Candidates for Libertarian Presidential nomination to debate at Massachusetts LP Convention October 9

Gold Mass Group: State LP Convention

October 9, 2011 10:00 AM
Tweed’s Restaurant
229 Grove Street, Worcester

[…]

Carl Person (confirmed attending)
Brian Irving (surrogate for R. Lee Wrights, confirmed attending)
R. J. Harris (may attend)
Roger V. Gary (may attend).

The Moderator
George D. J. Phillies
Former Candidate, President of the United States

28 thoughts on “Candidates for Libertarian Presidential nomination to debate at Massachusetts LP Convention October 9

  1. RedPhillips

    Maybe Phillies can ask them if they are true believers in anthropogenic global warming and allow them to alienate the vast majority of their base with an affirmative. Then he can ask them if they are willing to denounce all conspiracy theories a priori, so they can alienate any of the base that is left. 🙂

  2. George Phillies

    I certainly could ask them how we can best cheer on conservatives as they deny anthropogenic global warming, support trutherism and birtherism, and elsewise prove that conservatives are fruitcakes who the younger generation will recognize as comic relief..

    By the way, guys, libertarians mostly think it’s round, too.

  3. RedPhillips

    That’s right, because skepticism about anthropogenic global warming is the mark of a true fruitcake and equivalent to flat eartherism. Whatever.

    George, do you even keep up with the way the debate has been trending and where things stand now? The AGW true believers are losing ground and skepticism is on the rise. Or do you endorse the conspiracy theory that its all because the big oil companies are spreading disinformation?

  4. paulie Post author

    I certainly could ask them how we can best cheer on conservatives as they deny anthropogenic global warming, support trutherism and birtherism, and elsewise prove that conservatives are fruitcakes who the younger generation will recognize as comic relief..

    I don’t think truthers tend to be conservative.

  5. George Phillies

    Scientific opposition to anthropogenic global warming has collapsed. Contact with the top 100 research groups in climate change finds 97 support, several don’t work on the required question, and no real opposition remains.

    50 years ago, the Nautilus sailed under the north pole. It started on the Pacific side, because that was where the serious difficulty is. The Chukchi see, the old Bering land bridge, is only 150 deep in large areas, and ice flows going 60 feet into the water blocked it even in late summer. The Nautilus needed two complete tries to penetrate to the Arctic Sea.

    In 2011, the Bering strait is open blue water, and the ice even at the North Pole is relatively thin, a yard or less thick rather than the historic 4-5 yards, with extensive openings. The volume of North Polar ice has crashed, far lower than anything in recorded or measurable history, etc. In 2011, around the world far more high-temperature than low temperature records are set, sea water temperatures are at record highs, Antarctica has warmed by 20-40 Fahrenheit (and is still frozen solid), etc.

    Conservatives are in Denial, and all wet as a result. As a libertarian, I am of course delighted by this, and look forward someday soon to being able to sell them a used phone both in which they can hold their national convention.

  6. Darryl W. Perry

    @George – my point is that big giant yellow object that provides day-light and is also very hot, increases in temperature at times, thus causing warmer temperatures on every planet .
    That is not to say that some climate related changes are not due to human activity – but to blame every increase or decrease of temperature on human activity denies solar involvement.

    Additionally, in my experience – most people that deny solar activity as being involved in climate change have a political agenda that involves government solutions to “fix” (read tax & regulate people) the problem.

  7. George Phillies

    @12

    You might consider that the sun is actually visible in the sky, as opposed to being some hidden occult influence.

    In particular, you can point instruments at it.

    People have been doing so for some considerable time. The conservatives won’t tell you this, or are too stupid to have noticed.

    We are currently at or close to a solar irradiance *minimum*. If we were at an average point in the sunspot cycle, we would be a half degree give or take warmer.

    There is indeed solar involvement, the people who are interested in this and technically competent report regularly on the effect and include it in calculations, and the effect is currently pushing the wrong way to explain global warming.

    In my observation, most people pushing Martian climate –but not you–are in the pocket of a few nameable oil billionaires.

  8. paulie Post author

    –“Additionally, in my experience – most people that deny solar activity as being involved in climate change have a political agenda that involves government solutions to “fix” (read tax & regulate people) the problem.”

    –“In my observation, most people pushing Martian climate –but not you–are in the pocket of a few nameable oil billionaires.”

    The bad faith argument is not persuasive in either case.

    Some people question prevailing climate change theory because they are afraid it will be used to justify big government, or because they hope to preserve their existing business model profits.

    Some people support prevailing climate change theory, regardless of their level of understanding of it, because they hope it will provide a justification for big government and/or they hope to “stick it” to the plutocrats.

    I believe examination of scientific evidence should be based on scientific evidence, not on hopes or fears of what it will be used to justify.

    My own examination of such evidence – most of it in the 1990s – leads me to believe that human action is indeed destabilizing the climate, with a maze of factors compensating and overcompensating for each other, leading to ultimate results that we can’t accurately predict given the state of our knowledge at this time.

    Given what I know about the ability of big government to solve other significant problems, it is absolutely the last entity that I would want to fix this problem, which I believe is both real and serious.

    Nor do I believe that the crony capitalist system that most people erroneously believe is a free market will fix it, given the severe market distorting incentives built into the present system.

    I do believe it is possible that a truly free market could solve this problem through innovation, although at some point it may be too late for this to work. Indeed, it is possible that such a point may have already passed.

  9. Michael H. Wilson

    I don’t know whether either side has a lock on the truth, but I do know there are somethings that can be done to mitigate the situation. Bringing the troops home and reducing the overseas commitment of U.S. troops is one. Opening the urban transit market to competition is another. And we should be promoting both. Maybe I should put that last sentence in bold caps!

  10. NewFederalist

    Gosh, I sure will enjoy the LP presidential candidates debate if this is ALL they talk about. Perhaps they can solve the question of abortion as well! I can’t wait!

  11. Paulie

    What were those questions?

    On a side note, I noticed that there were a lot of searches for Roger Gary leading to IPR yesterday. Anyone know why? Has there been a significant development with Roger Gary or his campaign? Someone else with that name or a similar name?

  12. Darryl W. Perry

    1) Two-part question: Libertarians support a free-market that’s free from government intervention; how do you propose to eliminate government protected monopolies and subsidies that protect big business? Additionally, how will your plan not harm small business?

    2) What is your philosophy on central banks and fiat currency?

  13. RedPhillips

    Therein lies the problem. As many suspected before and as the Climategate scandal confirmed, research into climate change is a closed shop. You did read about Climategate didn’t you? You know those e-mails admitting deliberate manipulation of data and suppression of dissent.

    “Conservatives are in Denial, and all wet as a result. As a libertarian,”

    If it makes you feel better George to believe that it is just those conservatives (the other) that are skeptical about AGW and all your fellow libertarians are enlightened believers then you go right on believing that but perhaps you shouldn’t accuse others of denial.

    I agree with paulie that science should not be politicized, and I don’t rule AGW out beforehand. I just object to foot stomping that the question is settled because it most certainly isn’t, and I object to the blindness that allows some people to overlook the obvious institutional bias of the climate change industry.

  14. RedPhillips

    “In my observation, most people pushing Martian climate –but not you–are in the pocket of a few nameable oil billionaires.”

    Careful now! That’s dangerously close to a conspiracy theory.

Leave a Reply

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