Our monthly open thread. Post news tips about alt parties and independent candidates, discuss any story that should be posted here but has not yet been posted, or even delve into completely off-topic stuff….just avoid quarantined thread subject matter and things that could get us and/or you into legal trouble such as threats, libel, and copyright infringement.
News tips can also be sent to the IPR writers who have chosen to make their contact info available at https://independentpoliticalreport.com/about/.
It’s also become an IPR tradition to post videos in the open threads. Here’s the latest from Juice Rap News:
Yeah, I need to post that and a few hundred other articles. Not sure why I can’t just get started on it. Everyone else that was posting with any decent regularity seems to have quit, taking a break, or gone off to blog elsewhere all at the same time too. We signed up a bunch of new people, but none of them have posted anything yet. September was our lowest number of articles ever in a month, and it should not have been – lots of stuff we should have covered. I’m torn between being worn out and wanting to make sure we keep going. It would be easier to do that if I was working with several other people all regularly posting articles. Oh well, it’s October, I should at least post a new monthly open thread if nothing else. Maybe it will finally break the logjam and get me posting other stuff.
http://www.lp.org/news/press-releases/libertarians-sue-kentucky-public-television-for-first-amendment-violation
http://www.lp.org/blogs/staff/new-york-times-and-cnn-articles-cover-libertarian-party-candidates
Wow!
Look at those two cool-looking liberty lovers having a good time on the boat with Gary and Jim.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/27/politics/james-traficant-death/index.html
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/?s=traficant
ALASKA CONSTITUTION PARTY
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
SEPTEMBER 28, 2014
FAIRBANKS, ALASKA
The Alaska Constitution Party (ACP) successfully completed its first annual party convention this weekend in Anchorage. The party now boasts several new members who attended meetings on Saturday including former Alaska Republican Party chairman Russ Millette.
“We had a few guests on Saturday who dropped in to watch us conduct business, unsure whether they wanted to become members. I think they liked seeing the process and liked what they heard,” said ACP Vice Chairman Maria Rensel. As members deliberated over changes to the proposed platform and bylaws a number of spectators decided to change their party affiliation and become part of what will surely become an historical event in Alaska politics.
Some of the most notable changes in the platform include adopting the national party principles and platform, not participating in publicly funded primary elections, supporting the establishment of the office of Sheriff elected by the people and requiring party officers and candidates to pledge an Oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. “This platform represents four years of hard work that will provide a sure foundation upon which to continue to build the ACP,” said Chairman J.R.Myers.
Oathkeepers National Advisory Board Member, Justin Giles spoke to the audience about posting billboards outside of military bases to remind soldiers to honor their Oaths. He told attendees that Oathkeepers is not affiliated with any political party and does not endorse candidates. Though supportive of many associations including Constitutional citizen militias they are allied but separate organizations. Giles says he and Oathkeepers’ founder Stewart Rhodes are working closely to re-write the first order that Oathkeepers have a duty to refuse.
“Item number one will be—‘We will not set up and enforce any Free Speech Zones’, the First Amendment has got to be first”, said Giles. “They actually set up one of these at the Bundy Ranch. When people violated [it] they brought out attack dogs and snipers. The fourth amendment is dead; it’s gone; because good men did nothing. As Constitution Party members when you are elected if you hear of a ‘Free Speech Zone’ at any time for any reason…if you aren’t willing to tear down those fences with your hands, this nation is gone.”
The Convention re-elected J.R. Myers as Chairman and Maria Rensel as Vice-Chairman and also elected Alyssa Ann Eck as Secretary and Leslie Martin as Treasurer for 2014-15 leadership. The five candidates endorsed by the party were the Myers/ Rensel ticket, Pam Goode for House District 9, James Squyres for the Delta-Greeley School Board and David Luntz for the Deltana Community Corporation. Two additional offices of assistant Secretary and assistant Treasurer were added to the bylaws. Three National Committee positions were also filled.
We went in Newport Beach, although they have a lot of whale-watching trips leave from Long Beach.
I believe Jim Gray lives in Newport, but he had never been on one with the exception of a trip in Alaska. Both Gary and Jim seemed as excited as I was about the event.
There is a petition process in Ohio to place a Presidential ticket only on the ballot with 5,000 valid signatures. I think that this is what would likely be done if the LP of Ohio loses party status and does not get it back in time for the 2016 Presidential election.
http://watchdog.org/173632/ohio-libertarians-ballot-access/
So does that mean the presidential ticket would not be on in Ohio?
“Jill Pyeatt September 27, 2014 at 7:39 pm
My husband Alan and I went on a whale-watching fundraiser this morning for ‘Our American Initiative’. Both Gary Johnson and Judge Jim Gray were there. We met some wonderful new people from the liberty community, and saw lots and lots of dolphins (no whales, though)..”
Where in California was the whale watching ship you all went out on docked?
I took one of those whale watching trips out of the San Francisco area years ago. The ship went out to some island off the California coast where the only human inhabitants were researchers, and I’m not sure if they were there year round. The water was rough that day and everyone on the boat ended up puking, including the ships crew. I puked on the way back before reaching the Golden Gate Bridge. We did not even get to see any whales, but it was still a cool trip, in spite of getting sick on the way back.
Here’s a new liberty blog that’s a free offshoot of the Ron Paul channel. Some of the people signed up as contributors are friends of mine. I just found out about it today.
http://www.voicesofliberty.com/editorial/news/
Yes, Paulie, that’s us from this morning! It was a great way to visit with Gary and Jim. It was relaxed, casual, and quite exciting, when the dolphins started jumping out of the water around us.
I saw you posted this on FB…
My husband Alan and I went on a whale-watching fundraiser this morning for “Our American Initiative”. Both Gary Johnson and Judge Jim Gray were there. We met some wonderful new people from the liberty community, and saw lots and lots of dolphins (no whales, though)..
Fewer levels of bureaucracy.
In the beginning was the plan.
And then came the assumptions.
And the assumptions were without form.
And the plan was without substance.
And darkness was upon the face of the workers.
And they spoke among themselves saying,
“It is a crock of shit and it stinketh.”
And the workers went unto their supervisors and said,
“It is a pale of dung and none may abide the odor thereof.”
And the supervisor went unto their managers and said,
“It is a container of excrement and it is very strong, such that none may abide by it.”
And the managers went unto their directors, saying,
“It is a vessel of fertilizer, and none may abide its strength.”
And the directors spoke among themselves, saying to one another,
“It contains that which aids plant growth and it is very strong.”
And the directors went unto the vice presidents, saying unto them,
“It promotes growth and is very powerful.”
And the vice presidents went unto the president, saying unto him,
“The new plan will promote the growth and vigor of the company, with powerful effects.”
And the president looked upon the plan and saw that it was good.
And the plan became policy.
This is how shit happens.
Fair enough. But at least in those cases it is relatively much easier to send your kids to a different school than when the problems are introduced at the state or worse yet national level.
So let’s make schools all over the country even more abysmal than anything seen to date?
http://www.wallbuilderslive.com/download/CommonCoreQuickFacts.pdf
The information at that link should be considered despite the source.
” Return control to parents, teachers, local communities. Enable high-quality, diversified education. Allow property taxes to drop.” seen above.
Why are libertarians proposing that local school boards are likely to be better than a state group, from a Libertarian as opposed to a conservative perspective. They are all government agencies. After all, when public schools are being sued because they did something incredibly stupid, e.g., propagandizing for some religion, it is local schools and parents not the state board of regents that is at fault. The point of common core was that there are a number of states, mostly in the deep south, where schools are abysmal. Common core will elevate them to being merely awful.
>”http://www.lp.org/legal currently at $6,275.73 Goal: $9,000.00.”
That’s great. It was at $125 after I contributed less than one week ago. I think this is one of the fastest funding of a specific LP initiative in quite a while.
Well done, Nick and LNC for taking the offense on this.
Statism: The Most Dangerous Religion
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6uVV2Dcqt0
http://www.ballot-access.org/2014/09/rent-is-2-damn-high-party-and-life-justice-party-removed-from-new-york-gubernatorial-ballot/
Doug Casey: Do We Need A State?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVu-q5R__3E
Mark Axinn via statechairs
mark axinn
7:04 PM (21 minutes ago)
to LP-State, LP-Meetup
Thanks to Gary, Mike and Bill for once again being our men on the spot. These guys have each done a terrific job for Gigi and for all of us.
Here’s what happened today (as I discern from their reports):
1. Gigi is on the ballot. Today, the Board of Commissioners confirmed their clerk’s report that she has 3074 valid signatures, which is more than the statutory minimum for her independent petition to be the Libertarian candidate for the 5th Senate District.
1A. (Aside)–The BOE Commissioners today also confirmed that Gia Arnold did not have a sufficient number of valid signatures to qualify for the 62nd Senate District. Gia has three business days to file and serve an action in New York State Supreme Court to challenge that determination if she wishes to do so. I want to take this opportunity to thank Gia for her efforts to get on the ballot as a Libertarian and look forward to her further efforts to promote liberty in western New York.
2. With respect to Gigi’s lawsuit, the Judge in Nassau County heard oral argument from Gigi’s attorney Gary Donoyan and from the attorney for Senator Marcellino and his co-conspirators, John Ciampoli. Gary proffered three arguments to dismiss or transfer Marcellino’s lawsuit to overturn the BOE determination on jurisdictional grounds. That means that he argued the Judge should dismiss the case without even considering the merits of either party’s claims, merely because there is a defect in the papers (the verification issue), because they were not timely served (the “hoist them by their own petard” Berler Rule argument) and because the case is pending in the improper venue (Nassau County rather than Albany County where the State BOE maintains its office).
3. The Judge properly reserved decision so he can review the papers and the law further and consider his decision over the weekend. The parties were instructed to re-appear in court on Monday at 9:30 am.
4. Even though today’s argument was limited to Gigi’s motion to dismiss, Gary cleverly let the Judge know that Gigi should also prevail on the merits of the petition if that is necessary. In particular, Gary handed the Judge a copy of the BOE Clerk’s finding which specifically found she has enough signatures to qualify.
Once again, I know I speak for all of us in the LPNY in thanking Bill McMillen for his regular attendance and reports from the State BOE and to Gary Donoyan for his defense of this blatant attempt to prevent voter choice in the 5th Senate District.
Mark N. Axinn
Chair, LPNY
_______________________________________________
Statechairs mailing list
[email protected]
http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/statechairs_hq.lp.org
http://www.ballot-access.org/2014/09/alaska-state-court-rules-in-favor-of-joint-independent-democratic-ticket-for-governor-lieutenant-governor/
Ballot Access News:
On September 26, Siena College released a poll for the New York gubernatorial race. The results: Democratic incumbent Andrew Cuomo 56%; Republican Rob Astorino 27%; Green Party nominee Howie Hawkins 7%; undecided or other 10%
http://www.policestateusa.com/2014/ashley-huff/
Woman arrested for possessing spoon covered with dried Spaghettios – Police State USA
GAINSVILLE, GA — An innocent woman was jailed for over a month when she was because of a spaghetti-encrusted spoon.
policestateusa.com
http://www.lp.org/blogs/staff/libertarian-party-likely-to-set-record-for-alternative-party-votes-in-midterm-elections
“This year, it seems extremely likely that the Libertarian nominees for the office at the top of the ballot will poll over 2,000,000 votes”, says Richard Winger, editor and publisher of Ballot Access News
“This is partly because the Libertarians have more candidates for the top-of-the-ticket office this year than ever before, but mostly because so many of the party’s nominees are receiving substantial support.”
Click on the link to read the whole article.
http://www.ballot-access.org/2014/09/libertarian-party-likely-to-set-a-record-vote-for-all-minor-parties-in-u-s-history-for-offices-at-top-of-ballot-in-a-midterm-year/
I’d be up for a thread if we can tie it into a party, campaign or candidate somehow. Otherwise, there are many subjects we could start off-site-topic threads for. Part of the rationale of open threads is not to have to start oodles of them. I find the subject very interesting myself. (Funny aside: Robert Capozzi apparently thinks it’s “paulie’s singularity” – LOL).
The latest Rap News is quite interesting too — and extremely timely on a personal level, since I’m currently listening to Ray Kurzweil’s book “The Singularity Is Near” on audio CD. Robert Foster’s ability to summarize RK’s theories so succinctly, and in rap form to boot, is very impressive!
Kurzweil does indeed predict in his book that this explosion of machine knowledge utterly transforming life as we know it will occur by 2050. If he and his fellow techno-prophets are even close to being right, it kind of changes everything.
Might it be worth having a separate thread on the Singularity and its implications for libertarianism and the future of the movement?
Brilliant graphic from the Storey Institute (September 25, 2014 at 8:15 pm), that really offers a great visual image. Thanks for sharing, Paulie. The Homeland Security threat level guide is very informative as well. 🙂
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/09/prweb12202640.htm
New York Libertarians Defend Ballot Position Against Republican Challenge in Court Friday
Incumbent Marcellino filed suit alleging fraudulent signatures
•
Mineloa, New York (PRWEB) September 26, 2014
The continuing legal battle for the New York State Senate’s Fifth District returns to court this morning, with a hearing at 9:30AM in the Nassau County Supreme Court. The matter is Index Number 8640/14 in the Supreme Court of the State of New York. At issue is whether or not Georgina “Gigi” Bowman will appear on the ballot this November 4th. The New York State Board of Election clerks’ report has stated Ms. Bowman has more than enough signatures to have a spot on the Libertarian line. Republican incumbent Carl Marcellino filed a lawsuit alleging fraudulent petitions and Bowman’s campaign will contest those objections in court today.
The suit is based on objections filed by 3 of Senator Marcellio’s paid staffers, Robert Conte, Mary Anne Hicks and Kathy Wilson. Conte, Hicks and Wilson all appear as Marcellino employees in NY Senate Payroll Report.
Ms. Bowman’s campaign shared a petition with current New York gubernatorial candidate Michael McDermott, who has already been approved for the ballot with the same signatures being disputed in papers filed by Suffolk Attorney John Ciampoli. The Libertarian Party of New York’s longtime attorney, Gary Donoyan is representing Ms. Bowman in the case, with support from lawyer and Party Chair Mark Axinn.
Ms. Bowman has been a member of the Libertarian Party for several years, and is its endorsed candidate in the Fifth District race. She has been extremely vocal in her criticism of the incumbent and his policies, as well as his vote to help enact the SAFE Act restricting firearm ownership and magazine capacity inside New York state borders.
In addition, the New York State Board of Elections Commissioners will meet at noon today in Albany, to decide whether to accept or reject the board’s clerk report.
All in all, a very tense and nerve-wracking day looks to be in store for both the Republican and Libertarian State Senate campaigns.
http://www.ballot-access.org/2014/09/alaska-republican-official-sues-to-prevent-democratic-gubernatorial-nominee-from-withdrawing/
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Libertarian Party of Oregon Admonishes Jason Yates; Accuses Him of Fraud for Claiming False and Misleading Endorsement
Wilsonville, Ore – September 25th, 2014 — The Libertarian Party of Oregon (LPO) State Committee voted yesterday to admonish Jason Yates, Republican Candidate for US Congressional District 1, and accuse him of fraud for making false and misleading claims that he is endorsed by the Libertarian Party of Oregon.
The Libertarian Party of Oregon has not endorsed Mr. Yates and has its own candidate for District 1, James Foster.
“It is regrettable that an individual would seek to deceive the voters of Oregon by claiming to have the endorsement of a well-known political party, when in fact he only has the endorsement of an independent political action committee that assumed a similar name with the intent to deceive people,” stated LPO Chairperson Wes Wagner.
“If Mr. Yates had any integrity left whatsoever, given his other misrepresentations about his educational achievements, he would withdraw from politics and engage in the time-honored tradition befitting a disgraced politician – spending more time with his family.”
The LPO has also voted to file criminal complaints for the false filings of certificates of nomination by Tim Reeves, previously described in our Aug 27 release.
The LPO has fielded more non-fusion candidates than all other minor parties in Oregon combined in this election cycle.
Contact:
Jeff Weston
Secretary, Libertarian Party of Oregon
[email protected]
###
Happy new year, Mark. I’m not motivated enough to find what Deran said about Hawkins at the moment but there is this:
http://www.ballot-access.org/2014/07/siena-poll-for-new-york-gubernatorial-race-shows-howie-hawkins-green-party-nominee-at-11-in-upstate-new-york/
http://www.ballot-access.org/2014/07/new-york-gubernatorial-poll-shows-green-party-nominee-howie-hawkins-at-6/
http://www.ballot-access.org/2014/08/new-york-gubernatorial-poll/ 7% on Aug 5
http://www.uncoveredpolitics.com/2014/09/22/green-partys-howie-hawkins-polling-at-24-in-syracuse/ Sept 22
Granted, we all know how those numbers tend to drop for alt party candidates at the end.
Deran–
Going back a few days (I was off line for religious holiday), you raised some points about Howie Hawkins.
I believe he has done a tremendous job in a state which hates the Green Party (and Libertarian and Constitution Parties as well), but I doubt he will do as well as you predict.
In 2010, Howie was the only the second Green Party Gov. candidate (the first was “Grandpa” Al Lewis in 1998) to get more than 50,000 votes and achieve party status/ automatic ballot access for the GP that year for the next four years. I think that was due to two factors:
1. Howie had been the GP candidate in 2006 so he had some name recognition, especially in his home town of Syracuse.
2. He was in the big televised debate at Hofstra. In fact that helped all the third-party candidates that year. Warren Redlich got 1% of the vote, or 48,300 votes, just a smidgen under the magic 50,000 number. Howie Hawkins got 1.1%, or 59,000 votes, which was enough for ballot access. Both of their campaigns were greatly enhanced by being in the debate.
I have not heard any talk of a debate this year, and certainly not one which would include the Green and Libertarian Parties, both of whom are on the ballot. Same with the Rent is too Damn High.
Cuomo doesn’t have to bother, and so he won’t, which unfortunately will not inure to our benefit like the debate did in 2010.
http://www.lp.org/legal currently at $6,275.73 Goal: $9,000.00
Libertarian poll numbers across the country continue to raise the hackles of the old parties — and they’re running scared.
Now they’re fighting dirty.
As your chair, I’m committed that when the Libertarian Party puts a candidate on the ballot, we’ll follow through to keep them on the ballot. And if our opponents cheat, we’re going to fight back — and fight back hard.
In New York, we’re mounting a legal defense to keep Libertarian Gigi Bowman on the ballot.
In Illinois, we fought back frivolous challenges from Republicans to keep our slate of candidates on the ballot.
And now they’re fighting us in Kentucky.
Our opponents are violating the law to exclude David Patterson, Libertarian candidate for Senate, from appearing in a televised debate in the highest-profile Senate race in the country. He’s up against a Democrat and Kentucky Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.
I won’t go into details, but there are some “smoking guns” in this case that show they’re breaking the law to suppress our candidate.
We must file a lawsuit immediately. This could have ramifications to all our candidates who are being excluded from debates.
We can expose their dishonest and underhanded maneuvers. But I can’t do it without your help.
Our Legal Offense Fund is down to only $2,000. The lawsuit in Kentucky is going to cost $9,000.
I will not spend money we don’t have. If you want to see us in this fight — if you are as committed as I am to show the old parties that if you hit a porcupine, it hurts — I need your financial support.
When we authorized this lawsuit at the Libertarian National Committee meeting this weekend, committee member Guy McLendon wrote a $500 check on the spot to support it. He knows how powerful this could be, he knows what the “smoking guns” are, and he knows how much earned media we will get from this. I need you to join him.
Fill out the form below to give your best contribution to our Legal Offense Fund. I promise you that every dollar we receive from this fundraiser will be spent on legal offense.
We’re going to bring the fight to the old parties in Kentucky and in any other state where corrupt politicians and their cronies in the media break the law to fight us.
We’re going to show them that they can’t suppress our Libertarian candidates’ bold message to cut government and advance liberty — or hide how weak the old-party politicians really are.
We need to file a lawsuit this week. I can’t do it without your contribution today.
Please donate today to the Legal Offense Fund and help us fight back!
Yours in liberty,
Nicholas Sarwark
Nicholas J. Sarwark
Chair, Libertarian National Committee
P.S. — We had a wonderful grand opening of the Libertarian Party’s national headquarters this past weekend. Our party is here to stay, and the headquarters is a concrete sign of that. We’ve sent a message to the old parties, and they’re scared.
P.P.S. — With your support, we can fight back in Kentucky to get Libertarian David Patterson into the debates against Republican Mitch McConnell — and open doors for more Libertarians in debates. Please donate today.
[Note: Any funds raised in excess of what is needed will be used for other legal fund projects.]
And on LP facebook:
Learn more about David Patterson (L), candidate for US Senate (KY) at https://www.facebook.com/DavidPatterson4Senate2014
We have seen that the Republican Party has thrown tons of money to try to knock Libertarians off the ballot. Not only has this has forced the LP in those state to deplete resources but it has cost the TAXPAYERS money.
It is time for the GOP and others to face their fears and accept the fact that the Libertarian Party is here to stay.
Learn more about Libertarian candidates at http://www.lp.org/candidates-14
#Libertarian #PartyofPrinciple #GameOn
The Illinois Republican Party tried to knock the Libertarian Party of Illinois off the ballot ALL summer. Now it is time for them to face their fears and accept that we are here to stay.
Learn more about Libertarian candidates at http://lpillinois.org/campaigns/
#Libertarian #PartyofPrinciple #GameOn
http://www.ballot-access.org/2014/09/democracy-com-makes-it-possible-for-any-candidate-to-have-a-campaign-web-page-without-cost/
http://www.theonion.com/articles/obama-vows-to-split-isis-into-dozens-of-extremist,36903/
Yes, it’s the Onion, but is this really satire? Seems quite factual to me…
And via David Colborne …. http://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/if-you-think-military-intervention-is-unjustified-now-wait-until-you-see-the-instability-it-will-cause
Gun grabbing mothers group leader says Goebbels words are “words to live by”….not kidding, she actually said that.
COITELPRO 101 – The Sabotage of Legitimate Dissent
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISkqQ3hpW5E
Here is Adrian Wyllie’s first TV commercial that will air in the Tampa Bay market later this week:
http://youtu.be/QIGeYae6MLg
Backstory: http://www.examiner.com/article/wyllie-campaign-announces-television-ads-are-just-days-away
I think we can all agree, socialist, Green, Libertarian etc, that seeing high school students getting outside in protest against attempts to “clean up” high school curriculum – down play civil disobedience, social protests, strikes, etc, and to emphasize “patriotism” (as defined by who?) and obedience to traditions and laws, is a good thing.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-colorado-student-protests-story.html
Yes, I even cleared my browser’s cache, closed and reopened the browser and still no Recent Comments. I checked with both Firefox and Safari.
Deran, that’s exactly what’s happing to me. There are simply no comments listed under “Recent Comments. I noticed it last night.
Just now, when I posted the comment on Howie Hawkins, I did not think it went through because I got a “Bad Gateway 502” notice. Whatever that means. But my comment seems to have gone through anyway. When I go to the IPR home page, and reload the page, I see no list of Recent Comments on the right side of the page. Just the Recent Entries list.
Generally I find the Green Party too Keynesian in their economics and too hippie-dippie in their party culture, but I am impressed by Howie Hawkins, I know he has a long history as a socialist, and as a Green, and according to the first poll in New York State since the Sept primary, he is polling at 9%, An astronomical (for a Green in NYS) increase over even Hawkins past vote total. Even if it turns out to be 5%, that will still be a few hundred thousand votes. I’ll bet if Hawkins can pull at least 5% in November he will have a good chance of being the Green’s 2016 presidential candidate.
Last time, 2010, Hawkins was allowed to be in one (two?) of the major debates. If he can get into one or more of those this time I’ll wager he can get closer to 9, even, 10%.
But of course the Democrats, even with Cuomo’s 25% lead over the Republican, do not want to see the Greens get anywhere near 10%, and possibly supplant the Working Families Party as NYS’ Left of Center third party. And thus the Democrats are trying to keep Hawkins out of any debates Cuomo is in.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/cuomo-leads-challenger-rob-astorino-25-points-poll-article-1.1950771
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHVtUw5wToA
http://benswann.com/profiling-muslim-americans-is-not-libertarian/
Seems to be working OK here at the moment.
Is anyone else having a problem with the “recent comments” section not showing up? Oddly, it seems to come and go.
“I think that there are too many Libertarians out there who do not really understand what we are up against.”
I don’t know how you sleep at night.
“Jill Pyeatt September 23, 2014 at 2:22 pm
Andy, PLEASE don’t post links to Vernon’s site. That’s doing exactly what he wants you to do.
Trust me on this, the best thing to do is IGNORE him. That will drive him crazy.”
I think that everyone needs to be aware of the fact that “Vernon” has telephone surveillance capability, and/or “Vernon’s” handlers have telephone surveillance capability.
All of the evidence points to this being a government sabotage operation against the Libertarian Party and movement.
I think that there are too many Libertarians out there who do not really understand what we are up against.
Amen!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3VwtDfGajQ&feature=youtu.be
That’s a very short drive 🙂
Andy, PLEASE don’t post links to Vernon’s site. That’s doing exactly what he wants you to do.
Trust me on this, the best thing to do is IGNORE him. That will drive him crazy.
Jill, it’s at http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business_hq.lp.org/attachments/20140915/a936eab1/attachment-0001.pdf
Andy, please stop responding to vermin. We are taking his posts down but sometimes it may take a few minutes or a couple of hours before someone sees them. If you quote him in the meantime, you are in effect preserving his post even after it is removed unless you want yours removed also.
Nicholas, I’ll put together an article later today with thism (unless someone gets to it first.
BTW, did you write a chair’s report? I never saw one (I’ll include it in the article if you did).
Video of the grand opening speech, shot by Arvin Vohra:
http://youtu.be/hpAR4_hJ3vk
“Vernon September 23, 2014 at 2:54 am
Speaking of lying pieces of shit: http://88fourteen.wordpress.com/2014/09/15/andy-jacobs-and-paul-frankel-are-dishonest-lying-pieces-of-shit-still-closely-associated-with-busted-fake-veterans-charity-scammer-gary-fincher/”
You’ve given yourself away, “Vernon.” It is obvious that you are some kind of government agent.
I did talk to Gary Fincher on the phone as he called me from jail multiple times. I did not take his calls at first, but I was curious as to what he had to say, so I ended up paying the money to receive a few of his calls from jail (jail phone is a huge scam). I had not spoken to him in years, and I have not seen him since May of 2010.
Gary actually apologized to me and said that he wants to put his life back together. He also asked me if I’d bail him out of jail. Now one could question whether or not his apology was for real, or if he was just trying to get me to bail him out of jail, but this is not the point. (And note that I have not bailed him out of jail, and I am not likely to bail him out of jail either).
The point here is that I only mentioned it to two people that I had talked to Gary. One of them was to Paul, who happened to be within earshot of most of these conversations, and the other was to a friend over the phone. Neither Paul nor the other person had mentioned these conversations to anyone else, and they were not mentioned online or in any emails.
The only way that “Vernon” would know that I spoke to Gary would be if he/she had telephone surveillance capabilities, or if somebody who had telephone surveillance capabilities fed this information to “Vernon,” who of course twisted the information around to turn it into a smear.
I only told four people where I was, and two of those four people are family members, one is another one of the Libertarian petitioners that has been smeared here (Jake), and the other one is a petitioner friend I know off of the mercenary petitioning circuit, and I only told the last person which motel I was staying at, but I never mentioned the room number (and no, there have not been any gay sex acts, and no big arguments or lots of noise that elicited complaints).
Who is going to have these kinds of surveillance capabilities, along with the motivation to engage in these type of surveillance activities, and the motive to post such smears, other than a politically motivated paid government troll?
If “Vernon” was really out to say negative things about petitioners in general, why doesn’t “Vernon” talk about the mercenary petition coordinator who got Gary into the Veterans thing, and why doesn’t “Vernon” talk about the other mercenary petitioners who have done the Veterans thing?
Also, notice how “Vernon” has not said a peep about the mercenary petitioner who worked on the LP petition drive in Illinois this year who had all of the signatures that they turned in thrown out (more than 3,600 signatures valued at over $9,000 of LP donor’s money) because they violated a legal technicality?
There are all kinds of screw ups, mishaps, and scandals in the world of petitioning that “Vernon” could talk about, yet “Vernon” only talks about a very tiny handful of petitioners who are or have been Libertarian Party activists, and who have also posted political stuff online.
There is also the racist stuff, and “Vernon’s” repeated attempts at tying both big “L” and small “l” libertarians in with racist material, as if libertarians are a part of some kind of racist movement. This is straight out of a government provocateur’s playbook.
All of this is done under the cover of fake screen names and IP anonymizers. After all, “Vernon” doesn’t want to give up the government agency or foreign government for whom he is working.
It should be pretty obvious to all that this is a part of a sabotage operation against the Libertarian Party and movement.
“Vernon September 23, 2014 at 2:35 am
Andy – it is not healthy to talk to yourself, LOL https://88fourteen.wordpress.com/2014/09/08/is-libertarian-andy-jacobs-a-paid-government-troll-and-if-so-which-countrys-government-is-paying-him/”
We are on to you, you lying piece of shit.
“Vernon September 23, 2014 at 1:38 am
We’re not related, but I like his writing. He should get over the judaic propaganda against Hitler though. I think he will evolve into a national socialist and Thulean/Odalist in time.”
Maybe you could get Lesiak a job for the same government agency where you work. Which is it, FBI, NSA, CIA, DHS, DOD, or perhaps a foreign government agency like the British MI6 or the Israeli Mossad or the Russian SVR?
“klesiak September 22, 2014 at 9:45 pm
Greetings, just dropping by, ATPR is going strong, check us out for some story ideas….
This one is good 🙂
http://amthirdpartyreport.wordpress.com/2014/09/22/us-senate-candidate-in-kentucky-with-jews-we-lose/
14/88……….jk.”
I’ve got to wonder if Lesiak is “Vernon,” or if “Vernon” is Lesiak’s father or some other relative.
I have no lack of story ideas. I have lack of attention span to sit down and make them into articles.
What’s good about it?
jk? u sure?
Average age = 14
Highest IQ = 88
Greetings, just dropping by, ATPR is going strong, check us out for some story ideas….
This one is good 🙂
http://amthirdpartyreport.wordpress.com/2014/09/22/us-senate-candidate-in-kentucky-with-jews-we-lose/
14/88……….jk.
http://christianpoliticalparty.com/constitution-day-passes-without-notice/
Liberty Advocate Framed by FBI? – The Schaeffer Cox Story
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFf4bZfsVOM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nP6xBFyA_aw
“Deran September 22, 2014 at 12:43 am
I would favor segregating discussions of petion concerns and issues that do not have directly to with current or the last election to a series of separate posts.”
Several points I made in comments about petition concerns DID have to do with this election. The mercenary petitioner who worked in Illinois on the Libertarian Party this year and had 100% of their signatures (over $9,000 worth of signatures) thrown out due to them having violated a legal technicality happened this year, so it is certainly a relevant topic.
If it starts becoming a big problem again we’ll tighten up on the enforcement.
We already have separate threads for it. We haven’t been as stringent about enforcement on that because there have not been as many complaints about it lately.
I would favor segregating discussions of petion concerns and issues that do not have directly to with current or the last election to a series of separate posts. Some people go on and on about those things and while I am sure it is interesting to the people who post about it constantly, it really cluters up Open Threads and other posts not related to petitioning. I’m not saying it’s as off topic and obsessive as “PLAS” or “USA Parl”, but I do think these oft repeat deiscussions could benefit by not getting lost among other topics, and would benefit readers who are not interested. Or who have heard the stories and complaints before.
Ground control to Major Tom! Ground control to Major Tom! Can you hear me Major Tom? Can you hear me Major Tom?
Where is Tom Knapp? He posted multiple times on this forum about a small turn in of voter registration cards back in 1999 which contained some cards with false SSN’s on them (which were only put on the cards during the last turn in, because after weeks into the drive, the state LP coordinator said he was not going to pay for cards that had already been collected but lacked SSN’s, even though this requirement had never been mentioned prior to this), but were processed as valid anyway (as in the cards made the voter roll), yet Tom has been silent about the $9,000 plus worth of signatures that were thrown out in Illinois because a mercenary petitioner violated a legal technicality in that state.
If Tom was really concerned about everything being done properly on LP ballot access drives, shouldn’t he be on here pitching a bitch fit about over $9,000 worth of signatures being thrown out in Illinois because a petitioner violated a legal technicality?
” If these signatures had been collected by me, or Paul, or Jake, or Mark, or Gary (who has not even worked on any Libertarian Party ballot access drives in over 4 1/2 years),”
Mark got another job in the fall of 2008, and since then, he’s only worked on 5 ballot access drives, and only two for the Libertarian Party.
Jake has done more ballot access work recently, but he’s also had long gaps where he has not worked on any ballot access drives at all, and in the last 6 years, going back to this date in 2008, so I’m not counting the LP ballot access drive in Alabama in 2008, which ended on September 6th of that year, Jake has only worked on 5 LP ballot access drives.
Since the fall of 2008, Gary only worked on 2 LP ballot access drives, one in 2009, and one in early 2010.
Going back to the year 2000, Gary worked 16 LP ballot access drives from 2000-2010. He did work on petition drives during that time period for other groups, but he also had another job outside of politics, which was delivering motor homes. He worked a bunch of other petition drives for the LP and other groups back in the 1990’s, starting in 1991 for the LP.
Going back to the year 2000, which is when I started in ballot access, I’ve worked on 36 LP ballot access drives (plus a lot of others for other groups).
Going back to the year 2000, Paul has worked on 40 LP ballot access drives, and prior to 2000, he worked on his first ballot access drive, which was for the LP, in 1998, and then he worked on a long one that started in late 1998, and lasted until the year 2000.
So out of the Libertarian petitioners that have been slandered here, it is really only Paul and myself that have done what I’d call a lot of ballot access work, particularly in recent years.
A non-libertarian mercenary who frequently petitions for the Libertarian Party had every signature that they turned in thrown out in the challenge in Illinois this year because they violated a legal technicality. The number of signatures that were thrown out from this person was over 3,600, which, at $2.50 a pop, means that over $9,000 worth of signatures that this person turned in were thrown out.
How come “Vernon’ hasn’t said anything about this? If these signatures had been collected by me, or Paul, or Jake, or Mark, or Gary (who has not even worked on any Libertarian Party ballot access drives in over 4 1/2 years), “Vernon” would have come on here and raised a big stink about it, yet a non-libertarian mercenary has all of their signatures thrown out on an LP petition drive and “Vernon” says nothing.
How come Tom Knapp isn’t on here bitching about this? Tom Knapp has repeatedly made a stink about a Libertarian Party voter registration drive from 1999 where Gary Fincher wrote in random numbers in SSN boxes on some of the forms the last week that he was there, which was in response to the state LP coordinator engaging in a breach of contract by arbitrarily saying that he was not going to pay him for any registrations where the person registering did not fill in the SSN box, which was due to the state LP coordinator misinterpreting the law, as the courts had already ruled that SSN’s were not mandatory to register to vote. Tom Knapp repeated this story multiple times on this forum, even though it happened way back in 1999, and even though it was only a small number of registrations, and even though the false SSN’s did not disqualify any of the registrations (because the SSN box was optional, and all of the mandatory information was in fact legitimate), yet here we are in 2014, and a non-libertarian mercenary petitioner who worked in Illinois had 100% of their signatures thrown out in the challenge, over 3,600 petition signatures for which the LP paid out over $9,000, due to the petitioner having been caught in a legal violation, and Tom Knapp has said nothing about this.
So let’s do the math here. Damages caused by false SSN’s in a small number of voter registration boxes in New Mexico back in 1999 = no real damages, other than a few people getting their feathers ruffled. Damages in Illinois due to a petitioner violating a legal technicality in that state = over 3,600 signatures thrown out, which means that the Libertarian Party spent over $9,000 on these signatures for nothing. Over $9,000 in damages in Illinois in 2014 is a hell of a lot more than ZERO dollars in damages in New Mexico in 1999.
Out of the petitioners who have been slandered on this site, the only ones who worked in Illinois this year were myself and Jake. The Republicans tried to disqualify all of the signatures that we collected (just as they tried to disqualify the signatures of every other petitioner who worked on that petition drive), however, they were unable to disqualify all of our signatures, and we in fact both had a good validity rate on those signatures. If you took away the signatures collected by Jake or myself on the LP petition drive in Illinois this year, the Libertarian Party would not have ballot access in Illinois right now.
The last time I brought this point up to Tom Knapp, as in other scandals or mishaps that have happened on LP ballot access drives that were far bigger and more recent than the New Mexico incident from 1999 (which was really much ado about nothing), Tom Knapp’s response was that he had quit the LP, so he did not care about what happened on any LP ballot access drives after he quit the party. Tom Knapp rejoined the party this year, so considering that Tom is a current Libertarian Party member again, the LP ballot access drive in Illinois this year should be relevant to him.
“Republicans and Democrats are losing registrations across the country, while Libertarian registrations are rising. ” http://buff.ly/1t6Ghhm
Boo Hoo
They can, have, and will do so in increasing quantity and frequency.
It’s my party, you can cry if you want to…I will laugh too when it happens to you.
Put on a little Hootie,
Only wanna be with you,
The words connected me to you
“Sometimes you’re crazy
And you wonder why
I’m such a baby
Cause [Libertarians] make me cry
Well there’s nothing I can do”
Republicrats can never lose.
Maybe. Or maybe it takes them a long time to process complaints. Which would be bad, because all kinds of damage could be done with incitement to violence and posting people’s personal info while they are getting around to reviewing it. Or maybe there is another explanation I did not think of yet.
If FFF got shut down because of the porn, WordPress must see the pron as more of a potential legal trouble for WP than the neonazi troll’s promotion of violence and libel?
Just checked and vermin vern’s crappy blog is still up and still violating wordpress terms of service. As laughable (not in a good way either) as FFF’s blog was, it was nowhere near as bad. I know at least two or more people have let wordpress know that Vern is violating TOS in regards to open incitements to violence as well as violations of privacy and spamming at other blogs (namely this one) but so far they have ignored it. Why the double standard, or how long does their reviews process take when one of their users violates their TOS and it is brought to their attention?
http://reason.com/archives/2014/09/19/can-police-resist-using-new-military-toy
Can Police Resist Using New Military ‘Toys’?
Once they start, it’s hard to stop.
http://reason.com/blog/2014/09/19/the-gops-metamorphosis-fromthe-stupid-pa
“The GOP’s metamorphosis from…the stupid party into [one] that is both stupid and useless is almost complete.”
p] Almost?!
http://reason.com/blog/2014/09/19/asset-forfeiture-laws-evil
Asset Forfeiture Laws ‘Evil’ and ‘Unreformable,’ Say Former Justice Department Officials {duh}
http://reason.com/blog/2014/09/19/barney-frank-explains-how-americas-liber
Barney Frank Explains How America’s Libertarian Nature Is Helping Legalize Gay Marriage, Marijuana
….he makes some interesting libertarian-friendly statements (including actually referencing libertarianism)….
http://reason.com/blog/2014/09/19/more-hysteria-over-toy-guns-and-non-guns
More Hysteria Over Toy Guns and Non-Guns in Schools
http://reason.com/blog/2014/09/19/it-looks-like-pot-will-soon-be-legal-in
It Looks Like Pot Will Soon Be Legal in the Nation’s Capital, Maybe in Oregon Too (Alaska Is Iffier)
….Amendment 2, which would make Florida the first Southern state to approve medical use of marijuana, is also ahead in the polls. As a constitutional amendment, it needs 60 percent support to pass. A Quinnipiac University Poll conducted in July put support at a whopping 88 percent….
Anger at Feds Drives Growing Interest in Seceding From the Union
Secession is a recurring theme in recent years. Remember all of those petitions to the White House to Let My People Go signed by ticked off residents of mostly red states, but some blue ones, too? Well, perhaps sparked by all of the debate leading to the failed secession vote in Scotland, Americans have a continuing interest in the idea-so says a Reuters/Ipsos poll. According to Reuters, “Some 23.9 percent of Americans polled from Aug. 23 through Sept. 16 said they strongly supported or tended to support the idea of their state breaking away.”
http://reason.com/blog/2014/09/19/anger-at-feds-drives-growing-interest-in
How Many Billions Will Bombing ISIS Cost? What About Other Radicals?
While the Obama administration splits hairs over whether literally having armed American soldiers on Iraqi soil counts as “troops on the ground” (hint: It does) and quibbles about whether it’s a good idea to arm so-called moderate rebels in Syria to fight ISIS (hint: The CIA says it’s not), the U.S.’s primary strategy in Iraq War III has been airstrikes. How many billions of dollars is this going to cost America, though?
http://reason.com/blog/2014/09/19/how-many-billions-will-bombing-isis-cost
No-Fly List Defenders Have a New Excuse: ISIS
http://reason.com/blog/2014/09/19/no-fly-list-reform-hearing
Obama Might Send Armed Soldiers, On the Ground, to Help Fight ISIS-But Don’t Worry, They Won’t Be ‘Ground Troops’
http://reason.com/blog/2014/09/19/obama-might-send-armed-soldiers-on-the-g
More Rand Paul doubletalk
http://reason.com/blog/2014/09/19/rand-paul-wants-to-destroy-isis-yet-stay
Rand Paul Wants to ‘Destroy’ ISIS Yet ‘Stay the Heck Out of Their Civil War’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3ubVNtpWFiU
http://www.lp.org/blogs/wes-benedict/lnc-meeting-to-be-streamed-live-on-920-921-agenda
Regarding http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business_hq.lp.org/2014/001875.html quoted above.
According to Tom Mahon CPD lawsuit is trying to get Green Party on board and see whether they are willing to commit to responsibility for part of the costs/risks. Supposedly they are ready to go otherwise.
According to another source that I am not sure whether I should name, “What I heard, for what it’s worth, is that the CPD lawsuit is being delayed to max fundraising first/cover current overhead.”
Americans are fooled by overblown propaganda which is designed precisely to rile them up for the benefit of the warmongers and war profiteers.
Yes, the propaganda has been effective.
However giving in to it accomplishes exactly nothing positive.
While your plan is better than Obama’s it still hastens a larger conflict (see the two links I included for context on that).
So, by playing in to exaggerated and consciously maniplulated public fears that “ISIS is a threat to the US” you just play into the hands of the manipulators and move the US closer to even more widespread military involvement in the middle east and other parts of Eurasia in the not too distant future, albeit by a slightly different path than the Republicrat establishment wants to take.
Whereas the LP statement correctly assesses that the only solution for the US regime is to butt out, stay out, and let the people of the middle east figure out their own problems without the US regime’s unwanted, unneeded and counterproductive “help” which has a long track record of only making the problems there worse and worse despite the US regime’s dizzying array of alliance switches.
Or to put it more concisely: US regime get out and stay out.
I base my plan on the following factors:
1. Americans consider ISIS a threat to the US
2. Americans want the US to disengage militarily from the Middle East
My plan kills two birds with one stone.
The LP statement completely ignores factor #1.
http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business_hq.lp.org/2014/001875.html
http://www.lp.org/candidates-14
http://www.lp.org/how-do-libertarians-republicans-and-democrats-differ
http://www.lp.org/2014-libertarian-federal-candidate-pledges
http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business_hq.lp.org/2014/001879.html
I’m not sure what problems you have with the LP release. I think it was on the money. You allude to problems but don’t name them.
I am all for ending the embargo on Iran, but having the US switch sides in the line-up to conflict (see the medium.com link above and http://scgnews.com/the-geopolitics-of-world-war-iii for context) by encouraging Iran to fight ISIS – do they really need encouraging? – wouldn’t do anything to prevent larger war, it would hasten it by getting leading edge bit players to engage sooner. Giving the larger forces backing and allying with them in various ways this is a very dangerous game.
Iran is still a regime that hates the US, Israel and the west so why would the US want to strengthen Iran, or Iran’s ally Assad of Syria, any more than the US should stengthen ISIS and other opponents of Assad in Syria? It is foolish to believe that the US regime can do itself or the world any good by helping any of the sides in these conflicts or that it can accurately assess which side is the “good guys” (or that there is a “good guys” in this conflict).
Consider the history of US interventions in the middle east. Destabilizing Saddam Hussein and Assad has led to the rise of ISIS, funding the Taliban against the Soviets led to the rise of Al-Qaida, funding the Shah led to the rise of the Ayatollah by formenting anti-American resentment, then the US armed or in various ways supported both sides in the Iran-Iraq war as well as helped finance and back Saddam from his rise to power to the falling out in 1990. US aid to Israel, US infidel troops in the Muslim holy lands of Arabia and US occupations, bombing, embargo and invasions of Iraq have fueled the rise of extremism by creating hatred, resentment, backlash and blowback throughout the Muslim world.
All of these interventions have created blowback and (let’s be generous) unintended consequences that have been worse than whatever they were aimed at addressing, and the continually worsening problems that resulted have been used to justify ever more US regime intervention, in a vicious cycle that keeps getting worse with every US attempt to “fix” the middle east’s problems.
Of course this is all great for the US weapons industries, companies like Halliburton that supply and rebuild warzones, media sensation mongering corporations, the prison-police-industrial complex (both criminals and police have many military veterans among them), bankers that lend money to these enterprises, and a few others. But overall it is really bad for the US and the world and creating a more vicious, more organized and more well trained bunch of terrorists as time goes on, with ISIS being the latest.
At best, the US regime is really bad at picking allies and trying to engineer less bad outcomes by intervening in the middle east, whether with troops, bombing, aid, sanctions, or even diplomacy. At worst, it is cynically engineering ever more conflict for the benefit of select corporate partners who are intertwined with the establishment power structure.
Either way, by far the best thing the US regime can do is stop trying to fix it, since it just keeps making things worse and worse, and just completely butt out and stay out. Not that that will fix centuries and even millenia of problems all by itself but it would probably be better than anything else the US regime could possibly do.
The chances that the US regime will consciously engineer a more positive outcome in the middle east are about the same as a bunch of retarded monkeys on meth with chainsaws improving the condition of a patient by performing brain surgery. Please get the monkeys away from the patient and if possible get the chainsaws out of their hands!
Interesting read, although I haven’t verified how reliable or unreliable the source is:
https://medium.com/@matthewstoller/the-solution-to-isis-is-the-first-amendment-95fc2c94f52e
I like Austin Cassidy’s proposed remedies. Much more productive than my offer a few years ago to anally abuse Coulter in a dirty port-a-potty at the tail end of a several days long campout music festival.
I can’t think of a woman ever who disgusts me as much as Ann Coulter. She’s one of the reasons so many people, including me, think of the GOP as a party of very mean people.
They’re desperately trying to keep the party from blowing apart, but I think it’s too late for that The lack of integrity is just too glaring.
http://www.ballot-access.org/2014/09/illinois-state-court-keeps-libertarian-statewide-slate-on-ballot/
http://www.uncoveredpolitics.com/2014/09/18/ann-coulter-wants-to-murder-libertarian-voters-seriously/
See the latest from Saturn’s Repository:
“A Sensible Solution to the ISIS Crisis”
http://saturnsrepository.wordpress.com/2014/09/18/sensible-solution-to-the-isis-crisis/
Maybe “Vernon” is posting from Russia.
Russia’s Online Troll Army Is Huge, Hilarious & Already Everywhere
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CussBbmJHzI
That was already discussed above. He had a porno page which he called private but was actually publically accessible. Then he took down the link and apologized but apparently the page was not actually deleted. This caused the blog to be deleted as a whole. Terms of service violations are not automatically caught or sought by wordpress, someone has to take the trouble to report them. For example I have noticed that vermin vernon’s 8814 blog has several terms of service violations, including inciting violence and violating people’s privacy, so someone may want to bring that to the attention of wordpress.
Mr. Areola got himself in some trouble apparently.
“This blog has been archived or suspended for a violation of our Terms of Service”
I can only imagine how this played out.
I apologize if this is an inapproprite comment. But I couldn’t resist.
I think that includes undecided. That is, yes, it is competitive between Walker and Parnell. I wish I could say that means you or Mark Fish (I think he is running for Gov, I’d have to check though) are very competitive, but that seems like wishful thinking in the context of similar polls in the past and what I know about the dynamics of the race.
Check it out, the Alaska Governor’s race becomes very competitive, 40% want Other.
http://amandacoyne.com/politics/new-governors-race-poll-shows-walker-leading-parnell-by-8-points/#comment-48708
http://taxfoundation.org/article/2014-international-tax-competitiveness-index US ranked 32nd of 34
September 15 at 9:11am
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/sep/14/foreign-tech-entrepreneurs-visa-us-struggle
For foreign tech entrepreneurs, getting a visa to work in the US is a struggle
Spanish-born Iñaki Berenguer, working on his second startup, warns: ‘In five, 10 years, the US will not be the leader any more’
theguardian.com|By Nina Roberts
http://reason.com/blog/2014/09/12/welcome-to-berlin-yankee-hope-you-brough
Welcome to Berlin, Yankee! Hope You Brought a Mattress for Your Money!
There are an estimated 7.6 million Americans living in foreign countries, give or take.
reason.com
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVGp_H2uCCk&feature=youtu.be
American police scammed Canadian visitors out of $2.5 billion
American police are targeting their northern neighbors, according to a travel warning from the Canadian government. State and federal law enforcement officer…
youtube.com
http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2014/09/call-anti-police-ending-states-security.html
Pro Libertate: Call the Anti-Police: Ending the State’s “Security” Monopoly
freedominourtime.blogspot.com
http://politix.topix.com/news/14045-heres-how-technology-in-politics-will-boost-libertarians-and-greens
Jurors Beware: State Crime Labs Incentivized to Help Falsely Convict
Jurors should be aware of strong incentives for state crime labs nationwide to help convict—their financial stability is often tied to convictions.
omkt.co
http://omkt.co/AABVAE
Lorie Meacham via Fully Informed Jury Association
4 hrs:
In the 1850s the Fugitive Slave Act required $10 payment to commissioners who ruled in favor of slave masters and only $5 when they ruled in favor of blacks who slave masters claimed were their property. This led to many legally free blacks being sent into slavery along with those who the law legally defined as property being returned to slavery. Jurors should be aware that today, many state crime labs operate under similarly perverse economic incentives, getting paid specifically when their work leads to a conviction. As a juror, among your powers is ultimate authority in weighing the credibility of all testimony and evidence. You are not obligated to believe any evidence, analysis, or testimony presented to you.
·
http://fija.org/2014/09/17/jury-takes-minutes-to-acquit-man-who-spent-10-months-in-jail/
Things like this happen to more people than many folks would even begin to imagine or want to think about ….read the details of what happened to him other than just being in jail. And millions more jailed for “crimes” they did commit but which should have never been crimes to begin with. Ten months is a lot more than just ten months, it can destroy your whole life.
I wouldn’t go so far as to say no one but you get the idea.
That would be good.
Well, maybe I’ll change my mind about my previous statement. 🙂
“HQ grand opening” should include some speeches, fundraising, and so on, not just a cocktail party. And that program (if you do one) should be broadcast and taped for later viewing as well, which could be additional good publicity and additional fundraising. You are losing an opportunity if it is *only* a cocktail party and nothing else.
Me three 🙂
Frankly, I would find it entertaining as well–
<iIt will not. Nobody wants to watch a cocktail party over the Internet.
You might be surprised. Personally, I find it can be interesting to listen to the conversations near the mic. Besides, it gives the appearance of being inclusive.
PEACE
If anyone wants to wach me drink and can send me some booze I’ll drink it on camera for you.
Isn’t there a formal portion of the event? There should be, even if it’s short (which it probably should be).
Nick–
Excellent point.
Please Fed Express me a bottle of bourbon and I promise you won’t have to watch me drink it! 🙂
It will not. Nobody wants to watch a cocktail party over the Internet.
Will that be streamed also?
The LNC will be meeting this weekend in Alexandria. The meeting should be streamed, though I don’t have the link yet. There will be a HQ grand opening on Saturday evening, from 7:00-10:00 pm.
Top NSA Whistleblower: NSA Has The Power To Blackmail Anyone
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyIkzr22bD8
Thanks, Paulie and Jill.
Utopians getting scammed? That must have never happened before…
Yeah, but when you sell land with the promise that it’s divisible and improvable, while knowing that it’s not, that’s fraud in the inducement. Which also squares with the founders disappearing into the wind as soon as the jig was up.
So far as I can tell, GGC failed because of regulations that prevented the subdivisions. Not really a failure of freedom…
There’s also that train wreck show “Utopia” But I assume Some of that is set up a bit, These self-chose.
Not surprising, but I think the diagnosis of why it happened is incorrect.
Something I just saw today,
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/09/15/libertarian-utopia-styled-after-ayn-rand-book-spectacularly-falls-apart-almost-immediately/
Happy birthday, Langa!
9/11 Firefighter Blows WTC 7 Cover-Up Wide Open
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQrpLp-X0ws
Happy birthday to both of you.
Happy 38th birthday to Robert Sarvis!
If he turned 38 on September 15, that means he and I are exactly the same age, down to the day.
Too bad I haven’t accomplished nearly as much in my 38 years as he seems to have in his.
Anyway… Happy Birthday, Rob!
Where Does The 9/11 Truth Movement Go From Here?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gh8nphnBwZ8
Where Does The 9/11 Truth Movement Go From Here?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gh8nphnBwZ8&list=UUhwwoeOZ3EJPobW83dgQfAg
Bob Bridges debated his dinosaur party opponents today
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UMJRg4de5s&sns=fb
PEACE
Happy 38th birthday to Robert Sarvis!
I think you mentioned that already, LOL
Mark,
Exactly.
I don’t like that token system for LP POTUS candidates . . .
I for one have no objection to people who wish to post anonymously, so long as their posts are not offensive.
The objection with Vernon and some others is to the content of their posts, not to the fact that they prefer not to use their full or real names.
Thanks everyone.
Yes, that’s a difficult loss, NF. Sorry to hear this.
I wish to express my condolences as well NF.
Thanks, Mark.
NF–
Condolences on your loss. My parents are both in their 80’s so I expect that I will be in your situation at some point sooner than I would prefer too.
George–
Excellent editorial.
Bravo!
They aren’t ridiculous statements. The analogy is correct, in that what you propose (which has already been considered and rejected) is an over-recation that sweeps up the innocent as well as the guilty. If people did not derive some utility from posting here they would not do it. Thus they would lose utility if they were not able to. Everything you, I and anyone else is saying about this has already been said in this thread and other threads, so please stop and please consider the topic closed. If you feel really strongly about it you can follow your own advice about starting your own forum or going to a different one. Otherwise, the decision has been made so please move on.
“;langa
September 14, 2014 at 2:14 am
Your proposal is like outlawing all fire because some fires are arson.”
Or outlawing guns because some of them are used to commit crimes.”
Ridiculous statements. This is a freaking internet forum. There’d be no damages suffered by not posting here. Just go to another message forum, or start your own message forum. You don’t “need” to post here.
“Sorry to hear. My condolences.”
Thank you, Paulie.
Yep.
Your proposal is like outlawing all fire because some fires are arson.
Or outlawing guns because some of them are used to commit crimes.
Is there a police tank in your neighborhood? Perhaps a police fighter-bomber?
NPR has released an equipment list of stuff supplied to police forces from the military
http://www.npr.org/2014/09/02/342494225/mraps-and-bayonets-what-we-know-about-the-pentagons-1033-program
This includes police tanks, aircraft, gadgets that can read or perform DDOS attacks on your cell phone, etc.
Liberty for America Editorial
Republicans Launch War on Libertarian Party
All across America, Libertarians are reporting on the new and systematic war of the Republican Party of torture, war crimes, and massive corruption on our Libertarian Party. The Republicans have attacked on so many fronts that it is difficult to know where to begin.
In Ohio, Republican public officials used new and bizarre interpretations of their state election laws to knock Libertarian Charlie Earl off the ballot for Governor. Contrary to all past interpretations of the law, they claimed that ballot access contractors were employees who had misfiled their nominating papers. Unless Earl’s litigation restores him to the ballot, Republicans will cost the Libertarian Party ballot access in Ohio.
In Washington, Republican liars and several astroturf organizations are claiming that “Top Two” means that Libertarians are now being taken seriously, and have candidates on the two-way November election ballot. These people are showing up on Libertarian Facebook groups to spread their deceitful propaganda, and we urge all readers to call them out for their Republican Big Lie technique.
Under Top Two, there is an open primary, with the top two candidates advancing in November to the general election. In California, two years ago, the depraved top-two election scheme meant that in one heavily Democratic Congressional District in November voters had a choice of two Republicans. In Washington this year, some Libertarians were in two-way primary races, because the Democrats had not fielded a candidate. They advanced to the general election exactly as they would have done if top two had not been in place. The Republican Big Lie is that Top Two let the Libertarians run in November.
In New York, Republicans filed suit to take Gigi Bowman off the ballot. She had filed 5000 signatures, with 3000 needed. One of their claims was that it was impossible for anyone to collect the number of signatures she had filed, so her signatures had to be fraudulent. Of course, that does sort of say that the New York Ballot access laws are written to keep people off the ballot.
In Vermont, the state Republican Chair sent out a diatribe denouncing the Libertarian Party as too extreme for Vermont, and claiming that the Republican Party was the good choice.
Republican Senator Rand Paul launched a publicity campaign claiming he is a libertarian. The real Rand Paul is an antiabortionist daughter-slayer, who would leave our daughters and granddaughters to die in back-alley abortions. His stands are exactly like his father’s actual stands — antiimmigration, anti-gay rights, global warming denier — his stands on far too many issues are not vaguely libertarian. The cornerstone of the campaign was a propaganda piece in the New York Times Sunday magazine, hailing Paul as a libertarian rock star. While the level of misinformation in the article was quite impressive, starting with the claim that the Koch brothers are major financial supporters of the libertarian political movement (they left us in the early 1980s), followed by an extremely extensive set of allegations about libertarian political choices that manages for the most part to ignore the Libertarian Party.
In Illinois, Republicans sent men visibly wearing guns to homes of petition-signers, trying to intimidate the signers into repudiating their signatures. They did this after their effort to challenge by more conventional means the signatures of Illinois Libertarian candidates failed completely.
We quote a letter from LNC Chair Nick Sarwark:
Dear friend of liberty,
In Illinois, the Republicans have actually hired gun-carrying investigators to intimidate Libertarian petitioners and petition signers, hoping to get us thrown off the ballot. We’ve spent a bunch of money on ballot access in states where the old parties put up ridiculous ballot hurdles (e.g. Kentucky, Illinois, New York). In fact, we’ve spent more than we had in the bank, because this fight is so important to our members. We’re overextended for a good cause — putting Libertarian candidates on the ballot — but we can’t keep this up without member support.
The old parties don’t want competition on the ballot, and they work hard to eliminate it. In addition to the armed intimidators in Illinois, they’ve spent tens of thousands of dollars suing to kick our candidates off the ballot in Ohio. They’re filing frivolous legal challenges against our candidates in New York.
They don’t want voters finding out about a real Libertarian option. Too bad. We’re going to keep bringing the fight to the establishment parties, and we’re going to keep beating them in court.
But we can only do it with your support. You are the most important part of the Libertarian Party. I can’t do it without you. I serve as the party’s chairman at your direction. If you support real political action, putting boots on the ground to put Libertarian candidates on the ballot, we need your support now. What gets funded gets done. If members don’t step up, we can’t keep bringing the fight to the old parties.
We can’t fight them if our candidates aren’t on the ballot. Please donate now.
Yours in liberty,
Nicholas Sarwark
Chair, Libertarian National Committee
Finally, across America, bloggers are surfacing with the assertion that Libertarians are dividing the conservative vote, thus causing conservatives to lose. Let us ignore the minor detail that there is extensive polling on the question, and Libertarian voters not finding a candidate would elsewise not vote at all, or if they did vote would tend to prefer a Democrat over a Republican. The number of these diatribes we are seeing is skyrocketing, using repeated themes as though there was astroturfing.
Yet another incident this week
http://mashable.com/2014/09/12/george-zimmerman-road-rage/
How long before this guy murders again? And will he keep getting away with it?
Well, that sucks. The page was no longer linked to the public index.
He forwarded an e-mail to me in which a WordPress rep explains.
We have a “final solution” for the vermin Vernon problem 🙂
Good, let’s keep them accountable.
We take those posts down.
Well, in NF and langa’s cases it is. Your proposal is like outlawing all fire because some fires are arson.
Seconded.
Since it’s not going to happen, it won’t be.
Sorry to hear. My condolences.
Pretty sure he did. But it’s a moot point.
How can we know?
More GOP cheating in Nebraska, but thankfully the Libertarian candidate won’t stand for it.
See https://www.facebook.com/sarwark4chair/posts/531377096995649
Your suggestion has been considered and rejected. I don’t want to get into it again, since this has been discussed quite a bit. It’s not going to happen, though. We’re dealing with Vernon a different way.
This is not just a case of innocent people using pen names. This is a case of some coward, or group of cowards, posting a bunch of trash talk, lies, and exaggerations, as a way of smearing people, and also going as far as making false criminal accusations (which is a crime in itself), and pretending to be other people who currently post here, or who have posted here in the past.
I consider these to be serious offenses which are worthy of running these types of people off of this site.
Andy, I pointed out nicely that not one other person shares your view about using someone’s real name. Please stop bringing it up. And please stop being rude to people like New Federalist.
“NewFederalist September 12, 2014 at 6:08 pm
It would also get rid of me, Andy.”
That would be your problem.
Hmm… let me think your offer over. I am a bit busy right now since my mother passed away three weeks ago and I have a multitude of things to take care of. I will get back to you.
NewFederalist, I’d like to publish an editorial by you in The Saturnalian discussing the use of pen names. Would you be interested in doing so?
Apparently, Nathan Norman’s blog was removed not because of his last post, but because of “pornographic material.” I guess he never actually deleted the “private” page.
Andy has never addressed me on this question.
We’ve been over that. In this thread, even. What will repetition accomplish?
It would also get rid of me, Andy.
The above posts from “Roger” are yet another example of why trolls like “Vernon” should be run off of IPR. What I mean here is that “Vernon” pretends to be another person who has posted here in the past, or who is a current poster (as “Vernon” pretended to be Austin Cassidy in another thread recently).
Once again, the best way to get rid of vermin like “Vernon” is to only allow posts from people who post under real, verifiable names. This would not be hard to do, and it would get rid of lying cowards like “Vernon”.
I don’t necessarily agree with this article’s position, but it is an interesting read:
http://scgnews.com/the-geopolitics-of-world-war-iii
Nice try Vern, not…LOL
“Roger
September 11, 2014 at 11:37 pm
I bet if you smart folk’s here help me look through this dude’s list you can help me find all sort of hole’s in his facts and argument’s I mean it is one thing to say them wacky Jihadi’s did it or the US government,”
Hi, “Vernon”.
I bet if you smart folk’s here help me look through this dude’s list you can help me find all sort of hole’s in his facts and argument’s I mean it is one thing to say them wacky Jihadi’s did it or the US government, heck Ill even believe it was space alien’s maybe but not Israel! No way they would do that to us were they’re #1 best freind and ally! You guy’s gotta help me proove that dude wrong, I bet he’s gonna feel really stupid too!
Like for example what about this crazy dude that says the Jew’s did it? He must be crazy right?
http://rediscover911.com/international-zionism-did-911-23-facts/
Andy I think you do have a point, the government story does not add up but I dont know what to believe I am just searching for some answers and the truth has to be out there somewhere.
Secrets of World Trade Center 7 Revealed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuC6noDQcyo
Vernon’s posts shold be reported to wordpress for TOS violations (incitement to violence, spamming IPR after being asked to stop, abusive, etc). I have no idea whether your post about the restraining order is what caused your blog to be taken down or not. I agree that your blog was not nearly as bad as Vernon’s, and certainly his blog should be taken down.
This is my last post. I am disgusted that Vernon is allowed to make posts encouraging people to kill kikes and I can’t even talk about an erroneous restraining order. FTW.
I posted the following Saturn’s Repository stories on Sept 11 and Sept 12 of last year. Both are historically significant and important for examining Sept 11, 2001 in retrospect.
Howard Stern Show on-air reaction to the events in real time:
http://saturnsrepository.wordpress.com/2013/09/11/twelve-years-after-howard-sterns-911-broadcast/
Harry Browne’s essay “When Will We Learn?”
http://saturnsrepository.wordpress.com/2013/09/12/harry-browne-when-will-we-learn/
http://www.lp.org/blogs/staff/libertarian-chair-remembers-911
http://www.ballot-access.org/2014/09/kentucky-u-s-senate-poll-3/
Lorie Meacham 1:32am Sep 11
Project Censored: In addition to the people dying on the street or in their homes through law enforcement related activities, research shows that several hundred people a year die in local jails. In conclusion, we believe that, with some 1,500 people dying annually, a major continuing problem with law enforcement related death exists in the US.
Law Enforcement Related Deaths in the US: “Justifiable Homicides” and the Impacts on Families
http://www.ballot-access.org/2014/09/hearing-set-for-ohio-libertarian-party-ballot-access-case/
The issue I am referring to was indubitably applicable to the National Convention, and was in place before the 2002 NatCon.
http://www.lp.org/blogs/staff/libertarian-jeffrey-carson-appears-in-congressional-debate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qv9zOcJJsgE
He allegedly got a restraining order from Marianne Williamson to stop sending her lewd pictures, but says he was not doing that, and says Jim Burns told him in a dream she would be his wife and that he would be elected president of the US.
Sorry, I meant Vernon.
The convention is covered by that section of the policy manual. I remember voting on it. ’08? ’09? It would be in meeting minutes somewhere. It was kept separate, including a separate credit card system, as recently as 2012.
Something has changed, and I would guess without LNC approval. It would have happened last term.
I didn’t see the last post. Anyone remember what it was about?
I was in the process of writing a review of the Functional Fillmore Frugal website. I guess it’ll now be a news story about its removal from WordPress.
Speaking of Vermin:
http://thesaturnalian.wordpress.com/2014/09/10/forgotten-vermin-supreme-interview-recovered/
Excellent idea,
Yeah, that’s what Nixon said. In 1962.
This took everything out of me. I can’t beat the system and I’m tired of trying. Everyone I encounter online is against me. I am done using the internet. Maybe I’ll get a job or write a book. Bottom line, you won’t have Norman to kick around any more.
Today is 9/10, but maybe you could team up with Vermin (if you two aren’t the same person) or Milnes and guest blog at one or both of their blogs.
Today is 9/11. That is appropriate because today someone committed a 9/11 against my website.
Someone reported my website for unknown reasons. Political suppression is all I can think. WordPress won’t tell me.
IPR, you win. I give up. Our rivalry is over.
The Functional Fillmore Frugal movement is dead.
Archived or suspended. Not sure whether that is permanent or not.
Not sure what terms of service CLC violated, but Vermin’s 88fourteen blog probably violates some TOS also. Maybe someone should check with wordpress.
I guess I’ll never know. The site has been pulled down by WordPress.
“functionalfillmorefrugal.wordpress.com is no longer available.
This blog has been archived or suspended for a violation of our Terms of Service.”
http://functionalfillmorefrugal.wordpress.com/2014/09/10/what-exactly-is-a-restraining-order/
For CLC’s sake, I hope he is just trolling and not actually this batshit crazy.
Andy, in your Libertarian Zone, what happens if a young girl turns up pregnant? Will she have any choices?
George, you are probably referring to Section 2.03 (12) of the Policy Manual, which requires “Special Events” to have dedicated accounts, for all expenses to come out of the dedicated accounts, and for all obligations to be paid before any money from the account can be spent on other purposes. However, this only applies to events designated as such by the LNC or Executive Committee.
I don’t believe the Convention is a Special Event under the Policy Manual, and there is a separate section of the Policy Manual, Section 2.03 (4) specifically regarding the rules for conventions.
progress! A sane way to approach the issue:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/101988031
I tis my recollection that th LNC has a voted requirement that all con income must go into a restricted account that must cover all convention costs, first. I do not recall how the rule for fundraising at the banquet y was handled.
I see that the article in George’s newsletter mentions that they did not save the money received as convention revenue to pay for convention expenses. That was a very bad decision. The Treasurer should not have allowed it, since he had to have been involved in the convention budget process.
Major mistake. Hopefully it will not take long to recover from.
George,
Thnks as always for an informative newsletter (live link is http://libertyforamerica.com/201409.pdf ) and thanks for the electronic copy, as I am not at my snail mail address.
The September Issue of Liberty For America
Now at LibertyForAmerica.com/201409.pdf
In This Issue
Republicans Launch War Against Libertarian Party
Wonderful Libertarian News
Criminal Complaint against Republican Party
Nearly Free Web Sites
Active Facebook Groups
State Party News
National Party News
LNC Under Severe Financial Stress
LNC In Action
Opening from Editorial
Republicans Launch War
on Libertarian Party
All across America, Libertarians are reporting on the new and systematic war of the Republican Party of torture, war crimes, and massive corruption on our Libertarian Party. The Republicans have attacked on so many fronts that it is difficult to know where to begin.
In Ohio, Republican public officials used new and bizarre interpretations of their state election laws to knock Libertarian Charlie Earl off the ballot for Governor. Contrary to all past interpretations of the law, they claimed that ballot access contractors were employees who had misfiled their nominating papers. Unless Earl’s litigation restores him to the ballot, Republicans will cost the Libertarian Party ballot access in Ohio.
In Washington, Republican liars and several astroturf organizations are claiming that “Top Two” means that Libertarians are now being taken seriously, and have candidates on the two-way November election ballot. These people are showing up on Libertarian Facebook groups to spread their deceitful propaganda, and we urge all readers to call them out for their Republican Big Lie technique.
Under Top Two, there is an open primary, with the top two candidates advancing in November to the general election. In California, two years ago, the depraved top-two election scheme meant that in one heavily Democratic Congressional District in November voters had a choice of two Republicans. In Washington this year, some Libertarians were in two-way primary races, because the Democrats had not fielded a candidate. They advanced to the general election exactly as they would have done if top two had not been in place. The Republican Big Lie is that Top Two let the Libertarians run in November.
…and much more
Green News – DC
1:51 PM (1 hour ago)
to dcsgpnews2, bcc: me
(Forwarded by the D.C. Statehood Green Party. Among the featured speakers at the Sept. 13 rally: Cheri Honkala, 2012 Green vice-presidential nominee and co-founder of the Poor People’s Economic Human Rights Campaign, and Ben Manski, former co-chair of the Green Party. Read more information at http://www.wearewoman.us and http://rallyhub.wearewoman.us.)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Jacqueline Nantier-Hopewell – Director, We Are Woman DC Office
E-Mail: [email protected]
Phone: (703) 577-4297
Contact: Kimberley Johnson – Director Media & Press, We Are Woman
E-mail – [email protected]
Phone: (818) 203-5636
NATIONAL RALLY EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT (ERA)
Renewed Push for ERA Ripples Across Nation Ahead of November Elections
Washington, DC September 7, 2014– Pushing back against a wave of legislative and judicial action seen as targeting the rights of women, the grassroots organization “We Are Woman” will lead a Constitutional Day Rally in Washington on Saturday, September 13th, launching the return of a demand for the ERA to fully enfranchise women into the United States Constitution. The organizers have included a special tribute to military women and are expecting thousands of supporters from across the nation to attend the rally scheduled from 9:30am-4pm on the west lawn of the Capitol. The rally comes just weeks ahead of the fall elections in which women are projected to be the key voting demographic.
The much criticized ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Hobby Lobby case, jeopardizing women’s access to affordable contraception, quickly elevated an interest in the ERA and the visibility of the rally. Women across the nation had been engaging lawmakers and challenging candidates on concerns about the “gender gap” in pay and political representation, when the controversial ruling came down, further provoking tensions. Rally organizers intend to promote a drive for women voters to register their protest on a number of issues at the polls and to support the ERA for constitutional equality in response to concerns.
“The ERA is on the move again. In February, the Virginia Senate voted to ratify, and now the Illinois Senate,” said Eleanor Smeal, Feminist Majority President, who is the keynote speaker at Saturday’s rally.
“The overwhelming support of voters for the ERA and the gender gap in voting is moving the ERA forward,” she continued. Smeal previously headed the high-profile, national ERA campaign as President of the National Organization for Women.
Several states have ERA bills pending or being introduced in addition to those being entertained at the federal level in Congress. Women’s rights activists look to Illinois in November to be the 36th of the 38 states needed to ratify the ERA. The outcome of a bill pending in the state house is expected then.
Public information about all guest speakers, the tribute to military women,entertainment, transportation, merchandise, lodging and food for the two day event is available at http://www.wearewoman.us
http://www.ivaw.org/blog/iraq-veterans-against-war-statement-resistance-ferguson
Meanwhile back in realityland:
http://www.lp.org/news/press-releases/get-out-stay-out-of-iraq-and-syria
Another question: if holding an opinion, or belonging to a group which a survey says is statistically likely to hold some opinion, is itself an initiation of force, doesn’t that logically dictate that it justifies retaliatory force (not just preventing immigration)? Would you be justified in physically attacking someone because they share some sort of group identity with people who tend to hold some given political view, if that is the only basis for the physical attack? Would you be justified in taking such people’s property or limiting their movement on that basis alone?
The Libertarian Zone is not the real issue here. The issue is the actual, existing US regime interfering with individuals’ movement rights as if it owns or co-owns all property within its claimed borders.
Surveys of political opinions held by immigrants or anecdotal stories don’t have anything to do with any individual’s personal views, they could be a 100/100+ libertarian and the regime will still interfere with their rights. It’s a real stretch to say that merely holding a political opinion, much less belonging to a group that a survey shows tends to hold some political opinions, is in and of itself an initiation of force, but if you are willing to make that stretch for international borders, you would logically also have to make it for state, county, city, and various government district borders (legislative, congressional, city council, county commission, etc). Imagine how inconvenient travel, commerce, moving for work or whatever reason, etc would be if all those borders were enforced in the same way as international ones. After all, the same logic applies and people who hold [or belong to some group which some survey claims tend to hold] various unlibertarian political opinions can move across any of those lines, register to vote at their new address and change the outcome of elections.
And if individual migration rights can be curtailed based on group opinion surveys, what about individual gun rights or individual property rights? After all, people could use their money to influence elections or policy and they could even use their guns nefariously to force their opinions on others.
The real question with any attempts to enforce rules against trespass is who owns the property. The only way for the regime to have a legitimate right to say who is trespassing is if it legitimately has an ownership role in all property within its claimed borders. I don’t believe it does, but supposing it did, that would logically also confer to the regime all the other customary rights associated with property ownership – the right to tax (collect rent), the right to regulate people’s behavior, the right to kick people out (regardless of where they were born).
Starting a Libertarian Zone would require libertarians either gain an electoral majority in some territory, or perhaps by purchasing land somewhere, or maybe by raising lots of money and constructing a floating city.
The land territory could be inside the USA or outside the USA. I’d prefer it to be inside the USA, but I recognize that this may not be possible given how far off course this country has gone. The floating city concept would probably have to be in international waters as not to be under the jurisdiction of any government, however, maybe it would be possible to strike a deal with some government, or to pay off some government and have the floating city near an already occupied land mass.
Joshua Katz said: “Then why shouldn’t non-libertarians be deported now?”
If it were possible, yes. We’d be better off if every mainstream Democrat and mainstream Republican left the country. Since it is not possible, I think that a better solution is for libertarians to band together and create a Libertarian Zone somewhere, maybe in some state or county, or perhaps by purchasing some land or an island somewhere, or maybe by constructing a floating city in the ocean, and then excluding non-libertarians from entering.
“How does one verify their libertarian credentials to gain entry? How is such a system enforced and funded? How do you gain power to make it happen?”
By requiring people who enter the Libertarian Zone to sign the Libertarian Zone contract. The contract would be enforced through randomly selected fully informed jury trials, and the outcomes of those trials would be enforced by everyone in the Libertarian Zone. There would be no police and military (as we know them) in the Libertarian Zone, so each Libertarian Zone member would be responsible for enforcing the Libertarian Zone contracts. A person who has been convicted of Libertarian Zone contract violation may face shunning and deportation, and everyone in or outside the Libertarian Zone could be a possible contract enforcer through the Libertarian Zone bounty system.
” Joshua Katz September 9, 2014 at 11:22 am
I agree that soft-libertarians wouldn’t want to live in the Libertarian Zone. I also strongly suspect that most hardcore libertarians wouldn’t either. Most hardcore libertarians do not want to live with the fact that unorthodox thoughts (even unacceptable forms of libertarianism, I’m guessing, such as geo-libertarianism) can get them deported. I am rather hardcore – which implies not liking authorities over my thoughts – and I enjoy the ability to manuever and try to figure things out within libertarian philosophy.”
What I have proposed is my version of what it would take to start and maintain a Libertarian Zone. I already said that there could be more than one Libertarian Zone, each with minor differences while adhering to the same general idea. So if somebody does not like my concept of what it would take to start and achieve a Libertarian Zone, they would be free to work with others to start a similar concept somewhere else.
I agree that soft-libertarians wouldn’t want to live in the Libertarian Zone. I also strongly suspect that most hardcore libertarians wouldn’t either. Most hardcore libertarians do not want to live with the fact that unorthodox thoughts (even unacceptable forms of libertarianism, I’m guessing, such as geo-libertarianism) can get them deported. I am rather hardcore – which implies not liking authorities over my thoughts – and I enjoy the ability to manuever and try to figure things out within libertarian philosophy.
Nevermind, I scrolled up and found you really do take it to its logical conclusion. Very well.
The two are tied together. I only support the right of libertarians (the only truly peaceful people) to immigrate. If a person is hostile to liberty, I do not want them immigrating to where I live and becoming registered voters.
Then why shouldn’t non-libertarians be deported now? How does one verify their libertarian credentials to gain entry? How is such a system enforced and funded? How do you gain power to make it happen?
Elected Libertarian puts his foot in his mouth:
http://www.ourtownperrysburg.com/Our-Town-News/2014/09/08/Perrysburg-councilman-makes-light-of-NFL-star-s-domestic-violence-incident.html
Does that include across state, city, county, congressional district, legislative district, county commission district and city council district lines? Should we have checkpoints at all those borders and immigration quotas between all of them? It would sure make it fun to go from coast to coast…if you were allowed to at all, that is.
20 Conspiracy Theories That Turned Out To Be True
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDX1zzhnOA4
Some Greens or Constitution Party folks or people from other minor parties may be offended by what I say in my Libertarian Zone concept. I actually do have more respect for the Greens and the Constitution Party and most (not all of course) other minor parties out there than I do for mainstream Democrats and mainstream Republicans.
I think that it would actually be good for people to be able to chose which system they live under. Green Party people should be free to form their own communities and set up Green Zones, and the same goes for other ideologies (just as long as they are not forcing people who do not want to live under those rules to stay there).
People who don’t like the Libertarian Zone, or are offended by some things that may happen in the Libertarian Zone, do not have to live there.
Paul said: ” paulie Post authorSeptember 8, 2014 at 12:28 pm
Supporting the right to immigrate is a lot different than supporting every individual immigrant.”
The two are tied together. I only support the right of libertarians (the only truly peaceful people) to immigrate. If a person is hostile to liberty, I do not want them immigrating to where I live and becoming registered voters.
“Hell, I can understand for example that some NH residents may not like some of the ‘massholes’ that are moving there, but I wouldn’t be in favor of border checkpoints at the state line, roundups or forced deportations of massholes. Does this really need to be said?”
Actually, if New Hampshire could be turned into a Libertarian Zone, I’d be in favor of this. The fact that big government types can move into New Hampshire is one of the flaws in the Free State Project. The Free State Project wants to get at least 20,000 libertarians to move to New Hampshire. Well what if 20,000 anti-libertarians move into New Hampshire during the same time period? They could cancel out all of the libertarians that move there. What if 20,000 libertarians move to New Hampshire, but during the same time period 40,000 anti-libertarians move to New Hampshire? The libertarians in New Hampshire could be so outnumbered that their efforts will never be successful.
Supporting the right to immigrate is a lot different than supporting every individual immigrant. That should be obvious.
It’s like saying that if you support equal rights for LGBT people you must like every single one of them as a person. Or if you support gun rights that you support and like as a person every individual gun owner. Or if you oppose wealth redistribution, you must not think that any rich people are assholes. That would be absurd, and so is the notion that opposing government exercising a property right it should not legitimately have means you have to like every immigrant.
Hell, I can understand for example that some NH residents may not like some of the “massholes” that are moving there, but I wouldn’t be in favor of border checkpoints at the state line, roundups or forced deportations of massholes. Does this really need to be said?
langa said: “Actually, Andy, you are the one who appears not to get it. There is no reason for me to go post somewhere else. The people who run this site have always allowed anonymous comments, and it appears that they will continue to do so. If you have such a problem with that, then perhaps you are the one who needs to find a new place to post.”
I was making a suggestion to the people who own/run this site. They can either take my suggestion, or not take my suggestion. My suggestion is meant to get rid of or expose the people who engage in mud slinging while hiding behind fake names. It appears that the people who own/run the site are not taking my suggestion, so you don’t have anything to worry about as you can still post here under your fake name.
Should I start my own site that would be similar to this one, and then enact a rule that only people who post under real, verifiable names can post there? Maybe, but I’ve got other things to do with my time so I probably will not do it, at least not anytime soon.
“Rather, I was referring to his frequently repeated claim that so-called ‘illegal’ immigrants should be deported and/or denied entry into the U.S., not on the basis of any actions that they have committed, but rather, on the grounds that they tend to support the welfare state, oppose gun rights, etc. (as if this were any different than the millions of natives who hold the same views).”
Once again “langa” misrepresents my views. I do not know if “langa” is misrepresenting my views intentionally, or if “langa” has poor reading comprehension skills, and this is causing “langa” to misrepresent my views.
First of all, ideally, I would deport ALL people who are not libertarians, be they “legal” immigrants, “illegal” immigrants, or native born. If you are not a libertarian, you are a threat to freedom (since only libertarians agree with the non-initiation of force principle), so get the hell out.
Voting for Democrats or Republicans or for an anti-liberty ballot question is an act of aggression. Lobbying for more food stamps or government healthcare or for gun control laws or for foreign aid or for a minimum wage or for a bigger military budget or for anything else that expands the state is an act of aggression. Living off of government welfare is an act of aggression. Receiving Affirmative Action is an act of aggression. Anyone who advocates that people turn in their guns to the government, or that only the police and military should have guns, has a pathetic slave mentality and has no place in a free society. Anyone who thinks that people should be arrested for drugs, prostitution, or gambling, does not understand the difference between voluntary activities and involuntary activities, and such a person has no place in a free society. Anyone who thinks that the US military should be involved in conflicts around the world has no place in a free society. Anyone who thinks that it is OK for the government to spy on people in the name of “fighting terrorism” (or whatever other BS excuse is given) has no place living in a free society. Anyone who thinks that the government should prevent people who want to get married from doing so has no place in a free society.
Second of all, I realize that this is not realistic, because there are far too many non-libertarians out there (I estimate that only about 1/3 of the population is even reachable for the libertarian message), and this is the problem, and this is also the main reason why we do not have a libertarian society right now. This is why I advocate the formation of “Libertarian Zones,” and that people who are not libertarians should be excluded from the “Libertarian Zones”.
Could people lie about being libertarians just to get in a Libertarian Zone, or could a person be a libertarian and then “fall from grace” and do something that is not libertarian (as in initiate force or fraud)? Sure, and this is why I came up with the Libertarian Zone contract, which also includes Libertarian Zone contract jury trials, and the means of enforcing the outcomes of those jury trials through the bounty system, and/or through shunning, probably a combination of both.
The Libertarian Zone would not be for everyone. It is likely that some “soft libertarians” may not even be cut out for the Libertarian Zone. The Libertarian Zone would consist of rugged, hardcore libertarians, who understand the NAP principle, and are willing to fight for it, to the death if necessary. Mainstream Democrats and Republicans would not be welcome in the Libertarian Zone, nor would any other variety of socialists, communists, fascists, theocrats, monarchists, etc…
I would say that it is stupid to blindly oppose immigration, but I would also say that it is stupid to blindly support all people who are immigrants. I do NOT blindly support all native born Americans. I really can’t stand mainstream Democrats and mainstream Republicans. I also dislike any immigrants, both “legal” and “illegal” who are welfare moochers, Affirmative Action supporters, lobbyists for foreign governments, theocrats, gun grabbers, or who hold any other view which is in line with authoritarianism or being a mindless sheep who is easily manipulated or controlled by the authoritarian establishment.
Statistics, as well as my own personal experience, show that most immigrants who are coming to America today are the wrong kind of people. They are socialists, or hold some other kind of anti-freedom view, like the Russian communist immigrant I got into a debate with over shutting down the state liquor monopoly in Washington a few years ago, or the black African immigrants that I got into a debate with in Maryland over gay marriage (he thought that all gays should be put in prison), or the hispanic immigrant I ran into in Nebraska who scored ZERO (as in a bottom of the Nolan Chart Authoritarian) on the World’s Smallest Political Quiz (note that this person threw the quiz back at me and refused to sign my Libertarian Party ballot access petition), or the hispanic immigrant I ran into in California who refused to sign my anti-Affirmative Action petition (they said something like, “I don’t want white people to get those jobs, I want those jobs.”), or the two immigrants from Ireland and Australia (both of whom were white and obviously spoke English) who thought that only the police and military should have guns, and that Americans who support gun rights are just a bunch of “ignorant rednecks,” or the Armenian immigrants I ran into in California who refused to sign my anti-rent control petition, or the Armenian immigrants that I ran into in California who were in favor of more gun control laws, and who did not understand the connection between gun control and the Armenian genocide, or the black African immigrant who called the police on me for asking him to sign a petition to recall California Governor Gray Davis from office (He shouted, “Gray Davis is your leader! You should show him respect!”), or the Russian immigrant cop I ran into in Florida who threatened to arrest me in front of a DMV for asking people to sign a petition to place a Medicinal Marijuana initiative on the ballot, or the black immigrant from Hati who was a cop in Maryland who threatened to arrest myself and another petition circulator (who was black by the way) for gathering signatures on a Libertarian Party ballot access petition on a public sidewalk, etc…
Why in the HELL should I blindly support any of the people mentioned in the paragraph above just because they are immigrants?
We are being controlled by big government Democrats and big government Republicans, and “they” are transforming this country into a totalitarian welfare/warfare police state. Therefore, I think that many of the wrong kind of people are being attracted to come to America, become citizens, and register to vote.
This is NOT to say that all immigrants are bad. There are some good ones out there who really do believe in individual freedom, and I gladly welcome these people. Unfortunately, I believe that the ones who really believe in individual freedom are in the minority.
Native born Americans who do not believe in individual freedom are a threat as well. Deporting native born who violate the Libertarian Zone contract is covered in my Libertarian Zone contract.
http://thehuntingtonian.com/2014/09/05/marcellino-working-to-win-any-way-he-can/
Anti-anti-racism or just old fashioned racism?
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/09/the_new_racism_michael_brown_and_trayvon_martin_deny_it_exists_and_smear.html
Yeah, US =/= libertarian zone. You are correct. Also, somehow I don’t see the actual, real US regime only deporting people who are non-libertarians. Any actually existing US regime immigration enforcement policy would ensnare any libertarian immigrants as well.
Thanks, and take your time…no rush.
Wow, “langa” obviously does not get it.
Posting on this message forum is a voluntary activity. There are no damages incurred if a person is not able to post here. The people who put this site up can come up with whatever policy they want for posting here. I made the suggestion that they enact a policy which would be that only people here who have the balls to post under a real, verifiable name be able to post here. If the people who run this site decide to enact this policy, and cowards who hide behind fake names do not like the new policy, then the cowards who hide behind fake names can just not post here anymore. Go post on a different message board that welcomes cowards who hide behind fake names, or start your own message board where cowards who hide behind fake names are welcome.
Actually, Andy, you are the one who appears not to get it. There is no reason for me to go post somewhere else. The people who run this site have always allowed anonymous comments, and it appears that they will continue to do so. If you have such a problem with that, then perhaps you are the one who needs to find a new place to post.
Oh, and feel free to keep using the idiotic phrase “cowards who hide behind fake names”, as it accomplishes nothing, except to underscore the intellectual bankruptcy of your position. This is not an elementary school playground, where you can goad someone into a fistfight by calling them a “chicken” and making clucking sounds.
I think it is actions, not beliefs, that would trigger deportation under Andy’s proposal. For example, suppose you came to believe that it is necessary to sacrifice randomly chosen strangers on a hilltop by the light of the moon to appease the sun god and make him come back in the morning. It’s OK if you believe this (in the sense that you have the right to believe whatever you want so long as that is all you do) but not OK if you actually do it. Not a huge issue though, if you do act on it everyone agrees you are a criminal and/or insane and you get locked up in a mental hospital or prison.
But suppose you are really charismatic and attract some great organizers as disciples, so your religion spreads and becomes “normal,” well then we have a problem. A majority may say that it’s now legal to perform these human sacrifices and illegal religious discrimination to try to stop them. While the initiations of force that are normal and accepted in our society may be somewhat less dramatic than widespread random human sacrifice, they are just as deadly. In any case, if all you did was hold this religious belief and didn’t act on it or recruit others to act on it I don’t think you would be deported in Andy’s “Libertarian Zone.”
Actually, I wasn’t referring to his “Libertarian Zone” proposal. (While I think such a thing is highly unlikely to be feasible in the near future, I would be happy to be proven wrong. As both a libertarian and an anarchist, I applaud the idea of setting up voluntary communities, and I support the right of people in those communities to set up whatever rules they choose, as long as such communities are, in fact, 100% voluntary, and do not infringe on the rights of any third parties).
Rather, I was referring to his frequently repeated claim that so-called “illegal” immigrants should be deported and/or denied entry into the U.S., not on the basis of any actions that they have committed, but rather, on the grounds that they tend to support the welfare state, oppose gun rights, etc. (as if this were any different than the millions of natives who hold the same views).
[By the way, paulie, I have not forgotten about the thick libertarianism discussion. I appreciate the thoughtful comments that you and Joshua made, and I do plan to respond to them at some point. I just don’t have time to get back into it at the moment.]
Chinese-American Gun Owner Who Was at Tiananmen Square Speaks Against Gun Control
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05AHr89rnTA
Thanks, we have. If you want to put up a site where someone has to prove their real identity to post comments, by all means, go ahead.
“langa” said: “You would think that a self-proclaimed “libertarian” would understand the desire for privacy, but then again, what do you expect from someone who thinks libertarianism includes the right to forcibly deport anyone who disagrees with his political views? What a clueless idiot.”
Wow, “langa” obviously does not get it.
Posting on this message forum is a voluntary activity. There are no damages incurred if a person is not able to post here. The people who put this site up can come up with whatever policy they want for posting here. I made the suggestion that they enact a policy which would be that only people here who have the balls to post under a real, verifiable name be able to post here. If the people who run this site decide to enact this policy, and cowards who hide behind fake names do not like the new policy, then the cowards who hide behind fake names can just not post here anymore. Go post on a different message board that welcomes cowards who hide behind fake names, or start your own message board where cowards who hide behind fake names are welcome.
Also, as far as deporting people and/or not allowing the entrance of people into my Libertarian Zone concept who are not libertarians, there is absolutely NOTHING which is philosophically inconsistent about this. There is NO right to be a Democrat or a Republican or to hold any other ideology besides being a libertarian, because libertarians are the only ones who advocate the non-initiation of force principle. If one is not a libertarian, then one believes that it is OK to initiate force and fraud (to one degree or another), therefore they are a threat to individual freedom. My Libertarian Zone concept is a voluntary community of libertarians who come together and sign a contract stating that they agree to live by libertarian principles, and if one signs the contract and then violate those principles, they could face deportation from the Libertarian Zone (if convicted of contract violation by a randomly selected, fully informed Libertarian Zone jury). If one does not like the terms of the Libertarian Zone contract, then there is a simple solution to this, and that is DO NOT MOVE TO THE LIBERTARIAN ZONE. Nobody would be forced to live in the Libertarian Zone, and there could in fact be more than one Libertarian Zone, each with slight variations in their contracts, while still adhering to the basic idea.
Since people want to keep talking about, the conversation being referenced (for anyone who does not already know) was in https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2014/09/iprs-troll-vernon-starts-his-own-blog/ .
The thread was closed because Vermin had already received enough attention and because it was getting very stale and repetitive with Andy failing to address any of the points made by people who disagree with him, as if just saying the same thing over and over constitutes debate. I can’t help it if people refuse to take a hint and insist on carrying on that same conversation in this thread, though…..
Yep, I agree. So do multiple other people who posted on the other thread. So what if one person disagrees? I think the consensus was clear and the policy is not changing.
I think it is actions, not beliefs, that would trigger deportation under Andy’s proposal. For example, suppose you came to believe that it is necessary to sacrifice randomly chosen strangers on a hilltop by the light of the moon to appease the sun god and make him come back in the morning. It’s OK if you believe this (in the sense that you have the right to believe whatever you want so long as that is all you do) but not OK if you actually do it. Not a huge issue though, if you do act on it everyone agrees you are a criminal and/or insane and you get locked up in a mental hospital or prison.
But suppose you are really charismatic and attract some great organizers as disciples, so your religion spreads and becomes “normal,” well then we have a problem. A majority may say that it’s now legal to perform these human sacrifices and illegal religious discrimination to try to stop them. While the initiations of force that are normal and accepted in our society may be somewhat less dramatic than widespread random human sacrifice, they are just as deadly. In any case, if all you did was hold this religious belief and didn’t act on it or recruit others to act on it I don’t think you would be deported in Andy’s “Libertarian Zone.”
Right on, langa! I agree 100%!
I was going to post this on the thread about Vernon’s blog, but since that thread was (inexplicably) closed, i will post it here:
Several people on this thread [the thread about Vernon’s blog] have mentioned several reasons why someone might post under a “fake” name. However, my reason is not one of those, but rather a much simpler one: My “real” name is no one else’s fucking business. Period.
You would think that a self-proclaimed “libertarian” would understand the desire for privacy, but then again, what do you expect from someone who thinks libertarianism includes the right to forcibly deport anyone who disagrees with his political views? What a clueless idiot.
By the way, if anyone has a problem with my posting under a fake name, I have conveniently set up a toll-free hotline to accept your complaints. The number is 1-800-EAT-SHIT.
http://www.lp.org/blogs/staff/gun-toting-thugs-harass-libertarian-supporters
Dear friend of liberty,
In Illinois, the Republicans have actually hired gun-carrying investigators to intimidate Libertarian petitioners and petition signers, hoping to get us thrown off the ballot. Read about it.
We’ve spent a bunch of money on ballot access in states where the old parties put up ridiculous ballot hurdles (e.g. Kentucky, Illinois, New York). In fact, we’ve spent more than we had in the bank, because this fight is so important to our members. We’re overextended for a good cause — putting Libertarian candidates on the ballot — but we can’t keep this up without member support.
The old parties don’t want competition on the ballot, and they work hard to eliminate it. In addition to the armed intimidators in Illinois, they’ve spent tens of thousands of dollars suing to kick our candidates off the ballot in Ohio. They’re filing frivolous legal challenges against our candidates in New York.
They don’t want voters finding out about a real Libertarian option. Too bad. We’re going to keep bringing the fight to the establishment parties, and we’re going to keep beating them in court.
But we can only do it with your support. You are the most important part of the Libertarian Party. I can’t do it without you. I serve as the party’s chairman at your direction. If you support real political action, putting boots on the ground to put Libertarian candidates on the ballot, we need your support now. What gets funded gets done. If members don’t step up, we can’t keep bringing the fight to the old parties.
We can’t fight them if our candidates aren’t on the ballot. Please donate now.
Yours in liberty,
Nicholas Sarwark
Chair, Libertarian National Committee
I added the link, Matt.
No link there, Jill.
Here is an article by Chuck Baldwin that our readers might be interested in.
http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin821.htm
Agreed with Joshua.
>This is actually another problem I have with it. “Left libertarians” want to exclude people for >some reasons, while “right libertarians” (although they usually don’t call themselves that) want >to exclude people for other reasons. So if people are to be excluded from libertarianism on the >basis of “thickness” (or lack thereof), who gets the final say on what exactly constitutes a “real” >libertarian? Hoppe or Long?
>I would imagine that the answer would be “both” (or “neither”, depending on how you want to >look at it). In other words, “they” can have their definition of libertarianism, and “we” will have >ours. But that just exacerbates the problem I mentioned above in my response to Paulie. We >should be trying to figure out ways to bring libertarians together, instead of ways to turn them >against each other. In fact, if I were as conspiracy-minded as some people around here, I >would probably think this whole idea of “thick libertarianism” was designed to destroy the >libertarian movement (the old “divide and conquer” tactic).
I may be not fully understanding your point, since I have trouble seeing the exact concern you’re raising. However, from what I can see, you’re unnecessarily personalizing. Thickness is not about kicking people out of the libertarian camp. It’s about clarifying the libertarian idea. At times, it’s about cautioning people who should be a bit more careful – this happens most often with the economy, and causes people to perceive libertarians as defenders of corporate privilege and Enron, when we should be seen as the only group that consistently fights those things. In any case, it’s about ideas, not people. I don’t write people out of the camp, I just try to convince them that the ideas they already hold entail (not logically, not logistically) further views, so they should hold those too. If I fail, we continue to work together on core libertarian ideas. So a better question is whether Hoppe or Long gets to define what libertarianism not, not who is a libertarian. But this question doesn’t arise only with thickness, or only with libertarianism. It applies to every idea. Who gets to define a priori – Mises, Kant, or Aristotle? Who defines a real Austrian? Who defines a real Platonist (no Platonist today can possibly say Plato…)
The idea that we’re out to divide is absurd. It would be better directed at plumb-line libertarians. Take the Carson-Block debate, for instance. Carson never suggested that Block’s views weren’t libertarian, but Block consistently made this claim about Carson. So who does the dividing?
The backlash against thickness is interesting. 8 years ago, Roderick gave a lengthy seminar developing thick libertarian ideas at Mises. This year, Rockwell published several attacks on thickness. I’m not sure why this change happened. Maybe Tucker’s departure?
The way to bring libertarians together is two-fold. First, work on what we all agree on. Second, try to persuade others that your view is correct. That’s what I do. I haven’t seen a real argument from you against thickness, rather concerns about thick libertarians themselves. I’m happy to engage with such an argument.
>I (and I would guess most “thin” libertarians) don’t disagree with the first part. Yes, there are >certainly other bad things in the world besides aggression, and to the extent that we recognize >those things as bad, we should do what we can to combat them. Where I disagree is with the second part of your statement, which seems to imply that ridding the world of aggression is >worthless, unless we can also get rid of all these other things. On the contrary, I believe that >aggression is a very real problem in its own right (in fact, it is the single biggest problem in the >world), and ridding the world of it would have tremendous value, even if, after doing so, other >serious problems might still exist.
>To insist that those who wish to join the fight against aggression are welcome to do so only if >they are also willing to join these other fights makes no sense to me. It just unnecessarily >excludes many who could help to eliminate the problem of aggression, while doing nothing to >further the elimination of these other problems.
I think I adequately dealt with the second paragraph here, except that I’d add, in addition to what I said above, that thick libertarians are, in practice, more willing to form alliances than thin, on average. We spent a lot more time working with issue-specific allies on the left (or on the right.) You can say that thin libertarians do this too, mostly with the right, and that would be true – but, in my opinion, those alliances don’t work as well, since thin libertarians don’t actually tend to find many ares of agreement, and usually are mistaken when they think they’ve found one. We have more genuine points of intersection with non-libertarians, since our views are larger (larger set, more intersection possibilities.)
On the first paragraph: If my roof is falling in, and my paint is screwed up, both are worth fixing, but the house won’t be in order until both are addressed. Each one has value in fixing. Both are real problems. If you come by and offer to help with the paint, I’ll happily accept. If you claim, after helping me, that my house is now fine, I won’t agree.
At the same time, if rain is getting in, it’s not a great time to fix the paint until the roof is addressed. If we fail to get others to stop aggressing, and succeed only in not ourselves aggressing, or doing anything that looks like aggression, we’ve got a problem. (This is my complaint with those who thought the SC shouldn’t hear Kelo due to federalism – it’s not a great situation if federalism is ignored except on the rare occasion when the outcome would be beneficial. It was, to me, an even more absurd argument with the sodomy laws in Texas, since all that really happened was overturning Bower, which was itself a decision inimical to federalism.)
If the state takes all my money and gives it to you, and you manage to stop all aggression after that, I’m still out of luck. If this happens on a large scale, you’ve eliminated safeguards against aggression – the rich will just hire Blackwater. You need to eliminate, not only the state, but also the injustices caused by the state. I also don’t know that I’d rather live in a world with no state, but lots of segregation and discrimination, as opposed to one where systemic injustices are dealt with (the market only functions to clear this if a significant enough portion of the society is willing to break with the pack. The same is true about state attempts to fix the problem, so that doesn’t work either. But if you get rid of cops immediately, and the result is a bunch of lynchings…)
langa,
I think you may be reading too much into thick libertarianism. It’s a vision which places some people’s libertarian views into a larger context of opposing concentrations of power and massive top-down hierarchies that don’t necessarily involve initiation of force, not necessarily a call to stop working with other libertarians who have different cultural values on the issues where we agree, nor a demand that they stop calling themselves libertarians.
I also work with many non-libertarians on issues where I agree: primarily liberals and leftists on anti-war, anti-racim, anti-police brutality and anti-drug war causes; prmarily conservatives on gun rights, lower taxes and spending, cutting red tape, etc. It’s simply not true that I wouldn’t want to cooperate with people on issues where we agree just because I disagree with them on unrelated issues. I work with people that I disagree with on quite a few things all the time.
I fully agree with you that “I believe that aggression is a very real problem in its own right (in fact, it is the single biggest problem in the world), and ridding the world of it would have tremendous value, even if, after doing so, other serious problems might still exist.” I would be very surprised if Joshua doesn’t also agree with this.
You started this discussion by positing that those of us who place our libertarianism in a certain context which you claim is “PC” (a label which is generally used by its opponents to imply lack of individual thought or blind adherence to some type of groupthink, which ironically all too often exemplifies groupthink and lack of individual thought on the part of people who apply this label to others) are somehow prone to or enabling government censorship of some viewpoints we dislike.
I’ve disagreed with this contention, not attempted to engage in any of the exclusionism which you have put forward and which no one here has spoken in favor of.
Ohio: Golden Week is Back..
Won’t matter for Gov Sadly, but for Down Ballot.
In Other Words, Suck It Kasich 😉
Not all thick libertarianism is left-libertarian. Hoppe, for instance, is a thick libertarian.
This is actually another problem I have with it. “Left libertarians” want to exclude people for some reasons, while “right libertarians” (although they usually don’t call themselves that) want to exclude people for other reasons. So if people are to be excluded from libertarianism on the basis of “thickness” (or lack thereof), who gets the final say on what exactly constitutes a “real” libertarian? Hoppe or Long?
I would imagine that the answer would be “both” (or “neither”, depending on how you want to look at it). In other words, “they” can have their definition of libertarianism, and “we” will have ours. But that just exacerbates the problem I mentioned above in my response to Paulie. We should be trying to figure out ways to bring libertarians together, instead of ways to turn them against each other. In fact, if I were as conspiracy-minded as some people around here, I would probably think this whole idea of “thick libertarianism” was designed to destroy the libertarian movement (the old “divide and conquer” tactic).
The point of left libertarianism is, in sum, that there are other sources of oppression than the state, and that some of these get cemented even without being initiations of force – and (this is why the left needs to be incorporated into our conception of libertarian, not just be some extra thing we slap on later) we cannot have a free world if those are not addressed also.
I (and I would guess most “thin” libertarians) don’t disagree with the first part. Yes, there are certainly other bad things in the world besides aggression, and to the extent that we recognize those things as bad, we should do what we can to combat them. Where I disagree is with the second part of your statement, which seems to imply that ridding the world of aggression is worthless, unless we can also get rid of all these other things. On the contrary, I believe that aggression is a very real problem in its own right (in fact, it is the single biggest problem in the world), and ridding the world of it would have tremendous value, even if, after doing so, other serious problems might still exist.
To insist that those who wish to join the fight against aggression are welcome to do so only if they are also willing to join these other fights makes no sense to me. It just unnecessarily excludes many who could help to eliminate the problem of aggression, while doing nothing to further the elimination of these other problems.
In your prior comment: “buys into the politically correct mindset that William was talking about, and in doing so, opens a Pandora’s Box. In fact, I can easily imagine someone arguing that libertarians should support laws against hate speech, on the grounds that we need to “balance” our support for free speech with our opposition to bigotry, or some such nonsense.”
Again, I’m not saying that libertarians can’t oppose bigotry. I oppose it myself. But I don’t try to smuggle that opposition in under the guise of libertarianism, any more than I would try to claim that my musical tastes or my religious beliefs are part of libertarianism.
I do also think that an “individualist” philosophy that treats individuals not as individuals but based on their membership in collectives (in most cases collective they have no choice in such as ethnicity, birth gender, or sexual orientation) is internally inconsistent.
So, if I understand you correctly, you think that someone is not a “real” libertarian unless all their personal beliefs are in perfect harmony with every aspect of libertarian philosophy? If that is your claim, then I would submit that it is an unreasonable standard, and virtually no one would meet it.
To give just one of many examples, libertarianism is a “bottom-up” philosophy that values decentralization. Does that mean that someone who adheres to a “top-down”, hierarchical religion (e.g. Catholicism) can’t be considered a “real” libertarian?
It’s hard enough to find people who support (or can be persuaded to support) the NAP. If we start rejecting large numbers of them, simply because of personal disagreements on cultural issues, we will never be more than a tiny cult.
Didn’t seem very editorial to me, but maybe I skimmed it too fast. I’ll post it for you.
Concerning “Third Party Rushmore,” paulie says: “Very nice! You should post that here, too.”
I would but I don’t want to violate the rule against posting one’s own editorial content.
http://www.lp.org/blogs/staff/lee-hieb-on-her-libertarian-campaign-for-iowa-governor
Independents now have legitimate shots in the Alaska gubernatorial election and the Kansas Senate election.
That aside, I’ve noticed that the Veterans Party seems to be expanding rapidly (even if that expansion is just in terms of party organizations/committees, which is quite possible). I know that locally, many individuals who were Libertarian candidates for office have defected to the Veterans Party after the LP apparently lost its ballot access.
I guess that just reinforces what Libertarians have been saying about the inefficiency of government spending.
Wow, just read “Vernon” the Fake’s latest screed. It looks like this government troll has been monitoring IPR since the beginning, and prior to that was monitoring Last Free Voice and Third Party Watch. Hey, it is your tax dollars at work that pay “Vernon’s” salary.
I used to think Vernon was intelligent, but this is junior high stuff. Too funny!
Zero comments on Vernon’s blog on any of his posts. It’s euthanasia time for Vernon!
LOL, Vernon! I’m sure all of our clients will jump to your site right away. Oh, wait–they’re hanging out on the new thread I started last night, so they won’t see your commment.
Regarding the decline and fall of Independent Political Report:
http://88fourteen.wordpress.com/2014/09/03/independent-political-report-rapidly-circling-the-drain-how-about-a-white-nationalism-open-thread/
It’s euthanasia time for IPR!
Thanks Jill.
Sent to you on email.
>This is one reason why I’m not a big fan of so-called “thick” libertarianism, as it buys into the >politically correct mindset that William was talking about, and in doing so, opens a Pandora’s >Box. In fact, I can easily imagine someone arguing that libertarians should support laws against >hate speech, on the grounds that we need to “balance” our support for free speech with our >opposition to bigotry, or some such nonsense.
Not all thick libertarianism is left-libertarian. Hoppe, for instance, is a thick libertarian. In any case, though, let’s look at the leftist variety. The point of left libertarianism is, in sum, that there are other sources of oppression than the state, and that some of these get cemented even without being initiations of force – and (this is why the left needs to be incorporated into our conception of libertarian, not just be some extra thing we slap on later) we cannot have a free world if those are not addressed also.
Is it possible to argue for a balancing of force, within this mindset? Sure. But balancing would never mean advocating for the use of an incredibly large force (the state) against a very small one (the individual.) Balancing relates primarily to determining the sequence in which programs should be eliminated, and whether or not it’s a good idea to eliminate government tomorrow (with a magic button, somehow) without addressing some problems caused by statism and other forms of oppression. The logic just can’t lead to PC speech codes because that creates an imbalance.
Mark, it needs to be an article. I’ll try to get to it later today.
Republicans filed a lawsuit against Gigi Bowman yesterday (last day to do so).
Of course , we will fight it.
More on other threads.
For anyone unaware of what langa and I are talking about:
http://radgeek.com/gt/2008/10/03/libertarianism_through/
In your prior comment: “buys into the politically correct mindset that William was talking about, and in doing so, opens a Pandora’s Box. In fact, I can easily imagine someone arguing that libertarians should support laws against hate speech, on the grounds that we need to “balance” our support for free speech with our opposition to bigotry, or some such nonsense.”
Yes, I do also think that an “individualist” philosophy that treats individuals not as individuals but based on their membership in collectives (in most cases collective they have no choice in such as ethnicity, birth gender, or sexual orientation) is internally inconsistent. However, I won’t turn to government force to address the error.
It’s errant nonsense to suggest that we can’t oppose racism and other forms of bigotry because some other people want to use government to address such problems, or that if we acknowledge that such problems exist we must ourselves turn to big government for the answer.
Where did I ever suggest such a thing? Of course, libertarians should be able to take whatever position they want with regard to bigotry (or anything else that does not involve aggression). On the contrary, it is the “thick” libertarians who insist on telling other libertarians what personal opinions they are allowed to have, in order to be considered “real” libertarians.
The whole point of libertarianism is that just because something is bad doesn’t mean that government is the answer. It’s errant nonsense to suggest that we can’t oppose racism and other forms of bigotry because some other people want to use government to address such problems, or that if we acknowledge that such problems exist we must ourselves turn to big government for the answer.
Federal “Hate Speech” Ban on Horizon, Saturn’s Repository,
http://saturnsrepository.wordpress.com/2014/09/01/federal-hate-speech-ban-on-horizon/
Scary stuff, for sure. We may well go through a totalitarian phase in the US soon.
This is one reason why I’m not a big fan of so-called “thick” libertarianism, as it buys into the politically correct mindset that William was talking about, and in doing so, opens a Pandora’s Box. In fact, I can easily imagine someone arguing that libertarians should support laws against hate speech, on the grounds that we need to “balance” our support for free speech with our opposition to bigotry, or some such nonsense.
The Democrat nominee for Alaska governor has pulled out of the race and will run as an independent candidate’s lieutenant governor on the Alaska First Unity ballot line.
As pointed out by Ken Moellman on the statechairs list:
Oops, I forgot Grant Lally who also filed over 5000 sigs to get on the ballot as Libertarian candidate for Congress in the third CD. Grant is a fusion candidate.
Moving back to the Libertarian Party, it appears that the Republicans have given up their challenge of the New York statewide slate, meaning that Michael McDermott, Chris Edes, John Clifton and Crl Person are on the ballot for Governor, Lt. Gov., Comptroller and Attorney General.
Thre other candidates for state assembly districts (David Casavis, John K. Wilson and Mark the “Shark” Glogowski) have also qualified.
Republican scum have filed challenges to four other candidates and we will fight them with respect to Gigi Bowman for State Senate District 5. Gigi submitted over 5000 signatures for a positition that requires 3000 valid sigs.
No changes have been made. Seems to be a glitch in the spam filter, no idea why but I’m fishing them out.
Yes but where is the corresponding poll about those that refer to themselves as liberal or conservative? Most people, in my experience, have no idea what they are talking about regarding politics. I find the Pew’s interest in libertarianism and those calling themselves as such.
Off topic but have changes been made to IPR posting rights? I know get messages saying my posts are awaiting moderation.
It’s talking about people who call themselves libertarians.
The Pew poll means nothing to me. I don’t care if many don’t know what a libertarian is. Most don’t know what conservative or liberal is either. People are dumb, especially when it comes to politics. I have to wonder about Pew motivations here. I suppose it’s a good thing that libertarianism is being discussed but at the same time there appears to be a deliberate smear campaign going on by the established political elite. Pew focusing on what people think libertarianism is could be an example of this. Where’s the corresponding poll about what a liberal or conservative is?
Scary stuff, for sure. We may well go through a totalitarian phase in the US soon.
Very nice! You should post that here, too.
SMH. I found similar results when I tried to do outreach to registered Libertarian voters.
Yep. Also, how does posting bonehead rock videos help his mission of smearing our names? LOL.
They are not getting their money’s worth with this bonehead. But then, government spending does not tend to be very efficient. This is no exception.
Pew Research did some polling of people regarding libertarianism. It pretty much shows that the term “libertarian” is meaningless. It appears that many people who self-identify as libertarians are actually mutant space aliens or maybe mentally ill progressives.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/08/25/in-search-of-libertarians/
“September 2, 2014 at 2:22 am
Vernon’s blog is good for a laugh. Boredom and obsession colliding.”
Funny how somebody who is supposed to be a NAZI cares so much about who petitions for the Libertarian Party.
Also, funny how he continues to talk about somebody who has not even petitioned for the LP for 4 1/2 years, and has not been involved in LP functions in over 6 years, and since 2008, had only worked on 3 LP ballot access drives, one in 2008, one in 2009, and one in early 2010.
Oh, and funny how he continues to trash talk Paul, when Paul had the highest petition signature validity rate among the 12 petition circulators who worked on the last petition drive on which he worked.
“Vernon” is also a coward and a liar who hides behind a fake name and uses an IP ananonymizer. The most likely explanation in my opinion, is that “Vernon” is a paid government troll.
Vernon’s blog is good for a laugh. Boredom and obsession colliding.
September updates:
Federal “Hate Speech” Ban on Horizon, Saturn’s Repository,
http://saturnsrepository.wordpress.com/2014/09/01/federal-hate-speech-ban-on-horizon/
Third Party Rushmore, The Saturnalian,
http://thesaturnalian.wordpress.com/2014/09/01/william-saturn-third-party-rushmore-2013/
Vern got his own blog? Great, maybe he can stop trolling IPR now?
Knowwhatimean, Vern?
Hey Vernon, why don’t you post under your real name, you chickenshit weasel?
Happy Labor Day to all White Workers everywhere!
I have put up a new blog that will be meant to speak for the White working class as well as expose certain criminals that are well known here to the regular readers at the “independent” loonytarian political report. Sieg Heil! National socialism will win!
http://88fourteen.wordpress.com/
William Saturn has brought up his concern for the growth of “hate speech” in this country eventually corrupting our first Amendmendt. Here’s a story about crime among the Amish where a judge overturned convictions for hate speech.
http://jonathanturley.org/2014/08/29/sixth-circuit-overturns-16-hate-crime-convictions-in-amish-case/
No token system for LP POTUS candidates at the LNC 2016 Convention! Let any good standing member make the best case for Liberty . . .