Archive for November, 2007

Christine Smith put out a
somewhat controversial
essay which said that, unlike some other libertarians, she would not compromise principle.

The first time I saw it was on the LP Radicals yahoo group, and given that I have recently volunteered to help the caucus members make more informed decisions about the various LP Presidential candidates, I thought of a few questions to ask.

They have been up for several days, and I also since posted them on several other yahoo groups on which Christine Smith posted the same message. I am hoping that the candidate sees the questions and responds to them. Several people have said that she is not very good about getting back to people, but this is the first time I have personally tried to get a hold of her, so for now I will keep an open mind.

I’m guessing she’s just been busy, so I hope maybe posting them here will help bring these questions to her attention.

OK, here they are:

I have gathered there are no issues on which you think the 2004
platform was too extreme. Is my understanding correct? If not, what do
you think may have been too extreme?

Are there any issues on which you think the 2004 platform was not
libertarian enough? If so, what issues, and what was inadequate about

Do you think the platform should be about the length of the 2004
platform or that of the 2006 platform? Somewhere in between? Longer
than both? Shorter than both?

What issues, if any, do you think are the most glaring omissions?

When did you join the Libertarian Party?

Prior to running for President, in what ways were you involved in the
Libertarian Party or libertarian movement? What other libertarian
movement groups have you been involved with, and what was the extent
of your involvement?

In what ways do you plan to be involved if you do not get the
Presidential nomination?

If you lose the Presidential nomination and are offered the VP
nomination, would you consider it?

Have you ever run for office with another party or as an independent
candidate? If so, where and when, and for what office?

Have your views changed during this campaign? If so, on what issues
and why?

Do you plan to share all contacts your campaign generates with the
national party? Would you characterize your present working
relationship with LPHQ and/or LNC to be friendly or somewhat adversarial?

Do you have any significant involvement in issue organizations or
political coalitions which intersect with libertarianism but also
include significant numbers of non-libertarians? (for instance, Steve
Kubby has been active in medical marijuana legalization and the drug
policy reform movement; George Phillies is active with his local ACLU
chapter; Wayne Root claims he can reach out to internet gamblers on a
large scale).

Steve Gordon has criticized your position on the middle east wars,
claiming that you said that you would evacuate the troops and leave
their equipment behind. Is that an accurate description of your position?

Do you believe the national party platform (past or present) would be
adequate to serve as your campaign platform, or do you plan to have a
separate campaign platform if you are nominated?

Are there any innovative ways in which you hope your campaign will
work to surpass all previous LP Presidential results, and what do you
think your chances are of doing that?

How much of an emphasis do you plan to put on working with local
candidates and building state and local LPs? Ballot access? Youth and
college outreach?

Have you spoken to large crowds not just of
libertarians? (For example, Steve Kubby spoke at Hempfest, estimated
attendance 50,000, and I believe George Phillies said he spoke at
MassCann, which is also a large legalization event).

Also: have you played a significant role in passing any legislation
that actually made people more free? (Steve Kubby helped write and
pass prop 215, California’s medical marijuana law).


As I mentioned, Steve Gordon also has
some questions
for Ms. Smith which he has been trying to get her to answer through several phone and email attempts for several days.

Steve Kubby has some concerns, too.

Hopefully we’ll hear back!

Read Full Post »

In the great state of Alabama, we are “blessed” with many weird, kinky, strangely sex-obsessed religious whackos, and many of them are bent on non-concensual bondage and domination through the legislative/law enforcement process.

Southern Baptist minister, and good friend of Jerry Falwell, Gary Aldridge died in June of “accidental mechanical asphyxia” and was found hogtied and wearing two complete wet suits, including a face mask, diving gloves and slippers, rubberized underwear, a head mask, and a dildo with a condom on it in his ass.

Other than a few aberrant cases like this, sex toys are usually safe, and most reasonable people would consider them to be a private matter, and certainly none of the government’s business.

But reasonable people would not include the Alabama legislature, which in is great wisdom passed a law banning dildos, vibrators, and other weapons of mass stimulation.

Not content with the law as it stands, Alabama Attorney General Troy King wants the legislature to make the law even more draconian.

I remember Troy from college. He was always a little weird. He used to write frequent letters to the CW, which described in detail his disgust with homosexuals hooking up in public toilets (well before Larry Craig), a subject he seemed to be intimately familiar with, and exhorted readers to go eat at Cracker Barrel, which at the time was under fire for a policy of discriminating against having gay employees. Troy always seemed just a little too obsessed with homosexual perversion.

He also often defended the shady antics of the machine, a secretive coalition of traditionally all-white fraternity and sorority members designed to influence campus politics (sometimes through violence and intimidation), founded by famous segregationist Lister Hill, and compared to “a cross between the KKK and the mafia” by a national magazine.

Enter Loretta Nall. Vowing that Troy King can have her vibrator when he gets it from her cold, dead fingers (careful, Loretta…he might just be kinky like that), Loretta organized a campaign to send Troy some sex toys. Ultimately, she settled on an inflatable, penetratable, blow-up piglet. As Loretta explains,

You gotta admit that Troy King has been begging for someone to slap him around a little bit for a very long time. This whole sex toy/anti-obscenity crusade he puts on is nothing more than a distraction from his failures as AG. The guy is a joke.

Some people have asked me why I did it. Well, to humiliate King for starters. Of course, I never really expected it to get this much play. That seems to be a recurring theme with me. I was really just being a smart-ass again. Also, since the 11th circuit ruled that Alabamian’s do not have a constitutional right to sexual privacy (and King still says that isn’t enough) then we must have a constitutional right to sex publicly…right? Or do we not have a constitutional right to sex at all in the state of Alabama? If that is the case then somebody’s got some ‘splanin’ to do Since King wanted to make us the laughing stock of the nation AGAIN I figured a little table-turnin was in order.

Some people have failed to understand the signifigance of me sending a pig to the AG. Yeah…I know that is really hard to believe. I almost feel like if they don’t get the pig symbolism then I shouldn’t bother to explain it because they probably wouldn’t be able to follow along anyway….but I will explain it just this once. Troy King is the top law enforcement officer in the state. Law enforcement officers are often referred to as ‘pigs’ by citizenry. Also, as I mentioned before I didn’t want to encourage Troy to breed outside his species by sending a human blow-up doll.

I’ve also considered dressing up in a penis costume and attending the next press conference on this issue….however, I am afraid that in such a costume I might be mistaken for Troy King or any of the many dickheads that inhabit Montgomery, AL.

The story has since been picked up by major media, including J. D. Crowe in the Mobile Press-Register who explains,

The beauty of this gesture has my heart squealing with joy. If there’s anything I enjoy more than drawing uptight, arrogant authority figures in perverted attire, it’s drawing pigs. Any time I can shovel all my favorites into the same cartoon and still make some sort of editorial point is Birthday Cake Ice Cream. And since ToyBoy King has been in the news for allegedly targeting only Democrats for investigations, all this toon needed for a little smattering of significance was an abused inflatable donkey…excuse me while I lick the icing off my face.

Troy has been unsually absent from the public eye since receiving Loretta’s gift, no doubt putting it to good use repeatedly. Just what you might expect from Troy and his like.

Read Full Post »

By Steve Kubby

FORT BRAGG, CA — The cream white American car in my rearview mirror
has an “E” on the license plate, the official designation for
California State agency vehicles. The driver exited my private road
and then did a U turn when he saw me turn and head down my road.
When I arrive at my gate, I leave my car and turn to meet the
intruder. With an odd sort of smile on his face, he hands me an
official envelope from the California Secretary of State. He tells
me to have a nice day and quickly leaves.

As I ponder what might be waiting for me inside the envelope, I
reflect upon the overdose of government that has been my constant
companion since helping to pass a law the police and prosecutors
don’t like. For a moment, I am transported in my head back to a time
when I found myself lying shivering and vomiting on the concrete
floor of a freezing jail cell, wondering how any society can treat a
cancer patient like this.

Then I think about how my fellow activists and I answer to a higher
authority. Whatever might be in the envelope will not change my
determination to live free or die. Suddenly, I find myself energized
by this realization that I will never give up and that I will fight
for freedom with my last breath.

I open the envelope and read the message from Debra Bowen, California
Secretary of State. It is a letter of congratulations, informing me
that my name will appear as a Libertarian candidate for President of
the United States, on the California Primary Election Ballot, to be
held February 5, 2008.

So I will be on the ballot as the ultimate long shot for winning the
Presidency. Those odds may be fearsome, but I remind myself that of
all the candidates running, I am the only candidate who has done
something that brought some freedom into people’s life, instead of
robbing them of one right after another.

Running for President and receiving a letter from the California
Secretary of State should be a happy affair, but in these days of
government poking its ugly nose into every aspect of our private
lives, I find myself relieved, more than anything else, that I
haven’t been accused of yet another bogus violation of their
fraudulent legal system.

Thomas Jefferson said: “When the people fear their government, there
is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.”

Yeah, I’m going to be on the ballot and the government should be
worried, very worried, because I have a bad attitude about
government, especially the federal government. I will be speaking up
for liberty on a national forum and telling people about how we must
end this federal tyranny and finally live free.

Read Full Post »

This is a work in progress. The original (text in black) was written by Mike Renzulli and adopted by the LP of Arizona.

We are working on a final version which we hope that LP National and all state and local parties adopt.

WHEREAS American foreign policy should seek an America at peace with
the world, and conduct foreign policy based on the enlightened
principles of non-intervention as espoused by George Washington and
Thomas Jefferson
; and

[Susan Hogarth] I also would
leave out the references to George Washington (definitely) and
Jefferson (maybe). Washington was no libertarian, and only looks like
one because the crap in office now is so appalling they’d make
Alexander Hamilton blush for shame.

WHEREAS the United States government should return to its historical
libertarian tradition of avoiding entangling alliances, foreign
quarrels and imperialist adventures, while recognizing the natural
right to unrestricted trade and travel; and

WHEREAS the United States has intervened in the affairs of Iraq and
Afghanistan, nations that neither directly attacked nor threatened
America, and our invasion of their sovereign territories is an attempt
to impose our values on people in other lands; and

WHEREAS such overt hostilities are immoral and contrary to the
principles of the philosophy of libertarianism and the Libertarian
Party; and

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Libertarian Party of the United
States demands that the President of the United States and U.S.
Congress act to immediately end the occupations of Iraq and
Afghanistan; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Armed Forces of the United States have
the full support of the Libertarian Party of the United States.
believe that the immediate withdrawal of U.S. forces will better
ensure their safety and create a more manageable situation for the
governments of Iraq and Afghanistan to maintain civil order; and

I also am not a fan of the ‘we support the troops’ language. I PITY
them (on a good day), but I damned sure don’t SUPPORT them. They are
engaged – willingly! – in unlawful and immoral acts!!! Let’s stop this
pandering to warmongerers.

Susan Hogarth

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Libertarian Party of the United States
calls upon the United States Congress to impeach President George W.
Bush for lying to the American public about the reasons for invading
Iraq and Afghanistan; violating the War Crimes Act of 1996, the 4th,
5th, 6th and 8th Amendments of the Bill of Rights and Article 1
Sections 8 & 9 of the United States Constitution by allowing the
illegal surveillance of American citizens; approving the illegal
torturing of prisoners of war; sanctioning the holding of prisoners of
war without formal charges, legal representation or a trial by jury;
invading sovereign countries without a Congressional declaration of
war and illegally using government funds for domestic political
propaganda related to the war on drugs; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED we also call for the cessation of covert or
military activities of the United States government geared towards
directly or indirectly provoking hostilities with the Republic of Iran.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the passage of this resolution will be
communicated by the Secretary of the Libertarian Party of the United
States to the President and Vice President of the United States, the
heads of both Congressional chambers and all major national news media

Read Full Post »

Posted on CALibs yahoo group.

Good news!

As some of you may have heard, the jury in my prostitution case came back with a unanimous verdict yesterday, after a little less than three hours of deliberation: Not Guilty! Needless to say, I and all the folks who were there to support me were very happy. Once we had a jury selected, a process that took all of last week, things went pretty rapidly. The actual trial started Monday with the opening arguments, followed by the testimony of Officer Heather Fox, the Fremont Police vice cop who lied and pretended to be a client in order to lure me into this entrapment.

I do feel she was honest in her testimony about the events, though I have serious doubts about her testimony when we recalled her outside the presence of the jury. District Attorney Suzanne Simpkins was required by law to turn over to us any documents the police had relating to this arrest or to undercover sting operations in general, and she told us there were no such documents. On the witness stand however, Officer Fox mentioned being given about a week prior to the arrest a list of slang terms used on the Internet, for help in deciphering ads such as mine. Even judge Keith Fudenna, who was no friend to me or to justice during most of this case, appeared to agree that this would have been covered under the discovery request. But when we were able to query Officer Fox about it, she (1) said that she no longer had a copy of the document, (2) did not know whether any other officers were given copies of the document, (3) did not know whether the Fremont Police Department still had the document, and (4) reaffirmed the D.A.’s previous contention that the FPD does not have any written policies, procedures or documents relating to undercover sting operations. I think this was a pack of lies, especially #4 which is just not credible, but unfortunately there appears to be little we can do to prove it, since the judge did not press them on it.

The D.A. surprised us by calling no further witnesses after Officer Fox, so the following morning I testified in my own defense, followed by a client of mine who was good enough to volunteer to come forward and testify as a character witness. After both attorneys got to ask all their questions of the various witnesses, they gave their closing arguments. Erica’s closing argument was terrific, one of the strongest parts of her whole performance on this case, for which I already give her high marks. I would strongly recommend her as a criminal defense attorney to anyone who might be in need of one. While it got off to a rocky start when the judge prohibited her from talking about the Fremont police chief’s memo to the community letting people know the department would no longer investigate burglar alarms unless there was a verified problem, and was cutting back on auto theft, robbery, and street crime investigations, all due to an alleged lack of resources — “alleged” because they seemed to have no lack of resources for entrapping prostitutes on the Internet for intending to engage in sexual activities among consenting adults — it was all uphill from there. Erica demolished the contention that the cop saying “OK, that works” in response to hearing my rates for time which could include “being fucked” meant that we had an actual agreement, noting that if you go to Best Buy and a salesman is telling you about various TVs and how much they cost, and you say “OK, that works” but nothing subsequently happens such as you taking a TV to the register, it does not mean that you have committed to purchasing one. She also recounted a recent phone conversation in which someone from the D.A.’s office in San Francisco had called her and let her know that some motions would be filed, and she said “OK.” Then when she was in court, the D.A. tried to say Erica had not objected to these motions, but as Erica explained, she was simply acknowledging the D.A.’s statement, not agreeing to what was being stated. I suspect that these personal, common-sense examples had a powerful effect on the jury.

The juror who had been the foreman (Charlie Messinger, who happens to be an elected member of the Newark School Board) and stayed around to talk with a few of us after the trial concluded yesterday afternoon, confirmed this, saying that the jurors felt my attorney Erica Franklin was very persuasive in explaining how no actual crime was committed, and how the D.A. had not proved the three elements she needed to prove for them to convict (intent, an agreement, and an act in furtherance).

More soberingly however, he also added words to the effect of “there might have been a crime if they’d waited another 10 minutes before making the arrest.” He also told us the jury felt I was likable and honest in my testimony. He said that when I mentioned that I would have had sex with the two female vice cops for free, he said “us four guys in the back were all going ‘Me too!'” The conversation was a pointed indication that despite the favorable verdict, I could have easily been convicted if the circumstances of the case had been only very slightly different in any number of different specifics. I do not think the jurors “got it” as far as understanding that prostitution is not a real crime, or that this arrest was a travesty and an injustice from the get-go. Messinger said he had never heard of FIJA (the Fully Informed Jury Association), and appeared to be unaware of jury nullification (I talked about it a little bit, and wrote down FIJA’s website for him — http://www.FIJA.org). Clearly more public education in these matters is desperately needed.

Meanwhile however, those of us who believe in freedom can savor this hard-earned VICTORY! It is the best outcome I could have realistically hoped for, and justice was at least partially served — the police and D.A.’s office will not face any penalties for violating my rights, and I’m still out a few thousand dollars and many hours of my life plus the small amount of property I believe the cops stole from me when I was arrested, but at least I have the satisfaction of knowing that the Fremont authorities put in a substantial amount of time, money and resources into this, and after nearly two years came away totally empty-handed except for the taxpayer money that they are all sucking up as a normal part of their jobs. I want to get a copy of the transcript of this trial and put it on the Internet for the benefit of sex workers and others who may have to fight such injustices in the future and could be helped by knowing more details, but I have learned that obtaining it will mean paying the court reporter $2.50 per page, or a total of several hundred dollars more, despite the fact that as the official record of a public trial it should be public information. Just one more way the system is designed to rip people off! If you have not already supported me with a donation or your presence or both, a small contribution toward covering this last expense would be most welcome.

Likewise I will also be publishing the various motions we filed in this case, as well as the details of my police report, the transcript of the undercover tape the cops made of the arrest, and whatever other info I can get out there (minus only a few details of personal information such as my driver’s license number and so on that I will redact). If anyone has any specific questions or comments about this case, please feel free to email me or call me while it’s relatively fresh in my memory and I will be happy to give you more details, at least until I get tired of recounting them. 8)

Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))

Read Full Post »

I don’t comment at TPW anymore.

However, occasionally I still read the conversations there. On one thread someone claimed that energy independence has to, in every case, be government mandated.

Naturally, I disagree. In fact, I believe big government is currently responsible for a lack of energy independence.

How so? Here are just a few of the ways.

  • Corporate personhood and non-concensual limited liability. By shielding polluting petrochemical corporations from legal responsibility, the regime gives them an unnatural advantage over cleaner alternatives.
  • Corporate welfare. Large, established corporations line up at the trough to receive billions of dollars of stolen tax loot; petrocorps are no exception.
  • Military-industrial complex. Sure, plundering the Middle East’s oil is not the only reason why the Bush gang has plunked half a trillion dollars of your money into a sand hole. But do you really think it wasn’t one of the reasons?
  • Interstate highway system. A big government incentive to sprawl, along with others such as subsidized utility extensions, clearing of inner city neighborhoods in the name of urban renewal, occupational licensing and taxes and regulations making mass transportation and taxis less affordable, and many others.
  • Speaking of taxes and regulations there are insufferable multitudes of them, and they keep innovative new startups – such as those which might develop alternative forms of energy in a free market – from ever getting off the ground and competing with the established big players on an even field.

    Big corporations have lobbyists who help tailor the regulations, lawyers and accountants to keep them in compliance and fill out the paperwork, money to make regulators look the other way or pay fines if and when absolutely necessary, and more. Small new companies are at a distinct disadvantage in this arena.

  • Marijuana prohibition has been used as a rationale to keep industrial hemp from being cultivated, even though it can’t get you high (unlike gasoline, which can fuck you up if you huff it) and has many promising uses, including as fuel.
  • Other government disincentives to venture capital and entrepreneurship include the social security pyramid scheme
    and linkage of employment to health insurance. The latter parlays with regime intervention in the health care market, which has caused a price spiral.
  • Not a complete list by any means, but there you are.

    Read Full Post »

I’m up in Massachusetts working on the End The Income Tax petition, as well as marijuana decriminalization.

The End the Income Tax campaign has asked me to see if anyone is interested in coming in to Massachusetts for the last week or so of the signature gathering.

End the income tax is paying $1.50 a signature, and marijuana decrim is paying $2.00 a signature. I’ve been having most people sign both.

The campaign has room to house at least one more person, and travel costs are negotiable.

They are also looking for donations.

You can call 508-358-4247 or email info@smallgovernmentact.org

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: