BTP presidential candidate Charles Jay has published an essay on his blog, in honor of Independence Day, about declaring independence from the Libertarian Party, for those who feel that party is increasingly libertarian in name only. It was brought to my attention by Darcy Richardson. Here is a taste…
Since I am in one of those “free and easy†kinds of moods, I was wondering whether I could be so bold as to put a few creative (or “subversive†as the LNC might read it) ideas into your head.
As a presidential candidate for the Boston Tea Party, I am obviously tuned in to some of the discontent that currently exists in the Libertarian Party, especially as the BTP is growing at a fast pace as a result of it. Yet, even with this unhappiness, which has sometimes bordered on outrage, I have noticed a loyalty in some members of the party that extends to supporting the very candidate who was the source of such discontent in the first place.
And it makes me kind of curious.
Sure, it would seem illogical, and may indeed be the by-product of a certain political expediency (i.e., a matter of ballot access down the ticket). I’m sure there is also that sense of hope, that somehow a party that has suddenly taken a sharp turn in the wrong direction will be able to correct itself so that it can indeed again lay claim to being about libertarians and libertarianism.
I also appreciate that folks have something invested in the party and want to see things through. I admittedly don’t share that connection, and haven’t built up a lot of equity in the so-called “Party of Principle.â€
That having been said, though, such hope for the LP at this point would be highly optimistic.
The party you worked with for years is gone. And it’s not likely to make a comeback.
For those of you who are begrudgingly supporting the LP candidate for president, I’d like for you to indulge me for a moment. If you would, take a step back, look into yourself, take a deep breath, and ask yourself the following questions:
continues at http://totalactionradio.com/cj08/?p=6
47 responses so far ↓
1 richardwinger // Jul 5, 2008 at 10:38 pm
Charles Jay also ran for president in 2004, against Michael Badnarik. He was only on the ballot in Utah, as the nominee of the Personal Choice Party. I don’t think any Libertarian thinks Michael Badnarik wasn’t “libertarian enough.” Jay has his own reasons for running for president. Those reasons are independent of any characteristics of the Libertarian Party.
2 inDglass // Jul 5, 2008 at 10:47 pm
[blockquote]Jay has his own reasons for running for president. Those reasons are independent of any characteristics of the Libertarian Party.[/blockquote]
What are these reasons? Even if they exist, Jay is still more libertarian than Barr and the most libertarian candidate for President this year.
Jay’s running mate Tom Knapp is well respected and certainly has no reasons for running beside advancing real libertarianism through building the Boston Tea Party.
3 paulie cannoli // Jul 5, 2008 at 10:53 pm
I noticed on Charles Jay’s about page that, like Wayne Root, he is a sports handicapper.
I wonder if they know each other and what they think of each other?
4 Mike Theodore // Jul 5, 2008 at 11:08 pm
Good point. Who the hell would run against Badnarik, and claim themselves personally Libertarian.
Now I hate to sound like his. Because I sound like an ass when I do. Now I can jump from the Libertarian Party with everyone else (months after joining) or I can continue Libertarian causes. How in sweet hot hell does splitting the party in two solve anything.
Do you guys want to dissolve into the back alleys of history like the Reform Party?!
Even the bloody Prohibition Party split in two!
What is the point?! Jesus effin’ Christ!
*sigh* (Representing the deep sigh after pouring all that out. This was supposed to be brief.)
Look, I was once talking with a libertarian turned BTP. He said he left because the Conservatives were purging them. How in the hell are they purging you?! Your leaving the party on your own! Stay! Fight! I don’t care which side your on! Just don’t kill this party, people!
One day, before I die, I want to see a Libertarian elected to some kind of national office. Some Libertarians say it’s impossible. Same one’s that are leaving into BTP. God dammit. Once this party dies from this, thats it folks. The BTP will not rise to the size your wildest dreams give it credit for. The LP is our last hope. Why would you take that away from this country?
I’m getting more and more annoyed by this senseless bickering.
5 Peter Orvetti // Jul 5, 2008 at 11:12 pm
I expect there are a fair number of committed Libertarians who do not feel they can vote for this year’s national ticket who will nonetheless stay in the party, and vote for downballot LP candidates.
6 Mike Theodore // Jul 5, 2008 at 11:13 pm
God, I hope so.
7 inDglass // Jul 5, 2008 at 11:39 pm
Mike, I agree with you that people should not abandon the LP because of a candidate they do not like. There is the potential here for Barr to draw new people to libertarian ideas, and there must be true libertarians in the party to welcome these new people and spread the message. Also, in states such as my own, the LP is the only third party with ballot access.
Keep in mind that you do not need to leave the LP to join the BTP. I think there are many advantages to being a member of both. Let’s not blame the BTP for a split-up of the LP if that even happens.
I highly doubt the LP will split. It is a large party with some solid state affiliates that many people are sticking around to support. There are many great libertarians staying in the fight, such as Steve Kubby. At the same time, we have seen reports of Barr supporters who inted to head back to the GOP after November. Who knows, the Barr thing may blow over and we could see a real libertarian like Badnarik nominated again in 2012.
8 Mike Theodore // Jul 5, 2008 at 11:45 pm
You know what? Maybe I’m just an over paranoid guy. I have no idea. From your end, I might look like a ranting and raving maniac. Especially after recent lack of sleep…
2012! HAHAHAHA! I forgot. Taking down Root will be like tipping a cow. But who will climb over that thrashing SOB and take the stage?
Jingo? Hess, maybe…
9 Peter Orvetti // Jul 5, 2008 at 11:59 pm
I’m hoping Michael Munger might run in 2012, or perhaps Dr. Ruwart again. Or maybe the Angela Keaton “campaign” will become something real?
10 inDglass // Jul 6, 2008 at 12:15 am
Munger or Ruwart would be outstanding! Hey, why not both? Ruwart/Munger 2012. Let’s start drafting them now. Hell, let’s start campaigning for them too
11 Mike Theodore // Jul 6, 2008 at 12:17 am
You know, I’m not so sure with Ruwart. Sure, it would be a dream come true for some, but it would bring back memories of division. We need someone to bring us up strong.
I know nothing about Munger.
Keaton…Why not? It will be an unseating race, so I’m up for anything.
12 G.E. // Jul 6, 2008 at 12:55 am
Munger’s platform is far too moderate for me to get excited about.
Mary all the way!
13 cbennett // Jul 6, 2008 at 1:17 am
Look here Lil’ boy Mikey,
How many years have you put into activism, running campaigns, volunteered on campaigns and other outreach with the LP? The conservatarians took over the LP and they are spineless, unbearable, out-of-control, gutless individuals who were not happy with McCain and saw a great opportunity to take over a little party like the LP. I have been an LP member since you were in diapers. I’ve put in numerous of hours with the LP only for the LP to abandon the principles that I hold dearly. So you wanna stay and “save” the LP…be my guest. The BTP is going to compete with the LP over the heart and soul of Libertarian values. Until the BTP is on par with the LP I will continue to help those down-ticket REAL libertarians who aren’t getting any attention from Bob Barr. I hope that the LP falls so flat on their faces that the conservatarians will go back to the “party of torture” and spew their disgusting vile there. If I wanted to be a Republican, I would have joined that party. I am a Libertarian damnit and I didn’t leave the party, the fucking party left ME!
14 pdsa // Jul 6, 2008 at 2:41 am
Much of these comments seem to be labouring under the false assumption that Barr as ’08 LP Presidential Candidate is the problem. This is a gloss, and a 3-monkey dodge. The problem is the right-sided favoritism and gamesmanship being played from the LP National.
Heading into the ’06 midterm election, there could not be found on the LP website ONE mention of habeas corpus’ theft in the Military Commissions Act. There was however voluminous mentioning of and support for various individual state initiatives to curtail eminent domain usage. This is not to say that eminent domain abuses are not a concern, but clearly: if the state has stolen habeas corpus from it proper possession by all humanity, There Can Be No Liberty.
Furthermore, upon a thorough investigation of the legislated remedies written into many of the eminent domain initiatives, it became transparent that these were not promulgated with an attempt to secure individuals’ possession of property, but were instead manufactured with the intent of protecting property possessed by collectivist business entities. The remedies were structured in a manner that if a community were forced to choose between competing claims, the small landholder would always lose to the REITs, The Corporations, The LLCs, etc.
Empowering of any collectivist entities, whether it be state, or private for profit, to a position of dominant power over the rights of the individual will never result in the people’s liberty.
Barr’s candidacy is only an effect of the underlying illness within the LP, now manifest as Republican Light.
15 Peter Orvetti // Jul 6, 2008 at 2:47 am
As a proud 33-year-old member of the National Youth Rights Association, I really wish folks would stop taking shots at Mike about his age. I wish I had been as on the ball at age 16 as Mike is now. Ageism is ageism, whether towards young or old.
16 G.E. // Jul 6, 2008 at 2:51 am
I support my young brother.
I just wish he would R.E.A.D. before asking questions.
17 Robert Milnes // Jul 6, 2008 at 5:17 am
The solution to Barr/Root was to make use of BTP to form a fusion ticket & get a lot more ballot access. & bypass the LP executive ticket but vote Lib. downticket. That didn’t work out. So now the last possible fusion ticket with enough possible ballot access to win is via the GP. inDglass, wouldn’t be nice if the Lib. candidate you mention the only one on the ballot, could get ALL the progressive vote (40%)?!
18 paulie cannoli // Jul 6, 2008 at 7:54 am
pdsa (comment 14), Peter Orvetti (15), and GE (16) are all correct.
19 Robert Milnes // Jul 6, 2008 at 8:47 am
paulie cannoli, what about 17?
20 paulie cannoli // Jul 6, 2008 at 9:35 am
Robert, no third party or independent candidates, separately or together, is going to get anywhere near 40% or even in that ballpark this year, and the Green Party will not nominate a libertarian for POTUS or VPOTUS at their convention in Chicago in a few days (reminder to anyone reading: I’m coming up there from Alabama; need a ride and a place to crash – couches and floors OK – if possible).
BTP needs 800 valid in NJ (1200-1600 raw). If you are short on money, I recommend giving petitioning a try. You can make your own schedule. Libertarians and Greens need to get on there too. Probably out of my way.
21 Robert Milnes // Jul 6, 2008 at 10:29 am
paulie cannoli, if the Green party members & activists & delegates listen to me, it just might still be possible to win this year. Everybody screwing up & naysaying notwithstanding. That is my opinion & evaluation. You have said yours. I guess we’ll see who the Greens nominate soon enough. I’m more concerned with Oklahoma & the Indian vote. Will someone please give this man a ride & a place to crash…stay? Good luck there, pc. I heard some delegates can’t even afford to go.
22 Robert Milnes // Jul 6, 2008 at 10:32 am
Getting ready to watch Bob Barr on ABC This Week.
23 paulie cannoli // Jul 6, 2008 at 11:25 am
Giving credit where it’s due, Mr. Barr did very well in his interview.
There are certainly advantages in having a political pro as the LP candidate. The disadvantages have been belabored elsewhere.
24 Robert Milnes // Jul 6, 2008 at 11:33 am
paulie cannoli, so, you are a barf?
25 paulie cannoli // Jul 6, 2008 at 12:00 pm
What’s a barf?
I’m an undecided voter between Barr, Jay and McKinney right now, although I’m most likely not to vote at all.
I’ve met Barr on a number of occasions. I had a good phone conversation with Charles Jay last night. I plan on going to the Green Party convention.
I’ve been very critical of Barr at those times when he has deserved criticism. As promised, I won’t shy away from saying when I think he does good, and this was one of those times.
He has from now until November to win or lose my vote.
I don’t vote merely based on party loyalty. If I did, I would still be a Democrat. The LP has to earn its support, like anyone else.
26 Sean Scallon // Jul 6, 2008 at 2:27 pm
Schisms are the bane of non-major party existence. Major parties have had schisms as well throughout history, some that haver been significant and historic. But in the end the group that breaks away either rejoins the party or goes to ther other party. Such parties seem strong enough to sruvive such schisms.
Not so non-major parties. How many socialist parties does one nation need? How many conservative parties does one nation need? A lot of these splits have more to do with personality and pretty issues more so than any grand dispute over doctrine.
Like it or not Bob Barr won the LP nomination fair and square. He won because average LP members got tired of nominating ideologically pure nobodies who wasted a lot of money and couldn’t get a sixth of the press attention Barr has received.
Steve Kubby and Mary Ruwart have accepted this fait accompli and will no doubt bide their time until they can get a crack at the nomination again in 2012. Others have decided they can’t wait that long and have formed the BTP. Fine. That’s their right. But before engaging in a schism one must ask themselves whether its worth it or not to start a brand new party or wait it out in the party you are in? Do you have the money and the membership necessary to m ake this aprty a success or are you simply engaging in childish behavor because your side didn’t win? Does the world need two libertarian parties or are you simply creating a ghetto for yourself that will be marginalized and ultimately ignored?
If non-major party activists used such thinking and little more common sense, there would be less schisms and more effectiveness than there is now.
27 G.E. // Jul 6, 2008 at 2:36 pm
“Like it or not Bob Barr won the LP nomination fair and square. “
Sorry, I don’t agree with that assessment.
28 paulie cannoli // Jul 6, 2008 at 2:40 pm
In what ways do you think Barr cheated?
29 Arthur Torrey // Jul 6, 2008 at 2:56 pm
Lets see, we have Barr arranging the speakers list at the convention.
We have the “Liberty For Sale” auction website on LPUS, originally set up to get the nomination for Ron Paul…
We have LPHQ staff members issuing press releases attacking other candidates – then going to work for the Barr campaign.
We have a candidate running for office while sitting on the LNC (and busily funding Republican candidates, and supporting anti-libertarian messages while doing so…)
Etc.
ART
30 G.E. // Jul 6, 2008 at 3:03 pm
Art summed it up fairly well. I’d add in the Gordon/Cory/Viguerie/TPW coterie as well.
31 Mike Theodore // Jul 6, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Ok, one day and I have much to respond to before I have to head back out again.
Chris,
Ok, you’ve done more than I can imagine for the LP, and I just stumbled in a few months ago. Now down ticket candidates are essential, but I want to try to keep the national party intact. You know what, maybe they will fall out of the party. Besides someone like Root, I can see that happening. But how the hell can we hold if we’re trying to keep people out? Just my central view.
Who knows? I have no idea how someone like me looks to an experienced insider like yourself. Sorry if I can be offensive at times. Really.
BTW, I’ve been trying to reach you on facebook. Every time I send the message it says you’ve signed off and it doesn’t get through. Are you running the Stafford campaign?
32 Mike Theodore // Jul 6, 2008 at 3:45 pm
Peter, I need a little ageism now and then to keep me in check. I’ll be getting the same stuff when I’m 90 and pounding my flabby, senile fingers into whatever we’re using as keyboards then.
But I can guarantee that things will be much worse by then. So that’s why I’ll follow this along till I die.
33 Mike Theodore // Jul 6, 2008 at 3:47 pm
G.E.
“I support my young brother.
I just wish he would R.E.A.D. before asking questions.”
That was a wee bit of panic on my part. Up here I can only get on this computer before lunch, and once my aunt is off after dinner. I was just shocked at how fast all those comments were put on there. I’m back to my laptop full time tomorrow night, and I promise I will catch up.
34 cbennett // Jul 6, 2008 at 3:47 pm
Yes Mike I am Larry Stafford’s campaign manager. At least Larry is more libertarian and tolerable than Bob Barr.
35 Peter Orvetti // Jul 6, 2008 at 3:47 pm
When you’re 90, I hope you will consider my head in a jar as a vice presidential candidate for 2084.
36 Mike Theodore // Jul 6, 2008 at 3:49 pm
Robert,
Your right about the mountains. If your trip doesn’t shake off the depression, you need some pills. Get up to the Colorado mountains sometime.
37 Mike Theodore // Jul 6, 2008 at 3:51 pm
I’ll be back in Illinois in August, Chris. I’ll see how my work schedule will be. I’ll try and help ya’ll out.
38 Mike Theodore // Jul 6, 2008 at 3:52 pm
Peter, and my Robert Byrd like jowls at the top of that ticket? I think not.
39 paulie cannoli // Jul 6, 2008 at 4:25 pm
All of those things can be characterized in different ways.
I’m not taking a position one way or the other by posting this. Just trying to see if the story is solid.
Lets see, we have Barr arranging the speakers list at the convention.
Did Barr literally arrange the speakers list? Details please.
We have the “Liberty For Sale†auction website on LPUS, originally set up to get the nomination for Ron Paul…
“Liberty Decides” has been explained to be a fund raising tool for the LPHQ/LNC. As far as I know, whether it had anything to do with Ron Paul or not is speculation.
We have LPHQ staff members issuing press releases attacking other candidates – then going to work for the Barr campaign.
The other side on this one says the press release in question was in response to media inquiries about the LP’s position on child porn. Anonymous supporters of either Root, Barr, Phillies, or a mix of all three called attention to it on TPW; from there, it gained more attention and mainstream media were starting to call LPHQ to get reactions.
Shane and Sean felt they were doing their duty to keep the LP from being smeared as the kiddie porn party. Then Shane got slammed for it, and felt like he had to quit. Working for Barr was a logical career move – not at all necessarily premeditated.
Nor is it clear that Shane was a Barr supporter before the nomination (for instance, he may have been for Root). He was able to maintain his official neutrality well enough that I can’t ell.
We have a candidate running for office while sitting on the LNC (and busily funding Republican candidates, and supporting anti-libertarian messages while doing so…)
In fact, Barr suspended his active participation on the LNC when he decided for sure to run for the nomination. It’s true that he ran for re-election, but he was either going to be the nominee or an also-ran by the time the term started, not one of the candidates for the nomination.
I’d add in the Gordon/Cory/Viguerie/TPW coterie as well.
Too vague.
Again, I’m not saying whether you are right or not. But it’s not really an airtight case.
40 paulie cannoli // Jul 6, 2008 at 4:26 pm
Comment 39 was in response to comments 29-30. The exchange in between popped up while I was composing it.
41 Mike Theodore // Jul 6, 2008 at 7:41 pm
Paulie, your the only one that uses the numbers for some reason. Every I should, I forget about them. It’s a bloody mental block!
42 paulie cannoli // Jul 6, 2008 at 7:50 pm
42, the Answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything, from Douglas Adams’ series The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy
43 Mike Theodore // Jul 6, 2008 at 7:52 pm
Damn, someone else read that as well! Finally.
I had the Ultimate Guide and people kept asking me if it was a Bible at school
43, heart attack prediction. Circa friend Jack last week.
44 paulie cannoli // Jul 6, 2008 at 8:04 pm
Wikipedia says:
In mathematics
Forty-four is a tribonacci number, a happy number and an octahedral number.
Since the greatest prime factor of 442 + 1 = 1937 is 149 and thus more than 44 twice, 44 is a Størmer number.
The aliquot sequence of 44 is (44,40,50,43,1,0).
Given Euler’s totient function, \varphi(44)=20 and \varphi(69)=44.
44 is the number of derangements of 5 items.
[edit] In science
* The atomic number of ruthenium
[edit] Astronomy
* Messier object M44, a magnitude 4.0 open cluster in the constellation Cancer, also known as the Beehive Cluster
* The New General Catalogue object NGC 44, a double star in the constellation Andromeda
* The Saros number of the solar eclipse series which began on April 30, 1448 BC and ended on June 7, 168 BC . The duration of Saros series 44 was 1280.1 years, and it contained 72 solar eclipses.
* The Saros number of the lunar eclipse series which began on October 1, 1363 BC and ended on March 27, 153 . The duration of Saros series 44 was 1514.5 years, and it contained 85 lunar eclipses.
[edit] In sports
* The retired numbers for former baseball players Hank Aaron, Willie McCovey, Colin P. Berthaut and Reggie Jackson.
* Retired NFL Numbers: Floyd Little (Denver) and Pete Retzlaff (Philadelphia)
* Retired NBA Numbers: Dan Issel, (Denver Nuggets); Jerry West (L.A. Lakers)Paul Westphal (Phoenix Suns); Sam Lacey (Sacramento Kings); and George Gervin (San Antonio Spurs).
* A number of legend at Syracuse University, worn by great football players Erine Davis, Floyd Little, and Jim Brown. The number is now officially retired.
* The number for Dale Jarrett’s UPS Toyota in NASCAR
* On the movie Forrest Gump Forrest’s football jersey number for college was 44.
[edit] In other fields
Forty-four is:
* The code for international direct dial phone calls to the United Kingdom
* The designation of Interstate 44, a freeway that runs from Texas to Missouri
* The designation of U.S. Route 44, a highway that runs from New York to Massachusetts
* A poker game in which each player is dealt four cards down, and four cards are dealt face down on the table in a row. The first three cards on the table are “community” cards and may be used in any player’s hand. The fourth card and any card matching it in rank is wild, and can also be used in a hand (each player is guaranteed one wild card). For each of four rounds, one “community” card is flipped up and a round of betting occurs. After the last round, the winner is the person with the highest poker hand.
* The name of a mysterious savior of Poland prophesied in Adam Mickiewicz’s drama Dziady
* The name of the Mysterious Stranger in Mark Twain’s novel No 44, the Mysterious Stranger.
* The .44 Magnum or .44 Special revolver cartridges
* The name of the band including former blink-182 bassist Mark Hoppus and former blink-182 drummer Travis Barker, +44
* Vicks Formula 44 is a cough suppressant
* Bill Clinton (the 42nd President) and George W. Bush (the 43rd President) were born 44 days apart in the summer of 1946.
45 Mike Theodore // Jul 6, 2008 at 8:13 pm
I’d do the same with 45, but I have to go.
Damn Paulie…
haha
46 paulie cannoli // Jul 6, 2008 at 8:19 pm
Damn Paulie…
Why bother? The way this day is going I’m pretty sure I’m already damned.
47 Mike Theodore // Jul 7, 2008 at 12:49 am
Sounds about right. The lightning up here is eying me menacingly as well.
Leave a Comment