Charles Jay will be interviewed live on RevolutionBroadcasting.com at 8PM ET. Thursday the 25th. If the readers of IPR would like to suggest questions for Charles, I will do my best to include them in my interview.
Boston Tea Party candidate Charles Jay to be interviewed on RevolutionBroadcasting.com
September 22nd, 2008 · 33 Comments
Filed Under: Non-left/right parties
33 responses so far ↓
1 G.E. // Sep 22, 2008 at 7:11 pm
Good first story, VTV. We’re happy to have you here!
2 G.E. // Sep 22, 2008 at 7:21 pm
Jay and the BTP should do a press release acknowledging Paul’s endorsement of Baldwin, but stating that Jay is actually closest to Ron Paul’s views and is on the ballot in x states.
3 VTV // Sep 22, 2008 at 7:24 pm
Working on that. Do you have any policy questions for Mr. Jay?
4 Hugh Jass // Sep 22, 2008 at 7:24 pm
G.E.,
Had Jay been on the ballot in more states, such that people in most states could vote for him, Ron Paul probably would not have endorsed Baldwin.
5 Fred Church Ortiz // Sep 22, 2008 at 7:26 pm
Had Jay been on the ballot in more states, such that people in most states could vote for him, Ron Paul probably would not have endorsed Baldwin.
This is plausible.
6 VTV // Sep 22, 2008 at 7:30 pm
Thank you G.E. glad to be here.
7 G.E. // Sep 22, 2008 at 7:30 pm
I’d like to hear Jay’s take on Roe v. Wade. I know he’s pro-choice. But does he think that decision is constitutionally sound? Does he think states should be able to make abortion illegal?
BTP press release idea: Acknowledge Ron Paul’s endorsement of Baldwin and say it’s “understandable” given Barr’s deliberate attempt to alienate Paul, Paul’s long-time friendship with Baldwin, and Jay’s appearance on just three ballots. HOWEVER, “with all due respect to Rev. Baldwin,” there are several areas where Ron Paul’s views are different from Baldwin’s, but where they’re the same as Jay’s. Free trade being #1. I’m sure there are more.
8 Travis Maddox // Sep 22, 2008 at 7:33 pm
Jay would be my second choice but he’s not on the ballot in MO. Wish him luck though.
9 VTV // Sep 22, 2008 at 7:37 pm
I will hit him on Roe vs Wade.
10 VTV // Sep 22, 2008 at 9:37 pm
Anything else?
11 Ross Levin // Sep 22, 2008 at 9:59 pm
the national initiative
12 VTV // Sep 22, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Hehehe, yeah my bosses will love that. But sure.
13 Ross Levin // Sep 22, 2008 at 10:01 pm
Oh, and I think John Murphy would be happy to be on your show sometime. I think you know of him, he’s also endorsed by Gravel and has endorsed the national initiative. His email is johnamurphy@comcast.net if you want to contact him about doing a show.
14 VTV // Sep 22, 2008 at 10:07 pm
Email sent.
15 Eternaverse // Sep 22, 2008 at 10:17 pm
Could you ask Gravel who he’s endorsing/ voting for?
16 VTV // Sep 22, 2008 at 10:19 pm
Yes. I can do that.
17 Peter Orvetti // Sep 23, 2008 at 3:02 am
I’d have a strategic question for Jay: Will his ‘04 running mate be campaigning for/with him at all? Marilyn Chambers was the main reason he got any attention at all that year, and I expect she’d be good for a few press hits if they held a news conference or something.
18 VTV // Sep 23, 2008 at 11:30 am
I will ask him that too.
19 Jared // Sep 23, 2008 at 4:26 pm
I remember reading a while back he supported the Line Item Veto. Ask him if that is still his position, and if so how is it constitutionally sound.
20 VTV // Sep 23, 2008 at 4:28 pm
You mean Charles Jay? Just making sure since someone put a Gravel question here.
21 Thomas L. Knapp // Sep 23, 2008 at 5:23 pm
VTV,
If you do bring up NI4D with Charles, feel free to mention that his running mate has endorsed it
I’m the guy who writes most BTP press releases, and I won’t be writing one about the Paul/Baldwin thing unless the chair asks me to. Here’s why:
- We’re not going to endorse Baldwin, but I don’t see any reason for the BTP to go out of its way to highlight that it’s NOT endorsing Baldwin, either. In approaching C4L voters, I hope we go with honey, not with vinegar.
- Jay has endorsed the C4L four-point statement, so Paul already knows (if he’s noticed or cares) that we’re with him on that.
- The BTP’s national committee has put the four points of the C4L statement up for consideration by the membership as the party’s program for the next two years. I predict that the membership will ratify those four points, and hope that they won’t add or subtract anything, so that the BTP will, at that point, have a valid claim to be THE “C4L-Compliant” party.
We take our pokes at Barr when the situation calls for it, because yes, we ARE an offshoot of the LP and our current activities tend to center around taking the ground that it keeps abandoning. But I’d as soon not see us inserting ourselves into any additional pissing matches vis a vis the Baldwin endorsement and such.
22 VTV // Sep 23, 2008 at 5:40 pm
Your next for an interview Thomas. So get ready! I am warming up the hot seat.
23 Jared // Sep 23, 2008 at 8:19 pm
VTV,
I’m specifically referring to Mr. Jay.
Thanks
24 JimDavidson // Sep 24, 2008 at 9:00 pm
My buddy Tweak Jones is interviewing me on Friday morning midnight to 1 a.m. east coast time (11 p.m. to midnight on Thursday in Dallas, for example).
I am the chair of the Boston Tea Party. I also see no reason to take Dr. Paul to task for choosing his long time friend to endorse for president. I worked alongside Chuck Baldwin in South Carolina earlier this year trying to win that primary for Ron, so I’ve heard him speak. I don’t agree with all the things Baldwin says, but I’m also not Ron Paul, so I don’t get to choose who Ron endorses.
Jared, a line item veto appears in the constitution of the Confederate States of America. If you think it isn’t constitutionally sound, you probably also don’t like all the signing statements Bush has added to the laws he’s signed.
Of course, it is possible to amend the constitution, if that’s required to impose a line item veto. At this stage in the economic shenanigans, it is probably too late to get the federal budget under control before the printing presses start rolling into hyperinflation. But if you have a proposal for how to balance the budget without Carter’s zero based budgeting or a line item veto, do say more about it.
I think Marilyn Chambers does a good job using her celebrity to promote freedom of speech. It would be super to have her judge the wet T-shirt and wet thong contest in Alabama, if that happens this year. Maybe we should send her one of the CafePress.com/bostontee shirts and ask her to pose in it?
25 JimDavidson // Sep 24, 2008 at 9:01 pm
Shoulda mentioned, Tweak’s show is on Revolution Broadcasting, or so he sez.
26 VTV // Sep 25, 2008 at 12:36 pm
Questions for Charles Jay I have so far:
1. I’d like to hear Jay’s take on Roe v. Wade. I know he’s pro-choice. But does he think that decision is constitutionally sound? Does he think states should be able to make abortion illegal?
2. Does he like the national initiative? (That his VP endorses.
3. Is his former VP from 2004 campaigning for him at all?
4. Do you support a line item veto?
5. Bailout
6. Georgia.
7. Iran.
8. Ron Paul’s press conference.
9. Do you agree to the 4 points Ron Paul presented?
Anything else?
27 hogarth // Sep 25, 2008 at 12:53 pm
Afghanistan
28 VTV // Sep 25, 2008 at 12:57 pm
10. Religious freedom
11. Iraq and Afghanistan
29 Peter Orvetti // Sep 25, 2008 at 1:47 pm
Also, ballot access/write-ins. Has Jay filed paperwork to be an official write-in candidate in D.C.? Elsewhere?
30 BrianHoltz // Sep 25, 2008 at 2:07 pm
If your audience gets bored of these softball questions, you might want to probe to see if he is as radical a libertarian as 1) his running mate and 2) so many of the BTP’s critics of the LP. The following questions are kryptonite to such radicals, so don’t expect clear answers even if you ask them.
Should the criminally accused have the Sixth Amendment right to subpoena third-party witnesses, compelling their attendance at trial?
Do you believe that every individual has the right of personal secession, declaring himself exempt from all the government’s laws (while still being subject to private prosecution for violations of natural law)?
Do you support unconditional amnesty for all those individuals who have been convicted of, or who get accused of, tax resistance or evasion?
Do you support elimination of all restrictions on immigration?
Should there be any legislation that sets rules or fees for pollution, or should all pollution problems be handled as private torts?
What kinds of weapons, if any, — e.g. nuclear, biological, chemical — should be outlawed for private ownership?
And for the Mother Of All Questions: how many of the 30 elements of the No 1st Force Pledge (http://libertarianmajority.net/no-1st-force-pledge) can you endorse?
31 VTV // Sep 25, 2008 at 8:05 pm
going on right now. http://www.revolutionbroadcasting.com
32 VTV // Sep 25, 2008 at 8:19 pm
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/V-RADIO/2008/09/26/Boston-Tea-Party-Presidential-candidate-Charles-Jay-on-V-RADIO
33 G.E. // Sep 25, 2008 at 8:21 pm
If anyone cares, here are my answers to Brian’s questions:
“Rights” cannot compel others. This is not a legitimate “right” but a compulsion under the monopoly state.
Absolutely.
Yes.
Yes.
“Private Torts in Private Courts!” — my campaign slogan.
If individuals perceive the ownership of a particular class of weapons to be a threat, than in a free society, they could take action (either “vigilante” or through a third party) to either destroy the weapons or to apprehend the “offender.” A jury would settle who was in the right.
Leave a Comment