years ago) and I have also said that I don’t see libertarians and progressives having all that much in common beyond foreign policy issues and the war on drugs and perhaps a few others. But you are like a bulldog on one’s cuff when it comes to PLAS. You just won’t let go. That is fine with me which is why I wish you luck in finding someone to advocate for it. If you can get it tried and it works then great. If it is tried and fails would you ever accept the verdict? Would you relentlessly nitpick why it didn’t get a fair trial? I suspect you would nver accept that it won’t work but I would like to see you get a chance to present the idea to someone who might be able to pursue it.

  108. Robert Milnes

    NF, what do you think about The Libertarian Vote/Cato Institute @13%?
    Tom K.-skeptical.
    I said Ron Paul got more or less The Libertarian Vote in 2008.
    Tom argued & actually listed the results & did the math. I think it came to @8%. But that is 8% of the republican vote which should be divided in half roughly in the general.
    The 27% TR got in 1927 is a convenient # as 27 + 13=a round figure 40%.
    But I got that figure in other ways also.
    36.6% leftist coalition Chile/Allende 1970.
    Also the progressives working within the democratic party supporting Obama in a close race with Clinton in the primaries-2 candidates running about even 50/50. Divided in half-dem/rep=@25% “progressive” Obama v @25% blue dog Clinton.

  109. NewFederalist

    “Why do you care whether I get PLAS a fair try or not?”

    Let’s just say I admire your tenacity. I always like to see someone get a fair chance to prove something that is important to him.

  110. whatever

    Maybe you see me as a political Charlie Sheen?
    <P
    Certainly not. Sheen is a high-functioning individual and a warlock. You are a loser and a troll living in a trailer.

  111. Gabbi's Friend

    I do have a lot of friends in Alabama. What part of Alabama is Shockley from?

  112. George Davis

    Trying to contact a C. Al Currier who once worked in Lancaster,CA phone 541 469 6074

  113. Robert Milnes

    Here is what paulie deleted on another thread.
    Asshole.
    Libertarians>inclusive progressives>LP
    BTP>inclusive progressives>BTP OR>
    BTP>inclusive progressives>caucus LP
    Greens>inclusive progressives>GP
    Socialists>inclusive progressives>caucus GP
    Environmentalists>inclusive progressives> caucus GP
    Unions>inclusive progressives> caucus GP

  114. Robert Milnes

    It is just not good enough to elect a very few progressives in Congress & hope liberal Obama will act progressively. & no libertarians. & try for some extraordinary ticket like Paul/Ventura. They will not win & even if they did, they would face a vastly overpowering dem/rep Congress. Same for an Independent ticket like Nader/Gonzales. What is needed is to vote out all or most dems/reps and vote in @50/50 Libs & Greens.

  115. JT

    Milnes: “If any of you want me to campaign, I’m going to need some support.”

    If you don’t get some support soon, will you forget about campaigning? Please say the answer is yes.

  116. David762

    AFAIK, no ‘progressive’ change can come from within the corporate-influenced bipartisan Congress. Only by working outside the stultifying two-party system can real change occur. But no 3rd party has won the USA presidency since Teddy Roosevelt’s Bull Moose Party. That was a political alliance, as well. In 2012 it will take an alliance between 3rd parties. and particularly progressives and libertarians, to present a truly different national agenda that will electrify the voters out of their lethargic apathy and vote. To hijack a political hack: “Firm hope and fundamental change”.

    Teddy Roosevelt didn’t secede himself in office, largely because his supporters were not organized at the state & local level with strong 3rd party representation. All politics is, ultimately, local — that is the base. Except when international bankers step into power — power so remote and insulated at the very pinnacle. The sands in the hour-glass of American Exceptionalism have very nearly run out. Will We The People invert that hour-glass when the time comes, maintaining the the status quo of our servitude to the bankers? Or will We leave that hour-glass drained, and adopt an even older and more durable method of trade — direct barter?

    The time is quickly approaching when the Fed’s current commodization of sovereign debt, as well as their private discount window for the privileged few — taxpayers’ credit card of last resort, becomes unsustainable. Oh, boy — bank holidays, hyper-inflation, martial law, and world war 3 !! Wasn’t that ancient Chinese curse “May you live in interesting times.” ??

Leave a Reply

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