Andy Craig: When Libertarian Party Candidates Jump the Shark (Opinion Piece)

jump_the_sharkFull disclosure: Andy Craig is involved with the Gary Johnson Campaign. This opinion piece is his alone and NOT a statement from the Johnson Campaign.

The Petersen and McAfee campaigns (which are now apparently the same thing?) were always a bit silly, but the past few days they’ve completely jumped the shark. I’ve been busy with the Wisconsin convention (big success, by the way! Great job and thanks to everybody who came out!), so I haven’t been as glued to my computer screen as usual. But now that I’ve had the chance to glance at what they’ve been up to, I’m a bit flabbergasted. These are not the sorts of campaigns Libertarians deserve.

If you think your only path to the LP nomination is tear down your opponent with lies that insult the intelligence of the delegates, then you don’t deserve the LP nomination. Whining that another candidate is better-organized and has more support, certainly isn’t any reason to nominate you. Throwing a feet-stamping temper-tantrum on Facebook really isn’t the kind of thing that says “trust me with America’s nuclear arsenal.”

Trying to play the victim when you’re losing is an age-old political tactic, but it’s clear there are some candidates who actually care about the well-being of the Libertarian Party, while there are some who are only in this for themselves and the personal publicity that goes with being a “presidential candidate.”

Libertarians have spent millions of dollars and thousands of hours of labor over more than four decades to make ourselves the only alternative party able to put a Presidential nominee on the ballot in all 50 states. We do this for a number of important reasons beyond just having a candidate in the presidential race, reasons that some of the candidates for that nomination seem wholly unaware of.

Gov. Johnson has worked tirelessly to attend more LP state conventions in 2016 than any other candidate for the nomination, and when he’s not doing that he’s busy doing more interviews with major news outlets than the rest of the field combined. He has endorsed and supported Libertarian candidates for lower office in 2012 and 2014, before McAfee had even discovered the LP and while Austin was still bashing the LP in favor of GOP candidates. In 2012, he was one of just two candidates in the party’s history who manged to more than double our vote total. Through Our America Initiative, he’s led the fight for debate inclusion for whoever the Libertarian nominee is, as well as organizing Libertarian activists to engage in state and local politics on important issues, including lobbying their state legislators for things like ballot access improvements.

He has also, not once, gone after any of his opponents with a negative attack or smear campaign. Aside from a couple of instances of responding to them in debates, he hasn’t even mentioned their name. This isn’t new: he’s quite proud of the fact that he ran his successful re-election campaign in New Mexico without once mentioning his opponent in any advertisement. His campaign message is always built around making the case for himself, not denigrating his competitors.

The point of the L.P. nomination process is, ideally, to produce a better nominee who can go into the general election with the support of the party to win over the broader public. That includes a healthy discussion and debate of issue positions, as well as honing skills at presenting the libertarian message. From the party’s perspective, the best candidates who aren’t the nominee, are the ones who help shape the message in a positive way, and who help resolve intra-party conflicts now that could potentially come up later. Baseless slander and trying to blow up the party on a personal ego trip doesn’t get us any of that.

I have always been open to the possibility of a better candidate, and part of that is at least *acting* like you’re a serious candidate for the most powerful office on the planet. McAfee and Petersen haven’t done that, and at this point it seems exceedingly unlikely that either are capable of it.

I was asked this weekend, “The LP isn’t seriously going to nominate somebody else, are they?”

My response: almost certainly not, but if they do, it won’t be seriously.

This entry was posted in Libertarian Party and tagged on by .

About Caryn Ann Harlos

Caryn Ann Harlos is a paralegal residing in Castle Rock, Colorado and presently serving as the Region 1 Representative on the Libertarian National Committee and is a candidate for LNC Secretary at the 2018 Libertarian Party Convention. Articles posted should NOT be considered the opinions of the LNC nor always those of Caryn Ann Harlos personally. Caryn Ann's goal is to provide information on items of interest and (sometimes) controversy about the Libertarian Party and minor parties in general not to necessarily endorse the contents.

63 thoughts on “Andy Craig: When Libertarian Party Candidates Jump the Shark (Opinion Piece)

  1. Caryn Ann Harlos Post author

    InB4 someone says I am a Johnson shill. I do not support Governor Johnson. I hesitate to even say I support Perry though that is who my delegate vote would go to today. I don’t care in particular about the individual candidates. I love the Party, that is my care, and what is being done to the the beautiful thing that is the LP is trashy and should be beneath us.

  2. Thomas L. Knapp

    “what is being done to the the beautiful thing that is the LP is trashy and should be beneath us”

    True. And the Johnson gang are the chief culprits.

  3. Joe Wendt

    The only candidate that has jump the shark is Gary Johnson. Advocating Jewish bakers be forced to make Nazi wedding cakes, a bizarre prejudice against Muslims, angry outbursts during debates whenever someone confronts him on his record, and having an large debt from his previous run. I am sorry, Johnson is the silly candidate, for believing that he’s entitled to a nomination with a record like that.

  4. Caryn Ann Harlos Post author

    Joe and Tom , I don’t support Johnson either. Bring me a good opinion piece with support on these things, and I will gladly post it.

  5. Thomas L. Knapp

    Caryn,

    Depending on how strong an opinion piece you want, I may have already written it — this one doesn’t go into his public meltdowns/tantrums. It pretty much sticks to the financial profligacy of the 2012 Johnson campaign, and it’s already dated by George Phillies’s new book, Surely We Can Do Better which explains that the campaign may now have actually LOST money on matching funds (spent about $300k getting them, got $600+k, but has now been ordered to refund $332k of that to the FEC), covers the fact that basically only 1 in 7 dollars raised by the campaign were spent on, um campaigning, etc.

  6. George Whitfield

    Andy Craig: Well written article and true. Gary Johnson is clearly the best candidate for the Libertarian Party Presidential nomination and certainly deserves our support. I trust the delegates to the National Convention wisely nominate him.

  7. Dave Terry

    GOOD JOB ANDY!!!
    Clearly, the cowardly, back-biting screeds of Knapp, Phillies and Wendt have brought us all back to that ‘glorious’ day when John Hospers endorsed George W. Bush.

    I can honestly say that I have NOT voted for any ‘non-Libertarian’ candidate since Barry Goldwater in 1964.
    As I approach my 75th birthday, I sincerely hope I will not have to cross the Rubicon again and vote for another ‘non’ – libertarian!

  8. Jill Pyeatt

    This is well said, Andy, and I agree. These past 4 or 5 days have been embarrassing.

    Perhaps there has been dirty, behind the scenes politics from Johnson that we don’t know about. The Petersen campaign has been so dramatic that I don’t take what they say seriously. I’m not sure if the McAfee campaign has info we should know, but, if they do, it should be presented properly.

    I am not a Johnson supporter, but even though I don’t like some of his financial problems and some of his answers that I hear in the media, at least he’s conducting himself like an adult.

  9. Thomas L. Knapp

    “I am not a Johnson supporter, but even though I don’t like some of his financial problems and some of his answers that I hear in the media, at least he’s conducting himself like an adult.”

    When did that start? I’ve seen differently in public. And I’ve heard differently from people who have interviewed him recently (cough … cough).

  10. George Dance

    “[Johnson] has also, not once, gone after any of his opponents with a negative attack or smear campaign.” If Petersen or McAfee wins the nomination, that will probably change; that will be due in part to their attacks on Johnson, and in part to the fact that their own questionable (by libertarian standards) positions have gone unexamined. Personally I liked that about the GJ campaign: for example, I saw the Stossel campaign as an opportunity to present the party in the best possible light, not one for having a Republican-style melee between the candidates. But if GJ loses due to that, I don’t expect it will ever happen again.

  11. Thomas L. Knapp

    Dear God. Anyone who thinks that “roomgate” was more than an infinitesimal blip on the radar of negative campaigning seriously needs to go to the local sporting goods store, buy a cup and start wearing it.

    And anyone who thinks that one day of internal movement paranoia — “OMG! Gary is buying hotel rooms!” — did one one thousandth of the damage to the party that Johnson’s public cake meltdown did simply isn’t living in the real world.

  12. George Dance

    Tom Knapp: “Anyone who thinks that ‘roomgate’ was more than an infinitesimal blip on the radar of negative campaigning seriously needs to go to the local sporting goods store, buy a cup and start wearing it.”

    Funny, last week you were hinting that Reason magazine was planning a major expose on the topic. Which sounded, er, reasonable: the idea that a campaign had bought all the spare hotel rooms at the site, and was giving them away free as illegal bribes in exchange for votes for their candidate, sounds like a major scandal.

    Now, suddenly, it’s “move along, nothing to see here.” What up?

    BTW, I prefer “Roomghazi.”

  13. Thomas L. Knapp

    “Funny, last week you were hinting that Reason magazine was planning a major expose on the topic.”

    No, I wasn’t “hinting” any such thing. I had heard that Austin Petersen was talking with one of the larger libertarian publications, which I did not name, about a “Johnson scandal” topic which I did not specify (it wasn’t “roomgate” but something supposedly much bigger, the details of which I was not given). Whether or not that rumor was true, I don’t know, but I’ll be glad to divulge my source for it: His name is Austin Petersen.

  14. Caryn Ann Harlos Post author

    Dear Tom in response to your letter (though unfortunately it isn’t God responding):

    ==Dear God. Anyone who thinks that “roomgate” was more than an infinitesimal blip on the radar of negative campaigning seriously needs to go to the local sporting goods store, buy a cup and start wearing it.===

    Not so sure that will fit me properly but okay. And I know you would like to think this, but often tiny things make people sick and tired. There was a whole anti-Johnson screed. One item was falsifiable. The rest are not yet easily so. And shocker of all shockers, the one item was falsified. It is a big deal. I guarantee you that you will still be hearing about it at convention and not just from me. I’ve been right before 😉

    ==And anyone who thinks that one day of internal movement paranoia — “OMG! Gary is buying hotel rooms!” — did one one thousandth of the damage to the party that Johnson’s public cake meltdown did simply isn’t living in the real world.===

    You follow me on FB and know that I ride the cake issue and ride it hard. There is no mutual exclusivity here and not a zero sum game.

  15. Caryn Ann Harlos Post author

    Tom,

    On your prior article.. if it is outdated by GP’s recent work, then would it be the best thing? I am willing to post it however. The financial concerns are a big concern to me and should to all Libertarians.

    I have been openly critical of Johnson on many things. And the finances is a legitimate one. This latest spate by the Petersen machine and the McAfee machine are dirty politicking with no credible proof and tangible disproof.

  16. Thomas L. Knapp

    Caryn,

    I agree that my prior article would not be the best piece — and oh, how I hate writing a column and having it superseded by a book within mere days.

    I don’t intend to write anything else substantial concerning Johnson until closer to the convention — and then only if my oppo research turns up stuff that I believe will and should have a material effect on the outcome.

    What I DO intend to do here at IPR this week is one or more pieces excerpting important parts of George’s book. I’ll be working with him on how much of the store he’s willing to give away (for those who want more, the e-book is only 99 cents on Amazon and I link to it in a comment above).

    I’m certainly not questioning your willingness to take any and all candidates to the woodshed if they deserve it. The only thing I question is your sense of proportionality. “Roomgate” was a six-minute story, not a six-day story, and it’s certainly not going to be a six-week story. Although, because I am a whore, I did cover it in my podcast last night, almost entirely by way of encouraging people to listen to your appearance on Coley’s show.

  17. Andy

    I think that this year, all of the candidates for the nomination have jumped the shark.

  18. Caryn Ann Harlos Post author

    I love you Tom!

    And if and when you have anything and need a fellow editor to post it, I will.

  19. Andy

    Tom, I listened tea few of your podcasts recently. Who does the customized do-whop style intro music?

  20. Thomas Knapp

    Andy,

    The custom doo-wop jingle is performed by Rob Morris — you can find him on Fiverr. The music is a set piece that he uses for all customers. I wrote the lyrics to fit. I’m pretty happy with it. What do you think of it? (I also had some “DJ drops” recorded by Tenth Tier Media, also via Fiverr — those are the voice pieces that separate the sections).

    Thanks for listening!

  21. Andy

    I thought that it was good, and different sounding intro music for a political talk show. If you ever make it to commercial radio, I think you could keep the same intro music.

  22. Thomas L. Knapp

    Glad you like it!

    I don’t have any ambitions to make it to commercial radio. I do plan to eventually normalize the weekly podcast to a set time, continue improving its production values, etc.

  23. Dave Terry

    Caryn Ann Harlos Post author
    April 18, 2016 at 12:53

    I love you Tom!
    And if and when you have anything and need a fellow editor to post it, I will.

    I REALLY thought you had better taste Caryn Ann

  24. langa

    I have no interest in defending McAfee or (especially) Petersen, but I can’t help being dumbfounded the use of the phrase “jump the shark” by a Gary Johnson supporter.

    Surely, if an ostensibly “libertarian” politician calling for burqas to be banned and Jews to be forced to bake Nazi-themed cakes does not constitute jumping the shark, nothing ever could.

  25. Darcy G Richardson

    “Surely, if an ostensibly “libertarian” politician calling for burqas to be banned and Jews to be forced to bake Nazi-themed cakes does not constitute jumping the shark, nothing ever could.” — langa

    Brilliantly stated, langa.

    Johnson’s Palace Guard, the fan boys who monitor virtually every criticism of their undeserving hero, are engaged in a kind of psychological projection in which they vigorously deny their own candidate’s myriad shortcomings and flaws while attributing those very same things to his rivals.

    Though they themselves obviously don’t recognize what they’re doing, it’s a quite common phenomenon, particularly in times of political crisis or uncertainty.

    As history shows, it can sometimes lead to paranoia, as was the case with Richard Nixon and some of his most loyal defenders during the unfolding Watergate scandal in 1973-74.

    Coupled with their own candidate’s massive debts from 2012, the Petersen, McAfee and Perry candidacies — all three of whom are waging stronger and more spirited challenges than anybody expected while calling into question Johnson’s own libertarian instincts — clearly have some of the former governor’s most ardent supporters on edge.

  26. Jacob C. Witmer

    I’m supporting McAfee for the nomination. He doesn’t favor anti-libertarian policies, or half-measures. Also, he is the most intelligent candidate in the running, and libertarians can’t go forever without intelligence.

    When Johnson held the seat of power in NM, he wouldn’t return libertarians’ calls. He also pardoned only a small number of the victimless crime offenders in his ticket-mill court of a state. His governorship did nothing to interfere with the out-of-control Albuquerque PD that murders the homeless and roughs everyone up. He advocates private prisons PRIOR to drugs being legalized (anyone else see a problem with that?!).

    As a governor, he could have done a lot more to stop the abusive tyranny of “his own” state.

    That said: Johnson is a lot more libertarian than Bob Barr. Johnson can actually lay claim to the term, to some degree. Johnson did speak out against the drug war, while he was governor. Although Johnson gives the benefit of the doubt to some illegitimate state power, he’s been fairly consistent on defending a woman’s right to choose, etc. Johnson actually claimed he was in favor of these things when he was governor of NM, so he’s not a completely new arrival to the philosophy.

    I think it would be great if Johnson ran for governor again, and won it for the LP, and then implemented his newfound respect for nullification.

    If Johnson wins the nomination, I would vote for him, again.

    But McAfee is the optimal candidate right now, and will continue to be so, unless something crazy happens. (Such as Peter Thiel steps into the race, and offers to spend $50M winning the presidency and $50M supporting already-declared-but-non-delusional State Legislative candidates.)

    McAfee brings a lot of mental capacity to the equation. We’d be fools not to nominate him. He’s the only candidate who will “clog with their whole weight against the system.” That’s what we need right now. We don’t need someone who will “work with” the sociopaths in government. We need someone who will work against them.

    McAfee’s that guy.

  27. Andy

    I think New Mexico has term limits on the office of Governor (I would have to look it up to be sure, but I recall hearing this), so assuming I am right about this, Gary Johnson cannot run for Governor of New Mexico again.

  28. Andy

    $50 million is not even close to the ballpark of the kind of money that it would take to even come close to winning the White House.

  29. Andy

    While Governor of New Mexico, Gary Johnson signed a bill that BANNED late term abortions, and he also supports laws that mandate parental notification if a minor wants an abortion (with exemptions if a minor is raped by a family member).

  30. Thomas L. Knapp

    $50 million is note even close to the ballpark of the kind of money that it would take a major party candidate in a typical race to win the White House.

    We won’t know how much money it will take for a Libertarian candidate to win the White House in an atypical race until one does so.

  31. Andy

    $50 million is a drop in the hat for a presidential campaign. Even a well known celebrity candidate would have to spend more than that to be competitive.

  32. Andy Craig

    ***
    Andy
    April 20, 2016 at 14:42
    I think New Mexico has term limits on the office of Governor (I would have to look it up to be sure, but I recall hearing this), so assuming I am right about this, Gary Johnson cannot run for Governor of New Mexico again.***

    New Mexico’s limit is only on consecutive terms.

  33. Andy

    Well if that is the case, perhaps Gary Johnson should run for Governor of New Mexico as a Libertarian Party candidate.

  34. Dave Terry

    , and perhaps Andy should put a .45 automatic in his mouth and pull the trigger.

  35. Freudian slip

    Dave Terry: “and perhaps Andy should put a .45 automatic in his mouth and pull the trigger.”

    Dave feels the Johnson. He feels it in his bowels. With a finger warm on his trigger. If anyone has a firearm in his orifice, it is Dave Terry.

  36. Darcy G. Richardson

    When Andy Craig says that he’s involved with the Johnson campaign, he should probably disclose that he’s now a paid consultant with that campaign. (As if they didn’t already have enough “consultants” on Gary’s staff.)

    Here’s the Schedule B from Gary Johnson’s April monthly report, covering the month of March:

    http://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-bin/forms/C00605568/1066293/sb/ALL

  37. Andy

    Andy Craig, can you disclose the nature of your paid consulting work for Gary Johnson 2016?

  38. George Phillies

    And over on Facebook we have another person paid by the Johnson campaign dutifully defending him. Doing a respectable job given the lousy tactical position.

  39. Darcy G Richardson

    “And over on Facebook we have another person paid by the Johnson campaign dutifully defending him.” — George Phillies

    Thanks for bringing that to our attention, George. I never thought I would see the day when a Libertarian candidate for president would come out in favor of a Full Employment Act — even if it’s only a jobs program limited to his rabid fan boys.

  40. wolfefan

    I wonder who “Liberty Consulting” is. They formed just a couple of months ago.

  41. Andy

    Jacob C. Witmer said: “He advocates private prisons PRIOR to drugs being legalized (anyone else see a problem with that?!).”

    I see a problem with this, just as I see a problem with allowing hordes of foreigners to enter the country and get on welfare. The welfare state acts as a magnet for the wrong kind of people.

  42. robert capozzi

    based on his comments here, AC’s job is — hopefully — to coach GJ. AC seems to have good instincts.

  43. Darcy G Richardson

    “Well if that is the case, perhaps Gary Johnson should run for Governor of New Mexico as a Libertarian Party candidate.” — Andy

    That’s an intriguing suggestion, Andy. It would be interesting to see how many of the 27,787 New Mexicans who voted for Johnson in 2012 would stick with their aloof former governor when reminded of his earlier right-wing, disturbingly authoritarian record as the state’s chief executive — an administration that for eight years never tired of pummeling the poor.

    Gary Johnson was extremely fortunate during the 2012 presidential election. He was given virtually a free ride by the media and LP members alike — and for that, Libertarians should count their blessings.

    It’ll be different this time. Much different. In fact, Johnson is just now beginning to be subjected to some scrutiny and — given the high negatives of his likely major-party rivals this year — that careful examination of his record as governor of New Mexico will only intensify if and when he’s nominated in Orlando.

  44. Derrick Michael Reid

    LP can win the White House, but only one way, Reid-Sarwark, otherwise certain failure, continued stagnation, and a squander opportunity. Sarwark is running for LNC again. Libertarians respond to emotional pander. The 2016 result seems predictable. Libertarians should focus on electability, presidentiality, broad appeal, logic, and intellect, so as to not repeat the LP tradition.

    http://www.totalitariandemocracy.com/lectures/public-articles/dmrmessage
    http://www.totalitariandemocracy.com/lectures/td-lectures/totalitarian-democracy-026
    http://www.totalitariandemocracy.com/lectures/td-lectures/totalitarian-democracy-027

  45. robert capozzi

    Reid is certainly a confident one, by all indications wildly over-confident.

  46. George Phillies

    Liberty Consulting Service
    731 East South Temple
    SLC, UT

    Ummh, that’s the same address as the campaign management last time.

  47. Andy

    Tom, anyone with any common sense and who is not blinded by “political correctness” is concerned about masses of foreigners, a large percentage of which hold Marxist and/or theocratic ideologies, entering the country, using welfare programs, and then after fraudulently being declared “American citizens”, being added to the voter rolls, where the statistics show that a high percentage of them vote in large blocks to expand the welfare state and restrict gun rights.

    If anyone is a COINTELPRO agent here I’d say it is those who try to shout down anyone who points out these facts.

    Just to be clear, this does not mean that all foreigners are bad, but it does mean that anyone who denies that there is a problem has their head buried in the sand.

  48. Jill Pyeatt

    Andy said (for the millionth time): “Tom, anyone with any common sense and who is not blinded by “political correctness” is concerned about masses of foreigners, a large percentage of which hold Marxist and/or theocratic ideologies, entering the country, using welfare programs, and then after fraudulently being declared “American citizens”, being added to the voter rolls, where the statistics show that a high percentage of them vote in large blocks to expand the welfare state and restrict gun rights.”

    I’m not concerned about immigrants coming here to join progressive movements and vote liberty away. I kind of consider your ravings to be paranoid and irrational. So, am I cointelpro???

    I guess I’m the only one who knows.

  49. Dave Terry

    Thomas L. Knapp, April 18, 2016 at 07:51

    “what is being done to the the beautiful thing that is the LP is trashy and should be beneath us”
    True. And the Johnson gang are the chief culprits.

    What damage has been done to the Libertarian Party, is primarily been done by anarchists, and so-called ‘mini-archist airheads such as Thomas Knapp, et al.

    Those rights allegedly protected by the FIRST Amendment are IN FACT protected by the SECOND!

  50. Thomas L. Knapp

    Mr. Terry seems to be implying that I am a minarchist. Most of his calumnies I can ignore, but that one has to be corrected. I’m an anarchist, pronounced lib er tare ian.

    I hope Mr. Terry is able to get a refund on his convention package, airfare, etc. now the Oregon impostor organization’s attempt to defraud the Libertarian National Convention into seating a fake delegation has fallen through.

    I take that back. I actually kind of hope he loses his money. Maybe that will teach him some manners and some morals. I doubt it, but it’s worth a try.

  51. Dave Terry

    Too old for a nap wrote:
    ” I’m an anarchist, pronounced lib er tare ian.”

    Hopefully, by the time he graduates from
    kindergarten, or completes his first nap;
    the very juvenile Tommy Knapp will know
    that “anarchist” is actually pronounced
    ultra crep i dar ian

  52. langa

    Sure, there’s a problem. There are lots of problems. What I can’t fathom is why, given the government’s track record of “solving” problems, you think we should turn to them to solve this one.

    Basically, every time the government attempts to “solve” a problem, 3 things happen:

    1. They violate our rights on an absolutely massive scale.
    2. They totally fail to “solve” the original problem.
    3. They end up creating new problems, which of course they offer to “solve” for us.

    Lather, rinse, repeat.

    Given all that, I have no idea why you think they would be any better at solving the “immigration problem” than they have been with so many other problems.

  53. langa

    That last comment was in response to Andy saying:

    Just to be clear, this does not mean that all foreigners are bad, but it does mean that anyone who denies that there is a problem has their head buried in the sand.

  54. Andy

    What can government do?

    Repeal the Refugee Resettlement Act (which uses tax payer funds to bring people in, and then signs them up for welfare)

    (Surely libertarians should object to the Refugee Resettlement Act since it uses tax payer funds, right? It seems like there are too many “politically correct” “libertarians” out there to call for an end to this program.)

    Prohibit immigrants in general from collecting welfare. Prohibit Affirmative Action as well.

    Make the Naturalization process more difficult. Require a thorough understanding of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution, and also an understanding of free market econmics, as well as completion of a 2nd amendment class, that would include trips to a firing range.

    Ban foreign lobbyists. Lobby for a foreign government, get deported.

    Basically, pull away the welcome mat from welfare recipients, Marxists, and theocratic nutjobs.

    Is anyone currently in office going to do any of this stuff? No, because they want to destroy the country.

    They are using mass statist migration to usher in the New World Order.

  55. langa

    Andy, I agree with you that libertarians should be opposed to the Refugee Resettlement Act. Of course, we should also oppose welfare and affirmative action, but for everyone, not just for immigrants.

    Where I disagree is that I do not think we should make it tougher to immigrate legally, or to become a citizen. This will do virtually nothing to keep the bad immigrants out, and will merely make it harder for the good immigrants, just as gun control does nothing to disarm criminals, but simply makes it harder for law-abiding citizens to defend themselves. Additionally, increasing restrictions on immigration will lead to more bureaucracy, more police state tactics (like national ID cards), and will generally make us less free.

  56. Thomas L. Knapp

    —–
    Repeal the Refugee Resettlement Act (which uses tax payer funds to bring people in, and then signs them up for welfare)

    (Surely libertarians should object to the Refugee Resettlement Act since it uses tax payer funds, right? It seems like there are too many “politically correct” “libertarians” out there to call for an end to this program.)
    —–

    I’ve never encountered a Libertarian who DOESN’T support repealing the Refugee Resettlement Act. Or, rather, who wouldn’t support repealing it if it existed (it doesn’t — the Refugee Resettlement Program is part of the Refugee Act, and no, it doesn’t “sign them up for welfare;” in fact, they’re required to reimburse the US government for the cost of their flight here).

    “Prohibit people in general from collecting welfare.”

    There, fixed that for ya. I oppose government transfer payments, period, end of story. I don’t give a tinker’s damn what side of an imaginary line the people collecting those payments came from.

    “Ban foreign lobbyists. Lobby for a foreign government, get deported.”

    Lobbying is talking. We have some kind of law that protects talking. First … First Amoodment? Something like that.

Leave a Reply

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