It looks like Karen Kwiatkowski is running for Congress as a Republican in 2012. I post this here because she has been frequently suggested as a possible LP candidate for President in 2012. I guess this rules that out. Below is from an Editor’s Note preceding her opinion piece.
Ed: Below is a column from Karen Kwiatkowski, candidate for the Republican nomination for the 6th Congressional District in 2012.
Here is the Karen Kwiatkowski for Congress Facebook page.
a Reform Party of Texas activist, Sandy Madison, had a similar situation in the 1990s ………..
http://www.kintera.org/faf/donorReg/donorPledge.asp?ievent=463821&lis=1&kntae463821=38FF89091EF2418D8B5E62EB2750587F&supId=330157263
sorry to hijack , but its for a good reason maybe the best reason ever. U may know i lost my little cousi to cancer , well her family and i are raising money for candlelightersnv.org , the money goes directly to help kids and their families , not research . I have a competition going with my faily to raise the most , so even $1 helps , thank you , love you all , LG – Debra Dedmon
[a] even in Junior ROTC [pre college] standard (but out dated) rifles were loaned out.
[b] ah, the short order drill, sooooooooooo useful in staying alive in the jungle!
[c] ah, bayonet practice, sooooooooooooo useful with a clogged up M – 16 or a ‘borrowed’ AK – 47 ——– nether of which has / had a bayonet holder!
#119- You HAVE been around the block a few times! (Sounds like we are of similar age.)
#113, yep no firing pin but the riders didn’t know that. This was mid-60s and we were in uniform but I don’t think we needed permission, just drop token in box and get on board.
117 jt, thanks for clarifying on KK. I’ve not seen her make such a prediction. I get the sense from the quote I pulled that she wants to make Goodlatte “uncomfortable.” If she thinks she’s going to win, I do wish her luck, but I missed her saying that and I am skeptical if she believes it. (I also sense that she might have had a better chance as a D. She might even have made Goodlatte uncomfortable as a L candidate, but she’s chosen the R primary path now.)
As for RP, I think I’ve heard his spiel enough to say that it has an element of what I’d call “slick,” since he immunizes himself by saying he’s for a “strong national defense.” I support that sort of “slickness.” I suspect what we hear in his presidential activities tracks with his congressional races. It plays for a large segment of the population, including conservatives, liberals, and non-ideological folk.
Capozzi: “OK, then, would you say Ron Paul’s district is “conservative,” “L,” something else? My guess is Paul’s district is also conservative — possibly MORE conservative than the Valley — and he keeps winning. A master politician can frame things in such a way that a L could win in a conservative district, unless you have a VERY narrow def. of “conservative.””
His district is a conservative one, though how it compares to Karen’s district I don’t know. Paul is the exception that proves the rule. Why is that? I’m not really sure; I honestly haven’t researched it enough. But I don’t think he makes an attempt to frame his foreign policy views in a kind of slick, skillful way.
Capozzi: “As for what KK has said, I’ve not heard her say she won’t win.”
Maybe the way I phrased what I said was confusing. I meant that Karen said she “probably” *will* win. That means a greater than 50% chance. I responded that her winning is “possible but quite unlikely.” I’d give her a much lower chance than 50%, especially against a 20-year incumbent (they rarely ever lose). I can’t give a percentage though.
Capozzi: “Where are you getting your reference for what her own handicapping of her prospects is?”
From her earlier in this discussion.
114 around, now THAT’S interesting. When did y’all tote in the tube…what year? Could anyone tote legally then, and now? Or did ROTC give you special privileges?
If they were like mine the firing pin had been removed.
No machine gun but I (and few fellow ROTC members) used to carry our M-1s on the Philly subway on the way to drill.
108 tb: I’ll take what I can get, though. If you give me an inch, I’ll take a mile – if I can get away with it.
me: Me too. The more germane question is does your advocacy approach produce enough others to give you that inch?
Having considered your approach, I prefer my more moderate one, where I actually ask for the inch and give practical reasons why inching toward liberty is beneficial for most.
Since I don’t do “morality,” I can easily not advocate extreme positions like the “right” to tote a machine gun in the subway, at least not until the subway is privatized. And, even there, heavy odds that the subway owner wouldn’t allow it!
110 tk, yes, we do agree. OTOH, notice that there are conscious actors who do agitate for what they believe will advance their interests. AARP opposes means testing SS, for ex., because they don’t want SS to be viewed as “welfare,” but rather an insurance plan.
Similarly, there are likely trade associations for military contractors which promote ideas to expand military spending…a few years ago, I recall some military types making a big deal that 3% of GDP was “necessary” military expenditure level to ensure domestic tranquility.
Apparently, they are unfamiliar with the concept of economies of scale…
109 mhw: Many of us live in an anarchic way each day. We don’t have a government supervisor hanging over our shoulder checking our every move and we do quite well.
me: Yes, I’ve heard that analysis, from folks like Stefan Molyneux. On the surface, I see the point. It’s the “seen.” The “unseen,” however, shows us a very different picture. If we’re not all free, none of us are, is how I look at it. Our potential to maximize the complete network of liberty and its manifestation is constrained whenever any of our peaceful actions are hampered in any way.
That’s my construct. Living off the grid, homeschooling, etc., are workarounds. They are not liberty.
How to ATTAIN liberty, and what it precisely looks like, dunno. Steps toward it seem worthwhile, including KK’s run for the House. I’d like to see her get elected. I’d REALLY like to see a moderate L get elected on the LP line.
Other (prospective) steps seem less helpful, and could be counter-productive. Hence, the extreme examples I sometimes throw out there to challenge my absolutist colleagues. Closing embassies. Machine guns on subways.
I’m not a “no particular orderist.” Ron Paul isn’t one, either. KK…dunno. I trust she’s not, particularly if she’s in it to win it.
Bob @ 107,
It sounds like we agree. I don’t consider the military-industrial complex an organized conspiracy or cabal, but rather a naturally self-organizing tendency of the kind that takes place any time you hand politicians a pile of money to spend.
Many of us live in an anarchic way each day. We don’t have a government supervisor hanging over our shoulder checking our every move and we do quite well.
Some communities within the U.S. have existed in an anarchic style for decades. In many cases the government officials have found it difficult to control much of what happens within some communities of minority groups, especially those where the police did not, or do not speak the language, such as the Chinese, or Haitian community.
I always hear about these mythical anarchists who want everything NOW.
I’m a mythical anarchist that wants everything now. I’m really in no position to insist on everything now, but I would like everything now.
I’ll take what I can get, though. If you give me an inch, I’ll take a mile – if I can get away with it.
I’ve already legalized a lot of things within my personal space and so far it has worked out fairly well. I’d encourage others to do the same.
104 tk: Yeah, that Dwight D. Eisenhower was such a fringe John Birch Society / Rothbardian anarchist type.
me: I wasn’t suggesting THAT, TK, sorry if I gave that impression. When Ike IDed that, I took it to mean an unconscious network, not a full blown conspiracy. He actually said: “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes.”
Note the “sought or unsought.” Note the “potential.”
It was and is a concern, a grave one. It is one for me as well. I’m reasonably convinced that the military and contractors have undue influence on government and military policies, and have for some time. But, near as I can tell, it’s a unconscious “complex,” not a “cabal.”
As a radical myself, I’m always willing to check premises. Is there an overt cabal? A network of winkers and nodders? A Bilderberg/Trilateral/CFR power structure calling all the shots?
Dunno. I do occasionally look at Alex Jones’s stuff, and I see a lot of holes there. His latest rant implies that since Clinton met with the Bilderberg in 91 (I recall) and Perry just did, therefore the fix is in.
Could be. We’ll see. I’m skeptical, even if Perry wins.
Generally, I don’t do simplistic bumperstickers. And I don’t, btw, lump JBS with Rothbardian anarchists. There is some substantial overlap in their thought systems, however.
103 jt: The essence of what I’ve been saying on this thread is that in all likelihood she *will* alienate most of her audience and won’t win the election, as she said would “probably” happen. Why? Because her audience is dominated by conservatives from an area in Virginia…
me: OK, then, would you say Ron Paul’s district is “conservative,” “L,” something else? My guess is Paul’s district is also conservative — possibly MORE conservative than the Valley — and he keeps winning. A master politician can frame things in such a way that a L could win in a conservative district, unless you have a VERY narrow def. of “conservative.” If, say, 40% of the Valley is filled with Bill Kristol fans, she has no chance…I’d agree there. But I think it’s a mistake to think that voters are as dogmatic as you appear to believe.
As for what KK has said, I’ve not heard her say she won’t win. She said: “My 6th District is filled with common sense people who understand and are receptive to the Ron Paul vision of liberty and prosperity, and they are ready to hear about ending the wars, at home and abroad. The incumbent is already responding by talking up liberty and budget balancing, even has he has no clue as to how to seriously implement either. He’s just where we want him. Every incumbent needs to be made uncomfortable. I’m just doing my part, and in the current political environment, we will probably win the thing. He would have been delighted for me to run as a libertarian or independent, but my job in this race is not just to build awareness or gain party members. It is to change the power structure.”
Sounds to me like she thinks she has a shot. She might.
Where are you getting your reference for what her own handicapping of her prospects is?
TK @104
SHHHHHHHHhhh you can’t talk reality in here, this is the politics room!
“It has a conspiratorial ring to it, e.g., the military industrial complex.”
Yeah, that Dwight D. Eisenhower was such a fringe John Birch Society / Rothbardian anarchist type.
Capozzi:” “KK may run in a similar manner, sounding kind of like a conservative, with some areas where she reframes the issue along L lines but in ways designed to not alienate her assumed, conservative target audience.”
The essence of what I’ve been saying on this thread is that in all likelihood she *will* alienate most of her audience and won’t win the election, as she said would “probably” happen. Why? Because her audience is dominated by conservatives from an area in Virginia in which most conservatives endorse the U.S. warfare system. She’s passionately against it and won’t hide that fact (nor should she).
I do think there’s a substantial percentage of *Republicans* who don’t align with the vast majority of *conservatives* in their party with regard to warfare and its trappings. I also think there’s a substantial t percentage of *Democrats* who don’t align with the vast majority of *liberals* in their party with regard to welfare and its trappings. But amongst the vast majority of self-identified conservatives in certain districts in the country, just as amongst the vast majority of self-identified liberals in certain districts in the country, the “range” of opinion in those respective areas is a small one.
IMO, Libertarians should welcome anyone who falls toward the libertarian quadrant’s right boundary as a party member, just as we should welcome anyone who falls toward the libertarian quadrant’s left boundary as a party member. There’s a tiny percentage of self-identified conservatives and liberals whom the LP can (and should) reach and recruit (there’s a larger percentage of Republicans and Democrats, and an even larger percentage of independents or non-voters, I believe). But a libertarian candidate winning in a solidly conservative district in Virginia while arguing against the warfare state or in a solidly liberal district in, say, Maryland while arguing against the welfare state? Doubtful, to put it mildly.
101 jt: Doesn’t change the point though that they (Ls and conservatives) aren’t interchangeable.
me: I agree, and I haven’t implied otherwise. OTOH, KK is running as a Ron Paul Republican, and Ron Paul himself uses both labels — L, conservative, and others, like constitutionalist. KK may run in a similar manner, sounding kind of like a conservative, with some areas where she reframes the issue along L lines but in ways designed to not alienate her assumed, conservative target audience.
jt: It means war-related actions such as those I mentioned above. You might not like the connotation of the word, but that’s the meaning.
me: It’s not so much the word’s connotation, but what it’s likely to evoke in the receiver. Some Ls have used rhetoric such as “I believe in a strong national defense, but I advocate foreign and defense policies that get the US out of the business of being the world’s policeman.” I think that’s pretty good rhetoric, and reflects my view. Railing against the “warfare state” seems amorphous to me, and I suspect to most outside the LM.
jt: Is “welfare state” also just a story Ls tell that’s a conspiratorial narrative?
me: Yes, although less so. The “warfare state” could imply pacifism or a weak national defense. The “welfare state” refers to income redistribution. Again, I think Ron Paul handles this pretty well, suggesting that transitioning away from the welfare state is a lower priority and will need to be handled in a more incremental fashion.
Capozzi: “I get the distinction, but I don’t think there’s one “conservative ideology,” or one “L ideology,” for that matter.”
Oh, right. I forgot. Doesn’t change the point though that they aren’t interchangeable.
Capozzi: “However, can some who CALL THEMSELVES “conservative” agree that we can’t afford the multiple wars, the far-flung major bases, the Marines guarding the embassies (oops, strike that last one, Wilson may not get the joke!)? I’d say yes, some can, will and do. Pat Buchanan comes to mind.”
I said before that “Most modern conservatives, especially in that area of Virginia, are strong supporters of the warfare state.” The word “most” is in there. I’m generalizing. I thought of Buchanan, and he’s an anomaly. In fact, his magazine, The American Conservative, was launched as a reaction to the dominant warfare-state conservatism that exists today.
Capozzi: “Right. I “support” the DoD, too.”
Sorry, I guess the prounoun “it” was confusing there. I wasn’t referring to the Defense Dept. I was referring to the warfare state.
Capozzi: “I’m not sure what you’re getting at here. I agree that the “warfare state” is not a single issue…it’s a shorthand term that Ls use to capture the overreaches of US foreign policy.”
What I’m getting at? You said people don’t generally vote on a single issue. I said the warfare state, which is what we’re discussing, isn’t a single issue. So there’s no connection.
Capozzi: “For non-Ls, [warfare state is] fairly meaningless, and frankly I don’t find it especially meaningful, either. ”
It means war-related actions such as those I mentioned above. You might not like the connotation of the word, but that’s the meaning.
Capozzi: “In short, the “warfare state” is a story Ls tell. It’s a conspiratorial narrative that is foreign to conservative and liberal worldviews.”
Is “welfare state” also just a story Ls tell that’s a conspiratorial narrative?
99 jt: So when I use the term conservative, I’m referring to people who generally adhere to the ideology, and not necessarily people who are registered Republican and/or generally vote for Republican candidates.
me: I get the distinction, but I don’t think there’s one “conservative ideology,” or one “L ideology,” for that matter.
jt: That doesn’t mean those people favor significantly reducing the Defense Department and repealing laws like the Patriot Act, nor does it mean they wouldn’t support a trumped-up war on Iran, for example.
me: I don’t think most voters, including conservative voters, think too much about the Patriot Act one way or the other. They likely like the sound of it, and some who are really paying attention might feel it was necessary but perhaps went too far. I certainly agree that if you polled conservatives whether the DoD should be significantly reduced, they would disagree. However, can some who CALL THEMSELVES “conservative” agree that we can’t afford the multiple wars, the far-flung major bases, the Marines guarding the embassies (oops, strike that last one, Wilson may not get the joke!)? I’d say yes, some can, will and do. Pat Buchanan comes to mind.
jt: Conservative magazines, newspapers, talk shows, policy institutes, political candidates, etc. overwhelmingly favor it (DoD, I think). Whom do you think these people and organizations are catering to?
me: Right. I “support” the DoD, too. These institutions manipulate the rank and file, just as L institutions manipulate the L rank and file, and progressive institutions manipulate progressives. Sometimes, the perspective changes, and the situation changes. The old right used to be the less interventionist ideology, the new right became highly interventionist. As the economic realities start to come home, views shift.
For ex: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/20/opinion/20douthat.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
jt: Two points: 1) The warfare state isn’t a single issue. It encompasses the military/policing actions, surveillance, corporate subsidies, due process, torture, etc. 2) Haven’t you pointed out single issues that you say would cause most people not to vote for a particular candidate (e.g., repealing all gun controls)? Support for the warfare state is a clear difference between most conservatives and libertarians.
me: I’m not sure what you’re getting at here. I agree that the “warfare state” is not a single issue…it’s a shorthand term that Ls use to capture the overreaches of US foreign policy. For non-Ls, it’s fairly meaningless, and frankly I don’t find it especially meaningful, either. It has a conspiratorial ring to it, e.g., the military industrial complex. Near as I can tell, there is a complex, but it’s complicated and more of an unconscious network than a conspiracy. I’m not sure all conservatives are lost causes on all these sub-issues. For ex., I could imagine some conservatives agreeing that, yeah, close the bases in Germany, but continue to support Israel. Or, yeah, the Patriot Act went over the line, but we need X, Y or Z. Or, yeah, corporate subsidies are bad, unless it’s done for a specific national security purpose. So, if KK frames things in winning ways, she might gain some traction vs. Goodlatte.
In short, the “warfare state” is a story Ls tell. It’s a conspiratorial narrative that is foreign to conservative and liberal worldviews.
Capozzi: “I’m noticing some Rs are getting less hawkish, perhaps in part because of the RP factor, in part because the wars have dragged on for so long.”
First, I think we need to understand that a Republican isn’t necessarily a “conservative.” One is a party and the other is an ideology. So when I use the term conservative, I’m referring to people who generally adhere to the ideology, and not necessarily people who are registered Republican and/or generally vote for Republican candidates.
Second, it’s true that most people are sick of the particular wars that have been going on for many years now. That doesn’t mean those people favor significantly reducing the Defense Department and repealing laws like the Patriot Act, nor does it mean they wouldn’t support a trumped-up war on Iran, for example.
Capozzi: “I’m sure there are ranges of hawkishness among self-IDed conservatives, and I’ve seen no evidence that the Valley is as hawkish as, say, Tidewater. If you have evidence to the contrary, I’d like to see it.”
I think there’s a range too, but the range is a small one amongst most self-identified conservatives (not necessarily Republicans). Do I have evidence that the Valley is more supportive of the warfare state than Tidewater? No. I just know that Karen’s district is very conservative, and most conservatives do support it. Conservative magazines, newspapers, talk shows, policy institutes, political candidates, etc. overwhelmingly favor it. Whom do you think these people and organizations are catering to?
Capozzi: “While there are single-issue voters, most are not so. I don’t think primary voters will overwhelming vote Goodlatte or KK based solely on whether one or the other is hawkish enough.”
Two points: 1) The warfare state isn’t a single issue. It encompasses the military/policing actions, surveillance, corporate subsidies, due process, torture, etc. 2) Haven’t you pointed out single issues that you say would cause most people not to vote for a particular candidate (e.g., repealing all gun controls)? Support for the warfare state is a clear difference between most conservatives and libertarians.
Nf, touche!
As was my response! Jeez…
I’m shocked that it’s not obvious the Lichtenstein Embassy aside was not read as a joke!
I wonder if the US has an embassy in Andorra?
(For those not paying attention and/or who are humorless , that too is a joke.)
We do not have an embassy in Lichtenstein. Our ambassador to Switzerland is accredited to handle all diplomatic interests. Get the facts right, Mr. Capozzi!
Robert you all too often bring up the embassy issue which to my knowledge no one, absolutely no one, has ever mentioned. Close down the bases yes, but you go to ridiculous extremes. Yet you claim others are extremist.
92 jt, I’m not sure that that area of VA is as hawkish as you seem to believe. There is a strong Mennonite contingent in the area, for ex.
I’m noticing some Rs are getting less hawkish, perhaps in part because of the RP factor, in part because the wars have dragged on for so long. I’m sure there are ranges of hawkishness among self-IDed conservatives, and I’ve seen no evidence that the Valley is as hawkish as, say, Tidewater. If you have evidence to the contrary, I’d like to see it.
I assume KK is going to run as a dove. Excellent! I favor that! That may impede her candidacy, regardless of which party line she might have run. Or it could help, perhaps counter-intuitively.
Why people vote for A over B is a complex matter. While there are single-issue voters, most are not so. I don’t think primary voters will overwhelming vote Goodlatte or KK based solely on whether one or the other is hawkish enough. It’s just not that simple. Electoral politics is about positioning, branding and marketing.
I agree the KK’s form of L-ism will be a “tough sell.” However, I’m sensing a turn in attitudes about matters of war. I don’t think that means voters will buy into the “necessity” of bringing the Marines home from the Lichtenstein Embassy, but I do think exiting Libya, Iraq, Afg., etc., on fiscal grounds could sell. That KK’s being former military immunizes her to some extent.
Milnes: “Agreed & yes. The Libertarian and Green platforms call for that-gradually, eventually.”
The Libertarian platform doesn’t call for dismantling the governmental system completely either gradually or immediately. It takes no stand on anarchism vs. minarchism as an end.
Capozzi, my point in post 74 that you responded to was about conservatives–not about running as a Democrat vs. a Republican in Karen’s district. Karen lives in in a very conservative district today, no matter who represented it 20 years ago (I’d guess though that whomever was the Democrat was also fairly conservative). Most modern conservatives, especially in that area of Virginia, are strong supporters of the warfare state. That means a very tough sell for a libertarian candidate who wants to criticize military actions, end other trappings of the warfare state, and reduce the Defense Department substantially.
more…
This sounds as if KK says she is NOT an anarchist:
“Only one person in the whole world thinks I am an anarchist, and that is Clifford May…”
http://www.lewrockwell.com/kwiatkowski/kwiatkowski127.html
I could not find explicit denials by KK of being an anarchist, but since May is the “only one,” then we have to assume she doesn’t consider herself one.
I think that clears that one up.
89 AAI, ok, I think I agree. What IYO differentiates an “anarchist” from a lessarchist?
IMO and observation, avowed anarchists DO acknowledge the advisability of incremental, often dramatic, steps toward statelessness. Most anarchists DO publicly advocate statelessness as their stated end goal. Of course, one could be an anarchist and yet advocate more moderate steps in the direction of statelessness.
As a rule of thumb, then, anarchist Ls generally advocate more dramatic shifts in the State compared with other lessarchist Ls. Fair?
I’ve yet to see the magnitude of change codified by avowed anarchists as to what is acceptable to them. Near as I can tell, the litmus test is that anarchists REQUIRE anyone who claims to be a L to ever acknowledge that a State function should be performed by a monopoly state UNLESS the “proper” qualification is stipulated. Fair? This is why the LP SoP is written in such a tortured fashion.
I don’t know if KK has ever claimed she is an “anarchist.” If she has and this is made known to the Valley voters, my guess is she’ll garner a very small percentage of primary voters. RP has explicitly said he’s NOT an anarchist, btw. Some of his advisors do.
Milnes: This is where the anarchists trip over themselves by insisting on anarchism NOW.
WHO are these anarchists?
I always hear about these mythical anarchists who want everything NOW.
Just as I always hear about these mythical Purity Police and “plumb-liners” and “litmus-testers.”
These are straw men. The radicals and anarchists I have met are all incrementalists and pragmatarians.
jt and tb, sorry, my point thus far has not been super obvious…if you look at the history of VA-6, you’ll see it was a D district pretty steadily until 1953. Its traditions include Wilson hailing from there…they’re pretty proud of Wilson being a native son, based on my observations in Staunton and environs.
The district also was represented by Caldwell Butler. His son Henry is someone I used to know, and he ran (and lost) for Congress as an R, though he considered himself a L, in NoVA. He’s a prof at GMU’s Law and Economics program now.
Interestingly, a Labor Party MC – a 3rd party in the late 1800s – held the seat from 1887-89.
Rather than being a “solid” R district, it was represented by a D from 1983-93. KK’s argument is that she should could not have run in her “conservative” district as a D, but I’d submit that the ideological landscape in the 80-90s has not changed a WHOLE lot today. Same era, I’d say. Perhaps Valley residents have gotten more R in the last 20…possible.
KK could have switched to the Ds, I’d say. Maybe should could have run as a L and done reasonably well. Districts can shift, as can voter attitudes. VA is a swing state. Just look at the Guvs and Sens in recent decades.
80 tb: If the LP big-tenters can find room for one group of right-wing assholes, certainly there must be room for more groups of conservative mini-statists.
Me: Charming! I kind of agree that our tent can be big, and include right (and left) wingers who are liberty leaning. JBS, fairly or unfairly, is notorious. Openly and publicly invoking them as a model for action seems like poor politics to me. You may disagree.
Tom B @82, “…unless they are running on a platform of dismantling the current governmental system completely.”
Agreed & yes. The Libertarian and Green platforms call for that-gradually, eventually.
This is where the anarchists trip over themselves by insisting on anarchism NOW.
Not gonna happen. But a progressive movement =slow revolution. That is the best that can reasonably be accomplished.
I remember Jimmy Stewart in the movie Shenandoah and I believe that it was an anti-war film
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0059711/
Am I correct?
Tom I hear that the book is great! and it is on my to buy list.
One more thing – from Shenandoah Valley:
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/230156-Everything-I-Want-to-Do-Is-Illegal
Sammy Davis, Jr. was from New York City and I’m pretty sure that both Woodrow Wilson and Karen Kwiatkowski have visited NYC.
Just outside the 6th District is Winchester. This is where Patsy Cline is from and she had big hits with “Crazy” and “Sweet Dreams”. Many people in the 6th District have heard these songs, perhaps even Karen Kwiatkowski.
Just some datapoints to contemplate.
Just a datapoint to contemplate.
I love it when the pot calls the kettle counter-revolutionary.
I would tend to agree that Ron Paul is counter-revolutionary. But, everyone seeking office is counter-revolutionary unless they are running on a platform of dismantling the current governmental system completely.
So, that would make any sort of PLAS electoral experiment counter-revolutionary.
Robert, I know you said it was just a datapoint; I didn’t understand the connection to what was being talked about though. I would’ve had the same reaction if you’d said that Sammy Davis Jr. was from her neck of the woods. I still don’t really understand. Nevermind.
I’ve been wondering how the John Birch Society is any different from the hyper conservative tea parties in any substantive way when it comes down to political correctness.
If there is, in fact, little difference, then why is it a mortal sin for Karen Kwiatkowski to merely reference a tactic used by the JBS, but it is perfectly acceptable for Wayne Root to embrace the tea parties, speak at tea party events, and claim to be recruiting for the LP from the ranks of the tea parties?
The truth is that the LP, the Constitution Party, the Campaign for Liberty, the tea parties, and the JBS have some overlapping dogma and some shared rhetoric.
If the LP big-tenters can find room for one group of right-wing assholes, certainly there must be room for more groups of conservative mini-statists.
jt, just a datapoint, like I said. WW was a D and hawkish. The Valley has a lot of crosscurrents in their traditions, near as I can tell.
Of course Ron Paul gets a lot of support from the military.
The military is predominately a reactionary/counterrevolutionary organization.
It is CLEARLY NOT libertarian.
It goes without saying it is not anarchistic.
Neither is Ron Paul.
Wilson let down the world by going for the expedient political move-running as a progressive democrat, taking advantage of TR splitting the Republican party; instead of bolting the democratic party for the Progressive party & joining TR & winning with the new progressive party.
Scumbag.
Capozzi: “Jt, fwiw, Woodrow Wilson is from KK’s neck of the woods.”
I don’t understand the implication? Wilson lead America into WWI. Also, that was almost a hundred years ago. Not sure what you mean.
Capozzi: “OTOH, RP gets much support from military types.”
He gets support from many people in the military. Not from many chicken-hawk conservatives.
Jt, fwiw, Woodrow Wilson is from KK’s neckb of the woods. Proves nothing…just a datapoint.
Still, the Valley is a pretty different place than Tidewater (mucho active military) or the Beltway Piedmont (mucho military , too). OTOH, RP gets much support from military types.
I’m cool with KK taking this path; it’s a fine path; bumpy start, I’d say.
Karen: “I come from a conservative background, and live in a conservative district.”
And that’s a big problem for a libertarian candidate for U.S. Representative. Most modern conservatives are staunch supporters of the warfare state, even if they’re sick of the current wars by now. I think that for the vast majority of today’s conservatives, criticizing it is reflexively viewed as anti-military and anti-American. And if that’s true of anywhere, it’s true of Virginia!
I don’t see a district that’s heavily tilted left or right as very fertile ground for a libertarian candidate for U.S. Representative.
Karen: “Running as a Ron Paul Republican is as good as any other plan discussed here.”
If I agreed with that, then I’d be a lonely Republican in the Ron Paul mold and not a Libertarian.
71 mm, I make no claims to anything remotely like a magic bullet. If it only took “hard work” to be successful, I submit that day laborers would be the most succesful peole in America.
As you feel you can give me unsolicited advise about how I spend my time, allow me to return the favor: do what brings you joy.
Marc, your call for precinct level activism is correct. It is hard work but it builds a party from the grassroots. I applaud your efforts. The Libertarian Party candidates who have been elected got out and met people, often door-to-door. It is hard work and time consuming but effective.
Same answer — what’s stopping you from recruiting them? Beltwayers aren’t any more statist than the average Boston snob, so no difference there.
And certainly not *all* Beltwayers are statist. Were you to try, you would find those who weren’t.
In contrast, I think the possibilities for extending libertarianism are endless everywhere.
But one actually has to speak to one’s neighbor about it once in awhile.
Yeah, me too. I don’t let it stop me, and neither should you. The time of my life when I was even more active than I am now was when I could honestly been considered “habitually broke”.
If you have a computer, internet access, a cellphone, and cable TV, you have enough excess wealth to organize your own precinct.
Oh, stop. We’ve discussed this before, but it sounds like you’ve forgotten what I said already:
——– quoting a previous comment ——–
No one asked for your “full time”. That’s called a ‘Red Herring’ argument. Even I don’t do that. Five hours a week — you spend more than that reading and posting on IPR — would be plenty.
Well Bob… on that, I *know* you’re wrong. I’d suggest studying some videos of Harry Browne speaking to outside groups, or perhaps some of his radio or TV interviews. He was by far the best presenter of libertarian ideas the LP has ever managed to run for president; but the fact is that his rhetoric was gentle, appealing, and didn’t insult anyone’s intelligence — the bedrock of persuasion that anyone can master the basics of.
Unless of course, your script resembled your prosletyzing: “Oh hi there, Mr Voter neighbor! I just wanted to find out if you’d like some more information about the Libertarian Party. Are you interested in your next-door neighbor being allowed to have a suitcase nuke in his apartment? Or your son being allowed to have sex with a 50 year old man? Well, if so, I think the Libertarian Party is for you! Here’s a printout of an article by LP critic Mike Huben, who systematically lies and exaggerates about every position the LP takes, just like I did a second ago… Please join us and help me get rid of the radical libertarians…!”
My analysis tells me that the LP is trapped by a portion of its membership who can’t be bothered to go shake a hand like real politicians do, but who are ever eager to criticize the efforts of others who aren’t so constrained.
That wasn’t what I said, so it’s not my opinion. Another Red Herring. What *is* my opnion is that those who want to see the LP succeed need to put on their business attire and go and shake some hands. One can start with the inquiries that come in just about daily from the national LP — heck, they’ve already expressed interest, they just need to see there are people behind the website. Your local LP chairman would **love** to hear from you — but only if you’re willing to work. He’s not going to be eager to get harangued by the purity police, so just keep that badge in your pocket.
——– end previous comment ——–
What are you trying to insinuate?
I think most people who read this board regularly have a pretty good picture of how motivated you are, yes.
—
When all of the libertarians who claim to have a magic bullet spend their time organizing their own precinct and county LP, the movement will begin to show real progress. Writing long-winded screeds on blogs excoriating other libertarians who aren’t as perfect doesn’t do it. Working through the major parties doesn’t do it. Diddling around with Party documents to make them less objectionable to the national socialist statists who are dragging the nation into oblivion doesn’t do it.
I would give my eyeteeth to see the day when libertarians spend less time attacking other libertarians and use that time and energy instead persuading their friends, neighbors and family of the benefits of freedom and organizing them into effective precinct organizations that will elect real, bona fide libertarians to public office.
To any libertarians who wish to ‘affix blame’ to other libertarians, the platform, our candidates, etc for this or that failure, perhaps you might first look in your own mirror and affix some share of that blame where it really belongs.
Download a map of your own precinct, order a batch of the ‘Discover Liberty’ tabloid from http://www.TheAdvocates.org , order a couple thousand of Wes Benedict’s door hangers, turn the computer off, put on a jacket, and go meet your neighbors with a sign-up sheet on a clipboard, an armload of the tabloids & doorhangers, and start doing something positive to bring more libertarian voters into the LP.
The recipe for success for the LP is simple. It doesn’t require convoluted excuses, it doesn’t require convoluted rhetorical backflips. It just requires WORK.
# 44 Robert Capozzi // Jun 21, 2011:
“………… Mr. Lake, is productive how exactly?”
[Lake: the illumination of truth, not opinion, but documented fact! You have been caught lying, in the same sneakie way about the same subject as Phillies and Knapp. By your own words will you be hung. Hypocrisy is the hall mark of the Ds and the Rs and also the Ls. We thirds and Indies need to self police. As we get stronger [no time soon!] in the Information Age, the duopoly establishment will jump on it ——- hard [as well as the &@$#&% Democans and Republicrats should!]
66 mm, I guess I’ve not made myself clear, so let me break it down for you again:
1. I live inside the Beltway, a highly statist place, not New England.
2. Mine is an untested hypothesis, based on some geo-demographic datapoints, coupled with some gut instincts and voting trends. I could be incorrect. WY may be the better place for an L breakthrough. Or MS. Maybe we’d need an outright collapse. Maybe it’s just hopeless. Maybe we need to take a subterranean approach, as, I’d suggest, the LM currently does, in effect.
3. Not that it’s any of your business, but I have very limited resources.
4. I wonder just how encouraging you really are of my being an activist. I am a forthright critic of NAP absolutism, in both theory and ESPECIALLY application. What resources I do have, I offer my perspective on why the LM has hamstrung itself with this simplistic, unworkable idea, IMO. Based on your opinions about politics as I understand them, if I did have resources, I suspect you would be a vocal critic of my efforts. IOW, you should be grateful that I only post here for my political expression. I wouldn’t, for ex., support Ls in the LP or the Rs or Ds who took extremist positions or who employed hater code words.
I trust I cleared up my motives and situation for you.
I can sit down and have a brew with anyone.
However… I have great respect for those who actually work to attain libertarian goals.
Regarding those who spend the majority of their time telling others “you’re doing it all wrong!!”, well, not so much.
Wow! I hope you two are friends!
I mean, besides spending so much time here.
So what’s stopping you from recruiting them?
63 nf, surely. Unless a L is pro-life, I suspect he or she should not even try to run as a R in the Deep South. Might as well stump with devil horns on. 😉 (To be fair, there may be some districts in the Deep South where a candidate can be pro-choice, but I suspect they are few.)
A pro-choice L running in New England as a R in a D-leaning district (most are) might resonate better. Of course, I happen to believe that New England is our most prospectively fertile region, but then I’m pro-choice.
#62- I agree but the same can be said for Rs. New England Rs are different than Deep South Rs, for example.
61 nf, thinking out loud, but I don’t think this means Ls should run as Ds just anywhere. VA Ds are quite a bit different than Ds in, say, NYC. An L would need to be able to speak in a language that at least somewhat overlaps with the Rs or Ds in that district.
I’ve been to the Valley, but I don’t pretend to be an expert in the micro-cultures there. I suspect that the Ds there are not hard-core redistributionists like they tend to be in NYC.
#59- I agree that Ls should not automatically figure that if they are going to run within the two party duopoly they should be Rs. The Ds have advanced most of the agenda for the past 75 or so years and the Rs have said either “me too” or “slow down” but not put forth much of their own. I think if one wants to be in the forefront of change (whether the ideas are borrowed from the SPUSA or the LP) the Ds might be the better bet.
No More for Ron Paul.
NM4RP
more…
Actually, if the independent got 13% (he was pretty L, if I recall) and the L got 9%, a libertarian D woman, former military officer might do pretty darned well. 22% voted for a non-major-party candidate is kind of high, I’d say.
Running as a D to the right of Goodlatte might do pretty well. While the Valley might be considered conservative, I seem to recall that there’s a strong Mennonite presence out that way. And I seem to recall that they are peaceniks.
In this sense, all politics is local. Again, what’s done is done. I just wonder if Ls running on a major party line should automatically assume they should run R. Perhaps not…
55 gw, yes, that district could be instructive for Ls who wish to win by running as an R or D. My comment here is not so much about KK, but just generally.
If the incumbent in a lopsided district is strong, I’d think that joining the OTHER party would serve the purpose of “making noise” more than a primary challenge. Fewer voters are paying attention in the primary season.
In the case of VA, let’s not forget that it wasn’t THAT long ago that it as a D state. Many of those folks were “conservative” Ds. Much of the South is that way. There are still “conservative” D MCs, especially in the South. VA itself is a swing state, although I suspect the Valley doesn’t swing too much these days…NoVA is where the swinging happens, given its population and heavy Federal influence.
A political party is a vehicle to advance ideas. If the goal is to first advance ideas, then to win, I’d want to see a “L” in the race and considered credible AND plausible.
So, in KK’s case, she might not have the resources and wherewithal to win the primary, in which case, her advancing of L ideas will reach few. My only point is that IF a L feels compelled to run for office as an R or D, consider your options carefully. In that district, it may seem intuitive to run as an R, but sometimes one needs to employ counter-intuitive thinking.
In KK’s case, running to the right of Goodlatte as a D AND being a former military officer might have been interesting. Being a woman might have also been an interesting contrast.
She may well be on the optimal path. I wish her luck.
jp 51, it was a suggestion. I certainly don’t want to “chase” KK or anyone off. Personally, I’d like to hear what she has to say to the LM. However, then she’ll have to defend things like her letter to Hinkle and the cite of JBS.
I’d like to see her win, actually, even though I disagree with her on some fundamental issues.
If a candidate must address controversy, it’s often best that a surrogate do so. Getting deeply in the mud will most likely bog her down.
So this primary is going to eat up a year of Karen’s life?
Geez.
I am familiar with the 6th Congressional District because my hometown, Staunton, Virginia, is within it. Although I have not lived there for many years I still keep up with its political scene.
I was a strong supporter of Arin Sime when he ran as a Libertarian Party candidate for the State Senate in 2006. That district included western Albemarle County and Augusta, Bath and Highland Counties and the small cities of Staunton and Waynesboro. Arin ran an energetic campaign and was a fine candidate. He received about 8% of the vote running against a Democrat and a Republican.
In 2008 Libertarian Party candidate Stuart Bain, who I also supported, ran against Goodlatte and received 9% of the vote. Goodlatte received 76% and an independent received 13%. Goodlatte’s electoral history is that he usually runs unopposed by a Democrat and gets from 75 to 100% of the vote. Occasionally the Democrats run a candidate and Goodlatte receives 60 to 69% of the vote. So Karen is correct in percieving that her best chance of defeating him is in the Republican nomination phase. I wish her the best and if she does not succeed I hope the Libertarian Party will again have a candidate who I will support.
re 52 What you claim is not exactly true in all cases and in talking to the American voter it would probably be easier to explain to the voter that her/his money is being used to subsidize the defense of other nations.
And for the record a lot of them want us there. Our military pumps money into the local economy when the troops go to town. England, Spain, Germany and a number of other nations want us to stay since our guys spend money.
8. Ballot access – requirements and qualifications
9. Legal – is there at least one decent cut throat to defend the candidate from the inevitable GOP backlash already in power?
10. Message – last but not least, what three or four issues will be the lightning rod of dissent/action between Roanoke and Harrisonburg?
the U.S. to stop subsidizing the defense Europe and much of Asia.
The U.S. is not “subsidizing the defense” of these nations — it is occupying them.
U.S. military bases in foreign countries 1. extend the U.S. military’s supply line, and 2. keep these occupied nations under the U.S. gun.
Presumably, many of these nations (Germany, Japan, Saudi Arabia) would be happy to pay for their own defense — by buying nukes.
But the U.S. (and in the case of the Arab states, Israel) does not want these nations buying nukes with their own money.
Some might say this is a wise American defense policy, stationing U.S. troops in foreign nations instead of letting those nations be free to pay for — and control — their own defense.
But let’s not lie and say the U.S. is doing these occupied nations any altruistic favors.
RC @ 49: “kk, I submit that as a candidate you probably should avoid forums like this.”
What??? Please don’t chase people off this site.
Taking the helm of this type of campaign should entail the following.
1. Adequate fundraising. Something close to an expectation of an initial 100K might intrigue an otherwise stolid and reliable GOPians who would otherwise just support the incumbent, all things being equal.
2. Media Expectation – Karen has a good shot at national gigs like the Judge & Stossel, but still has to convince local media outlets that her events and gatherings merit attention. The occasional strident or cutesy story not withstanding.
3. Polling – is there a reasonable chance that anything but internal party polling will take effect? Internet straw polling not withstanding. If the prevailing perception throughout is a Goodlatte domination of the aforementioned 15% loyal primary is a lock, no external or media recognized polling would be a problem.
4. Staff – depending on the funding, staff becomes crucial. Without a decent manager, office workers or ardent volunteers, it goes the route of one man third party shows.
5. Novelty and innovation – even without prevailing support or wisdom, is there a package of presentation or some innovation that can raise the candidacy beyond expectation?
6. Quality – even at the most desperate levels of attention denial, lack of supporters or other Ishmael like severity, does the candidate possess the requisite humor and poise that will at least merit grudging respect from media, opponents and potential independent thinkers ?
7. Debates – can KK get the incumbent into a debate in some forum or format. That could certainly help her more than him. It’s a real hard balancing act dependent on many of these previous points.
There might be a few more points to round up to ten, but I haven’t been sharpening that sword for a while now . . .
46 kk, I submit that as a candidate you probably should avoid forums like this. It’s likely not going to help your cause, as you should be above such critiques from outside the district.
From what I know of your district, I agree a RP R might be good positioning. Maybe Goodlatte can be defeated in the primary, but I’m kinda doubting it.
If an L wants to crossover into a major, I’d prefer that he or she pick his or her spot for a winnable race.
But…we shall see.
Karen, good for you and thank you for deciding to run for office. When I ran against Frank Wolf I had some Republicans ask me why didn’t I campaign against Frank as a Republican, my answer “if I had, I wouldn’t be here tonight”, running under the LP banner gave me a couple more months to talk about the issues. LOL, I wish you the best and I would add, have fun.
Bill
45 mhw, yes, calling our foreign policy views “isolationist” is a pathetic attempt to dismiss us.
Yet, the Rs are slowly starting to question the wars. And the Ds have always been uneasy about it.
Maybe we’re making progress!
I hope there are more Tea Party democrats, but both of the modern parties are nearly identical in that they both love and adore the warfare-welfare state. They may argue about whom to kill and which sector to subsidize, but they are basically the same. I come from a conservative background, and live in a conservative district. Running as a Ron Paul Republican is as good as any other plan discussed here. I’m not joining GOP positions I don’t share, but rather bringing my peace, prosperity and liberty perspective to the GOP and other District voters to consider.
The word isolationism is being tossed about by some in the GOP and by members of the media. The LP and our candidates must avoid using this word and point out that there is nothing isolationist in expecting nations to pay for their own defense costs and it is time for the U.S. to stop subsidizing the defense Europe and much of Asia.
Hopefully Libertarian candidates can point out that eventually American troops will come home, but it is best to allow that to happen now when our allies are capable of assuming the burden instead of it happening during a crisis and our military’s departure creates a vacuum into which another power will step.
charming. This, Mr. Lake, is productive how exactly?
ah, the immoral twin of Phillies and Knapp and a user of their steer manure rules *see their own documentation, bull shit artistes*
38 tk, I withdraw “debunk.” I’m satisfied that KK’s letter to Hinkle was shown to be hyperbolic and odd.
You slightly miss my point. She wants the party to en masse ask Root to leave months after he was elected to the LNC. Root has generally been trending away from his hawkish roots, and I say the party knew what they were getting.
It’s fair game for her to say that she can’t be in the same party as Root. She can make an ultimatum, which I take her becoming a R as being…Root or me. I can’t imagine that she’s paying attention if she expected the party to convene an emergency deposing convention because KK doesn’t like him. It’s just not feasible or, for many, desirable.
I totally respect her desire to champion liberty in the best way she thinks she can. If she’s fed up with the hawkish element in the LP to the point she wishes to go her own way, again, totally respect that.
The sequencing seems ungraceful to me.
She may well become a force to be reckoned with in the GOP. I think she’s probably miscalculated…Tea Party D might have been a better way to go.
Lake, I said ON BALANCE, the LP is the peace party – compared with the Rs and Ds. I acknowledged that we do have a more hawkish wing. Exceptions don’t make for rules. Most Ls that I’m aware of are non-interventionists, with some being strict and others less so. A D like Kucinich might be more dovish, but on balance I don’t see the Ds center of gravity as dovish as the LP. Ditto for Paul and the Rs.
You may have a different take, but using outliers like Cohen doesn’t persuade me.
It’s either (a) or (h)… I think.
NewFederalist // Jun 21, 2011 at 3:50 pm
Tea Party Democrat… has a nice ring to it!
Robert Capozzi // Jun 21, 2011:
As a dovish L myself, I prefer to see the LP be the peace party. On balance, I think it IS the peace party. Some Ls are more hawkish than I am, some are more dovish. I’d say the LP collectively is much more dove than hawk, WAY more dove than hawk than the GOP. Way more.
[a] you are insane
[b] you knowledgeable and are lying in a premeditated way
[c] You are really Thomas Knapp and or George Phillies and typing as Bob Capozzi
[d] you are ignorant of EVERY ONE else’s anti war stance, by accident
[e] you are ignorant of EVERY ONE else’s anti war stance, by purposident
[f] you never heard of Bruce Cohen
[g] you never heard of W. A. R.
[h] you are kidding, teasing, joshing
[i] OTHER:
Prior to Obama, My Yokohama Momma, [Obama, Japan] pretty much EVERY ONE save GOP neo cons were anti war. Of course, like Trickie Dick Nixon inherited the Viet Nam quagmire from ‘my fellow ‘Mericans’ LBJ;
Cheney’s conflict is now ‘owned’ by the Democrats!
LP as THE peace party, *joke, joke, joke*
Bob @ 34,
I’m not sure what in your comment was addressed to me.
All I was saying was that there wasn’t much to “debunk” in Kwiatkowski’s letter. Not a lot of factual claims, in other words.
I also found her reference to the JBS rather odd, especially given the existence of more “mainstream” indices of conservatism (ACU ratings, for example). Maybe the reference was itself a poke at the LP, implying that the LP is as “fringe” as JBS.
As far as the “invite Root to go to one of the war parties” versus her own Republican campaign, I don’t see the conflict. Saying that someone should be invited to leave the peace party and join a war party is not antithetical to saying that one intends to join a war party and try to make it less war-like (although the latter seems quixotic to me).
NewFederalist // Jun 21, 2011 at 3:50 pm
“Tea Party Democrat… has a nice ring to it!”
[Lake: what, ya never been invited to a Coffee Party ?????]
Tea Party Democrat… has a nice ring to it!
#34 that would have been a real hoot for KK to get the Democrat nomination. Marching up and down the Valley denouncing Obama and his wars, his failures re Patriot Act and civil liberties, etc. Embarrass the hell out of the “progressives.” There are many of these kinds of opportunities created for libertarians when one party or the other fails to run someone.
tk and NY Cynic, I went back and read the letter. KK suggested: “Why haven’t we, as a party, asked Wayne to simply join one of the war parties? ”
Some Ls suggest that all the time. “As a party” Root was elected to the LNC at large. So, KK’s suggestion seems way out of bounds, as there is no mechanism for the body to do such a thing other than in convention. IMO, this seems to be a bizarre thought experiment.
KK suggests that the LP “create a liberty friendliness rating on each issue for each congressman, much like the John Birch Society does on conservatism.” Some may think invoking JBS makes sense, but I’m not seeing it. She writes this open letter, then turns around and says I want to be a R MC a few months later. It could well be that the good people of the Shenandoah Valley would be OK with someone who publicly invokes JBS, but my guess is…not so much.
As a dovish L myself, I prefer to see the LP be the peace party. On balance, I think it IS the peace party. Some Ls are more hawkish than I am, some are more dovish. I’d say the LP collectively is much more dove than hawk, WAY more dove than hawk than the GOP. Way more.
If KK really wants to make Goodlatte uncomfortable, I would think the obvious thing for a peace-oriented L to run as a D. She could have been a Ron Paul Democrat.
That said, I certainly wish her well in this quest. My guess is she’d make a fine addition to Congress, a net plus compared with Goodlatte.
“Didn’t she send a letter to Hinkle claiming the LP is too pro-war for her tastes.”
Well when you have a man like Wayne Allen Root as a spokeman for the party and being nothing but a Neoconservative ass kisser she and every other principled Libertarian has the right to call out the LP on this issue. I wish Ms. Kwiatkowski well in her campaign. Conservatives and Paleocons for that matter too don’t like it when Libertarians step onto their turf.
RM@19,
“Yes, it has been tried. But in an isolated incident (Zeese) and haphazard way.”
Many times, in many places, in many combinations, going at least as far back as the early 1970s co-nominations of the California LP and the Peace and Freedom Party.
Actually, all the way back to presidential campaigns of the 19th century — but adoption of the Australian ballot messes up the comparisons, just like other factors mess up the TR 1912 comparison.
“We need a deliberate, coordinated, inclusive & national effort.”
Maybe you do. I don’t.
“Why don’t you get with the program”
Because there’s nothing in the program that I find attractive, even if it seemed likely to succeed.
Here’s one we ought to be on like white on rice. Time to Raise Hell!
“Two senators lobby to allow U.S. troops in Libya”
Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/06/21/116209/two-senators-back-authorization.html#ixzz1PvoMRpeE
Your anti-war heart is in the right place.
But up to now, your politics were in the right place too.
Ron Paul is anti-war. But we do not want or need the rest of his baggage-GOP/theocratic/nationalistic/states rights/etc.
Karen: “Every incumbent needs to be made uncomfortable.”
True.
Karen: “I’m just doing my part, and in the current political environment, we will probably win the thing.”
I hoped I wouldn’t hear that. I wish you luck, but you won’t “probably” win, Karen. Winning is possible, but it’s quite unlikely, no matter what your perception is of the voters in your district. It’s unfortunate if you don’t realize that.
KK, this primary campaign is going to occupy you through June 2012.
You see the no good that comes with supporting Ron Paul?
It has you preoccupied for a year. Ensnared in GOP politics/party.
& you are going to get tangled up in Tea Party politics also.
Now if I was suspicious, I could think that you & Root could get the LP ticket & declare it home for the Tea Party movement.
Come on, Karen. Do an about face. We can overlook this lapse in judgement. We are all only human & make mistakes.
I found this: http://bearingdrift.com/2011/04/22/goodlatte-to-face-primary-challenge/
Karen, great to see you posting here. I hope you do more often.
Great comments, and I think what we are doing is just the principled thing. My 6th District is filled with common sense people who understand and are receptive to the Ron Paul vision of liberty and prosperity, and they are ready to hear about ending the wars, at home and abroad. The incumbent is already responding by talking up liberty and budget balancing, even has he has no clue as to how to seriously implement either. He’s just where we want him. Every incumbent needs to be made uncomfortable. I’m just doing my part, and in the current political environment, we will probably win the thing. He would have been delighted for me to run as a libertarian or independent, but my job in this race is not just to build awareness or gain party members. It is to change the power structure.
RC @ 14: “Didn’t she send a letter to Hinkle claiming the LP is too pro-war for her tastes. (I recall that her claims were largely debunked.) ”
I recall that her opinions were actually quite on target. Many of us, including me, agreed with her.
Karen can earn the nomination if she commits to building an efficient ground operation. Only 10% of registered voters bother to show in a primary, But the incumbents are holding an extra advantage in not redrawing the district lines yet. Delaying until last possible time required: January will concentrate her GOTV push – but still can be won with enough foot soldiers.
Doesn’t really surprise me. If her motivation is something like what Tom mentioned in post 15, then it makes some sense (though I’d prefer any good candidate to run as a Libertarian because of what Marc said in post 9).
If her motivation is to win the Republican nomination against the incumbent, however, then she’ll just see what happens when the establishment Republican Party operatives mobilize against her.
Milnes: “Here you go again!
Bob’s whack-a-mole.”
As long as you post this inane idea (which I assume will be forever), you’re gonna get whacked by some people here.
@14RC
I have known KK to be two things.
1. Always serious
2. Critical of all sources of authority
I cannot speak for her, but if she believes for one second that the National LP has been compromised from within, it would be against her nature to stay with it.
I would like to think she is a pathfinder. Once an officer always an officer.
During her campaign she can mention things that Ron Paul might say or promote. Speaking directly to a RP audience instead of a fringe RP/C4L might make a difference in her home area.
If the language games are done properly she could in a short time brand through association.
To mention platforms and how close they are would benefit both Ron Paul and Lee Wrights.
Here you go again!
Bob’s whack-a-mole.
Every time I pop up you are there to whack me on the head with your ruler.
Yes, it has been tried. But in an isolated incident (Zeese) and haphazard way.
We need a deliberate, coordinated, inclusive & national effort.
Why don’t you get with the program before Root pulls a reverse PLAS & calls the LP the Tea Party?
Bob @ 17,
“Desperate enough to try PLAS yet?”
It’s been tried many times at many levels, both before and after you started suggesting your version (your version’s primary disinction being your attached fantasies about Theodore Roosevelt).
Desperation has nothing to do with it. Desperation would lead the LP to try things it hasn’t tried before, and/or things that offer some realistic likelihood of success, not just to repeat an already multiply-failed tactic.
AtbAFT @16,”After 40 years of mostly failure, it is time to try different tactics.”
Desperate enough to try PLAS yet?
Maybe someone should ask her why she is trying this strategy? It could be just another way of trying something new and seeing what happens. Maybe she loses but the local GOP sees an opportunity to “lock” in libertarian votes by endorsing her for some future office?
Maybe they trash her and lose the libertarian vote for the foreseeable future, leaving the LP to recruit her disgruntled supporters? After 40 years of mostly failure, it is time to try some
different tactics. A much stronger LP is just one
way to gradually change the political mindset of the voters.
Bob @ 14,
“(I recall that her claims were largely debunked.) ”
I recall that her claims were, for the most part, non-debunkable matters of opinion.
“I can see why an L might want to run as a R. But I don’t see why an L might want to run in a primary against a strong R.”
I can think of at least a couple of reasons.
One would be if you thought that a primary run could generate significant media coverage , and public discussion, of your policy differences with that strong R in a way that might affect your opponent’s future decisionmaking or your party’s platform.
Another would be if you really wanted the guy out of there, knew you couldn’t beat him, but thought you might be able to wound him badly enough in a primary for someone else to take him down in the general.
Looks like Goodlatte is running for re-election. Not sure what KK’s expectations are here.
Didn’t she send a letter to Hinkle claiming the LP is too pro-war for her tastes. (I recall that her claims were largely debunked.)
Now, she decides to run as a R? Against a popular incumbent?
I can see why an L might want to run as a R. But I don’t see why an L might want to run in a primary against a strong R.
I’m not getting the thought process here…perhaps she sees a weakness in Goodlatte that is not apparent. Maybe she wants to make a quixotic fuss.
(Devilishly, maybe she wants a Good Latte, and the Valley has few Starbucks…! 😉 )
@11 Thank you.
@ 9 “and she mentioned that she was an anarchist libertarian — and I believe her.”
You can talk the walk, but when she cashes that gov’t check each month that talk becomes cheap.
Just another R. who Ls get all excited about to NO avail !
~~~
“It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.” – Joseph Stalin
“The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can throw the rascals out at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies.” – Carroll Quigley
When the government’s boot is on your throat, whether it is a left boot or a right boot is of no consequence. – Gary Lloyd
“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum.” – Noam Chomsky
“There’s not a dime’s worth of difference between the Democrat and Republican Parties.” – George Wallace – Governor of Alabama and 1968 American Independent Presidential candidate
“Free election of masters does not abolish the masters or the slaves.” – Herbert Marcuse
“A man is no less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years.” – Lysander Spooner
“Apparently, a democracy is a place where numerous elections are held at great cost without issues and with interchangeable candidates.” – Gore Vidal
“Vote Libertarian, It Only Feels Kinky the First Time!” – http://www.lpstuff.com/shop/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=446
“Vote Libertarian – The fast-acting cure for Electile Dysfunction” – http://www.lpstuff.com/shop/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=355
“I Get It! That’s Why I Vote Libertarian” – http://www.lpstuff.com/shop/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=356
This Change Sucks B.O. – http://www.lpstuff.com/shop/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=639
“By establishing reading societies, and subscription libraries, and taking these under our direction, and supplying them through our labors, we may turn the public mind which way we will.” – Adam Weishaupt, founded The Order of the Illuminati
“School is the advertising agency which makes you believe that you need the society as it is.” – Ivan Illich
“The most potent weapon of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed.” – Steven Biko
@ George Phillies,
Yes. Karen Kwiatkowski is running in the Republican primary against incumbent Bob Goodlatte. This man has represented the district since 1993. Cook PVI has VA-06 at R+12.
She’s running in a primary against an incumbent?
Did I follow that correctly?
Karen appeared at our Rocktown Libertarians gathering on May 24, 2011. I knew she wouldn’t be dissuaded from running in the Republican primary, but I gave it a halfhearted try anyway.
She assured us she would be bringing her Libertarian ideas into the race against Bob Goodlatte; and she mentioned that she was an anarchist libertarian — and I believe her.
The problem I see with running as a Republican is that it will not serve to recruit new Libertarian Party members. Karen and I discussed this at some length. As the Secretary of the Libertarian Party of Virginia, I have a moral obligation to refrain from promoting her campaign, which pains me somewhat because Karen has been a very consistent libertarian presence in the Valley.
I first made Karen’s acquaintance via some email correspondence in Decmber 5, 2001 while she was still at the Pentagon and while I was running the Shenandoah County Libertarian Committee (which she became part of about two years later, once she retired from the military and moved to the farm she now owns in that county. Since those early days, Karen has graciously spoken to various LP groups, notably the libertarian student groups in Charlottesville, Harrisonburg, and Blacksburg, among others.
Certainly, I would prefer that she would choose to run as a Libertarian. She faces an uphill battle to win the Republican nomination from the entrenched Bob Goodlatte. While there is value in just getting libertarian ideas discussed in the political marketplace, there is more value — in my opinion — in finding new people, getting them signed up and organized, and doing it again next election. My personal belief is that you have to walk before you can run, and as you get stronger over time, keep walking faster until you’re strong enough to run.
This does not look good.
I’m sure she has a rationale e.g.@6 & I’d like to hear it.
But it might not be good enough.
It will be a miracle if she wins the nomination, assuming Goodlatte wants to keep his seat.
This is a Republican district and in 2010 the Democrats didn’t even run a candidate. Karen K. could win this just by having the “R” next to her name.
I just hope the grassroots talk radio Republicans don’t figure out that she’s not a “real” Republican. If they read some of the stuff she’s written over the years, they are apt to be frightened.
The Shenandoah Valley GOP must have been taken over by Paulians.
Interesting development. I see she knows what “Benjamins” are, which is a definite plus in my book.
Yeah, darn it.
Appears to rule out her running for the LP Presidential nomination for a fair number of years to come.
Nope, LP or independent as Plan B ………
Well… this sure blows the Milnes/Kwiatkowski ticket all to hell!