Thomas Sipos entertains the idea at Libertarian Peacenick.
As the Libertarian Party seeks a presidential candidate for 2012, perhaps they should consider actor Wesley Snipes?
Snipes is about to begin a three-year prison sentence after being convicted for federal tax evasion.
But Snipes was not merely trying to save money. It seems that he’s a tax protester.
On January 14, 2008, The New York Times reported:
“But unlike other celebrities who find themselves on the wrong side of the Internal Revenue Service, Mr. Snipes has a flamboyant explanation: he argues that he is not actually required to pay taxes.”
I believe the federal income tax is Constitutional and legal. But I’m also a “Big Tent” libertarian. If the LP’s tent is big enough to include pro-war neocons like Wayne Allyn Root and Neal Boortz, it should be big enough to include tax protesters.
Running Snipes for president will stimulate debate and discussion on the nature of taxes in general.
That Snipes has spent time in prison is another plus. As with Steve Kubby, prison will have sensitized Snipes to civil liberties concerns. Nor is there any reason that Snipes can’t campaign from prison. In fact, it can make for a colorful “talking point.” Here is a man who understands the need to reign in federal power!
Root’s supporters often argue that the LP should run a “celebrity” (like, they say, Root), because celebrities attract media attention. Well, Wesley Snipes is a real A-list celebrity, unlike Root, who’s a few rungs below Kathy Griffin’s D-list status.
That Snipes is African-American is another plus. His candidacy will broaden the LP’s appeal to progressives. Snipes will mitigate the impression that the LP is filled with Tea Party racists.
I don’t know much about Snipes’s political views in general. If I learn that he’s pro-war, that would be a deal-breaker. But he’s worth a closer look.
Here are some intriguing items about Snipes, from Wikipedia:
“Snipes converted from Christianity to Islam in 1978. His current beliefs are unknown.
“Snipes’s apartment was destroyed by the collapse of the World Trade Center’s Twin Towers during the September 11 attacks in 2001. He was on the west coast at the time.
“A September 24, 2002 Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee press release listed Wesley Snipes as an ‘artist who is supporting’ a $6 million fundraiser with tickets ranging from “$500 to $250,000.”
I’m still Catholic, not a Muslim, but I’m “Big Tent” enough not to require that a political candidate share my religious views. Indeed, I think that, in this time of anti-Muslim hysteria, it would be a positive public statement for the LP to run a Muslim for president.
Snipes can also address 9/11 from personal experience — his home was destroyed. It’s not like anyone can accuse him of being ignorant of that tragic day.
As an LP presidential candidate, Snipes would be an African-American, ex-Democrat, with strong civil liberties/tax-protester creds.
I’m not a Snipes supporter yet (my dream team is still Ron Paul/Karen Kwiatkowski), but I think Libertarians should take a closer look at Snipes. Learn more about him. Ask if he’d be interested in running.
Income Tax Shattering the Myth by Dave Champion – http://taxrevolt.us/
Wesley Snipes is a great American. Run Wesley run!
Hell yeah!
Taxes are too damn high.
“How about this? A Libertarian outreach package sent to Wesley Snipes while he’s in prison.”
Interesting. An unlibertarian wanting to do libertarian outreach to Snipes.
I just don’t want Snipes to get confused as to what libertarianism is.
Wow, I’m really impressed that Mr. Starr was able to find a wikipedia entry on “anti-establishment”.
I’d really be impressed if he could find where someone who actually was anti-establishment in the 1960’s uses the term to describe themselves.
It was a word primarily used by statist reactionaries to describe beatniks and hippies.
eg, yes, I get your point. That highly unlikely scenario would be a high-class problem to have!
RC @ 60:
I don’t think Snipes would have to be a ‘Perot-like’ figure by any means to get the Nader treatment from the establishment left (Soros, kos, Huffington, etc.). As I’ve said before, all it would take is Obama losing in Ohio (with Ohio being enough to swing the electoral college), and Snipes capturing more of the black vote than the LP usually does while Obama loses more of the black vote than Democrats usually do. Even if Snipes’s national percentage were still below 1%, capturing, say, 5% of the black vote (with the GOP capturing their typical 8-15%) with the Democrats only pulling in 80-85% would be enough for Soros et al. to argue the conspiracy. Whether it’s fair or logical is beside the point – as I’ve said, look at the way they’ve creamed Nader (though Nader is in now way responsible for Gore’s loss in a logical analysis of the election).
That’s all I’ve been trying to say.
And as I’ve been quasi-debating with JT in a different thread (the PLAS thread), I believe the Greens have become more ‘progressive’ since this moment (Nader in 2000), though they had already become increasing ‘progressive’ in the lead up to this. Since the national media have perceived the Greens as a ‘progressive’ group, so-called ‘progressives’ have shown up within GP ranks to strengthen this perception.
@60
Monica Lewinski was actually quite useful for Clinton. The sex scandal distracted the public, the media and even Ken Starr from the bribery, fraud and financial corruption charges that could and should have resulted in the impeachment of Bill Clinton and substituted lies told about an affair which was not worthy of impeachment.
Lewinski saved the Clinton presidency.
@60 “I thought we all benefited from the Lewinsky affair. Scandals are the friend of peace and liberty. It tends to distract the pol…and that’s helpful.”
Bring in the interns…
eg53, sophisticated. Yes, that COULD happen. But it exponentially unlikely. Even if a Snipes campaign gets 2%, and the additional 1+% is due to increased African American votes, that’s still very small. To make the case, you’d have to show that the African American vote for BHO was down, and that was attributable to the Snipes factor, esp. in the battleground state.
I assume Snipes would be another protest vehicle, that he won’t become a Perot type figure. As a convicted felon, I’d say this thought experiment assumes Snipes will not break out (unintended pun) and become a “real” force in the election.
But, let’s say the stars align and Snipes became a balance of power candidate. His presence in the race plausibly could be the reason BHO gets unseated (I still believe he may not run again…hoping so, actually). All else equal, I’m for the Rs unseating him, with the possible exception of Palin doing so, because I simply don’t believe she can handle the job. My default position is to prefer the incumbent to lose, and nothing BHO’s done changes that view. He’s done more damage than Bush, as I see it, and that’s saying a lot. In the few areas where I thought BHO might stumble toward sanity, he’s failed, IMO.
Presidents are almost always more dysfunctional from my perspective in the second term. Clinton may have been the exception, but there I thought we all benefited from the Lewinsky affair. Scandals are the friend of peace and liberty. It tends to distract the pol…and that’s helpful.
Andy: “A Libertarian outreach package sent to Wesley Snipes while he’s in prison. The outreach package could include some information about the Libertarian Party and some libertarian books.”
Good idea … but please not Root’s screed. We don’t want to drive off Snipes.
Capozzi @ 44
Wow, for once I agree with Capozzi, without qualifications.
Andy is right; Wesley Snipes should receive some Libertarian literature in prison. The Catholic Trotskyist Party will also send him literature. He should also join the website which is linked to on my post, which cannot be named on this thread.
“Nobody has the right to take anyone’s income no matter what they right down on a piece of paper (the so called ‘law’).”
Whoops! Should read “…what they write down on a piece of paper (the so called “law”).”
TB @45:
Actually, I don’t think you must get around much at all. I’d say 70% of the people I meet have no idea what a libertarian is, 10% think it’s some kind of ‘liberal’ because it sounds close, 10% mention Beck or some other whacko, and another 10% think we’re ‘kooks’ because they know some one they perceive as crazy who calls him/herself a libertarian.
Those ratios have been about the same in all the places I’ve lived, too – a small sampling of which is Dallas, South Carolina, D.C., and Denver.
Marc Stevens: More Proof Politicians are Criminals
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHdJsNGNzCM&feature=related
RC @ 44:
C’mon now. We both know you’re smarter than that. So you think that if Obama somehow lost a place like Ohio, and that the margins in places like Northeast Ohio (Cleveland is quite black) weren’t in line with the rest of the country, that Soros or kos wouldn’t start ridiculous tirades about the LP being the GOP’s cheap little friend? Look at the way they buried Nader (even though it’s clearly not Nader’s fault) for 2000.
Red @ :
First you said, “I fail to see how nominating a black ex-Democrat (presuming) Hollywood type would make the LP look like the “right’s little buddy.””
Then you said, “Nominating Wesley Snipes would not be primarily viewed as a cynical attempt to split the black vote.”
I’m arguing that places like dailykos would say that said “cynical attempt to split the black vote” would be *because* the LP is supposedly the “right’s little buddy.”
Marc Stevens: No Evidence Anyone is a Taxpayer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrT2bymfGR0
Marc Stevens: No One Owes Taxes
http://www.youtube.com/user/MarcStevens3#p/u/28/Wmq9Fzx-N_8
Larken Rose: I’m Allowed to Rob You!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngpsJKQR_ZE
I’m really happy to see that Wes Benedict put out that press release about Wesley Snipes. A fellow Libertarian friend of mine and I have been wanted the LP National office to release a press release praising Wesley Snipes for resisting the federal extorion racket ever since the IRS decided to go after Snipes 2 or 3 years ago. Unfortunately, the previous administration at the LP National office didn’t have the balls to do it. Hats off to Wes Benedict for putting this release out.
How about this? A Libertarian outreach package sent to Wesley Snipes while he’s in prison. The outreach package could include some information about the Libertarian Party and some libertarian books. I don’t know if he can watch DVDs or listen to CDs while in prison, but if he can, maybe some of them could be thrown in as well. If Snipes is receptive to the material, he could be invited to a Libertarian Party convention when he gets out of prison.
I don’t know where Wesley Snipes stands on all of the political issues, but I give him “props” for resisting the federal extorion racket.
“I believe the federal income tax is Constitutional and legal.”
I’ve looked into the claims of the tax honesty movemement for years and from the evidence that I’ve seen I think that they are probably correct. The income tax may be “legal” in certain cases, but in most cases it is applied illegally (in that it does not apply to most Americans who work within the 50 states). There is also the arguement that the income tax amendment was never properly ratified, which is likely correct as well.
However, there is a bigger arguement against the income tax and that is that taxation is theft. Nobody has the right to take anyone’s income no matter what they right down on a piece of paper (the so called “law”).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-establishment
tb: …use 1960?s Republican terminology – “anti-establishment” …
me: Maybe in the 70s. In the 60s, the term seems most associated with the New Left.
I prefer the current perception as the LP being for kooks, or people not knowing much of anything about it, than a possibility of us being seen as a ‘right’ party.
Erik, you must not get around much anymore. After years of people like Neal Boortz and Wayne “Reagan-Libertarian” Root, and the millions of people who hear Glenn Beck repeatedly say that he is a libertarian, not to mention the millions who believe that Tea Partiers are all libertarians ( and racists), lots of people think libertarians are hard core right-wingers.
The response to Wes Benedict’s press release about Snipes in black media seemed to be befuddlement.
So, Erik, quit worrying that folks might think the LP is a right-wing party – they already think that and not without reason. That nightmare train (the “Wayne Train”?) has already left the station.
Read the first post to this thread by Aaron Starr, former LNC big wig. He tries to use 1960’s Republican terminology – “anti-establishment” – as a pejorative against Sipos while calling into question if he is really pro-liberty.
It is as if Starr doesn’t know that to be pro-establishment is to be pro-status quo, and if you are pro-status quo, then you probably have no concept of what liberty is. Is this someone who should be a leader in the LP?
It seems VERY unlikely that an African American as the LP’s pres candidate would be a margin of difference. The “black” vote is maybe 10% of the total, and the LP’s vote is maybe 1%. +/-9 points of the 10% vote D. Moving that to even +/- 8 points might make somewhat of a difference.
Like Means, a Snipes candidacy might amp up the curiousity factor. From a media perspective, that can work to a L candidate’s advantage. At this stage, that’s the game we Ls are playing…minor leaguers getting the occasional showcase at the end of the season.
Making the best of the showcase seems to be our task. It would be optimal if Snipes would have to be perceived as a sincere L, not just a tax protester, in this particular thought experiment.
Erik G., I fail to see how nominating a black ex-Democrat (presuming) Hollywood type would make the LP look like the “right’s little buddy.” If anything, I would think it would do the opposite.
And I am never one to underestimate the cynical uses that political correctness can be put to, but I really think you are over thinking this. Nominating Wesley Snipes would not be primarily viewed as a cynical attempt to split the black vote. Only a serious wishful thinker would believe that Snipes would get anything more than a tiny fraction of the black vote. If anything, it would be viewed as a cynical publicity stunt.
For the record, I’m not saying this logic that I endorse, merely logic that would be likely to happen (thus damaging the LP, who doesn’t have even a 100th of the PR muscle that the Dems do).
TS @ 40:
That’s playing pretty fast and loose with what I’m trying to say, and I think you know it.
You want to run a *questionably* libertarian candidate (his credentials are what? tax-resisting?) even though he may not be very libertarian, and you don’t think this would be perceived as a cheap attempt at vote-splitting? It’s certainly a cheap attempt at something (in this case, publicity).
And if Snipes stayed as ambiguous about war as Root has (who attracts plenty of his own neo-cons), there’s no reason to think he’d only attract the “good” type of conservatives (although I hardly consider some paleo views as “good”).
And if you don’t think some Democrats would play the race card on this, you’re kidding yourself.
I don’t think Snipes would attract any establishment, neocon conservatives.
He may attract the good kind of conservative, anti-establishment and paleo.
As for the notion that Snipes might be perceived as costing Obama the election because Snipes is black, well, by that logic no party can run a black candidate against Obama, because the Dems “own the black vote”.
At best, that’s pretty patronizing.
The LP may as well not run a white if the GOP runs a white.
RC @ 38: Yes, except that the uproar surrounding Snipes, who would indeed likely garner a decent chunk of votes (even though he may be a questionable ‘libertarian’ overall), would lead to *such* a perception that more right-lovers would likely join our party, thus further eroding and deluding the LP’s ability to be be an actual libertarian party. Then again, maybe you wouldn’t mind an LP full of people like Ann Coulter as much as I would.
Right now, asshats like Root can only further the perception so much, but if a Snipes-type of candidate were to be portrayed as ‘costing’ Obama a re-election, the perception would be overwhelming.
eg, hmm, well, perceptions are again a matter of interpretation. FWIW, if you’re for a lot less government, some will perceive that as the “right’s little buddy.” That seems unavoidable, even on Gilligan’s Island. People pleasing and second-guessing yourself don’t seem wise to me.
Nominate Root > little buddy. Nominate Snipes > little buddy. Nominate Keaton or Wrights or Barr > little buddy. Such is the nature of a dualistic mindset.
We know we are different. That SHOULD be good enough. We can stand for our truth and let the chips fall where they may.
Second-guessing is neurotic, and therefore unwise.
Thane,
Read my comments @35.
@33
Why should Libertarians care what accusations Democrats cast? They cast so many accusations it is a task to keep up with all of them.
I don’t think it should be the primary consideration by any means, but the last thing we need is an entire nation thinking we’re the right’s little buddy. I prefer the current perception as the LP being for kooks, or people not knowing much of anything about it, than a possibility of us being seen as a ‘right’ party. Inevitably, the perception of the LP as a party of the ‘right’ would lead to more conservatives entering the party and destroying the libertarian message, much as progressives long ago killed much of what the Green Party originally was.
eg, seems plausible. Worrying about what the Ds or Rs might say seems the last of our considerations.
Am I the only one who thinks Democrats would accuse the LP of coddling the right and trying to split the black vote for Republican benefit (true or not) if we ran Snipes?
Bob @ 18,
“How are neocons leftists?”
I’ve taught this history lesson before with you present. If you want to know, look it up. If you don’t want to know, don’t pretend to know.
Yes, let’s nominate Russell Means. Can you imagine him all fired up in Chingachgook regalia in the debates? We just need some way to keep him on the reservation, so to speak, so the libertarian message goes beyond attacks on Son of the Morning Star.
There’s much about the LP that’s displeased me these past few years.
But Wes Benedict has, with near consistency, impressed me.
TMS:
See
http://www.lp.org/news/press-releases/wes-for-wesley-snipes
and
http://www.lp.org/blogs/staff/snipes-press-release-gets-media-coverage
Innovative ideas like this one are good to discuss and cogitate but in the end I suggest the nominee be a libertarian first and foremost. If a celebrity is deemed a good thing why not Penn Gillette? I don’t personally see any major benefit to selecting a celebrity but there are certainly a number of them who have fairly solid libertarian credentials… John Stossel, Judge Andrew Napolitano and perhaps Teller (who wouldn’t even run a whispering campaign!).
Wow, I didn’t know Benedict had issued a press release about Snipes. Cool.
srl, the reason seems plain enough to me: voters may well have an aversion to convicted felons. It’s risky to put forth a convicted felon for this reason. The law may not be “righteous,” but many unfamiliar with that concept might not listen past the fact that the candidate has been convicted of a crime.
OTOH, some may find the signal of a convicted felon of a law to be attractive.
My guess is there are far more who won’t consider voting for or listening to a felon than those who will. The felonious background would become the headline issue surrounding the candidate.
Sounds like a high-risk strategy to me.
I agree that it is an interesting idea, and one worth pursuing.
But it should be kept in mind that Libertarians, for whatever reason, have an aversion to having anything to do with somebody that openly flaunts the statist system.
Libertarians have rejected Jim Lewis and Irwin Schiff as standard bearers (’87 & ’96) as well as refused to honor with a resolution some folks arrested for FIJA leafletting (2010). I seriously doubt the 2012 LP convention will be much different.
PEACE
Interesting article, although I disagree with Sipos’ characterization of Wayne as a pro-war neocon.
I wonder whether anyone from LNC/LPHQ has actually communicated with Snipes? I saw that Wes Benedict got some good publicity for the Snipes press release (I saw it in the Washington Examiner). Snipes is going to have some time on his hands, so if anyone gets a chance to write or visit him, please do so!
Even if the presidential candidate idea is impractical, it would be great to get him interested in libertarianism if he isn’t already.
-Paulie
Pro-Wikileaks/Ant-TSA
College Park, MD
415-690-6352
(Sorry, still no time to read IPR comments; call if you wish to discuss).
Practical question: will Snipes be out of the slam long enough to run for anything?
The Mandela/Russell Means factor is sorta interesting, in concept…outlaw as politician.
Actors can make excellent politicians; they know how to deliver a line!
Can’t hurt to make inquiries.
Correction.
A good reactionary is a dead reactionary.
Sipos, do join in, Good Peacenik.
I don’t see how there can be a good reactionary.
statists=leftists?
dictator overthrowers=leftists?
nationbuilders=leftists?
Milnes, there are good rightists, and bad rightists.
Good leftists, and bad leftists.
Good moderates, and bad moderates.
Good libertarians, and bad libertarians.
Good progressives, and bad progressives.
Good conservatives, and bad conservatives.
Good independents, and bad independents.
It’s a matter or personal character, and stances on key issues.
Tom, your maestro-spin lost me.
How are neocons leftists?
Bob,
I agree that Kwiatkowski is a rightist.
Neocons are, in their distinguishing doctrines, (state) leftists.
Let the Lt. Col. learn that lesson the hardway,if she must.
Now,ifshe recants her endorsement of Ron Paul, leaves Lew & calls for a purge of rightists from the LP & endorses PLAS,then she couldn’t possibly be a rightist, right?
& she has hada comfortable niche atLew Rockwell./….I don’t enjoy criticizing libertarian couldda be vp’s on my ticket. But the radicals are screwing up things so bad particularly the LP, that it is difficult not to. When one puts up with rightists,one risks being called a rightist,in the fog of political warfare.
,
Tom, justbecause she endorsed Ron Paul doesn’t automatically label her as some sortof fool counterrevolutionaryrightist, true. Look at Sipos.
Bob,
When you describe Kwiatkowski as a “possible neocon,” you bring to mind something Mark Twain once said:
“It is often better to keep one’s mouth shut and appear stupid than to open it and remove all doubt.”
AS @1: “Entries, such as this one, make me wonder whether for many Libertarians the underpinnings for their system of beliefs is based on being anti-establishment rather than being pro-liberty.”
I find it helpful not to question the validity of a freedom fighter’s motivations. Motivations are often very difficult to externally decipher with any accuracy and when you get down to it, are none of my business.
Being anti-establishment and being pro-liberty seem not at all mutually exclusive. It also seems that both in what ever varying combination we find in people willing to fight for liberty, is likely to be diverse and to say the least, interesting.
The LPs numbers suggest to me that any and all allies should be encouraged as a strong default behavior. That regardless of left slant or right, anti-authoritarian motivation or pro-freedom drive, old or young, neophyte or practiced poitico, wealthy contributor or povertarian, and even those who are high on Nolan Chart or still have some fear to shake,
Take WAR for instance, people unfairly question his motivations all the time. There are a lot of motivations any one person might have. The best strategy for any coalition group is to encourage all, and promote the best at getting the largest messages out. That kind of work suffers without a wide diversity of efforts, views and motivations and it suffers without scale.
Entries, such as this one, make me wonder whether for many Libertarians the underpinnings for their system of beliefs is based on being anti-establishment rather than being pro-liberty.
How can one be pro-liberty and NOT be anti-establishment? Given the sad state of affairs we live in and the establishment’s refusal in most cases to even acknowledge systemic problems exist, those that embrace the establishment that clings to the status quo are the enemies of freedom, regardless of their protestations to the contrary.
Milnes: “You know just about nothing about Snipes.”
Not a lot. I just put the idea out there.
I think he’s worth a closer look. He’s worth getting to know more about.
Like I said, Paul/Kwiatkowski is my dream ticket, for the time being.
Big Tent=make room for counterrevolutionary rightists.
LRC=poor Dr. Milsted=Herr Frankenstein.
Again I ask how can you be so right about Root & wrong about Paul?
Snipes too canbe a teaching moment.
You know just about nothing about Snipes.\
“Sipos, you are all over the place.”
I’m a Big Tent kind of guy. I keep saying that.
I’m always being told by the Root people that we need a Big Tent. They should be thrilled with Snipes.
I don’t know if Snipes would be a good candidate. He may or may not be. But I put the idea out there.
It’s called “outside the box” thinking.
I’m also sure Snipes would get more media attention, and more votes, than would Root.
The Root people are always talking about the importance of media attention and votes. Again, they should be thrilled with Snipes.
(You mean, they’re not thrilled? Hmmm…..)
Finally, I think the LP is primarily an educational organization.
* Paul educated people about foreign policy in general.
* Kwiatkowski can educate people about the reasons for the Iraq War
* Snipes too can be a teaching moment. He’ll open a debate on taxes, the power of government prosecutors, and remind African-Americans that government is not necessarily their friend.
* Root would teach people about how awesome Root is.
& whydo I not get the benefitof the doubt that having been in federal prison & entangled in the mental health system and the endemic poverty system & legal aid system, I have gained some insight & empathy?
Sipos, you are all over the place.
You do not know the deal breaker war position of a candidate you propose?
His apartment was destroyed on 9/11. So what?
Evidently you know little of his rationale or motivation for tax protest.
He has a past of democratic fundraising utilizing his celebrity apparently. But his present politics are not described.
His religious beliefs are not described other than having converted@30years ago.
Yourdream ticketof Paul/Kwiatkowski consists of a dixiecrat conservative/possible neocon.
I did some research on Kwiatkowski & have communicated with her. She is uncomfortably close to Lew Rockwell-rightist & the varioius Pentagon neocons & rightists & warmongers. She claims to be an anarcho-capitalist. &has been a whistleblower of sorts.That would be a genuine libertarian school.However she wrote an article on her as an elected vice president.She woulddoverylittle.I’m sorry but to lead a libertarian revolution/inclusive progressive movement is not a do-little task.
i.e. she is shakey.
Snipes wouldn’t be the first Libertarian to spend time in the big house and he won’t be the last. Unfortunately.
The LP should reach out to all imprisoned victims of the unjust tax, drug laws and any other victims of the fascist-socialist state.
Should Wesley Snipes and any of these be LP candidates depends on a lot more than mere victimhood on a single issue.
We need a volunteer group to seek out victims of the state. Newspapers publish arrests and convictions. Each such victim should be contacted with a letter and outreach material targeted to their circumstances. Such an effort has to be handled carefully. Those individuals who are obviously violent or real criminals should be avoided.
While this is a good outreach project and could secure voters and supporters among sympathetic friends and family members of the victims as well as the victims themselves, it can only be, in the end, a minor long-term promotional effort. There are no magic shortcuts to building a party for liberty.
Entries, such as this one, make me wonder whether for many Libertarians the underpinnings for their system of beliefs is based on being anti-establishment rather than being pro-liberty.