Wayne Root requested that the following be posted on IPR:
Yesterday, I appeared on the Bill Cunningham Show and overall it went very well. However, some people are making unfounded claims that I endorsed Mitt Romney for President based on a couple of sentences where I did not express myself as clearly as I should have.
Let’s start with the exact transcript of what I said:
“I, I think the important thing now is to make sure Obama is not elected, and, and that means, in my mind, I mean I would, listen, I’d love if a Libertarian like Gary Johnson, the two-term governor of New Mexico, would actually get elected President, but I think we all know that’s not going to happen, so therefore it’s gotta be Romney, there’s no choice, and then unfortunately, the good news is Romney stops Obamacare I hope, and, I hope, and stops, you know, the incredible bankruptcy of America and the looting of taxpayers a, a little bit, slows it down so we don’t go right off a cliff, but unfortunately Bill I don’t have a lot of hope that he turns this around and saves America, cause to me he seems like a big government north-east liberal compared to Obama who’s a Marxist, so I mean between those two choices, yeah, I guess the lesser of the two evils is certainly Romney but they’re both bad choices, and that’s the problem I have, it’s big government guys on both sides.”
As a political commentator and pundit, I opine on many issues, make predictions, and break down the differences in political races. When one frequently provides rapid-fire commentary in the media over a period of years, once in a while you’d like to reword a sentence or two. This is one of those times.
The point I was trying to make – but perhaps not clearly enough to the host’s conservative audience – is that if the only choice were Obama versus Romney, Romney would be the better choice between two horrible options. It’s clear to me as a businessman that Obama’s economic choices and record are the worst in modern history. But there is another and better choice for the American people. Gary Johnson is the third choice – and he’s a perfect choice. His record is far superior to both Obama and Romney.
In my role as a political commentator, I’m asked hundreds of times a year to analyze races involving Republicans vs. Democrats. I do. But my personal choice is always a true principled Libertarian – because only libertarians embrace our philosophy of economic and personal freedom, and truly want to dramatically cut the size of government. My sincere hope is that our party’s candidates will win every election. Alas, it happens far too infrequently.
My realistic prediction in mainstream media appearances – where little opportunity is allowed for proselytizing and the underlying question is always “Republican or Democrat and why?” – is that the voters are going to pick Romney over Obama. But my hope is that voters will be exposed to a true libertarian like Gary Johnson who in eight years as Governor of New Mexico never allowed spending or taxes to rise and who vetoed more bills than all other Governors in America – combined! It would be a shame if the choice will be once again limited to bigger government or much bigger government – America needs much smaller government.
For the past four years, I’ve done thousands of media interviews as a former Libertarian Vice Presidential nominee, political commentator and columnist. The objective of this hard work is to fight big government and big-government politicians, and to point out that the Libertarian Party is the positive alternative to the two major parties, with both of them too often fighting for bigger government, reductions in freedom, and less individual choice.
Obviously I do not endorse Romney or urge people to vote for him. I support Gary Johnson for President. I am a fan of his, and I spent months urging him to run for the Libertarian Party’s Presidential nomination. I will proudly vote for Gary Johnson in November.
I will be writing commentaries and appearing in the media enthusiastically explaining “the Gary Johnson difference.” I’ve already gotten Bill Cunningham to schedule another interview next week on the biggest show in Ohio to explain why Gary Johnson is the best possible choice for President.
That’s called turning lemons into lemonade – getting Gary Johnson and the Libertarian Party a big dose of publicity – all because of my miscommunication!
Even if Gary doesn’t get elected this year, I think he can have a huge impact on the November elections and propel the Libertarian Party forward. A large and growing portion of the public is sick and tired of having to choose between a big-government Republican and a much bigger-government Democrat. Gary Johnson can speak to those angry and frustrated Americans and offer them a real choice – a Libertarian choice.
That is always my choice, even if the mainstream media is only interested in my analysis and prediction of a two-party race. I support the Libertarian difference – both economic and personal freedom. Something rarely found in the two-party system or candidates.
I’ve had countless media appearances over the past several years, and I can’t be perfect every time. Talk show hosts and audiences love to discuss the two-party horse-race aspect of elections, and I’m happy to oblige since that’s my profession. But in the end, Libertarian is my personal choice – and it will hopefully one day be the choice of all Americans. I do apologize for any confusion my words caused.
Keep in mind that when someone is willing to sacrifice thousands of hours, and do thousands of interviews, anticipate that there will always be a few words that are offensive to some. It’s a delicate balancing act I perform on a daily basis. And this is an art, not science. Someone’s got to do it. I’ve built a big platform. I’m willing to take the slings and arrows. I hope an occasional misstatement is forgiven. My heart is always in the right place – fighting passionately and enthusiastically for smaller government, economic and personal freedom, and increased liberty for all of us.
Wayne
Apparently the FEC rules that allow for the LNCC specify that the party may charter a separate LNSC for the US Senate, but the LNCC has to stick to non-US Senate races under the legal framework under which it exists. someone explained this to me in detail once or twice; I don’t remember all the details exactly. It may have been Chuck Moulton.
It doesn’t help.
But it hurts less when we speak up louder and more often to paint a different picture of what the LP and LM are all about.
Well it’s not like it’s difficult 🙂
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/resolution_evidence_1.pdf page 17 of 23
@35 “our bylaws and FEC rules that we could not contribute to U.S. Senate races. Only Congress or local.”
The Senate is one of the TWO HO– USES OF CONGRESS!
Thanks and likewise!
And as always, if any IPR writers agree, please feel free to make a post of any of my comments, as I sometimes do with other people’s comments when I find them to be particularly good.
15% is the poll average in September to get into the presidential debates.
5% is the actual vote percentage in November to start qualifying for those matching funds, which don’t start at 90 million but more like 10 million iirc. They then rise proportionately to the vote percentage and don’t get to 90M until you get to D/R level numbers.
I don’t really see 15% in September or 5% in November as very plausible unless we get a VP with a lot of money to spend on the race, but I’d love to be pleasantly surprised.
In the meantime, set some more immediately achievable goals consisting of X number of new LP dues paying members, X number new LP inquiries shared with all levels of the national, state and local party orgs, X new chartered county and local affiliates, X new student clubs, X number of candidates elected to lower level offices, X increase in average vote percentage for LP candidates at all levels, X percent increase in registered libertarian voters, X percentage increase in the LP’s budget for 2013 compared to 2012 or 2009 (discounting any matching funds that we might grasp for), and so on.
If we don’t set and seriously pursue those less awe inspiring but more achievable intermediate goals the most likely after-effect will be disappointment/washout/burnout.
I’d rather not either defend or condemn Wayne. He is just one man. True, he gets a lot of attention, but I think many people here could get a lot of attention too. We have had people offer to contribute to a fund to hire a publicist. We have people here who have the money. We have people here who could do a good job building a media spokesman/candidate/party official/author/speaker/talk show host and guest/columnist career. Or, if no one is interested in that (really?) we could have an informally organized speakers bureau with different people made available for different interviews, speaking opportunities, etc.
Let’s get something put together, folks. Seriously.
JJM, how about running for the VP nomination?
Among many other possibilities.
I don’t think it was an original insight by any means, but certainly do feel free to use it. I don’t have my sources memorized, I’ve just absorbed the material.
As difficult as it may be to believe based on the amount of time I spend on IPR, I actually manage to spend a lot of time living in the real world as well. And I don’t just mean the played out MTV reality show currently in its 40th-or-so season.
😛
Hannity, FOX News, 9 April 2012;
JOHN STOSSEL ENDORSES GARY JOHNSON (and RON PAUL)
Available for purchase at:
http://radio.foxnews.com/podcast/sean-hannity-tv-show/#premium
31:50
Hannity: Here’s what I think happens (with) free market competition. Parents learn about where the good schools are. And they are going to fight to get their kids in there.
Stossel: And word will get out, who the good teachers are and since we’re spending $12,000 per student, good teachers will make $300,000 a year!
Hannity: And they will do a lot better without the stranglehold of government though. Are you a Libertarian?
Stossel: 100 percent!
Hannity: So who are you going to vote for in this election?
Stossel: Ron Paul.
Hannity: You will? What if he’s not in the general election?
Stossel: Gary Johnson.
Hannity: Oh, good grief, that’s a . . . that’s a half a vote for Obama.
Stossel: Well, I know you disagree with me on that. But look, I am a Libertarian. I believe in these guys. They are the only ones who really want to limit government.
Hannity: I know; we’ve got to legalize dope . . . pot.
Stossel: Legalize everything between consenting adults.
Hannity: You and I have had that battle before.
Stossel: Let’s have it again!!
32:40.
“And if any of you were smart?you?d be building a platform to the left wing media.
Get busy!”
Fortunately, there are a lot of people who are doing just that at Antiwar.com, Reason, etc. However, it doesn’t help when we have “spokesmen” writing articles like this: https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2012/03/root-the-lynching-of-rush-limbaugh-over-sh-sex-handouts/
@105 try anarchist bitch or ask paulie the magician he can find anything
Paulie @119 Very good post! Not just because you mention me. 🙂
It is not about appealing to the left with liberal talking points but helping them to see that liberty is all about helping the common person, not the elite.
Our usual MO is to go in guns blazing with what we want to end but the problem is most people, not just the left attach concrete benefits to what we want to end and it sounds scary.
If we can first start promote the benefits of liberty, we can at least help people to not look at us as conservatives. Once they see that we care we can promote the benefits, not features of our solutions. The biggest hurdle I find is most people start debating the left/right talking points and we fall in line and do the same (taking the conservative side).
The more people take the benefits based libertarian message, the easier the middle to left (vast majority) outreach will be. You won’t be called, racist, homo-phobic, corporate apologists.
Here is an article about what we did back in CA. http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=10150186098157699
I think I am going to have to make a video in regards to this topic, but there are two major parts of what Wayne said that are far greater than “Minor mistakes”.
First of all, I would like to say that what Wayne said sounded exactly like Wayne, it would be what you would expect him to say “Stop Obama at all costs!!!! So it has to be Romney, we can’t afford it not to be” obviously I am paraphrasing, but if you take what Wayne said in the interview… that is the bottom line, to doubt that would show either a degree of ignorance never before discovered, or shows you are just part of the “Wayne Team” and trying to cover for him, which means, you probably need to go with him.
Let me explain why what Wayne did/said/believes pisses people off so much. There are many of us who work tirelessly not selling books, not trying to become famous on TV but by recruiting and spreading liberty and the libertarian message.
Unlike what Wayne believes this is where the real work is done, at the county levels. We only need national to put out a message, a libertarian message, so that people from the left and the right that we might appeal to can climb on board.
To people like John Spivey the former Tarrant County chair who put on the best debate in Ft. Worth last week, tirelessly working, while they feel Wayne just flushed their work down the toilet, for his own interest.
Now to the real easy stuff, the two major parties we need to overcome as a party are:
1. Lack of money.
2. The wasted vote syndrome.
I created a list of reasons to vote libertarian that I strongly believe in, it can be found here:
http://www.johnjaymyers.com/styled/
But that doesn’t cover number 1 above. But one of the main reasons to vote for the Libertarian’s strong, principled, candidate over Obama or Romney is simply this, if we can get 15% we get 90 Million in matching funds, and if we get that, we actually have a chance for all of our candidates to do much better in 2016.
That is really all the reason you need. Wayne does not believe that, he believes that Romney is better than Obama …. and “It has to be ROMNEY!!” There is no taking him out of context, that is what he meant and that is what he said.
Then obviously, there is the matter of the wasted vote syndrome, our actual number 1 enemy, where Wayne basically rode the wasted vote syndrome into Republican town, hung his hat, and got a beer.
You can not defend him here, those who have should be ashamed. This was not a small mistake, this is a complete break down of understanding as to why this party exists and what is needed to change its status.
@138
Not surprised about the competence… just the quality of the delivery in this instance.
@135
Are you actually surprised that paulie has his shit all in one sock? He seems to me to be one of the most enlightened posters I have ever encountered.
BB @135
You are right… I had missed how well Paulie had condensed that basic point into a short and understandable piece of prose in all the ruckus.
Thank you for calling it out.
Paulie, I might steal that 😉 but I will do it in an academic way, so I will just claim it is research instead of plaigerism. >:)
>>Wayne made a minor mistake <<
If that were true it would indeed not match the "level of vitriol."
Wayne has a pattern of behavior which is utterly unacceptable for a member of the Libertarian National Committee, IMO. The attempts to spin this as a one time minor error notwithstanding.
That said, he's a nice guy. Been nothing but kind and gentle in his emails and past personal interactions with me. But that's not the standard for anyone on the LNC, or paid staff, when it comes to comments in the media that misrepresent the party.
To the degree my initial comments here were a reaction out of anger, I apologize. I'm sure I'm still angry about the mess of our last presidential campaign, Barr endorsing Gingrich, and the other (so far without effect as far as I can tell) attempts to build a bridge to conservative republicans to "win elections" over sending a consistent message of Liberty.
The issue here is not about one minor slip, or our failure to rally around our leading quarterback/media expert/best thing the LP has ever had and a call for us to do better at that.
It's about the very core of what the LP is, or should be.
Joe
@88
Holy crap, someone on the internet who actually understands political ideologies and what they mean!!!
Wayne Root is a friend of mine. Even if he wasn’t, I would appreciate what he has done for the LP over the last several years. Mistakes can be made folks. It doesn’t have to mean we throw folks under the bus. I realize Wayne rubs some folks the wrong way, that’s fine, I get it. However, just make sure you’re criticizing him for the right reasons if you’re going to do that. I for one, am not going to do that. Again, I believe Wayne made a minor mistake that doesn’t arise to the level of vitriol that is often present in this forum.
Sure, Rob, I’ll check it out. Thanks.
Don’t hate the player, hate the game.
JP 128
Contact info @126
Email: [email protected]
Phone: 424.208.3634
Additional contact info [email protected]
She’ll be speaking at Freedom Fest in Vegas in July.
Check out
http://hammeroftruth.com/2012/who-wants-libertarian-drama-in-2012-all-of-us/
With VanDyke’s analysis and a list of Twitter reactions to this and the preceding article.
VanDyke calls IPR “IPT” for some unexplained reason.
Otherwise good doo doo!
“Paulie @ 124: “I hope that nothing that she does or does not do prevents you from doing anything that you would have otherwise done.”
Of course it doesn’t change me, and I hope I’m wrong because I’d really like to believe in the leadership in our state. I wish her well in her political endeavors. My comment from above remains, however, that there just might be valid reasons we don’t have a lot of women in the party.
BH @ 125: No one knew anything about her. She spent the first quarter of her speech making fun of (insulting) women. She refused to take questions and left zero contact information. None of the women I spoke to there had heard of her, or been approached by her to join this women’s caucus. In addition, I couldn’t find anything about her between her fluff interview with Reason magazine last July and showing up at the convention.
Now, I’m no detective, but the whole thing struck me as theater.
Paranoia is addictive…
Re: Michelle Liberman
Maybe someone should check out her shopping business – I’m not sure if she does free consultations, or whether anyone here from Southern California would actually pay money for something like that.
Then in the course of talking about other things you could bring up politics; let her do most of the talking.
Go into it with an open mind and have fun!
Email: [email protected]
Phone: 424.208.3634
Jill, all I’ve done is peruse her web sites (TheFreedomFriend.com, TheShoppingFriend.com) and watch her ReasonTV interview.
I don’t know her, I don’t endorse her, I don’t de-endorse her.
I just want to know why some people think she’s a puppet of the LPCA leadership.
I haven’t done a lot of research, but I followed the “publicity photos” link from Brian’s comment above which does list a number of events.
If she really is trying to get something off the ground, and you are as well (at least that was how I understood your comments from one of the CA convention threads), I hope that you will find ways to cooperate.
If not, I hope that nothing that she does or does not do prevents you from doing anything that you would have otherwise done.
Root – If you read the news headlines today, 2 things stand out…
#1) Romney will spend rest of the Presidential campaign going after female voters…his weakness. He needs to win over a few million women or he will lose. So he won’t try to win over conservatives…or white males…he has those groups. He will appeal 100% to women. (me- Romney will lose no matter what he does, Two-faced Latter day saints don’t sale down south and elsewhere, Son!) Please see – Still Voting For ‘Mitt Romney’? – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQwrB1vu74c&feature=related
#2) And Obama has mentioned Reagan and other GOP heroes a hundred times of late. For the rest of campaign he’ll be looking to impress groups that like Reagan…blue collar Democrats…blue dog Democrats…independents. (me- Smart move by BO’s handlers, pity the masses fall for it! BTW- Ronald Reagan talked some good talk, but his performance on the important issues was terrible. He was not a libertarian.)
Do you see the strategy you use to win elections? Obama doesn’t need to talk to liberals anymore. Romney doesn’t need to talk to conservatives anymore. (me- This country (and world) is in trouble economically, it would be a major shame and blunder if the LP fails to take advantage of it this cycle and make major inroads to independent voters. Also Roseanne Barr or Jill Stein could make major inroads to BO’s left flank, cutting deep into his foundation!) SEE THE MOVIE THAT PUTS ObamaCare ON ICE: http://www.freestarmedia.com/
As a Libertarian…I get guff because I “don’t sound Libertarian enough.” Or my arguments in the media aren’t “pure enough.” (me- you earn the guff, as a self-proclaimed L spokesman you should speak L.)
Don’t you see- therein lies the LP’s problem.
My job is to talk in a way that impresses NON Libertarians. (me-who cares if you impress? If they don’t hear the L message and convert, all you are doing is pumping up your psycotic ego and not helping the LP in western ND and southern IA (etc.) in the least!)
I don’t talk like any of you. (me- that could be a good sign you shouldn’t be a spokesman for the LP! You are out of touch with Ls.)
“Statist, corporatist, 2-party duopoly.” Who among mainstream voters knows what you’re talking about? Who would tune into a radio station a (sic) listen to a conversation about “the 2-party duopoly.” No one. Who uses terms like “fiat money?” No one in the mainstream. (me-Until the masses are educated to the truth, there will be no major changes. You may pet your bloated ego and expand your bank account, but the duopoly will maintain power and all those words of yours are all but worthless for the L cause.)
“The easiest way to gain control of the population is to carry out acts of terror. The public will clamor for such laws if their personal security is threatened.” – Joseph Stalin (the Rs and Ds current gameplan)
me- After reading your comments I see there is no hope for your pathetic arrogancy, you sir need to be taken down and humbled. I vote for your removal from the LNC and LNCC. Everyone needs to vote AGAINST Root at the upcoming convention. We must move away from allowing this used car salesman stick mentality to be preceived by anyone to represent the LP. REMOVE ROOT from any LP leadership position ‘for cause’ (endorsing an opposition candidate)!
BH @ 117: Since you did all that research into Michelle Liberman, can you post the Libertarian events she’s been involved in/organized? How about other people on her committee? How about the place on her Facebook page where she doesn’t call herself a Libertarian? I found absolutely zero about anything Libertarian, nor has anyone come forward to correct me, so I’m genuinely perplexed.
You weren’t at the convention, yet you seem like you know her. I’d really love to hear about her Libertarian activism so I can thank her for it.
116 tb: Libertarian ideas aren’t really part of the acceptable discourse in a media environment where the objectives are to entertain the audience or validate their deeply held convictions.
me: This is false. We see Ls speaking ALL THE TIME in the media…Reason, Cato, even Lew Rockwell himself are getting a fair amount of airtime. Partisan Ls do have a harder time getting media, but it too is done.
Off-the-grid anarchoLs probably don’t get much play…that’s true. Konkin and L. Neil Smith might well not have (had) a message ready for prime time, I’d agree…
The whole concept of competing with Wayne Root is nonsense. The idea that libertarians can just walk into any TV or radio studio and be given airtime for their views is a fantasy.
Libertarian ideas aren’t really part of the acceptable discourse in a media environment where the objectives are to entertain the audience or validate their deeply held convictions. The goal of educating the public on ideas considered to be on the fringe by news readers and media hacks is way down on the list.
You are absolutely correct, it’s not easy.
But if you mean to suggest that it can’t be done, you are off base.
It takes tremendous persistence, creativity, the ability to learn from one experience and apply it to the following ones, developing a repartee of one liners, learning to not allow hosts to trip you up, learning “their language” to connect with the hosts and the audience so they relate to you as “more friend than enemy” and learning how to phrase some points that may change some of their minds in a way in which they will be most receptive to them. To keep doing it, you also have to learn to be entertaining.
If you read Harry Browne’s archived campaign journal from the 2000 campaign (still available on his 2000 site) he has a lot of specific examples and pointers.
There are a few other things like that out there, but I’d love to see a lot more. And I’d love to see them publicized better at LP websites, conventions, etc.
Is it being suggested that libertarians parrot left-wing talking points and waste time bashing Republicans while suggesting that people vote for a Democrat to keep the more evil Republican from taking office?
Should libertarians approach hard-left progressive media outlets with the same rhetoric they put out on a daily basis in an effort to show them that libertarians are just like them?
Should libertarians show up at Occupy events and instead of talking about ending the fed, talk about the redistribution of wealth and income?
Nope, not at all.
If you want to see a good example of how to handle left wing media, see Steve Gordon on the Rachel Maddow show, available in IPR archives.
You can also ask Mark Hilgenberg about how several SoCal LP members came to become a fixture in the left-leaning alternative weekly papers in that area circa 2000, as well as at events where “that crowd” gathered.
Lately, Gary Johnson has been doing good work at places like an ACLU convention and various MSNBC shows, despite his tax policy and a few other things that I would prefer to discuss elsewhere.
Way back in 1980 Ed Clark reached a lot of left leaning audiences by speaking at hundreds of college campuses – something I hope Johnson (or Wrights, should he become the nominee) copies. Clark also opened up many such people’s minds by calling himself a “low tax liberal” in the media, despite criticism from some LP members.
So yes, it can most definitely be done.
There are many other examples, but unfortunately not nearly enough.
I don’t know about you but I respect Wayne more as a result of his willingness to participate here.
I also relate to saying the wrong thing at times, because I speak (or type in a hurry, which is nearly the same thing) almost constantly. I talk to between one and a small handful of people hundreds of times a day, most days of any week, in the course of my job as well as my volunteer activities, usually for no more than one or two minutes a person, sometimes maybe for 5 minutes, in addition to all the comments I make here and a few other sites. I’ve been doing that pretty much non-stop for about 15 years now. When you talk to that many people you better believe I have said some really stupid crap that I wish I expressed better after the fact.
I’ve also done a lot of local media. For any of you who live in small and medium sized towns, it’s incredibly easy to do. In my case I am talking about a Southern town dominated by a state university with about 150,000 people in the county and several other surrounding low-population rural counties bringing the watching/listening/reading area to maybe 200,000. The reporters are sitting around bored just waiting for someone to pick up the phone and call them about something, anything. I have been edited down and/or misquoted to make me sound pretty damn stupid, so I know how that goes. I’ve also had some great media coverage.
So, Wayne does that same sort of thing with higher-profile media all over the country. I have the same disagreements with Wayne as a lot of his most ardent critics here, but I still like him as a person. I also like to notice the times that we do agree, and give him credit for those.
Most of all I hope that disagreeing with Wayne spurs his critics here to redouble their (well, our) efforts to reach a variety of different non-LP audiences, not just conservative ones, through any and all media, including face to face one on one. And Wayne agrees with me.
That’s why the two of us get along, and that’s why whenever he says something that makes me go WTF – which happens a fair amount of the time – my reaction is not to call for him to be voted off the island, it’s to call for other Libertarians to build a louder megaphone and a bigger stage.
I know there are people here with experience in getting media and other audiences in a variety of different ways. I hope that the LP will do more to facilitate the sharing of that type of knowledge, and more to encourage members to learn by doing it themselves.
Teeth@122: the LPCA Control Freak Leadership choose the women’s leader for them
Right, because Michelle Liberman — with a “personal stylist” business, a forthcoming book, a portfolio of publicity photos, and bookings with ReasonTV and FreedomFest — couldn’t possibly come up with the idea of a women’s caucus on her own.
After all, she’s only a woman.
How dare she launch a liberty-oriented career in media/arts? If she keeps this up, she’ll soon have a jealous stalker with a handle like Liberman’s Legs Are Awesome.
Wayne wrote:
And if any of you were smart…you’d be building a platform to the left wing media.
paulie answered:
Gotta agree with Wayne on that one.
Is it being suggested that libertarians parrot left-wing talking points and waste time bashing Republicans while suggesting that people vote for a Democrat to keep the more evil Republican from taking office?
Should libertarians approach hard-left progressive media outlets with the same rhetoric they put out on a daily basis in an effort to show them that libertarians are just like them?
Should libertarians show up at Occupy events and instead of talking about ending the fed, talk about the redistribution of wealth and income?
The whole concept of competing with Wayne Root is nonsense. The idea that libertarians can just walk into any TV or radio studio and be given airtime for their views is a fantasy.
Libertarian ideas aren’t really part of the acceptable discourse in a media environment where the objectives are to entertain the audience or validate their deeply held convictions. The goal of educating the public on ideas considered to be on the fringe by news readers and media hacks is way down on the list.
The number one goal for the media is to sell advertising. The way to get favorable media treatment is either to buy advertising time or deliver a message that advertisers want to hear.
@ 112.
Can you name the states with the “control freaks”>
@109 I think you are right. If it were one sentence once, the matter would not have gone much of anyplace. Why should it have? The issue is the long record on this matter.
96 seebeck: Yawn. Do you exist to simply argue, be a Milnes alter ego, or actually be productive at something besides making your local utility company and grocer money?…
me: No, I don’t exist. The Machines have simply been sending information that I do into your Matrix pod.
Seeback: Yet Root, as a state VC and a LNC and LNCC member, gets a pass?
me: He hasn’t gotten a pass, from me or many on IPR, including LNC members. The Machines sent this information into your Matrix pod, but you somehow missed it. Pay attention!
Jill: Stunts like bringing in a gorgeous, photogenic women and introducing her as the “Chair” of a non-existent “CA Libertarian Women’s Caucus”, while ignoring the true women activists, could be a reason so many women are not interested in the LP.
That was yet another example of the control freak/top-down mentality that infects many state and national LPs’ leaderships.
The LPCA leadership wanted a Women’s Caucus.
Great idea!
But they couldn’t do it democratically or inclusively. They couldn’t risk asking the LPCA’s women to form a cause and choose their leader. The women might have choosen the “wrong” leader. Perhaps even an “ugly” woman as their leader.
So the LPCA Control Freak Leadership choose the women’s leader for them. A woman that they regarded as photogenic and sexy.
The LPCA’s women might well have chosen this woman as their leader, but they should have been given that option. Yet the control freaks couldn’t risk that they wouldn’t.
It seems that many state LPs are infected with little Starrs and Carlings and Roots, trying to control every decision at every level.
Hey Wayne,
I love ya. PLEASE stop commenting here. Comment wars never end well for any party. I know. I’ve lost tons myself. They ain’t pretty! The people you’re trying to win over are just going to pick apart your comments and purposefully try to infuriate you mre so that you do eventually make another mistake. Then they’ll be able to go, “SEE?!?! SEE?!?! I TOLD YA HE SUCKS!!!”
Just let this convo die. Pick it up on the radio again. It’ll all blow over. A comment section is not the best place to do this.
Love,
SP
@105: The cartoon in question was a photoshop of Starr’s face over Darth Vader and Keaton’s over Luke Skywalker. It was done not by her but by a member of the Riverside County LP (CA). A similar one had Starr as Hitler and Carling as Goebbels. They are (I believe) here in the IPR archives, circa November-December 2008 if you want to search for them.
When the whole thing hit the fan, the pics were met with laughter.
As for the BTP tank, the guilty party of that photo was… me. If I had known what kind of mess that would have caused, I probably never would have taken it.
Wayne, I am appalled that your “apology” was more apologizing for the rest of us being “confused” about what you meant.
Obviously you just don’t get it, and not for the first time. If this was the first time you had misrepresented the LP, it might be a different story. Obviously we all make mistakes, we are all human afterall.
But just do a search here on IPR of “Root” and you will find that approximately every two weeks you have done the same thing, over and over.
If you can not reach out to so called conservatives without misrepresenting the LP, then maybe we need a different spokesperson.
And BTW, the “TEA Party” is NOT the same thing it was 3 or 4 years ago. When it started, it was clearly an outgrowth of the ’08 Ron Paul campaign. Today it is a totally different animal with absolutely no resemblance to what it was when it started. Heck, most “TEA Partiers” today are supporting Santorum of all people!
You are an oddsmaker I hear. What are the odds that you will step on it again before the convention?
PEACE
Oops! in the above comment in the 3rd paragraph it should read that “I am a director”. There are four of us.
After thinking more about this matter and reading your apology again Wayne, I don’t think it is sufficient. I am not confused about what you said. To apologize for “my confusion” is insulting. It is clear that you gave verbal support to Romney. An apology that was sincere would be to apologize for your mistatement.
And Alex Snitker at #82, I agree with your reasoning about there being no important difference between Rubio, Romney and the Democrats. I am glad that I contributed to your campaign in Florida and voted for you, too. Thank you Alex for being principled and involved.
re @90 Wayne you are not the only person doing things in the LP. Many of us work an 8 hour day, have families and other responsibilities and still put in time for the LP.
I am on the state committee and I also edit the state news letter. I even emailed you some years ago to get you to write something for us, but you never bothered to reply. I also have emailed you along with the rest of the LNC about the condition of our outdated web site, but you have not had the courtesy to reply. That is bad business etiquette.
I am the director of the county chapter of NORML. I also research issues related to health care, urban transit, urban growth and drop in to see members of the legislature from time to time.
I spent 2 and a half hours last week help a group on the right get their news letter prepped for mailing. I also attended two government meetings as well as one for NORML.
I spent a good portion of some weeks last year and the year before collecting signature for a ballot initiative. I managed to get about 1500 signatures and was okay until I got pneumonia. I have proposed legislation and testified in front of legislative bodies. I write letter to the editor and on my desk to my left is a 2000 word article on a health issue I am writing with a Libertarian solution no less.
I’ve been a personnel recruiter, a salesman, a purchasing agent, a janitor and a bartender over the years and I worked offshore on oil rigs. I spent the last 20 years at one of America’s most successful retail companies doing grunt work because I have a wife at home who is partially disabled. I also I do most of the shopping and help at home.
I’ve been a candidate three times and I believe I had one of the highest vote totals of a candidate in 1986 which led me to conclude that this party needs a better infrastructure to help its candidates, but many of you on the LNC don’t get it. And I get the impression many of you on the LNC don’t give a rat’s ass that the infrastructure needs to be improved to help our candidates and members. I’m being polite. You may be on the radio, but you are ignoring the problems within. In my book you are ignoring your responsibilities on the LNC while you run around playing pundit. Apparently you can’t do both so give one up.
@104, how does one go about seeing this cartoon? 🙂
anghela keatons actions did not damage the LP , she wore a fucking BTP tshirt as a model for a website , leaked info while in secret session and made a cartoon photo of Aaron Starr…………she NEVER said vote for the Republican , or Dem , never…the disciplie of angela was a ridiculous circus , the chastizing of wayne from the LNC wont happen…different rules ya know :/
@11 he told the whole crowd torture was acceptable not just Alice Lillie……
SVD @ 65: “Question: does IPR count as a media appearance?
Because I am pretty sure I am making another media appearance right now. I’m going to start keeping count so my ego can be over 9000 as well, I have not been as disciplined as Mr. Root and he is now going to be my unwilling mentor.”
Well, if Facebook counts, I think Jill has him beaten by a wide margin! : )
@Alex
“again this is not about me but HE WAS LYING. Should we just get out of races when Republicans talk about those issues? No, we should call them liars and continue to challenge them over and over again until we win.”
I find it odd that you have this figured out, but don’t have Wayne figured out.
Wayne is not a stand up guy, he stands up for himself, and he is like a scared rabbit right now trying to find as many friends as he can, I am sure he promised you all sorts of things on the phone, and let you know how he and “his friends” would make sure you have a place in the party, and he will get you interviews or agree to be on your show… whatever.
Who the hell wants to be in “this guys” party?
I am little off-put myself by all of the people on this list that continue to have Wayne punch us in the face and then go “Oh I’m sorry Wayne, my nose got in the way of your fist, I now understand it was for my own good.”
Good lord, he is just a grifter, a snake oil salesman, see through this, pull back the curtain, Wayne has nothing to offer this party.
I treat him like the bums that hang around my restaurant trying to “work for change” they all promise they will work hard for me, but in the end it’s the bums that drive off all my customers.
Look Wayne I meet weekly with a group that is made up mostly of people on the left and I am sure I am not the only one doing so. I also attend two or three government meetings each week and sometimes offer a libertarian solution to a problem.
Neither one is likely.
I think Ron Paul will probably stick with the Republicans, but if he does buck them, it makes a lot more sense for him to go LP, and he would get the nomination easily.
Gotta agree with Wayne on that one.
Wayne,
I talk to Libertarians like a libertarian, using statist etc. is not part of my outreach.
My feeling is that sounding like a conservative only solidifies the thoughts in the average voter that we are just “ultra right wing”. It does nothing to promote how radically different Liberty is compared to both sides.
I understand that you don’t know how to communicate to the left, it is not easy. Luckily I come from the left, I understand them and I can communicate with them.
I can also outreach to the right, the problem I find there is they mostly respond to anti-left rhetoric as opposed to pro-liberty solutions.
Doing so only helps them feel we are the same, it does nothing to convert them to liberty.
Outreach to the left is very different, they want to know we are on the same side but meaning we are for people and we are caring. The solutions and issues come later. Is I tell them their feelings are wrong and they are nothing but socialists, they see a right winger and never look towards liberty. Which they now equate with anti-gay, racists, hate filled, pro-corporate state elitists.
Liberty needs to be promoted as liberty, not as conservatism.
@92:
Yawn. Do you exist to simply argue, be a Milnes alter ego, or actually be productive at something besides making your local utility company and grocer money?
The WHOLE FREAKING POINT is that when Root speaks (and I’ve told him this both publicly and privately, and it went in one ear and out the other without stopping for processing!), he needs to not only be cognizant of which hat he’s wearing, but be EXPLICIT about it. That is Spokesman 101 in politics, business, and life in general. He blew it here, and he also missed the other elementary and obvious point: in partisan politics one does not go endorsing the adversary party or its members or candidates, ESPECIALLY when one is or claims to be a leader in the party!
(Paul is an unusual exception to the rule because even he has admitted that he’s only a R for the ballot access, and he is a life member of the LP. Barr is not an exception because he never was a L to begin with as some of us warned–he was only a LINO, like Root. Jury is still out on Johnson.)
IOW, the bookie Root blew it on the fundamentals, as he tends to do, and as such, he now has egg on his face, and rather than simply admit he screwed up (which would go a LONG way towards redemption in the eyes of many), his ego makes him spin it and try to justify an unjustifiable act for someone in his elected position.
I know that when I was a state VC if I did what Root did, the membership and state leadership would demand my head on a platter, and rightly so. Yet Root, as a state VC and a LNC and LNCC member, gets a pass?
I. Don’t. Think. So.
I disagree. With the right resources and support, a third party could win. It’s way to early to tell what the official outcome will be.
@91,
“The key to making America more Libertarian is to convert people who are not Libertarians, don’t talk like us, think like us, don’t even know the name. We have to make a case to them.”
True.
And the case you made to them — not after being asked a question about Romney versus Obama, but right out of the gate after being introduced and mistakenly touted as a Libertarian presidential prospect yourself! — that a Libertarian can’t win this year, that the overriding priority is getting rid of Obama, and that therefore Romney is their only choice.
There’s nothing wrong with just admitting you publicly stomped on your own crank, Wayne. It’s usually a lot smarter than publicly pouring gasoline on said crank and setting it on fire to avoid admitting you stomped on it.
@72 – I’m hoping. RP on the AE ticket is more likely than Romney governing with a respect for the constitution. I’d rather hope for RP than hope Romneycare stops Obamacare.
@ Wayne – Will you vote for Lee Wrights or Gary Johnson in November even if it means Romney loses to Obama in the swing state of Nevada?
In Liberty, with Eternal Vigilance,
Jim Duensing
http://www.VoteForAChange.US
89 Seebeck, interesting perspective. If Root had meant at the time that Romney was the only option, I’d agree with you. Root’s maintaining that he was and is a GJ supporter.
So, while he might have been somewhat more contrite in his apology, it strikes me as a reasonable one.
Again, as a party official, I happen to think Root can’t be as forthcoming as he’d like to be, as he’s serving two masters.
Is it more important to get BHO out of office than it is for GJ to (if nominated) have a high-impact campaign, say, somewhere in the Clark to Anderson zone? Outside of the party, that’s an interesting question. As an official, he needs to put the institution first.
P.S. One other point I think Libertarians miss big time…
If you read the news headlines today, 2 things stand out…
#1) Romney will spend rest of the Presidential campaign going after female voters…his weakness. He needs to win over a few million women or he will lose. So he won’t try to win over conservatives…or white males…he has those groups. He will appeal 100% to women.
#2) And Obama has mentioned Reagan and other GOP heroes a hundred times of late. For the rest of campaign he’ll be looking to impress groups that like Reagan…blue collar Democrats…blue dog Democrats…independents.
Do you see the strategy you use to win elections? Obama doesn’t need to talk to liberals anymore. Romney doesn’t need to talk to conservatives anymore.
As a Libertarian…I get guff because I “don’t sound Libertarian enough.” Or my arguments in the media aren’t “pure enough.”
Don’t you see- therein lies the LP’s problem.
My job is to talk in a way that impresses NON Libertarians.
I don’t talk like any of you.
“Statist, corporatist, 2-party duopoly.” Who among mainstream voters knows what you’re talking about? Who would tune into a radio station a listen to a conversation about “the 2-party duopoly.” No one. Who uses terms like “fiat money?” No one in the mainstream.
It’s been 40 years in the wilderness because LP activists keep talking to Libertarians. Or talking like Libertarians to non Libertarians.
But LPers only make up 1% of population.
We have to learn to speak to the other 99%.
Yes, I speak like a Tea Party Reagan Libertarian…because I’m appealing to the groups I am comfortable with…I know their language…I am recruiting conservatives, Republicans, Tea Partiers, blue dog Democrats, Christians, suburban mothers, small business owners, homeowners, gun owners.
I talk their language…and Libertarians get mad at me for it, because they think I don’t sound like a Libertarian.
Well neither does anyone I’m preaching to. The key to making America more Libertarian is to convert people who are not Libertarians, don’t talk like us, think like us, don’t even know the name. We have to make a case to them.
And you can’t do that by talking in a language they don’t understand.
Learn a lesson here. Obama quotes Reagan all day long for a reason.
We need to appeal to others who do not understand Libertarianism.
Thats what I do.
Thats the only way to grow, achieve incremental success, and win elections.
Wayne
@80 No I did not “play” into anything…except the strategy that if you are nice to people and find common ground…you’ll be invited back again and again.
Which gives me a platform to help the LP. Which gets the word LP mentioned again and again.
Even many LP organizations say that just a mention of the word LP or a LP candidate’s name is worth thousands each time.
I’m not in the media once. I’m in the media 1000 times. each one leads to my next appearance…where I will get the perfect opening or opportunity to score a victory…make a point…establish a connection…on behalf of the LP.
It’s all a platform.
And if any of you were smart…you’d be building a platform to the left wing media.
Get busy!
Happy Easter,
Wayne
“I do apologize for any confusion my words caused.”
Note that Wayne doesn’t apologize for saying the wrong thing, just that what he said caused confusion.
IOW, he’s not apologizing for his actions, but others’ reactions.
How sanctimonious can you get?
This “apology” is a non-apology, plain and simple.
Had it been a real apology, Wayne would have simply said, “I said the wrong thing, and I’m sorry, and I encourage everyone to support and vote for the 2012 Libertarian Presidential nominee, whomever it is, and not Obama, Romney, or any other GOP nominee.”
(For those purposes, assume that Dr. Paul doesn’t win the GOP nomination.)
The rest of this screed is nothing more than a heaping pile of manure and Downy mixed in an Iranian centrifuge–a whole lotta spun $#!t.
Just like Democrats use peace, civil liberties and equal opportunity for poor and working class people to get ahead and then do the exact opposite.
Socialism is worker ownership of the means of production. That is obviously not what Democrats and Republicans are giving us.
State socialism is a perversion of socialist ideals where the state is believed to be a proxy for the workers in owning the means of production. Again, not really what Democrats and Republicans are giving us at this stage.
Fascism includes several characteristics such as nominally private ownership of the means of production under heavy regime control and favoritism to select regime-partnered corporations, as well as a tendency to fetishize the military and police functions of the state. Fascism also includes other nominally private institutions, from churches to unions to charities to what have you, all being heavily regulated, infiltrated, subsidized and dominated by the state. That sounds a lot like what Democrats and Republicans have been giving us in recent decades, although painted with a potemkin village veneer of democracy.
After all if you can have a vote between Hitler and Stalin, or Hitler, Stalin and Mao every two or four years, it’s not really fascism, is it?
As Rap News put it
Obama is a bomber, the thunder god of doom
And Thor gives him a peace prize on the day the bombs the moon?!
Spending increased faster under shrub than under any president since at least LBJ, and probably FDR. Then it grew even more under Obama. At this point I’m not sure whether a second Obama term or a first Romney term will do more damage, or the same amount of damage but in somewhat different ways.
Basically I liken our situation to trying to land a parachute in two large roughly equal piles of manure. They are coming at us too fast to really tell which one is the slightly bigger pile, and it looks highly unlikely that we will be able to avoid landing in one of them. Does it really matter if one is 500 feet high and the other one is 505, or vice versa, or if they are both exactly 500 feet of vertically stacked fecal matter? Either way we are going to be in a whole lot of shit.
We should promote liberty on all fronts: pro-peace/anti-war; pro-civil liberties/anti-social repression (aka anti-police state); pro-laissez faire, anti-kleptocracy.
Exactly.
@55 Wayne,
It seems you are making a great effort here – an effort to do what? – I’m not sure.
There is no question that you are promoting yourself, but who isn’t. That’s exactly what we as Libertarians expect each person will do – look out for his or her own self interest.
But, in this case, as a representative of the LNC and the LP, it becomes a problem if your interests and the interests of the LP don’t coincide.
Yes you work hard, and making mistakes is human. Many would like to forgive you, but what you said is beyond a mere mistake.
The problem is a matter of attitude and personality – yours.
You come across as arrogant, you think that you are the big hero and everyone should love and protect you and thank you and …
Think about how that sounds to another person.
Offputting.
Especially offputting in the LP where one of the problems is that there are quite a few individuals who dream of their own future as the great leader, the great philosopher, the great pundit, the great candidate that will be the hero, win the next election, lead the LP to victory and liberty and be carried away on the shoulders of the loving masses. This is one of the main causes of LP disfunction.
Perhaps it does take a bit of a “bigger than life” personality and an arrogant attitude to go on radio and TV and represent just about anything. But, not every spokesperson or political candidate comes across as arrogant.
Now, I don’t suppose you can change your stripes, and maybe you couldn’t be effective if you did …
But you should be a bit more humble in the face of your latest gaff – just say this:
“OK guys. I admit that what I said was the wrong message to be sending as an LP representative. It’s already out there, so I can’t make it disappear. I’m human and still learning and I still make mistakes. And this was a whopper.
On my next appearance I’ll try to do better. Please listen in.
And rest assured, everyone will be listening.
Good luck.
I wouldn’t say that. Democrats use sports analogies as well.
Womens’s sports, and women’s interest in men’s sports, have both grown a lot in recent decades.
I think that team psychology is indeed somewhat missing in the LP, regardless of whether it’s a sports team, business team, or in this case political team.
@ Wayne.
I always find it good to go line by line and respond directly. The one thing that Wayne deserves credit for is a response to people who criticize his actions. I did not expect a phone call from you on Saturday and did feel somewhat better about it after talking to you. Some of my lines in the post about it being done on purpose were wrong.
I don’t agree with you on several issues but I do think that you are doing it for what you think are good reasons. If my post inplied a malicious intent that was wrong.
Now onto the reply
“Alex Snitker- I helped you as much as I could from LNC in that last election. I stood up for you. I defended you when many LPers said negative things about you.”
My post was never really supposed to be about the 2010 campaign. I was trying to use it to show an example but I see that was wrong. It is very true that you were a supporter against those on the LNC board who attacked me.
“And as far as LNCC…we had limited resources at that time…just getting started…we issued I believe 8 or 10 checks in USA and I chose YOU to get a check. The biggest one we could write. Then we found out from our bylaws and FEC rules that we could not contribute to U.S. Senate races. Only Congress or local.”
This is something that you are accurate about and was not something I was thinking about in the post. At this point I could care less. That money would not have changed anything during the 2010 campaign.
“So I did pull any “crap” as you put it. I tried my best to help you financially and was prohibited by FEC rules. Did you remember that?”
The crap I am talking about is this Romney is better than Obama and the Libertarian is not going to win. This is also the main point of my post. If we have people going out in the media and asked to talk about politics we should be telling these people the hard truth.
When it comes to the President race there is so little difference between Obama and Romney that members of the LNC should be saying that whenever asked. Of course most of the hosts will disagree with you and challenge you to give the reasons why. This is where you can shine and explain to the hosts why this is true. I will just list a couple below.
1. Spending will increase under both Obama and Romney. This is just a fact and if more hosts challenged these candidates on this point we would be much better off. The only difference is the amount of the increase. This needs to be repeated over and over again to get this narrative into the mainstream.
2. The wars will continue and will expand under both Romney and Obama. We have already seen what Obama will do. This whole narrative in the media that Obama is somehow weak on defense is crap. Obama has spent more money that Bush and has increased the number of wars.
Obama even went further and didn’t even go to congress for some of them. I know that you are not nearly as anti-war as many Libertarians but even you can agree that what Obama is doing is wrong.
3. The further erosion of our civil liberties will be the same under Obama or Romney. Romney himself admitted that he would have signed the NDAA with the provisions that allowed for the detainment of Americans without due process. Romney just loves REAL ID and will work toward full implementation just like Obama.
4. Obamacare is bad but whatever Romney is going to replace it with will be just as bad. We can all agree that Obamacare is bad and I do hope that the Supreme court will rule that it is unconstitutional but remember that individual mandates have had Republican support for years. Do you really think that they have now changed their minds on this? HELL NO THEY HAVEN’T. All they have done is changed their tune a little to placate to the people.
The real problem is that neither Romney or Obama understand the proper role of government and are willing to shred the Constitution to advance their agendas. Romney may be a different poison but in the end they will both kill you.
“If we had $1,000,000 dollars we never could have given you one dollar. That’s the only reason you didn’t get a check from me.”
Again this post was not supposed to be about me. I only said this because to show a pattern. BIG mistake on my part.
“And as far as Rubio, if I remember one email or Facebook post out of thousands I get…,I believe someone asked me why you didn’t do better in that race.”
Again I should not have brought this up.
“Knowing you were a great candidate…one I called “one of 3 best in USA on numerous public occasions” I had to think hard why you didn’t do better in that race. Because I thought you had loads of potential.”
Thank you for the kind words. You did say good things about me and I appreciate it.
“And as always I gave my opinion to a stranger publicly..
My opinion was that Rubio acted like a perfect Tea Party politician…and that took away the edge of one of our best candidates.
Do you disagree?”
Well kinda. It does depend on the reasons for running. Rubio was a bad guy. He was not an all right guy who was just is a Republican. Rubio is complete evil and hopefully you can see that now.
They are touting this guy as the great Neo Con hope. He is not a Libertarian or a Constitutionalist. He is nothing more than a piece of S$%t politician. This is another problem we have. His rhetoric never matched his voting record.
He should have been challenged and I would do it again. He will be challenged again in 2016 and next time we will have what we need to remove him. We are already working on the plan to do just that and a Libertarian will beat him.
“Because if that wasn’t it…what was it?
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. Great candidate…excellent speaker…telegenic…had radio show. Perfect.
Yet poor results.”
It is all a learning process and we learned a bunch in 2010. We are passing that information on to Peter Richter and Calen Fretts who are two great Libertarian candidates here in Florida. One is running for Congress and the other is running for the State house. There are more we have running here in Florida and will talk about them at a later time.
“Why? You mean you are insulted that I blamed a good Tea Party candidate against you? I blamed someone who ran on a platform of lower taxes…lower spending…smaller government in my opinion negates our LP edge.”
Again this is not about me but HE WAS LYING. Should we just get out of races when Republicans talk about those issues? No, we should call them liars and continue to challenge them over and over again until we win. Our biggest problem is and will continue to be our canvassing activities. We are working on that problem here in Florida and will be successful in time.
“I proved my point. Far more ineffective candidates than you got better vote totals…even though they spent nothing. Why?”
I have a theory but it does not matter anymore. It is 2012 and we are putting together a plan with great people like Mark Adams who will help ensure accurate counts.
“Because Rubio took the steam out of our campaign. Because Tea Partiers have a lot in common on economic issues with LPers. And we need their votes. And with all of them going to Rubio that left very little for you to work with.”
Rubio and his ilk lied to the people and will continue to. We better understand that real enemy in this is the Republicans and not the Democrats.
It is the Republicans who use the Constitution, Liberty, Freedom and limited government and then do the exact opposite. We all know the Democrats are socialists but what you fail to realize is that the Republicans are socialist too.
I also understand that not all Republicans are like this but over 80% of the elected Republicans are including Romney, Rubio and West.
For a better explanation just look at this article.
http://1787network.com/2012/03/are-you-a-sheep-in-wolfs-clothing-the-gop-hopes-so/4197
You are playing with some evil bastards. I know that you think they will just come over and that they are really on your side but they are not. These people are F%&$ING pure evil. They have no honor and we should really be working to completely eliminate the GOP.
“That was a great compliment from me to you.
As far your statement above…you are not reading my statement very closely. Sorry Alex…but I’d never ask to hear every single interview you did in your race. and then pick them apart word by word.”
Good point
“Or how about all your radio shows? I wonder if you ever said anything that would offend anyone? I wonder if you were “pure” enough for everyone at IPR. I wonder if you would ever take something back that wasn’t worded the exact way you wanted it worded? Ever?”
I am sure I have said things that are not “pure”. Hell all you would have to do is to go back a month on my own show to find that but then again I am not a member of the LNC. I hold no official position in the LP or the LPF. That is the difference.
I did not run for a position on the EC for that very reason. I don’t want anyone telling me what I can and cannot say.
Don’t think that my post was put there to call for your removal. For all your faults you are better than most on the LNC. I have very few allies on that board and you are one of them. Most on that board hate me more than they hate you anyway. I don’t care about them anyway. They may be on the LNC but they hold little influence in the state of Florida.
It was put there to get you to understand that Romney is just as bad as Obama if not worse.
“I would not throw stones. Bad thing to start.
Circular firing squads ruin progress for a political party. No one is pure enough or perfect enough to survive.”
Good point. Libertarians do this quite a bit but I think the point I was trying to make here is that you somehow see a difference between Obama and Romney and that is not true on the issues that matter. I will refer again to the article so you can see it for yourself.
“Sorry…but 1 sentence or two out of 4000 interviews that you don’t agree with isn’t grounds for banning people…or expelling people.”
I did not call for either.
“Folks…heres the deal I thought it sounded different when I said it.
I listened…I agreed it didn’t come out the way I would have liked.”
Good to hear
“But it’s clear what I meant to say…if Romney and Obama were the only candidates than on economic issues I’d take a businessman any day over a marxist community organizer…”
Here is where we disagree. The choice is never between the two of these socialists. Yes Romney is worse that you think. He is just as bad as Obama and I will go over it point by point.
Both will increase federal spending.
Both will do nothing about the FED
Both will add to the national debt
Neither will balance the budget
Both support the government involvement in healthcare
Both have implemented a plan to force people to purchase a product from a private corporation
Both supported the bailout programs and STEALING money from WE THE PEOPLE to do it
Both will continue to get this country involved in unconstitutional wars
Both will continue to infringe on our civil liberties and detain American citizens without due process
This is why we cannot allow these show hosts to box us into this. We have to stand strong and explain that THERE IS NO REAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ROMNEY AND OBAMA.
This will be the perfect election to make this point and we cannot care who wins if it is not the Libertarian candidate. If this is a game of chicken we need to tear off the steering wheel and hold true to the FACT that if Romney or Obama wins we are doomed. There is no more time to waste.
“But those are not the only two choices. There is a third choice. Gary Johnson is a better option.
Exactly what I’ll be saying on Bill Cunningham’s show next week.
I apologized.
I righted the wrong.
I turned it into a big win for Gary Johnson and Ohio LP.
More p.r. and exposure than they would have gotten without my one sentence misspeak.
Let it rest…on Easter.
Alex…
Cooler heads prevail.
Happy Easter.
Wayne”
It is funny how things like this make for great radio. You are right that this will give you another chance to go out there. This time I have faith that you will explain it better.
And you are a stand up guy and admitted you were wrong. For that you should be commended.
Happy Easter
Alex
75 and 77: Stunts like bringing in a gorgeous, photogenic woman and introducing her as the “Chair” of a non-existent “CA Libertarian Women’s Caucus”, while ignoring the true women activists, could be a reason so many women are not interested in the LP.
I don’t think Wayne “endorsed” Romney. All he did was play into the statist narrative that there is a difference between the two teams.
He keeps the magicic alive that Pro Wrestling is real, and their rhetoric matches reality.
I don’t think Wayne is alone, I hear Libertarians go down the left/right debate on almost every issue.
This needs to be our focus, learning to promote freedom, not conservatism.
Economic issues? Social issues?
Let’s not forget foreign policy. Just because foreign policy occupies a relatively small portion of the LP platform doesn’t mean that it’s not a critical component of libertarian philosophy.
And yet, many LP leaders can’t even offer unqualified support for the wishy-washy notion of “non-intervention.” Wishy-washy, because the LP should be proudly antiwar and pro-peace.
That doesn’t mean that every war can be avoided, but that should be the goal. A goal that should be reflected in the LP proclaiming itself antiwar and pro-peace.
@77 I agree that they are not
all; I do not agree that they are not “at all”.
@75: IMO, sports analogies on IPR are not at all what’s keeping females from being active in the LP.
75 gp, the LP does poorly with both genders, so your analogy doesn’t work. Terms like “game change” and “comeback kid” are sports terms used by the last 2 D prezs, so you’ll need to elaborate if you expect to persuade us…
The use of analogies from athletics is a good example of reasons why the Libertarian Party does poorly with women. The Republican Party has the same problem, only worse, as witness the enormous gender and marriage gaps that have opened against the Republicans.
That is clarification? That you believe that there are only two people running for President?
Nice try Wayne, but I believe you have made your point that all those interviews are about you, and not Libertarian candidates across the country.
As a candidate on a local and state level, I find it atrocious that you would essentially give more credit to Romney than Gary. It is not that the sentence requires rewording, but rather it shows a slip in true feelings.
If you were a REAL proponent for Libertarians and libertarians, you wouldn’t lump us in with the GOP in such a fashion, and you wouldn’t ignore (practically) social issues.
Root’s statement speaks for itself.
The hundreds of statements he has made in the past speak for themselves.
Taken in the context that all of these statements have been made, Root makes it very clear as to where he is coming from.
To me, it is beyond comprehension that so many “libertarians” are willing to jump through so many hoops to defend this guy.
At some point, those in the libertarian movement who have already given up on the LP will end the practice of ignoring the LP and begin to openly denounce the LP.
The sad truth is that it is often easier to sell the idea of freedom to ordinary people than it is to sell the idea to a rather large number of LP members.
The notion that libertarians are conservative on economic issues and liberal (or tolerant) on social issues is is nothing more than a bullshit soundbite for lazy thinkers. Libertarians should be libertarian on economic issues and libertarian on social issues.
Highly unlikely.
I don’t think Wayne was telling anyone to vote for Romney over Ron Paul in the primaries. I think his statement was predicated on the assumption that Romney will win the Republicans primaries and that Ron Paul will not be on the November ballot.
Joe,
That may have had something to do with your use of angle brackets to quote (as is common on email). Angle brackets also form the basis of html tags, so the IPR commenting software may have misinterpreted some of your quotes as being tags.
You may actually use html tags for quoting (I usually use blockqoute or italics). If you don’t know know html the best thing to do is probably just to quote someone “like this.”
Wayne, thank you for the apology. I know you are a hard worker. Please be aware that there is an alert and active quality assurance unit assisting you.
54 tk: But Root endorses a Republican, and all of a sudden it’s the end of the world.
me: First, Brother Knapp, it’s mos’ def’ not the “end of the world.” But, it appears that you believe that to be a “Republican” is something like being a “leper.” It’s not. For ex., in RP’s case, he’s a R as a matter of convenience. He is out of step with most members of the GOP. He resigned the GOP in the 80s. He ran for prez as a L. He then wanted back in the game, and the LP was simply not a vehicle for him to get back in the game.
Barr was a former R in 2008 when he got the LP’s prez nomination. Johnson is now in 2012 a former R, too. Former R =/= leper colonist.
But you know that, right?
What this is about is an LNC and LNCC member seemingly endorsing the likely GOP nominee publicly, with Romney clearly not being an advocate for liberty.
Root admits that he made a mistake. He’s apologized for it. Points in my book.
“Daniel Wiener // Apr 8, 2012 at 12:06 am
Andy @ 57: Harry Browne was another rare libertarian who was good with the media, but a lot of that was practice and self-training. I’m not sure that his personality was naturally inclined that way. He buckled down to the task of getting on as many talk radio shows as he could when he was our Presidential candidate, and the more he did the smoother he got. That’s what more libertarians need to do, even if they aren’t initially comfortable with it.”
I met Harry Browne in person and I agree with your assessment. Harry made himself learn to be a good communicator, and I believe that he accomplished this quite well.
“Still, even at his peak, Harry Browne wasn’t getting as many bookings or as much coverage as Wayne Root has been getting.”
Yes, but I think that the media appearances that Harry Browne got were more effective in that they generated more inquiries to his campaign and to the Libertarian Party in general. The party actually grew during the Harry Browne years, and Harry inspired quite a few people to become hardcore Libertarian activists.
I have done a lot of sales work over my years on this planet and I am not going to accept these cheap excuses for this event. This is unacceptable. Not all “Libertarians tend to skew towards engineer and writer types”.
Question: does IPR count as a media appearance?
Because I am pretty sure I am making another media appearance right now. I’m going to start keeping count so my ego can be over 9000 as well, I have not been as disciplined as Mr. Root and he is now going to be my unwilling mentor.
@Wayne, again you’re arguing quantity over quality. I know where the flaws in that argument is and I and others confidently poke holes in them. I can also confidently say you are famous among libertarians (for the wrong reasons: your errant mouth) and among mixed up conservatives who mostly want to be left alone aged 35-150 in a few state radio markets. You sell them the latest horse puckey about hating on Obama, and they lap it up.
But you’re not a TV/radio celebrity. That honor is reserved for people who have their own shows. You know as well as I do who they are.
And as for your football analogy, you were caught throwing the ball to the other team. They haven’t paid notice to your verbal fumbles in the past as much as libertarians do. And why should they? Thanks for the help.
I do find it entertaining that you’ll so willingly tie the noose with your own keyboard cord in these comments throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks. I’m sure you’ll get that fame you’re so desperately seeking, no doubt with a lot of infamy added in there that will temper how seriously a voter would take you.
This is definitely a piss poor apology, more like a justification.
I could write a long story touting the greatness of socialism, I could make it sound really good, but the fact is… I am not a socialist.
Wayne can write many a story talking about libertarian ideas, but the fact is… he is not a libertarian. And with every media appearance we all suffer.
If he would resign, it would be exactly what the party needs for people to believe we are finally taking our principles seriously.
That coupled with what may end up being a Johnson or Wrights win at the LNC could cattapult the party out of obscurity.
Obviously saying that it must be Romney (at all cost) kind of attitude is not helping us.
I am not a radical libertarian, could never be considered such, if you read a blog I wrote called “Why Libertarian” it explains in detail what Wayne should be saying. And exactly why what he said goes against the grain of everything we pour our blood sweat and tears out for.
Every day libertarians work tirelessly to end the idea that voting libertarian is a wasted vote and every day Wayne crushes us with his many media interviews.
Andy @ 56,
I never said there wasn’t a big difference between Romney and Paul. There clearly is.
When Romney says he’s a conservative Republican, I don’t find it very believable.
When Paul says he’s a conservative Republican, I think he’s telling the truth.
For the record, if I insisted that my child write an apology for something awful that he had done, and he presented to me something along the lines of what Wayne presented this morning, I’d mark it a big FAIL and make him do it again.
The only thing Wayne is sorry about is that he’s received so much flak over his interview from yesterday. He really doesn’t get it, or if he does, he doesn’t care.
>>No other party on earth would decide to bash someone over one sentence in one interview out of over 4000 interviews.<<
It's the overall poor quality of those interviews that led to this. You've defended NOT presenting Libertarianism, you've stated you're spinning your brand of Republicanism as if it was Libertarianism in order to "attract conservatives" because that's the "winning formula."
Of your 4,000 interviews what percentage was actually spent being a member of the LNC and presenting a Libertarian point of view, and what percentage was your general "political pundit" role?
Having the word "libertarian" in the media does little good, and much damage when it's associated with your filtered version of what it means.
And Your spin here is, IMO, even worse than your original comment.
It's also, IMO, a clear representative of the kind of equivocation, compromise and misrepresentation you've been presenting in the media of what Libertarian Politics means.
You admit to a strategy that hides some aspects of that political philosophy in efforts to "win conservatives over."
You not a representative of what Libertarianism means to me, and this isn't about one sentence.
To use the sports analogy you started here, Bob Knight was fired by Indiana University after "one incident." So was Woody Hayes.
This was, IMO, your incident.
And you don't have the past winning record they had.
Your argument that you've done good with 4,000 interviews doesn't hold up when they were more designed to appeal to TEA party conservatives, than to actually present what Libertarianism represents.
Wayne, you are NOT the wounded party here, and your victim attitude above is disgusting.
Joe
Knapp @ 54.
In 2008, both Barr and Root were at least pretending to be libertarians. This week the person endorsed by Root doesn’t even pretend to have libertarian sympathies.
Andy @ 57: Harry Browne was another rare libertarian who was good with the media, but a lot of that was practice and self-training. I’m not sure that his personality was naturally inclined that way. He buckled down to the task of getting on as many talk radio shows as he could when he was our Presidential candidate, and the more he did the smoother he got. That’s what more libertarians need to do, even if they aren’t initially comfortable with it.
Still, even at his peak, Harry Browne wasn’t getting as many bookings or as much coverage as Wayne Root has been getting. Again, I think a lot of that is a matter of personality. Wayne enjoys that kind of salesmanship and it comes to him easily. But Harry Browne proved that it’s a learnable skill. If we ever expect to persuade the general public that we have the best ideas to achieve a free and prosperous society, more of us are going to have to learn those same skills.
Wayne Root said: “The LP has never had a media personality before.”
Actually, Harry Browne got quite a few media appearances back in the mid to late ’90’s and early 2000’s, and he helped grow the party too.
Thomas Knapp said: “But Root endorses a Republican, and all of a sudden it’s the end of the world.
WTF, LP?”
If Tom Knapp doesn’t see that there’s a BIG difference between Ron Paul and Mitt Romney even though they are both under the Republican Party banner, then yes, Tom Knapp is a very confused fellow.
@50 Stephen
Does the misinformation ever stop? I never have spoken out against our party. Never. I’ve made 4000+ media appearances and interviews to help our party.
And I never endorsed Mitt Romney. I said if the only choice were Romney vs Obama I’d choose Romney. But I stated clearly my first choice as the perfect candidate is Gary Johnson.
Are you aware that I endorsed Gary Johnson 3 months ago? You might want to check his web site. My endorsement has been there for several weeks. I’m supporting GJ, not Mitt Romney.
But the topic of the interview was who will win the Presidency Obama or Romney. I think you have missed that little detail. Probably because you weren’t on the phone with Bill Cunningham’s producer. I was.
The Lp should be thrilled that I’m asked to opine on Presidential elections…and credible enough for big time mainstream media to ask my opinions of Republicans and Democrats. That is branding the LP can’t buy. It is priceless free earned media and exposure.
I’ve been a loyal foot soldier and leader for the LP for 5 years now. I’ve given my blood sweat and tears. No other party on earth would decide to bash someone over one sentence in one interview out of over 4000 interviews.
Politics is like sports. Have you ever played? I have. I was a winner at every sport I played. And the team captain in every sport. When a kicker misses the game winning kick, or a wide receiver drops a sure touchdown…if you were the coach, would you attack him? Denigrate him? Verbally abuse him?
That’s obviously what certain Libertarians think is the way to treat people.
The answer for the winningest football coaches in history…is after a fumble…or dropped pass…or missed kick…you hug your player…your tap his helmet…you grab his face mask and tell him to keep his chin up and “be ready when I call on you next time.”
The last thing you do if your player is a star and makes a mistake is condemn him. The entire locker room PROTECTS him. Every teammate surrounds him and tells him they love and appreciate him. Then they tell the media “no he didn’t lose the game, we lost as a team.”
That’s how you play the game Stephen.
That’s how you win.
Funny, I’ve never heard of telling your star player to get lost after one play that didn’t go your way…or in this case one sentence.
The LP has never had a media personality before. What I do requires ego, guts, daring, and supreme confidence. I’m a riverboat gambler. Every political party needs media stars. And they all say things they would rather take back once in a while. It goes with the territory.
Wasn’t my first. Won’t be my last. That’s the mark of a winner. I live on the edge. I have to be willing to let it fly and be colorful every single time I’m in the media…without editing every word to see if it’s approved by you. That’s what all media personalities do. That’s the game. Take away that confidence and they are no good. Their career is over.
You cannot denigrate them if you don’t like how a sentence comes out. Out of 4000 interviews I can think of under 10 that I didn’t like.
This was one of them- or at least that sentence was…the other 20 minutes was a very good interview.
3,990 good interviews out of 4000. I’ll take that batting average all day long.
Goodnight and Happy Easter to your family,
Wayne
I’m confused.
In 2007, the LNC unanimously endorsed a Republican for the LP’s 2008 presidential nomination, and hardly anyone protested.
In 2008, the LP nominated a (different) Republican for president.
This year, the conventional wisdom is that the LP will overwhelmingly vote to nominate yet another Republican for president, although some are hopeful that the Republican whom the LNC endorsed in 2008 will either win the GOP nomination or come get the LP nomination.
But Root endorses a Republican, and all of a sudden it’s the end of the world.
WTF, LP?
Johnson/Sloan 2012.
Everybody wins and loses.
Stephen @ 49:
Unfortunately it appears that “being a talking head for Libertarians” is indeed a difficult job. My observation during 40 years in the Libertarian Party is that most libertarians do a piss-poor job of getting media attention. They’re much more comfortable writing screeds on semi-obscure web sites and debating with each other than getting out in front of the general public and making the libertarian case to the non-converted.
Partly I think it’s a matter of personalities. Libertarians tend to skew towards engineer and writer types, not sales people and publicists and orators. It takes a real effort for libertarians to re-orient themselves, and most aren’t too successful in doing so in a persuasive manner.
Hence a marketeer and promoter like Wayne Root stands out among libertarians. His personality clashes with the personalities of many of his critics, which I suspect constitutes as much of the underlying problem as any ideological differences. Many of the posters at IPR express a visceral hatred for Wayne Root rather than calmly discussing issues or differences in strategies.
Meanwhile Wayne’s aggressive, outgoing attitude and tireless work ethic have garnered him vastly more attention in just the past two years on radio, TV, and in print than any other libertarian I have seen. And yes, once in a while he’ll say the wrong thing. Considering the magnitude of his efforts, I’m certainly prepared to cut him some slack, especially when he’s willing to acknowledge a mistake.
I just wish other libertarians were able to promote our ideas at the same non-stop pace that Wayne does.
People sometimes stick their foot in their mouth with an occational stupid comment.
With that radio interview, Root went past the ankle and part-way up the shin.
With that explanation he closed on on the knee and is heading for the thigh.
As Chairman of the Lexington County, SC Libertarian Party and one of my state’s elected delegates to the national convention, I am not misspeaking when I say this: i vote on the issues. I vote for whoever matches my beliefs the best. Usually it means voting Libertarian but not always. In this case, I will almost certainly vote for our party’s nominee.
Bear in mind, however, that we may not have Gary Johnson as our nominee.
Still, I cannot stomach the thought of voting for Mitt Romney. There is, of course, the slim chance that Ron Paul will be the GOP nominee, in which case I would be comfortable voting for the GOP.
But I would never speak out against our party, as Mr. Root has done.
I join my LNC delegate, Stewart Flood, in calling for Mr. Root’s resignation from the LNC.
Please… please… stop acting like being a talking head for Libertarians is oh so difficult of a job (well, when you’re doing it right and not verbally setting yourself on fire).
I’ll grant that you’ve made a semi-successful career out of it, but as other have said your popularity is because what you are saying is largely considered “safe” to the establishment.
In the spirit of this religious holiday weekend, I’d say Root crawl away from this dustup with his LP career still intact (barely), and obviously taken down another rung or two in Google’s memory.
Root, you’re smart enough to know the movers and shakers in the party are watching you askance and wondering where your true loyalties lie.
Less@45,
Thanks — glad to hear that he may be moving in a pro-freedom direction on that one.
When he attended PorcFest2010 he made a comment about Jan Brewer doing good things in Arizona with the immigration law.
@ WAR
Will you vote for Lee Wrights or Gary Johnson even if it means Romney loses the swing state of Nevada to Obama in the general election?
@25 Tom – Yes, since declaring for the LP nomination, he hasn’t once repeated that proposal. If you know otherwise, I’d definitely be interested, as I personally listed that on IPR as one of my objections to him at the time of his declaration.
@28 Darryl – Same answer, although I actually don’t recall ever seeing him say that even as a Republican.
I give Wayne credit for a spirited defense. Perhaps he will be more careful in the future. Only time will tell. Let’s get an adult beverage and give it a rest.
You can vote on those buttons in a poll here
http://www.facebook.com/questions/407651339247128/?qa_ref=qd
40 jd, fair enough. The point I intended was to establish the notion of selectivity for some motivation. In the case of Paul, it would be both ideological AND dollars. What a waste of money it’d be for the LP to run against Paul!
Sorry to’ve not made myself clear, and thank you for allowing me to clarify what I meant!
Even though the Tea Party is not L, I do happen to think that it was on balance a positive development. Heck, RP was at one point referred to as the Godfather of the Tea Party! That it was unfocused and then hijacked doesn’t mean that it didn’t serve a useful purpose.
Regardless, I maintain that even if one disagreed with Root’s targeting strategy in 2010, I would think the fair-minded would not label it contra fiduciary.
36 db: Angela never agreed that her actions were mistakes. She was unapologetic. She was proud of it. She would, and did, do it again and again on purpose. And the IPR crowd gave her their full support. Wayne, on the other hand, owns up to his mistakes and tries to fix them, yet the IPR crowd calls for his head.
me: Please spare us the histrionical broad brushes, Deep. I love Angela to death, but I agree with you about the contrast between her and Root. I have not called for Root’s head. I did suggest that my gut said he should resign the LNC and LNCC, but never called for ousting him. Indeed, the LPF called for his being purged, I strongly disagreed with them. I’m pleased that he’s cleaning up the mess, though as a personal note I do think he should focus on his punditry and consider something like a Senate run down the line.
I am definitely in the IPR crowd.
@ Capozzi
I understand focusing limited resources where you expect the most dollar for dollar results. But, your comment seemed to compare not running a candidate against Ron Paul as akin to not running a candidate against Marco Rubio. I trust you see how the sentence structure sets up that comparison. I understand your point now, although I think it is better to fund high quality candidates in elections with lots of national media attention. One of the reasons I was opposed to WARs faction urging a NOTA vote for the LP candidate for US Senate against Reid in 2010.
In Liberty, with Eternal Vigilance,
Jim Duensing
http://www.VoteForAChange.US
34 jd: How is Marco Rubio arguably libertarian??
me: You are reading words that are simply not there, Counselor. I would think that it’s obvious that Ls and dollars for L campaigns are few. Can we stipulate that?
That Root advocated targeting races was well within bounds. That he suggested that Tea Party candidates would be a factor, and that running Ls where there were not Tea Party candidates is not an unreasonable consideration, IMO.
There could be other reasonable considerations, too.
It’s also not completely unreasonable to run as many candidates as possible, regardless of resources or opponent or voter ideological inclinations.
These are matters of practical political judgment. That’s VERY different than (inadvertently/effectively) endorsing your opponent.
I trust you see the difference….
“some people are making unfounded claims that I endorsed Mitt Romney for President”
“it’s gotta be Romney, there’s no choice”
Most popular buttons at the 2012 LP Convention?
1. Vote Romney and HOPE!
2. Romney / WAR 2012
3. Don’t Waste Your Vote on Gary Johnson. Defeat Obama. Vote Romney.
4. I get MEDIA! I get MEDIA! (this button would require artwork showing a spokesmodel with a right foot in his mouth)
5. Barr / Root ?? NEVER AGAIN!!
Happy Easter.
In Liberty, with Eternal Vigilance,
Jim Duensing
http://www.VoteForAChange.US
“If we had $1,000,000 dollars we never could have given you one dollar. That’s the only reason you didn’t get a check from me.”
THIS is why I’m concerned about WAR being Chair of the LNCC. It looks like it will be used for patronage, not for the good of the LP. Yes, it was a small slip to say “me” instead of “us.” Nevertheless, I think the possibilities here are a matter for concern.
So when in the interview Wayne said “it has got to be Romney”, can someone extract from the interview what question was asked to get the answer is “it has got to be Romney”?
Anyone? Anyone? Beuller? What was the question?
It seems that many of you have concluded that the question was “Who should people vote for in November?” I didn’t hear that question in the interview.
Actually I didn’t hear a question asked at all. WHAT has got to be Romney?
If I ignore the context and my reasoning skills, I could leap to all sorts of assumptions about what the question was.
Who let their dog take a dump in my yard? It’s got to be Romney.
Which presidential candidate has recurring bad breath? It’s got to be Romney.
Which president’s name most closely rhymes with hominy? It’s got to be Romney.
Or back on planet earth, where right before an interview they will discuss a run-down of what topics will be covered, maybe off-mic Cunningham asked Wayne to talk about “What do you think the American voters are thinking about the presidential election?”
That seems to match what Wayne said on the other thread yesterday, that he was asked to speculate on the horse-race.
Or we could even get context from what Wayne said immediately before that. He said HE personally would love it of Johnson were elected, but it’s not gonna happen. Doesn’t that sorta create an unstated follow-up question of “If Johnson won’t win, who will?” It’s gotta be Romney. That’s clearly not his personal preference, which he said was Johnson.
Wayne’s failure here was in not giving us the setup question to the answer he gave. The question wasn’t stated. People were left to find a conclusion in muddy waters.
Those of you who already didn’t like Wayne are going to twist it into whatever you want it to be. I hope the rest of you will consider other possible explanations and give him a chance to come back from an unintentional screwup and a lost opportunity to make a better point. It happens to all of us.
Both Wayne and Angela Keaton have groups of people who think they did things that harmed the LP. But I’ll tell you a big difference between Angela and Wayne. Angela never agreed that her actions were mistakes. She was unapologetic. She was proud of it. She would, and did, do it again and again on purpose. And the IPR crowd gave her their full support. Wayne, on the other hand, owns up to his mistakes and tries to fix them, yet the IPR crowd calls for his head.
BIG difference.
Alex Snitker- I helped you as much as I could from LNC in that last election. I stood up for you. I defended you when many LPers said negative things about you.
And as far as LNCC…we had limited resources at that time…just getting started…we issued I believe 8 or 10 checks in USA and I chose YOU to get a check. The biggest one we could write. Then we found out from our bylaws and FEC rules that we could not contribute to U.S. Senate races. Only Congress or local.
So I did pull any “crap” as you put it. I tried my best to help you financially and was prohibited by FEC rules. Did you remember that?
If we had $1,000,000 dollars we never could have given you one dollar. That’s the only reason you didn’t get a check from me.
And as far as Rubio, if I remember one email or Facebook post out of thousands I get…,I believe someone asked me why you didn’t do better in that race.
Knowing you were a great candidate…one I called “one of 3 best in USA on numerous public occasions” I had to think hard why you didn’t do better in that race. Because I thought you had loads of potential.
And as always I gave my opinion to a stranger publicly..
My opinion was that Rubio acted like a perfect Tea Party politician…and that took away the edge of one of our best candidates.
Do you disagree?
Because if that wasn’t it…what was it?
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. Great candidate…excellent speaker…telegenic…had radio show. Perfect.
Yet poor results.
Why? You mean you are insulted that I blamed a good Tea Party candidate against you? I blamed someone who ran on a platform of lower taxes…lower spending…smaller government in my opinion negates our LP edge.
I proved my point. Far more ineffective candidates than you got better vote totals…even though they spent nothing. Why?
Because Rubio took the steam out of our campaign. Because Tea Partiers have a lot in common on economic issues with LPers. And we need their votes. And with all of them going to Rubio that left very little for you to work with.
That was a great compliment from me to you.
As far your statement above…you are not reading my statement very closely. Sorry Alex…but I’d never ask to hear every single interview you did in your race. and then pick them apart word by word.
Or how about all your radio shows? I wonder if you ever said anything that would offend anyone? I wonder if you were “pure” enough for everyone at IPR. I wonder if you would ever take something back that wasn’t worded the exact way you wanted it worded? Ever?
I would not throw stones. Bad thing to start.
Circular firing squads ruin progress for a political party. No one is pure enough or perfect enough to survive.
Sorry…but 1 sentence or two out of 4000 interviews that you don’t agree with isn’t grounds for banning people…or expelling people.
Folks…heres the deal I thought it sounded different when I said it.
I listened…I agreed it didn’t come out the way I would have liked.
But it’s clear what I meant to say…if Romney and Obama were the only candidates than on economic issues I’d take a businessman any day over a marxist community organizer…
But those are not the only two choices. There is a third choice. Gary Johnson is a better option.
Exactly what I’ll be saying on Bill Cunningham’s show next week.
I apologized.
I righted the wrong.
I turned it into a big win for Gary Johnson and Ohio LP.
More p.r. and exposure than they would have gotten without my one sentence misspeak.
Let it rest…on Easter.
Alex…
Cooler heads prevail.
Happy Easter.
Wayne
How is Marco Rubio arguably libertarian??
As I recall it, I didn’t find Root’s advocacy of picking and choosing which races for Ls to contest and which not to be non-fiduciary. Arguably, it WAS fiduciary. With few exceptions, most Ls supported the LP not fielding a candidate against Ron Paul for that district’s congressional seat.
Whether that FL Senate race was the place to apply this selectivity principle is also arguable either way.
But this constructive/inadvertent Romney endorsement is not the same “sin.”
@ Snitker – Did WAR endorse Rubio during your race? Rubio just endorsed Romney too. hmmmm…
Normally I do not chime in here but this is the last straw.
I listened to the segment in question and without a doubt Wayne did a disservice to the Libertarian party and I think on purpose.
Here is Wayne’s quote.
“I’d love if a Libertarian like Gary Johnson, the two-term governor of New Mexico, would actually get elected President, but I think we all know that’s not going to happen”
This quote says it all. HOW THE HELL DO YOU KNOW WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN WAYNE? It seems to me that Wayne is continuing the myth that the Libertarian candidate is some how unelectable and his words (being on the LNC) hurt the party.
Many of us do interviews and are asked about the president’s race. Many of us are asked to opine about it. You are not something special and you cannot tell me that you do all these interviews out of the kindness of your heart. You said it yourself. Some of there interviews you get paid to do. Don’t sit there and tell us that you are the only one working to grow the party.
There are plenty of people out there that are doing REAL work and the more you try to justify your actions by telling us how many interviews you do it insults those who are working hard.
This is not the first time you pulled this crap. You did the same thing during my race against Rubio and now we see how that turned out.
This comment was the last straw. I really thought you would be good for the party but it is clear now that those who told me you were going to damage the party were right.
Gary, if you’re reading this, it is time to distance yourself from Wayne before you are tainted by him.
Because Wayne said “even though I was speaking as an LP spokeman through most of the interview, I was just for a second there speaking as a handicapper and an analysis, and then switched back to LP spokesman.”
If you’re going to pull that sort of switch, you should say things like “Even though I’m here as an LP spokesman, to answer your question I’ll have to speak as a handicapper and analyst instead” and then “now that I’ve given you the analyst answer, here’s the libertarian answer”.
If Wayne really honestly expects us to swallow that particular line of bul regarding how he was switching roles, then he ought to make it clear when he is switching roles.
@21 – Bravo !
I accept WAR’s apology. This brings up a point all of us can learn from, mainly if we, as Ls, continue to say Gary Johnson can’t win it is most certain he won’t be making that long needed breakthough for the LP. With almost the entire media against us, we certainly don’t need to reinforce the negativity all around us. Hopefully Root won’t slip up again! When someone asks to be forgiven we should forgive them!
Gary Johnson is qualified to be a “successful” POTUS, moreso than Romney or Obama. Voters would be smart to vote for Gary Johnson in Nov. Now we need to help get that message out, not promoting another cycle of wasted votes on the duopoly that has led us to disaster. Romney and Obama are the mouthpieces (puppets) for the duopoly, Gary Johnson is not a puppet for our enemies.
Federal Records Show Romney Campaign Bought And Paid For By Big Banks – http://www.conservativeactionalerts.com/2011/10/federal-records-show-romney-campaign-bought-and-paid-for-by-big-banks/
Who Donated to Mitt Romney – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Zq7sOjLvhI&feature=related
Capital None Obamacard – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQOB2xnvD3Y&feature=plcp&context=C49b3149VDvjVQa1PpcFMhymnMwqI7MIh1du0OaH7Bo4zDFmGXPgU%3D
Every Cent You Make (I’ll be taxing you) – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRRsfCD1Bh0&feature=endscreen&NR=1
Johnson also seems favorable to the “papers, please” legislation from Arizona!
The link worked for me.
A little common sense goes a long way. Would a member of the LP really endorse Romney? Clarification shouldn’t be needed. People should have listened for themselves before running with it. The link provided yesterday did not bring me to a stream of the show, only the comments. Surely I was not the only one this happened to.
Les@23,
“Also, Johnson’s pro-immigration stance would go a long way to offer a real contrast.”
What, has Johnson changed his position away from approving of conscripting every business owner in the United States as an unpaid ICE informant?
@ Alan in 20
Well said. The will to at least vote for Liberty needs to be nurtured in the electorate now and forever. We can’t surrender our vote and expect the Establishment to ever consider our opinion. But, even if hey are stealing the vote, I want them to know without a doubt that We the People know the score and We the People demand our country back.
@ Richard
Fair question.
I expect to be on the NV ballot as an Independent. It appears to me under the new rules that the deadline to qualify a party is early May with 7,000 ish signatures. The deadline to get on as independent is July 4th, with the same 7,000 signatures.
If I didn’t live in Nevada, I would be writing the state off my national ballot access plan. But, since I firmly believe that Liberty starts at home, I’ll be working to get on the ballot here. And, I think I’ll be successful in that effort. Although it will be a David vs. Goliath type effort.
If I am not successful in that effort I would have to see who the LP candidate is before voting for them. I won’t vote for GJ after he raised spending and “privatized” prisons in NM and while he is pushing the Fraud Tax and an Israel First foreign policy. I would consider strongly and lean towards voting for Lee Wrights if he were the nominee – in he case that I couldn’t by law vote for my first choice. But I will wait until the July deadline to compare and contrast all the available options on the NV ballot before making a final decision. Hopefully Ron Paul is on the Americans Elect ticket by then. Keep in mind that in Nevada we always have the option of voting None of the Above – even though they don’t count those votes. Although, there’s not much evidence they count the other ones either.
In Liberty, with Eternal Vigilance,
Jim Duensing
http://www.VoteForAChange.US 1773!
Also, Johnson’s pro-immigration stance would go a long way to offer a real contrast.
My take:
(1) Any normal human being is going to see Wayne’s on air comment as advice to vote for Romney as a lesser of two evils. It is still advice to vote for Romney.
(2) The initial response to the earlier post that claimed it was misleading was not correct. It was accurate. The current response that acknowledges a blunder is far more reasonable.
(3) I’m still not happy that libertarianism has been reduced to fiscal conservatism. That is a lousy summary of the libertarian philosophy. Those presenting libertarianism on behalf of the LP should, at a minimum, describe it as economic liberty, social tolerance, and a foreign policy of free trade, travel, and migration along with non-intervention militarily. Especially in light of the 2008 debacle, the LP needs to rehabilitate its brand as a unique point of view rather than a version of conservatism.
(4) Electing Romney is not the lesser of two evils in 2012. With the Republicans given strong odds to control both houses of Congress, a Republican president means they could get through all of their worst ideas. Were the Democrats expected to be in control of both houses, then it could be reasonably argued that a Democratic president was the worst option. GRIDLOCK in government is better for liberty in society.
(5) I’m sure a Republican radio audience is going to be happy hearing an LP representative call for everyone to vote for the Republican and strengthening the view that a vote for the LP is wasted. That doesn’t make it a good appearance if the goal is to build the LP.
(6) Gary Johnson hasn’t received the nomination of the LP just yet. And I hope that a second interview to praise him includes praise for his stances on getting out of all the wars, choice, marriage equality, and legalization of pot. Or else it is just going to strengthen the view that the LP is merely a purer form of conservatism.
“Nothing matters very much and few things matter at all.”
– Arthur J. Balfour, British Prime Minister (1902-05)
“Here, Kitty. Back in the bag. Get back in the bag now, Kitty.”
FWIW, I don’t think anything has changed since Ron Paul referred to the Democrats and Republicans as Tweedledee and Tweedledum in a 1988 campaign brochure. There STILL ain’t a dime’s worth of difference between Obama and Romney, including health care. So as Will Rogers might have said, that whole “lesser of two evils” theory is a bunch of hooey.
OTOH, if there were any difference between them as WAR claims, then obviously his implication is that people should vote for Romney instead of Ron Paul or the LP nominee.
No, this did not end well. We’ve been fighting that whole “lesser of two evils” crap for 40 years, and here it is again. No wonder the Romney fans in Bill Cunningham’s audience liked hearing it.
OK, it happened again. Apparently a result of using those greater and lesser than signs for quotations.
Wayne wrote:
“As a political commentator and pundit, I opine on many issues, make predictions, and break down the differences in political races.”
What he did not say, and what I expect everyone on the LNC to say, is:
“As a member of the LNC, I consistently support Libertarian candidates.”
The point here is he’s not acting as a member of the LNC but as a political pundit.
And then the rest of my comments beginning with “I see Wayne having a successful career as a political pundit in the future. I don’t see being a member of the LNC . . .”
“And, please consider joining the fastest growing libertarian party” …. That would http://www.lp.org
Something got deleted in my post above.
Where I quoted Wayne
>>As a political commentator and pundit, I opine on many issues, make predictions, and break down the differences in political races. < As a member of the LNC, I consistently support Libertarian candidates.<<
The point here is he's not acting as a member of the LNC but as a political pundit.
And then the rest of my comments beginning with "I see Wayne having a successful career as a political pundit in the future. I don't see being a member of the LNC . . ."
@ Wayne – I am enjoying this Easter weekend very much. Thanks for all of your help in that effort BTW.
Getting on the show again, does not undo the damage you did with the listeners of the initial show.
Do you admit that your comments would tend to encourage a libertarian or tea party conservative to vote for Romney over the Libertarian because “there’s no choice”?
If so, will you use your upcoming appearance on the BC show to try and undo that damage?
You should own up to the fact that your statements when listened to or read, by anyone but Aaron Starr, clearly indicate that we must vote for Romney because the most important thing is defeating Obama.
BTW, in reading your numerous backtracking statements since this interview, I found it laughable that you use as an excuse that this is your career and in the next sentence try and gain sympathy for all the time you volunteer getting media.
Please try and have as enjoyable of an Easter Weekend as I am having.
In Liberty, with Eternal Vigilance,
Jim Duensing
http://www.VoteForAChange.US
Wayne said in effect, we gotta vote in Romney no matter how bad he is and no amount of BLAH BLAH BLAH is going to change that.
Thanks for the full(er) quotation above. The next several lines serve to mitigate the impact of “there is no choice” when they are included.
I also want to say that Wayne has been emailing me directly, has been nothing but kind, despite my harsh criticism of him, not only in these remarks but also in his wider self-claimed strategy for appealing to conservatives.
I’ve apologized to him there for the degree to which I reacted out of anger in the moment. I believe Wayne and I have agreed that we are both human and mistake makers.
That said, the concerns I’ve expressed here remain. I don’t, for example, see ANY Personal Liberty issues identified in the LNCC “candidate training.” I see Gary Johnson’s positions on the Drug War, marriage, God, abortion and his history of drug use, as out of alignment with Wayne’s “God, Guns, Gold and Tax Cuts”
I remain unimpressed with the number of media appearances when they seem more designed to promote a TEA party agenda than a classical Libertarian one.
I AM impressed with Gary Johnson’s articulation of the personal liberty part of what I see as the core of the LP, as well as the economic ones where he and Wayne might be in fuller alignment.
>>As a political commentator and pundit, I opine on many issues, make predictions, and break down the differences in political races. <> As a member of the LNC, I consistently support Libertarian candidates.<<
I see Wayne having a successful career as a political pundit in the future. I don't think being a member of the LNC or running the Libertarian National Congressional Committee, or the education of our candidates at the convention, is consistent with that career.
After carefully rereading the above statement from Wayne, and acknowledging his professionalism and kindness to me personally in various emails over the past 20 hours or so, and with public apologies for whatever part of my initial reaction was motivated by anger, I restate my call for Wayne to resign.
Joe
Jim Duensing, I believe you live in Nevada, which doesn’t permit write-ins and which has tough ballot access laws (even the Green Party probably won’t be on for President in Nevada this year). I would be very surprised if you get on the Nevada ballot as an independent for president, and it is virtually too late to get the Boston Tea Party on. Assuming you don’t get on the Nevada ballot, will you vote for the Libertarian Party nominee for President?
Wayne has already said he will, so you ought to be willing to answer the same question.
I will be tuning in to this one. Hope it works, the Ohio LP works hard, and could use some good press. Johnson on the other hand seems to be more than adequate in getting his own press, and he speaks well for himself and the LP. It’s great how well he gets it, despite having just “come out of the closet” as a big L.
@ Scott – you’re right.
I have been opposed to WAR’s dishonest fast-talking version of neo-Libertariansim since he said to Alice Lillie at a Clark County (Las Vegas) LP meeting that he supports torture in some cases because he is tough on terror. This was prior to the 2008 election.
And I’m sure your and Starr’s unwavering unquestioning defense of anything and everything professional spokesmodel WAR says has nothing to do with your blind faith in Israel First foreign policy that has America fighting multiple undeclared unConstitutional wars. I find it interesting that you and Dondero were the first people to call me about WAR and try and get me to let him in the NVLP Presidential debate while he was still registered Republican. You are very loyal sir.
Are you bringing up my membership in the Boston Tea Party because you can’t argue with the logic of my statements?
War endorsed Romney. He told libertarian conservative voters on the Bill Cunningham show that the most important thing is to beat Obama – not to get our country back – and so we must vote for Romney and HOPE that Romney doesn’t take us over a cliff as fast. That’s what this thread is about.
But, since you mentioned it, the Duensing for President campaign effort has just started its effort to select Presidential Electors in each of the 50 states. If you want a principled actual libertarian candidate to support, who believes in America first not Israel first, please consider my campaign.
http://www.VoteForAChange.US/issues
And, please consider joining the fastest growing libertarian party in the nation at http://www.BostonTea.US
In Liberty, with Eternal Vigilance,
Jim Duensing
Wayne Allyn Root is an asset for the Libertarian Party. He has given new life to the LNCC and is working hard to give future libertarian candidates the tools to win an election. I’ve followed Wayne since 2005 and became a Libertarian becasue of him.
Wayne’s experience in marketing and media makes me very optimistic that the Libertarian Party will be a political powerhouse in a short time.
@5 Jim,
Wayne here. Maybe you’re not listening. The whole thing just turned into a big positive for LP. I’ll be on the same popular show with a mega phone promoting LP and LP of Ohio and Gary Johnson.
Free publicity for everyone that they could not have gotten without my first interview.
So all is well.
And all new listeners will hear the new interview and hear about Gary and Ohio LP.
And the ones who heard the first interview liked it. As Bill told me. Nothing but good response on his end.
So all is well my friend.
That is the essence of media and politics- you solve the problem. Quickly. Then you turn it into a big positive.
Go enjoy the holiday weekend
Happy Easter.
Wayne
Jim,
The transcript is accurate.
If I said that I would prefer that my legs be broken instead of my back, that doesn’t mean I endorse either, especially if the later part of that same paragraph clearly states that both are bad choices.
Thoughtful people can clearly distinguish what was stated and what you would like to have been stated.
And if it isn’t obvious from the initial transcript, Root’s clarifying remarks certainly make clear his intention.
“Jim Duensing // Apr 7, 2012 at 1:40 pm
I listened to it. WAR said that the most important thing is to defeat Obama, which is patently false. The most important thing is to take our Liberties and our country back from those who hate our freedom, whether they are Neo-con Republicans of Marxist Democrats.
If it walks like an endorsement, talks like an endorsement, and smells like an endorsement, guess what, it’s an endorsement.”
*************************************
I am sure the fact that Mr. Duensing is the Presidential Nominee of the Boston Tea Party has absolutely nothing to do with the content of his remarks.
http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2012/04/jim-duensing-in-the-new-boston-tea-party-presidential-
Listen for yourself
http://www.700wlw.com/player/?station=WLW-AM&program_name=podcast&program_id=bill_cunningham.xml&mid=21977071&fb_comment_id=fbc_10150792161367806_23594180_10150792348057806
I listened to it. WAR said that the most important thing is to defeat Obama, which is patently false. The most important thing is to take our Liberties and our country back from those who hate our freedom, whether they are Neo-con Republicans of Marxist Democrats.
He then said “it’s gotta be Romney, there’s no choice.”
He sets up the idea that in this upcoming election, the most important thing is defeating Obama, then he catches himself and adds an offhand positive remark about the NM Republican running for the LP nomination. Then, he says in this upcoming election it’s gotta be Romney (to defeat Obama) there’s no other choice.
This is a message to libertarians AND disaffected Republicans not to vote for principle or liberty, but to vote for the establishment and “hope” Romneycare stops ObamaCare.
To quote one of WAR’s heros, how’s that hopey changey thing working for ya now? I don’t want to hope that flip-flopper Mitt changes his stripes to liberty once he gets elected. An oddsmaker should know a longshot when he sees it. Romney supporting liberty in office is a longer shot than the Cubs winning three consecutive World Series.
The message being sent in this interview to the conservatives and libertarians listening is “Don’t vote your conscience. I too would like to see a neo-Libertarian win, but right now this election is too important and we need to vote for Bush to keep Kerry out – I mean we need to vote for Dole to defeat Clinton – I mean we need to vote for Romney to defeat Obama.” Same old song and dance from Republican apologists trying to convince libertarians to hold their nose and support one of the evil establishment candidates.
The GOP is not better than the DNC. The LP is not a wing of the GOP.
“it’s gotta be Romney, there’s no choice”
If it walks like an endorsement, talks like an endorsement, and smells like an endorsement, guess what, it’s an endorsement.
In Liberty, with Eternal Vigilance,
Jim Duensing
http://www.VoteForAChange.US – Time to Party like its 1773!
I believe that if people view the actual transcript (with all of its vocal slopes), it’s crystal clear that there is no endorsement being made.
“some people are making unfounded claims that I endorsed Mitt Romney for President”
“it’s gotta be Romney, there’s no choice”
@1
Done.
Wayne,
Thanks for the clarification. I haven’t read the whole thing yet but I appreciate you taking the time to respond.
My best for your Easter and/or Passover.
Paulie
415-690-6352
Aaron,
I realize that the headline and Wayne’s signature at the end of the post make it clear that the text is Wayne’s and not yours, but for the sake of clarity I think you should add a first line in the text making clear that you/we received this from Wayne (not sure which as I haven’t checked my email yet).
Thx,
-p