Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Ron Paul’ Category

On March 3, 2009 the Libertarian Party website issued a press release and published a blog clearly stating that earmarks in the 2009 Omnibus Spending Bill were pork, and the politicians responsible for them were not fiscal conservatives, nor libertarians.

LP Press Release – Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Libertarians urge Obama to veto pork-ridden spending bill
Libertarians stand with taxpayers against earmark abuse

LP Blog – March 03, 2009, by Donny Ferguson
Six of the top ten Senate ‘porkers’ are Republican
Taxpayers for Common Sense released a database Monday of the 8,570 earmarks, totaling $7.7 billion, in the FY09 omnibus spending bill.

Ferguson’s March 3 blog post cited the H.R.1105: Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009, earmarks data codified by The Taxpayers for Common Sense. The Taxpayers for Common Sense’s latest release of this data is the March 13, 2009 Update, Version 5 (xls file). Here is the listing of the top 10 earmarkers by total dollars in both The Senate and The House from that update:

Senate

  • 1. Thad Cochran(R-MS) – $473,707,775
  • 2. Roger Wicker (R-MS) – $396,012,300
  • 3. Mary Landrieu(D-LA) – $332,099,063
  • 4. Tom Harkin(D-IA) – $292,360,036
  • 5. David Vitter(R-LA) – $249,182,063
  • 6. Kit Bond(R-MO) – $248,160,991
  • 7. Dianne Feinstein(D-CA) – $235,027,932
  • 8. Daniel Inouye(D-HI) – $225,077,157
  • 9. Richard Shelby(R-AL) – $219,398,750
  • 10. Chuck Grassley(R-IA) – $199,144,486

House

  • 1. Mazie K. Hirono (D-HI 2nd) – $139,720,002
  • 2. Rodney Alexander (R-LA 5th) – $128,628,563
  • 3. Chet Edwards (D-TX 17th) – $117,926,271
  • 4. Neil Abercrombie (D-HI 1st) – $111,434,800
  • 5. David R. Obey (D-WI 7th) – $98,802,000
  • 6. Marion Berry (D-AR 1st) – $90,001,643
  • 7. Mike Honda (D-CA 15th) – $87,703,143
  • 8. Earl Pomeroy (D-ND) – $80,955,928
  • 9. Ron Paul (R-TX 14th) – $75,175,750
  • 10. James Moran (D-VA 8th) – $74,754,928

Six of the ten biggest Senate earmarkers, and eleven of the twenty listed are from the South. Even more remarkable: Ron Paul is the ninth largest earmarker in the House of Representatives. Is this why the LP has stopped firing away at Congressional earmarks?

Here’s Ron Paul’s rationalization for his rampant earmarking: Earmarks Don’t Add Up, although he doesn’t mention why he publicly grandstands his opposition to funding bills he knows damn well are a shoe-in to pass, while he works like a busy beaver behind the scenes assuring his district gets more than their fair share of his earmarking largesse.

Wake-up Paul Sheeple and smell the abattoir’s entrance straight up ahead…ROTFLMAO

Read Full Post »

From Liv Films, an editorial about gay marriage, fat marriage, eating lobsters, and more. Mona of Liv Films was the “Ron Paul Girl,” but most of their recent work has been non-political. LMFAO (laughing my fat ass off)….

Read Full Post »

Candidate Endorsement: Chris Bennett for Vice President

Chris Bennett[NOTE: Originally posted on Last Free Voice]

As you are hopefully all by now aware, longtime LFV contributor Chris Bennett is seeking the LP’s Vice Presidential nomination. While he would have my support simply for being an LFV contributor and a great guy, there is so much more to his candidacy that I have decided to formally endorse his bid for the LP Vice Presidential nomination.

Chris is 35 years old (will be 36 on August 30th) and lives in Springfield, Illinois. He graduated from Heritage High School in Littleton, Colorado. As an interesting aside, Chris was classmates with Matt Stone, co-creator of “South Park”.

Chris has been married to Evonne Bennett for eight years, and they have two children, Brandon (age 7) and Charity (age 9). He will graduate in May from the University of Illinois at Springfield, with a degree in Political Studies, and a minor in Economics. As such, there should be no question that he has the education to back up his candidacy, especially when compared with other LP candidates (including many of those seeking the LP’s Presidential nomination).

Chris also has the actual experience to back him up. As a libertarian activist for the last 16 years, he has volunteered on four presidential campaigns, three of them Libertarians. He was Scheduling Coordinator for the late Aaron Russo during his 2004 presidential campaign, and was also heavily involved in the Marrou and Badnarik presidential campaigns. He is currently the Legislative Chair for the Libertarian Party of Illinois, where he has fought for better ballot access for third parties in one of the most difficult ballot access states in the country.

Chris announced his candidacy right here on Last Free Voice last year, and his platform is as follows:

I will not make promises I can not keep. I do not have 200,000 dollars in future contributions and I am not endorsed by a famous dead person. However there are some promises I will keep:

I am strongly against the invasion and the “police action” in Iraq and will help push for an anti-war resolution at the Denver Convention.

I am against a fair tax and I will continue to fight to decrease the tax burden for all Americans.

I will continue to fight to restore our civil liberties and constitutional rights and fight to eliminate the Patriot Act, the Real ID Act, the Military Commissions Act and the North American Union.

As an African-American, I will use my candidacy to recruit more minorities and women into the libertarian movement.

As a soon-to-be college graduate, I will continue to convince younger voters and non-voters that the Libertarian Party is the future not the two “boot on your neck” parties and use my candidacy to re-energize libertarian college campus and local organizations across the country.

If I am nominated, I will help/assist state parties on getting our presidential ticket on their respective state ballots.

If I am nominated, I will assist serious Libertarian candidates running for office in all facets of their campaign across the country.

The days of a dormant Libertarian Party VP candidate are over. Our VP candidate should be as active as our Presidential candidate and I will proudly work with whoever you choose as our Presidential candidate in order to spread our message of liberty and freedom to the American people.

Chris has been working hard to spread the word about his candidacy, and in fact he is one of the few Libertarian candidates to get attention from the mainstream press. Even better, he received FRONT PAGE attention in a major newspaper, the Springfield State Journal-Register.

By BERNARD SCHOENBURG
POLITICAL WRITER

Published Monday, October 15, 2007

At 6-foot-9, Chris Bennett is hard to miss. And his political aspirations match his height.

Bennett, 35, a senior at the University of Illinois at Springfield, is hoping to become the vice presidential nominee of the Libertarian Party.

“The days of a dormant Libertarian Party VP candidate are over,” said Bennett in a news release announcing his quest last week. “Our VP candidate should be as active as our presidential candidate and I will proudly work with whoever you choose as our presidential candidate in order to spread our message of liberty and freedom to the American people.”

Bennett was soft-spoken as he explained in an interview how he realized, after working on Bill Clinton’s primary campaign in 1992, that he didn’t really believe in Clinton’s platform.

“I just didn’t like how he wanted more government in more stuff,” Bennett said. “I didn’t like government having more control over the health-care situation, as Hillary tried to do and she’s proposing to do now.”

So, Bennett said, “I went soul searching.”

“The Republicans didn’t feel right,” he said. “They never really do reach out to minorities or a lot of women. And the Democrats, it just seems like they were taking the black vote for granted. So I decided ‘I’m going to search for another party.’”

Bennett had seen a Libertarian Party convention on C-SPAN. The convention included an African-American candidate for the presidential nomination, Richard Boddie.

“He was saying stuff that I really agreed with,” said Bennett, who is black.

Bennett now has been a Libertarian activist for more than 15 years, including working as scheduling coordinator during the late Aaron Russo’s 2004 attempt to be the Libertarian nominee for president.

“For the longest time, I used to carry a Constitution in my back pocket,” Bennett said, “so if anybody wanted to get in a philosophical, constitutional argument, I could whip out my Constitution.”

Bennett doesn’t think the country’s leaders are adhering to the Constitution, including going to war in Iraq without a formal declaration of war. Among his platform planks are “restore our civil liberties and constitutional rights,” including elimination of the Patriot Act and a proposed federal “Real ID” identification card. He said both invade people’s privacy.

He’d like to see lower taxes, with eventual elimination of the Internal Revenue Service.

Bennett frequently posts on Web sites, including one called

lastfreevoice.com, often in strong language.

“Jesse Jackson has taken up the anti-gun issue only because he failed as a ‘civil rights’ leader and pushes his new agenda to re-invent himself,” Bennett claims in one entry. “Just remember Hitler forced his people to give up their guns and look what happened; millions died in concentration camps. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; I’ll defend those values with my gun to protect my right to bear arms.”

Bennett said he actually doesn’t own a gun, but believes in the right to own one.

He’s also taken off on television preachers who get rich through their appeals.

“TV evangelists are the scum of the Christian community,” he said, writing about recent allegations of misspending by Richard Roberts, son of Oral Roberts. “Isn’t it immoral to steal from your contributors for your own lavish lifestyles …? Who do they think they are — the GOVERNMENT?”

And in an essay chastising Democrats for not doing more to get U.S. troops out of Iraq, he refers to the president as “Fuhrer Bush.”

Bennett is pro-life on abortion, which goes against the Libertarian platform. But he thinks other Libertarians may be coming around. He also thinks steps should be taken to legalize drugs.

A native of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, Bennett moved to Littleton, Colo., at age 9. He’s been married to his wife, Evonne, for 71/2 years, and they have two children. He moved to Springfield in 2005 to attend UIS.

While he said rural or suburban Libertarians might not be keyed into the issue of race relations, those from urban areas are, and he thinks the party is good for African-Americans.

In addition to ending discriminatory drug laws, which he blames for too many blacks being in prison, the Libertarians’ anti-tax sentiment would also help, Bennett said.

“If we lower taxes, people would be more able to get the house that they want or be able to contribute to their church or their social organization a little bit more,” he said. People could also “save for a rainy day.”

“I know a lot of people who would like to start their own IRA account, but they can’t because they’re taxed so much,” Bennett said.

Clearly, Chris interacts well with the media, and is able to get across his point intelligently, but also in a way that the average person can easily understand.

For the above reasons, I endorse Chris Bennett, without reservation, for the Libertarian Party’s Vice Presidential candidacy.

This brings me to another point. Chris is in desperate need of donations, to help him get to the Libertarian Party Convention in Denver. As a family man working his way through college, with a wife and two children, he is far from wealthy. Not only will he need the funds for travel and hotel, plus incidentals such as food and beverage, he will also need the funds to print brochures, to hand out to the delegates in order to get the votes he needs.

We all give money to other candidates, whether Ron Paul or Steve Kubby or George Phillies, or someone else. We need to start giving money for Chris’s campaign, because unless he can afford to get to Denver, he will be unable to continue his campaign. It would be a travesty if a qualified candidate such as Chris was not seriously considered for the LP’s Vice Presidential nomination, solely because he lacks the funds to attend the convention. We can do much better than that, especially with a candidate who has proven his worth. If we all pitch in, we can get Chris to Denver.

You can make donations to Chris’s campaign by clicking here, or you can click directly on the “donate” link on his website, which will take you to the same place. You can donate by credit card, debit card, or by setting up other payment arrangements via PayPal.

While I normally would never ask anyone to donate to a specific campaign, I’m making an exception in this case. Chris is “one of us”, a valuable and respected member of the blogosphere, a valuable and respected contributor to Last Free Voice, and a valuable and respected member of the libertarian movement, who has given freely not only of his time and expertise on other campaigns, but also has managed to engage in hands-on activism while in college and trying to raise a family.

Chris is not just another libertarian on the internet, waxing philosophical about libertarianism, who suddenly decides he should be nominated to represent the LP in a lofty position; nor is is a Johnny-Come-Lately to the LP who suddenly decided he should be nominated for for the Vice Presidency; he has actually made many years of sacrifices which benefit us all, and he has the experience and education to back up his campaign for the Vice Presidency.

Unlike many candidates, Chris is not looking to raise millions. He has set a goal of $3000 to attend the LP Convention, and since I used to live in Denver, I can assure you that it’s a very reasonable goal, especially since it will also cover the costs of his campaign brochures.

I have made a commitment to donate $100 to Chris’s campaign, to help him get to Denver. If only 29 more people match that commitment (and I know there are many others who can afford to do so), Chris will have met his goal. However, even if you can only spare $10, or $20, or $50 – or if you can give the legal maximum of $2300 per person, or $4600 per married couple – you can rest easy with that donation, knowing Chris is a tried and proven libertarian, and a candidate who has actually earned that donation through his many years of activism on behalf of libertarians everywhere.

Please, help spread the word. Let’s raise the funds necessary to get Chris to Denver!

Read Full Post »

The Libertarian Party has started a new fundraising campaign called “Liberty Decides ‘08“. Basically, all Libertarian presidential candidates who have met certain guidelines (age-qualified, member of the LP, filed with the FEC, and raise at least $5000 for ballot access) are listed for competition (with one exception, since Dr. George Phillies chose to decline participation). People then “vote” for those candidates by making a donation in that candidate’s name. Each vote equals $1, so the more you contribute, the more votes you get to cast.There is no requirement that the donations/votes come from a registered member of the LP, or even that the voters claim to be a libertarian (many libertarians are not registered with the Libertarian Party, since that would remove their right to vote in many state primaries). The Libertarian Party will keep 60% of the money collected, while the eventual presidential nominee will get the remaining 40%, to be used in promoting the Libertarian Party.

There are a number of glaringly obvious problems with this competition.

Right off the bat, I can tell you that there are candidates listed there who have not raised $5000, period. However, if they left out candidates who hadn’t accomplished that yet, there would only be three candidates listed. I’ll get to those candidates in a moment.

There is no indication how many individual contributions each candidate received, and the competition is not set up to gauge support in that manner. This is important for several reasons, not the least of which is that there is no way to tell if the candidates received contributions from others, or if all their funds came from them. While at first glance it would seem unethical for the candidates to contribute to themselves in a competition, since that normally would be viewed as rigging the results, there is in fact nothing stopping the candidates from using their own funds. The rules quite specifically state, “Donations from the candidates will be counted towards funds raised”.

Given that three of the candidates have a great deal of money (specifically the ones sitting in the top three right now) there is absolutely no way for anyone to tell if those candidates simply contributed to themselves, though it definitely appears that they have done exactly that. Furthermore, allowing candidates to contribute to themselves places the wealthy candidates at an unfair advantage, and explains the current results.

The current frontrunners are Wayne Allyn Root, Mike Jingozian, and Daniel Imperato. However, I have seen no indication whatsoever that those three have any significant following. Quite the contrary, since all three have been subjected to a great deal of negative opinion from libertarians.

Imperato in particular is a candidate who has no discernible support, and his “press releases” are met with a great deal of laughter and derision, including from Yours Truly. Many others across the blogosphere have voiced their concern that Imperato may not be completely sane, though he does have enough money to rig the competition with ease. He is now in third place, undoubtedly due to contributing to himself.

Root is new to the LP, and even still has a website called “Millionaire Republican”; as a result he is viewed with suspicion, and is considered to be a Republican by most. Furthermore, Root is running on what is primarily a pro-gambling platform, since he is a Vegas oddsmaker. While libertarians believe gambling should not be illegal, one cannot run a presidential campaign on that stance alone, and some of his other ideas are hardly libertarian. For example, he is pro-war (and as a matter of fact, regularly uses his initials, which spell “WAR”, in place of his name), whereas libertarians adopt a strict non-interventionist policy. Root is currently in first place, also undoubtedly due to contributing to himself.

Jingozian is simply not very well known. I recall reading his site back when his candidacy first came to my attention, and I got the distinct impression that his views are a cross between the Greens and the Libertarians. Few libertarians will support a fusion candidate. By necessity Green goals require governmental intrusion upon our property rights, whereas libertarians believe the government’s only proper activity is to protect our rights. A successful businessman, Jingozian is in second place, also undoubtedly because he contributed to himself.

That the three wealthiest candidates – who have no chance of actually gaining widespread support among LP members – would appear to be winning was a completely foreseeable situation, given how the competition is designed; and it is inevitable that those candidates will contribute to themselves, then use that poll to falsely state they are a “frontrunner” in the race for the LP nomination. It is equally strange that, based on my own estimate of those candidates’ personal wealth, they are in exactly the order I would expect.

That’s a very serious problem, not only because misrepresentations about their own support among LP members might mislead people who are not already familiar with the candidates, but also because as discussed, those candidates who are winning have some decidedly un-libertarian ideas which will undoubtedly reflect very poorly on the LP as a whole.

This poll may also have a very strange effect on the Libertarian Convention. If delegates vote pursuant to what their constituents want, they cannot in good conscience ignore an official LP poll, especially since they may not realize that the wealthy candidates are contributing to themselves, as that information is not available on the same page as the competition. The actual rules are contained in a PDF file.

As much as I disapprove of the LP keeping the majority of the contributions for itself, and stipulating that the other 40% must be used to the LP’s advantage, that does explain why they are allowing candidates to contribute to themselves since there are three wealthy candidates who would get little if any support otherwise.

Another matter of concern is that, according to the rules, the poll counts funds raised since each candidate announced their campaign, including any funds raised by an exploratory committee. That gives an advantage to candidates who announced early, though as it is that early advantage is canceled out by the wealthier candidates who contribute to themselves. Again, it is impossible to ascertain the amount of actual support each candidate has during the course of the competition, which negates any possible usefulness the competition might otherwise have.

Last but not least, even in a poll where actual money is involved, “None Of The Above” rated fourth (for those of you not familiar with the Libertarian Party, delegates can actually vote for NOTA rather than to nominate a candidate). Quite honestly, I think it’s a very popular choice in this presidential election, and if not for the three wealthy candidates contributing to themselves, it would be ranked firmly in first place. NOTA is almost $2000 ahead of the next most popular candidate, which is “Future candidate”; in other words, those contributing to this competition (not counting the first three who are obviously contributing to themselves) by far prefer none of the candidates. NOTA and FC, if placed into one category as it should be, would be roughly equivalent to the current third-place competitor who contributed to himself, and firmly in first place if the three wealthy candidates were discounted due to contributing to themselves.

That says a lot.

Can the serious LP candidates overcome this negativity, based in a lack of excitement about the announced candidates, and a great deal of excitement about Ron Paul, who is running as a Republican? I honestly don’t know, but I somehow doubt it. The LP may end up not nominating a presidential candidate for 2008.

_______________________

Sources:
Last Free Voice
Libertarian Party
Originally posted on Adventures In Frickintardistan

Read Full Post »

moneydecides2.jpg

The Libertarian National Party has a new program, Liberty Decides ’08 designed “to promote our pre-nomination presidential candidates as they engage in a competitive process. To participate in the program, candidates must cross three thresholds: meet the LP bylaws requirements; file with the FEC; and raise at least $5,000 for the LP or LP state parties for ballot access.

Once qualified, candidates will be ranked by the funds they have raised for the program and promoted through the Internet, mail and LP publications.”

40% of all donations to this program will be set aside in a special fund to be used for expenditures coordinated with the candidate who does eventually win the LP nomination in convention. The remainder of the funds will be used to help the LP move forward with core issues such as media, ballot access and member recruitment.

One candidate has declined to participate, noting that the money does not go to help the candidates now, when they need help the most, and only 40% will go to the eventual nominee – whoever that may be – not necessarily the candidate that the donors click on to contribute in the name of.

Further controversy ensued when, in an early version of Liberty Decides, this candidate was included without his consent, and a silhouette of Ron Paul was used as a “Future/Unannounced Candidate.” The silhouette was removed, as was the objecting candidate, but in a controversial and widely talked about move, the LNC voted unanimously to invite Ron Paul to seek the LP nomination for President if he does not get the Republican nomination.

Some candidates are more positive about Liberty Decides.

Some other Libertarian activists have criticized Liberty Decides, notably Susan Hogarth, who wrote:

It would be a much more useful tool for Libertarian activists and likely convention delegates (you know, the folks who actually select the LP nominee) with two simple additions, which I mentioned yesterday:

1) some indication of how many individual donors each candidate has (and, ideally, how many of them are Party members).

2) some indication (other than a link to their websites) of positions.

Susan shares her thoughts about Liberty Decides here, here,
here, and
here.

Despite the criticism, the LNC expressed support for Executive Director Shane Cory and Liberty Decides at its recent meeting in Charleston.

Read Full Post »

Ron PaulHat tip Presidential Politics ’08.

Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, a former Libertarian Party presidential candidate, has raised a staggering $5 million for the third quarter of 2007.

Dr. Paul, currently a Republican Congressman from Texas, is an obstetrician who has a very large grassroots following, especially among libertarians. To many that libertarian support is even more stunning, considering that Dr. Paul opposes abortion, whereas the Libertarian Party does not hold such opposition. However, completely in keeping with libertarian principles, Dr. Paul advocates immediate withdrawal from Iraq, at one time angering Rudy Giuliani during a debate when he suggested that the 9/11 attacks were “blowback” from previous US activities in the Middle East.

Wolf Blitzer broke the fundraising news on his CNN show “Situation Room” with the following statement:

Some stunning political news this hour concerning Ron Paul: The Republican presidential hopeful is low in the national and state polls, but now, when it comes to campaign cash, he’s standing very tall.

Ron Paul’s campaign reports that the congressman from Texas raised five million dollars over the past three months. That’s in the same neighborhood as what rival John McCain is expected to report, and it’s five times what former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee reportedly raised. It’s also more than three million dollars more than Paul raised over the first six months of this year. Paul can partially credit his big bucks to a strong following on the Internet.


Blitzer was not the only political pundit to express astonishment at this unexpected development. A similar sentiment was expressed by other news organizations, including MSNBC and ABC.

ABC World News Tonight is flying to New Hampshire to interview Mr. Paul for tonight’s episode. Earlier today, ABC called Ron’s totals “jaw-dropping.”

Read Full Post »

Sorry folks, been too busy to post. But I thought I’d post this since no one else has yet. Our own Michelle Shinghal on Tucker Carlson, thanks to posts by our fellow blogger Steve Gordon.

Read Full Post »

Dennis Kucinich peace sign

To be quite honest, I haven’t given Dennis Kucinich much thought as a candidate, but after reading this, I think I’ll check him out.  I have to like a candidate whose supporters have such a good sense of humor.

While the poll put out by Ron Paul’s LibertarianLists.com web site is highly self-selected, we at Libertarians for Kucinich are excited to announce a poll that is even more rigorously self-selected.

Our latest baseline data indicates that Dennis Kucinich has an infinitely higher support level than Ron Paul among Libertarian Party voters — 66.67% versus 0.00% for Ron Paul.

Even more interestingly, when Ron Paul is run in a hypothetical election against more liberal members of his party, such as Pat Buchanan, Libertarians continue to support Kucinich by a consistent 2:1 margin.

In fact, 2 out of 3 Libertarians recommend Dennis Kucinich as part of a healthy political diet.

Now, we know that the Libertarian Purists and the Ron Paul campaign alike will attack our methodology and point out that our margin of error is 35%. However, they are just being political and are angry that our rigorous poll has 65% correctness.

Below are the poll percentage results:

1) Which of the following candidates would make the best president of the United States?

a) Dennis Kucinich — 66.66%
b) Ron Paul — 0.00%
c) Doug Stanhope — 33.33%
c) Some other Libertarian purist who will never, ever win — 0.01%

2) Which of the following is the greatest political tragedy of the 21st century?

a) We still lack a national health care plan — 33.33%
b) The federal government is overruling the rights of states to ban guns — 33.33%
c) Eric Dondero — 33.32%
d) The USA PATRIOT Act — 0.01%

3) Which of the following is the least unappealing option?

a) A night of sweaty debauchery with Hillary Clinton — 33.32%
b) A night of sweaty debauchery with Karl Rove — 33.32%
c) Are you serious? — 33.32%
d) Paying my income taxes — 0.03%

4) If Ron Paul loses the Republican Party primary, which one of the following actions would you support?

a) Having Ron Paul declare his undying support for Dennis Kucinich for president — 33.33%
b) Having Ron Paul get real and understand that only Dennis Kucinich could bring us Liberty in Our Lifetime ™ — 33.33%
c) Having Ron Paul donate his life savings to the Kucinich for President Campaign Committee — 33.34%
d) I am a purist Libertarian pantywaist who intends to vote for Phillies or Smith — 0.00%
e) I support Daniel Imperato and forgot to take my lithium this morning: — (-0.01%)

5) Who is the hottest?

a) Shane Cory — 33.33%
b) Stephen Gordon — 66.65%
c) Daniel Imperato after 11 drinks and a Social Security reform speech — 0.01%

6) Which is the most reliable way to get unbiased statistics about politics?

a) FOX News — 0.01%
b) CNN — 0.01%
c) LibertarianLists.com — 0.00000000000001%
d) LibertariansForKucinich.com — 99.967%
e) Other — 0.0000001%

7) If Dennis Kucinich loses the Democratic primary, should the Libertarian Party change its bylaws to allow him to become the Libertarian nominee?

a) Yes, because we need Dennis Kucinich in the White House! — 33.33%
b) Hell yes, because Dennis’s eyes see through the lies! — 33.33%
c) Are you kidding?!? Of course! — 33.32%
d) I am a Libertarian purist who hates real progress and thus am opposed to this incredibly good idea you’ve brought up — 0.01%

Many thanks to Libertarians For Kucinich for the laughs!

Hat tip Stephen Gordon.

Read Full Post »

Thanks to Google, LFV links to a site which reports only negative things about candidates, including Ron Paul. Here’s a taste, with some dirt on Rudy Giuliani:

Keeps priest accused of rape

Giuliani’s consulting firm continues to employ a priest — Msgr. Alan Placa — who has been accused of rape by multiple former students. Newsday gave the update on 6/23/07:

In 2002, after Newsday reported accusatons he had molested students decades earlier, the Diocese of Rockville Centre placed Placa on administrative leave. In 2003, a Suffolk County grand jury report cited the accusations by three of his former students and found Placa used his position as diocese vice chancellor to stifle other priest-abuse complaints.

But even after being pressed by survivors’-rights groups, Giuliani still refuses to show Placa the door.

There’s also an ad for a site which sells bumper stickers such as these:

Anti-Rreal ID bumper sticker

Guns Don't Kill People bumper sticker

Libertarian bumper sticker

There are other google ad links to the Cato Institute, an email service for political candidates, a site for US election polls, an offer to get Ann Coulter’s weekly column for free, and a site for an “urgent” Hillary Clinton poll. LOL

Read Full Post »

Here, Ron Paul compares Ed and Elaine Brown to Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr.

Here, Ron Paul claims he never said what we just watched him say.

Read Full Post »

Meanwhile, in Libertarian Party news, Steve Kubby
and Wayne Root debated on Liberated Space.

Read Full Post »

Presidential SealAll you have to do is answer 25 questions.

Admittedly the site could be improved, since it lists no LP candidates except Kent McManigal (who’s no longer even running except as a write-in candidate) and references a lot of organizations that I’ve never even heard of (but they expect me to say whether I agree with their platform).

It would be a lot more accurate if, for example, you were given a choice to state you believe the war should be ended immediately. As it is, the only options are setting or not setting a deadline for returning the troops, or neither (and that could mean anything).

That being said, the results still appear to be fairly accurate, since Ron Paul came up as #1, followed by a Democrat (I used to be a Democrat, so that sounds about right even though I’m not familiar with the candidate).  Kent McManigal tied for #3, while the vast majority of Republicans are at the end.  Honestly, I’m not familiar with all the candidates listed, and the lack of specificity with regard to issues such as war could have thrown it way off.  I suspect that, with more specific answer options, the results may be quite different.

It is very strange that Kent McManigal and two Democrats tied for third place, though. LOL

The following is my full ideal candidate list according to that site, based on percentage of agreement and level of importance on the issues:

Ron Paul 72%

Dennis Kucinich 62%

Al Gore 60%

Barack Obama 60%

Kent McManigal 60%

Christopher Dodd 58%

Wesley Clark 53%

Mike Gavel 52%

John Edwards 51%

John McCain 49%

Hillary Clinton 47%

Bill Richardson 47%

Joseph Biden 47%

Alan Auguston 46%

Newt Gingrich 45%

Tommy Thompson 43%

Tom Tancredo 37%

Chuck Hagel 36%

Fred Thompson 36%

Sam Brownback 36%

Mitt Romney 36%

Duncan Hunter 34%

Rudolph Giuliani 34%

Jim Gilmore 29%

Elaine Brown 20%

Mike Huckabee 18%

I’d be interested to know how accurate others believe their results to be, and it might be interesting to take them up on their offer to provide free code for our own candidate survey. I bet it would be a lot more accurate, at any rate.
Hat tip Kent McManigal

Read Full Post »

hat tip Michelle Shinghal

Now, anyone who has not just gotten here just now knows I’m supporting Steve Kubby for President. You know I have some issue position differences with Ron Paul. But, I’m endorsing Ron Paul for reelection to Congress, and I love what he is doing in the Republican debates.

Speaking of Republican debates, we will be providing live coverage at Last Free Voice tonight. I’ve heard a rumor that Michelle and TG might show up drunk, and there may or may not be trampolines involved. You won’t want to miss it!

So, to sum it up: until Steve can start showing up on the Daily Show, I’m damn glad and proud to see 1988 Libertarian Party Presidential Candidate Ron Paul on there. Here’s the clip:

And here is Michelle, doing her part by offering some high profile advertising:

Also useful as a floatation device, this kewl and handy billboard has many useful and even life saving properties.

Read Full Post »

Carol Moore reports a most disturbing rumor about the master shake who is currently seeking to represent the Adolf Giuliani wing of the Rapepubliccon Party in the TX-14 congressional primary. Listening to Eric take turns first lavishing fake praise, then going apeshit and foaming at the mouth here, here, and here, it doesn’t take much of a vivid imagination to believe.

One warmonger to respond to Ron Paul’s statements was Paul’s former congressional campaign manager Eric Dondero who now fulminates daily about fighting “Islamofacist” terrorists on a variety of forums. He declared he’s running against Paul for congress in his home district in 2008, unless Paul resigns or another republican stands up against him. See RightPundit, RedState.Com, and this blog.
.
Dondero was Ron Paul’s travel aide when Paul was running for the Libertarian Party nomination, ran his 1996 congressional campaign where Paul re-took his seat, and worked for a time in Paul’s congressional office. I can say from personal experience that Dondero is a sleazy little operative, quick to insult and smear others with lies. So I thought a lot better of Paul when I heard he had ended their alliance.
.
The most persistent unpleasant rumor whispered around about Dondero himself was that he allegedly “beat his wife.” He introduced me to her at the 1987 libertarian convention and she definitely had the kind of sad sack, always wary demeanor of a woman who expected a whack in the head momentarily. They later divorced.
.
I therefore was quite suspicious when I read Dondero’s claim on a libertarian discussion group in November of 2006 that his NEW wife had been mugged three times. Two paragraphs from the post will make his boorish style of argumentation quite clear:
.
Yup, I’m a bigot alright. Married to a Chinese woman. Been all around the world; 30 countries on 5 continents. Speak 15 to 20 languages. Have had more Mexican and Filipina girlfriends than you can shake a stick at.
.
My wife has been mugged three times (!!!) in the last three years in Houston. Once where they put a gun to her head. All because she’s Asian. And illegals and others here in Houston prey on Asians, cause they think they’ve “got money.”
.
After the posting I replied on the discussion group, referring to the 1987 rumors, and wondering if Dondero’s current wife really had been mugged or if the injuries came from someone a little closer to home. Dondero promptly dropped off the discussion group! EndAbuse.Org reports that as many as 3 million women a year are assaulted by their significant others. That sounds low to me!
.
I also noted at the time
some men may prefer to date immigrant women. First, many come from countries where deference to abusive males is still prevalent. Second, tenuous immigrant status makes them less likely to report physical assaults to police and/or are more easily intimidated by threats a man will press false charges against them. No wonder so many American men import “mail order brides.” If the rumors and impressions are true and Eric’s American born wife finally got up the gumption to call police on him, it would make sense he then turned to foreign born women.

Read Full Post »

Given the number of Libertarians who support Ron Paul, I have wondered whether it would be in violation of LP rules for state LPs to endorse a candidate from another party. I still haven’t looked into it, but Jake Porter has. Excerpted from his blog:

Another myth is that the Libertarian Party can support Ron Paul for the Republican nomination. Now, we will take a look at what the Libertarian Party bylaws say about this issue.

Article 6, 4: No affiliate party shall endorse any candidate who is a member of another party for public office in any partisan election. No affiliate party shall take any action inconsistent with the Statement of Principles or these Bylaws.

Libertarians often become very angry when Congress violates the United States Constitution. The Libertarian Party bylaws should be treated no differently. Additionally, I am told that many states have laws, not state party bylaws, but actual legislative law prohibiting one party endorsing a candidate of another party, or a candidate to be nominated by more than one party. I would need to look more into this to find out if it is true, but I have been told it is so. The Libertarian Party cannot, without violating our own bylaws, support a candidate for the Republican Presidential nomination.

Read more here.

I haven’t really thought this through, beyond that it might be a good topic for discussion, but …… perhaps the Libertarian Party should court Ron Paul for the LP presidential nomination, if and when he is denied the Republican nomination.

Read Full Post »

With all the attention we have been paying to Republican Presidential candidates Adolf Giuliani and Ron Paul lately, I thought it would be only fair to say a word or two about creepy warmonger
John McCain.

Here he is singing “bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran” and laughing about it.

What did the Iranians ever do? Never mind, war criminal McCain has never met a war he didn’t like.

McCain can’t help but remind me of the
Manchurian Candidate.

This illustrious member of the Keating Five Savings and Loan scandal Senators and noted gigolo is also well known for the McCain-Feingold Incumbent Protection Act.

Somewhat less well known is that he also co-sponsored the McCain/Lieberman gun show bill, which would have given the federal government the administrative power to prohibit all gun shows, and to register everyone who attends a gun show. According to wikipedia, “Since 2004, McCain has gained the unique distinction of receiving an F- rating from Gun Owners of America; and further unlike any other 2008 Republican Presidential Candidate has a dedicated section/compendium within the GOA web site, which contains numerous pages relating to John McCain’s very own anti-Second Amendment initiatives while in the Senate”.

Wikipedia also points out that he hired a board member of the Project for the New American Century, Randy Scheunemann, as his foreign-policy aide and is considering Billion Dollar Bob Riley for veep.

Oh, and his anti-torture provision? Not all it’s cracked up to be.

To sum it all up, I have to give McCain the maximum number of flushes.

Read Full Post »

H/T Reason Hit & Run

Eric Dondero, who commented on some of last night’s debate threads, has made an announcement at Redstate.

I am this morning, declaring my candidacy for Congress in the GOP primaries against Ron Paul. If he does not resign his seat, and if another Republican candidate does not declare against him, I will run a balls-to-the-wall campaign for Congress in Texas CD 14. I am the guy that got Ron Paul elected to Congress in 1996. I can and will defeat him in 2008.

Eric Dondero, Fmr. Senior Aide
US Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX)
1997-2003


Dondero says he’ll defer if another pro-war conservative, like former Rep. Steve Stockman, makes the run. Paul’s 1996 win was sort of miraculous, given how the national GOP marshalled its strength against him and even backed a Democratic opponent to keep him out of Congress. I’d guess the party will have too much to worry about in 2008 to back a Paul primary challenge (it’ll spend at least $3 million getting back Tom DeLay’s seat, for example), but this is the kind of thing that could attract a nice fat stream of web donations.

If Eric loses the primary, he has made plans to challenge RP in the general election as the candidate of the Lieberman Lebensraum for Amerika Party (not officially, at least not yet).

While I still endorse Steve Kubby for President, I’m happy to offer my endorsement to Ron Paul for reelection to Congress.

Ron Paul was of course clearly 100% correct in last night’s debate against Dondero’s fascist idol, Adolf Giuliani.

Read Full Post »

In this week’s “radio address,” Steve Kubby explains why it’s a bad idea for Libertarians to support those other parties:

I’ve heard from a number of you that you’re not supporting the Libertarian Party or its presidential candidate in 2008. That, instead, you’re giving your money and support to a candidate for another party’s presidential nomination.

I’m referring, of course, to Congressman Ron Paul of Texas — a sitting member of the US House of Representatives, and the Libertarian Party’s 1988 presidential candidate.

Friends — you’re making a mistake.

I have a great deal of respect for Ron Paul. He’s a fine man and a fine libertarian. But he’s affiliated himself with a party of big government … the party that brought us the war on Iraq. The party brought us “extraordinary rendition.” The party that can’t find habeas corpus in the Constitution. The party that, over the last six years, has grown government faster than at any time since the end of WWII.

If a candidate for the Nazi Party’s presidential nomination asked for your support, you’d laugh at him or turn away in disgust. You’d do so even if he said that he wasn’t one of “those Nazis” who wanted to herd all the Jews, homosexuals and Jehovah’s Witnesses into gas chambers. You wouldn’t just walk away from that candidate, you’d run away. And you’d be right — because even if that candidate isn’t one of “those Nazis,” his party itself stands for things that you can’t support.

When you support a candidate, you support that candidate’s party. And as fine a man as Ron Paul is, his party is simply not worthy of your support. He may be a libertarian, but his party is not libertarian and it’s not going to become libertarian, no matter how much money you throw at it.

Tune in for more:

Read Full Post »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: