Wes Benedict, a former state director for the Robert F. Kennedy Jr. presidential campaign and two-time Executive Director of the Libertarian Party, has proposed four specific requests for Kennedy to pursue if he is confirmed as Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services next week.
Benedict, who was the Kennedy campaign’s Texas State Director, as well as the Libertarian Party’s Executive Director from 2009 to 2011, and then again from 2013 to 2018, published a letter on Friday, praising Kennedy for allowing him to work on his independent campaign. In return for that opportunity, Benedict proposed four “Libertarian Suggestions,” touching on vaccinations, the legalization of marijuana, the presence of red dye in foods, and the Make America Healthy Again movement born from Kennedy’s campaign following his endorsement of then-candidate Trump.
While not a formal suggestion, Benedict also urged Kennedy to ask President Donald Trump and Elon Musk to be more considerate of the LGBTQ+ community, stating that while “eliminating special privileges and reducing government indoctrination is one thing; mocking, belittling, or encouraging discrimination and violence is another.”
As Benedict published the letter as a graphic, Independent Political Report has produced a transcribed version:
Dear Mr. Kennedy,
Thank you for the opportunity to serve as the Texas State Director for your Presidential campaign last year. I learned a great deal from you and now I’d like to offer some suggestions in return. (For disclosure purposes, I voted Libertarian for President.)
VACCINES
Regardless of the effectiveness and safety of COVID and other vaccines, the libertarian stance remains consistent: we support vaccine choice. It should be up to the supplier—not government—to ensure a vaccine’s safety, decide on the conditions of liability waivers, and set the terms and price. Consumers should have the freedom to accept these terms, negotiate further, or decline receiving it.Instead, with COVID, the government initially withheld the vaccines until they were FDA authorized, then absolved manufacturers of liability, and ultimately even mandated vaccination for many.
Some individuals may have been harmed by the vaccine and might have been better off without it. Conversely, it’s possible that among the 25,000 who died in New York in the interval between the vaccine’s development and its FDA authorization, some could have benefited from early access. Let individuals, in consultation with their doctors, weigh the risks and benefits for themselves.
RED DYE
I don’t need to know whether the red dye food additive or that blue stuff you’ve been drinking is safe, harmful, or effective to understand the government’s proper role. The government should at most report on these substances and require labeling, not ban or promote them.MAHA
I appreciate the goal to Make America Healthy Again, and you’ve inspired me to eat healthier. However, my libertarian position is: Let America Choose Healthy Again (LACHA). Don’t force us!LEGALIZE MARIJUANA
Most people already understand and agree with this. Maybe get Trump on board?Best wishes to you in your new role as HHS Secretary.
Sincerely,
Wes BenedictP.S. Please also ask Trump and Elon to be more considerate toward the LGBTQ+ community. Eliminating special privileges and reducing government indoctrination is one thing; mocking, belittling, or encouraging discrimination and violence is another. Let’s uphold the libertarian principle: live and let live, in peace and prosperity.
Kennedy, who was named by Trump to be his choice for Secretary of the U.S. Health Department in the week following the 2024 election, has since had his nomination advanced by the Senate Finance Committee in a 14–13 vote this past Thursday. A full vote by the Senate is expected next week.
O silly Omega Lultz,
“I addressed beliefs you held and put forward”
You didn’t. You made a hilarious claim about libertarianism not being libertarian but instead neo-conservative. You blasphemed. You projected your own mental gymnastics to avoid accepting the NAP while still pretending to be a “libertarian” onto me, just as you are now projecting your shadow boxing with straw men. But what you didn’t do, was address anything I said. As we will see shortly, you didn’t even bother to read it.
Would you like to try doing so now, or do you prefer to stick to your safe mental gymnastic and shadow boxing straw men as “weak minded way to avoid criticism you can’t intelligently defend against”? U+1F60F
“As far as the VP pick for Approval Voting, take that up with the people who made that choice, I was only a candodate [sic] for considrration [sic] for a VP run, not the one who made those calls.”
No. You decided to stand as a candidate for a party both evil and stupid enough to field domestic terrorist Denault as its VP candidate. You did not disassociate from them after that was announced. As that party’s candidate, you are therefore complicit in their evil and stupidity. Nice weak “weak minded way to avoid criticism you can’t intelligently defend against” though… U+1F60F
“Interesting focus you have though, would I be going out on a limb to assume you put a lot of stock i [sic] winning, and you somehow equate someone like trump [sic] winning to them being right or even righteous?”
I put any stock by winning? I believe Trump is right or righteous? You’ve clearly never bothered to read a thing I’ve said. Even Solipsistic Dungfly conceded that I was no Trump supported; and being more out of touch and retarded than him is quite an achievement, let me tell you.
No, what I care about is not being complicit in evil – whether that be voting for Trump in order to vote against Biden/Harris, or whether that be not being part of a parties that nominated the likes of Chase Oliver, Mike ter Maat or Andrea Denault… Something you have clearly never even stopped to consider, much less care about.
“Nice easy binary life choice, right and left, black and white, up amd [sic] down, good and evil. Simple choices for simple people.”
Moral relativism is simple, yes. The wide gate; the broad way. A simple path for simpletons, to lead them straight to destruction and damnation.
Hard is standing up for Good against evil, for Liberty against oppression, for Justice against tyranny, for Truth against deceit, for Christ against satan – and consequently for Life against death, for Russia against “ukraine”, for Israel against “palestine”.
Much easier to just call libertarians, who must needs do so, “neo-cons” so that you don’t have to do the same…
“You know a lot of namez [sic], how many of those peoples [sic] works have you read?”
All of them – the people that is, not their works. I have read enough both by and about them to deliberately follow in their footsteps.
How many of them did you read before dismissing us as neocons? I’m going to guess zero, since you couldn’t even be bothered to read anything I wrote before “going out on a limb” on a limb and erroneously assuming I set stock by winning and falsely accusing me of believe victory makes right/righteous…
“Well here is one you should read, even if you don’t actually read the others. Frderic [sic] Bastiat: The Law.”
It does not do, to tell me to read a treatise that you obviously have never even opened, let alone comprehended. If you had, you wouldn’t have stood candidate for a party that fielded Denault. U+1F60F
But I agree, Bastiat is worth reading – though nowhere near as good as the aforementioned – so I would certainly recommend that you follow your own advice and give “The Law” a read sometime …maybe once you’ve figured out how to spell the author’s name – or, judging by the rest of your nonsense, really anything in the English language… Perhaps reading it in the original French would be easier for you? No? Oh well, we can’t all be polyglots. U+1F60F
You know what, let me help you. Even though it’s a rather short treatise, it is probably a bit too stuffy and dry for someone who cannot even handle reading blog comments. So here is an audio book version for you: https://librivox.org/the-law-by-frederic-bastiat/
Do you think you have the attention span to listen, even though you have insufficient to read it? U+1F60F
“Bit [sic] someone how [sic] I get the impression you will look at a quick google review and call that ‘good nuff [sic]’ ”
Yet more proof that you have never even bothered to read anything I’ve written. Nice projection though. A shame big brother google didn’t help get you a summary of my posts before you embarrassed yourself… U+1F60F
Oh Nuna, if not for shadow boxing straw men what would you do, no I addressed beliefs you held and put forward, now you are somehow trying to amsayy all these ineividuals held the same belief set as you, while there may be some overlap in small areas attempting to paint me as anti any of them or accusing them is just a weak minded way to avoid criticism you can’t intelligently defend against.
As far as the VP pick for Approval Voting, take that up with the people who made that choice, I was only a candodate for considrration for a VP run, not the one who made those calls.
Interesting focus you have though, would I be going out on a limb to assume you put a lot of stock i winning, and you somehow equate someone like trump winning to them being right or even righteous? Meanwhile I’m sure you have ready made excuses when your pressure controlled opposition puts the other people in charge.
Nice easy binary life choice, right and left, black and white, up amd down, good and evil. Simple choices for simple people.
You know a lot of namez, how many of those peoples works have you read? Well here is one you should read, even if you don’t actually read the others. Frderic Bastiat: The Law. Bit someone how I get the impression you will look at a quick google review and call that “good nuff”
@Lutz – the failed congressional candidate of the party that just ran creepy clown Andrea Denault for VP, I presume(?)
Forgive me if I do not take your own hilarious mental gymnastic seriously in the slightest, but as you are implying that ???????????, Thomas Aquinas, Richard Hooker, John Locke, James Madison, Lysander Spooner, ???? ??????, ??????? ?????, ?????? ????????, Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn, Vaclav Benda, Janusz Korwin-Mikke, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Kevin Craig, Ron Paul, Rand Paul and Spike Cohen are all neo-cons rather than libertarians, I think that says almost as much about you yourself and of the untenability of your position, as your blasphemous rejection of God does… So I will let your laughable hubris and stupidity suffice to defeat you. U+1F60F
—
@Roman-wannabibi-Shukhevich
Gr8 b8 m8 I r8 8/8. Now go back to your opium induced nap. U+1F60F
Good morning Mr. Lutz, I’m as far from being an expert on libertarianism as I am from being a fan thereof, which is far indeed, so I can not judge between you saying the baby girl is not libertarian and her saying she is. I can only say that on the things I do know well or fairly well, her claims are almost invariably the polar opposite of reality. Perhaps her purpose, or one of her purposes, is precisely in practicing mental gymnastics on a wide variety of subjects, as a form of exercise, much as a gymnast would practice gymnastics routines for physical exercise.
My question for you is what does this mean: “extending NAP violations to things that offend your imaginary sky friend, next you’ll day the NAP can be violated on glorious sky cloth as well”
English is a foreign language to me but this makes no sense. Why do you capitalise nap? In what way does she disturb your rest? What imaginary sky friend and imaginary sky cloth and how do those relate to the foregoing exchange? I’m afraid I’m quite lost in trying to make heads or tails of any of that. Would you please explain?
One other phrase confused me – next you’ll day. Did you mean the next day, after the nap? Or next you’ll say? Something else I did not think of?
Thank you in advance if you bother to help and clarify.
What’s a concise summary of the rumble video for the vast majority of people who won’t be watching long political videos?
@Andy
Thanks! That was pretty great. I’ll be sharing that video around, for sure. And I would encourage everyone here to give it a watch too (at least from 3:05 to 24:42).
I doubt RFK will blindly take the word of OGC lawyers though – that doesn’t seem at all like him. Though neither does methodically working through a century or more of legal code in detail. And I think Champion overestimates how indisputable the results of even the most meticulous and simple experiment can ever be.
@Richard Winger
“Trump’s actions and statements about transgendered people, including adults who are serving in the military, have been extremely hostile.”
I respectfully disagree. To the best of my knowledge, that is, since there may certainly be actions or statements which I am unaware of. And I’m open to having my mind changed.
“A social worker friend of mine told me that help lines in the Sacramento area are so jammed with panicked transgender people the system is overwhelmed and most calls get a busy signal.”
This however, I feel has far more to do with TDS and mainstream fake news media trying to whip up panic, than with anything that Trump has said or done.
Cf., the US now has feminists sterilizing themselves or committing suicide, because they are somehow laboring under the misapprehension that pro-abortion Trump will force them to either stop getting pregnant or to see through their pregnancies… While both courses of action are far preferable alternatives to murdering innocent babies, and will have positive consequences for society as a whole in the long run and at least for men in the short run, there really is no rhyme or reason whatsoever for such drastically self-destructive action.
And that’s just feminist lunatics. There are a lot of other crazed individuals who have been worked up into a state of delusional paranoia about Trump for the past decade, and whose fears it is consequently easy for Trump’s opponents to prey on now. And when has the left ever let a good crisis go to waste – no matter how many suffer and die as a result…
Nuna after reading your post I have to say your mental gymnastics in trying to claim you and your views are libertarian are hilarious, in particular extending NAP violations to things that offend your imaginary sky friend, next you’ll day the NAP can be violated on glorious sky cloth as well. You are a neo con, stop pretrnding and go support your party and people. You fit into libertarianism about as well as a square peg in a round hole.
Good statement, Wes!
Dave Champion also has some good ideas on things RFK Jr. could realistically accomplish if he gets appointed as the head of HHS.
https://rumble.com/v65j3ks-can-trumps-appointees-make-america-healthy-again-maybe….html?e9s=src_v1_ucp
In my opinion, “transgender” is a mental illness. I don’t want mentally ill people in the military.
Benedict is pushing the covid vaccine which is clearly harmful . What a shock. He’s obviously not a libertarian.
Richard Winger- why should gays and whatever have more rights than I do? They clearly did under the Biden regime. How much of the Trans thing is actually untreated mental illness? Why is this never addressed?
Trump’s actions and statements about transgendered people, including adults who are serving in the military, have been extremely hostile. A social worker friend of mine told me that help lines in the Sacramento area are so jammed with panicked transgender people the system is overwhelmed and most calls get a busy signal.
“Regardless of the effectiveness and safety of COVID and other vaccines, the libertarian stance remains consistent: we support vaccine choice.”
No libertarian supports morons getting talked into subjecting themselves to irreversible gene-therapy with serious side-affects that include them shedding spike proteins on everyone around them. So unless you start distinguishing between vaccines and “vaccines”, this is a load of bollocks.
“Conversely, it’s possible that among the 25,000 who died in New York in the interval between the vaccine’s development and its FDA authorization, some could have benefited from early access.”
Again, complete bollocks contrary to all scientific evidence. Even Benedict himself is apparently unwilling to go so far as to explicitly pretend that however many people New York claims died, died of covid. What a load of horse shit.
“The government should at most report on these substances and require labeling”
If we’re going to bother having a government at all – which we shouldn’t – then it should AT LEAST require labeling, not at most.
“Let America Choose Healthy Again (LACHA). Don’t force us!”
Fair enough. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qS-FfNrjJNE
“Most people already understand and agree with this.”
Most people do not in fact agree with legalizing marijuana. Nor should they be forced to deny the evidence indicating detrimental long-term psychological and behavioral effects it can have. It isn’t something innocuous like alcohol, or relatively harmless like tobacco.
https://ballot-access.org/2024/08/25/ohio-secretary-of-state-says-libertarian-party-petition-is-valid/#comment-1247291
“Please also ask Trump and Elon to be more considerate toward the LGBTQ+ community.”
More considerate? They are very considerate toward the LGBTQ+ “community” – strange use of the word “community”; would you lump straight people together as “the heterosexual community”? – some might even say too much so.
“mocking, belittling, or encouraging discrimination and violence is another”
And when have Trump and Musk ever mocked, belittled, or encourage discrimination or violence against “the LGBTQ+ community”? They are as Log Cabin as they come. As a Christian, that is one of my issues with Trump.
Jordan, Mr Winger, please bear me out here – or correct me, if you disagree, of course. Do you feel like either Trump or Musk has been inconsiderate towards you, let alone mocked you, belittled you, or encouraged discrimination or violence against you, because of your sexuality or sexual identity?
“Let’s uphold the libertarian principle: live and let live, in peace and prosperity.”
Let’s uphold the libertarian principle: what you do in private is between you and God, but what you let others know about becomes their business too; and if it violates the NAP – including against God – then they have not only the right but also a duty to put a stop to it.
—
@Curious
“How does saying that he voted for Chase Oliver help his cause”
I was thinking the same thing. But he doesn’t say he voted for Oliver, only that he “voted Libertarian for President”. As if he is keeping it intentionally vague – as is his right under secret ballot (don’t know what he thinks he has to disclose).
Yes, but the question remains: is that the only reason he didn’t vote for Kennedy, or did he never intend to vote for him from the get go even while working on his campaign?
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., removed himself from the Texas ballot, and did not file as a write-in either, so it was impossible for Texans to cast a vote for RFK Jr. that would be counted.
How does saying that he voted for Chase Oliver help his cause (nobody asked – he didn’t have to disclose). And, why did he work for Kennedy and vote for Oliver – purely mercenary reasons for the former, or the latter only because Kennedy suspended his campaign?
Good job, Wes!