Monthly Archives: November 2008

Brian Holtz responds to Jim Davidson: ‘multiple freedom parties is dumb’

Responding to Jim Davidson’s Why two libertarian parties are better than one, Brian Holtz writes at Libertarian Intelligence:

Another freedom party makes sense only if your goal is A) to displace the LP or B) to start an explicitly anarchist party. Competing with the LP to improve it makes about as much sense as Henry Waxman starting his own Democrat Party in order to replace John Dingell as the Energy And Commerce chair. Instead the Democrat caucus narrowly chose Waxman over Dingell, and then united to shove that choice down the throats of the Republicans.

The difference between a Party and a Caucus is politics 101. A Party is for uniting all the voters who cluster around a common policy goal/direction. A Party uses caucuses to settle internal disputes over strategy, tactics, or candidates — and then comes out united and swinging. Splitting from the Party over such disputes is inane if killing the old Party isn’t your goal.

He continues in an older linked article on the same subject,

Offering multiple parties/candidates to the voters in our quadrant of Nolan space is dumb for multiple reasons:

* Having multiple liberty-oriented choices tells voters that libertarianism is too incoherent to be worth understanding.

* Having multiple liberty-oriented choices tells voters that the freedom movement is too poorly organized to be worth supporting.

* Having multiple liberty-oriented choices vastly increases the cognitive/investigative burden imposed on a voter asked to cast her single vote for liberty.

* Having multiple liberty-oriented choices tells politicians that pro-freedom voters are far from being a coherent caucus whose votes can be earned (e.g. by the party not running an opposing candidate).

* Getting liberty-oriented candidates on the ballot requires a threshold amount of signatures/fees.

* Getting a liberty-oriented party ballot-qualified requires a threshold amount of voter registration and/or votes in statewide races.

* American elections generally do not allow fusion voting.

* American elections do not allow approval voting, but instead uses plurality voting.

* Duverger’s Law suggests the natural tactical response of voters to plurality voting is to gather into two parties straddling the political center along its major axis, or into one party for each natural cluster of voters in the political space.

Continues here.

[read more]

Update: Minnesota Senate race isn’t the only recount this election season

We have previously reported on independent Cathy Church’s bid for prosecutor in Marquette County, Michigan. Thanks to Greg Peterson of for putting these stories together.

Apparently, Church was not convinced with the results of the election and filed for a [read more]

Cindy Sheehan asks, ‘Is Citigroup thankful for corrupt government and robbed taxpayers?’

The following is reposted from OpEd News. It was written by former independent candidate for Congress and prominent anti-war protestor Cindy Sheehan:

While Secretary of the Treasury from 1999-2001, Larry Summers worked with the Clinton [read more]

Washington State’s Party of the Commons

According to the party’s blog, Commoner: A Party of Commons journal. Progress, Tradition, Ecology “We have become the 4th most popular party in Washington state, based on the number of votes in recent elections. Only the “Big 2″ major parties and the Constitution party are ahead of us in popularity in Washington.” However, [read more]

Stephen Meier: Open letter to the LNC

sent to

Nov 26th, 2008

To: Libertarian Party National Committee

Subject: Angela Keaton

In regards to the upcoming LPNC meeting to be held Dec 6th and 7th in San Diego, CA. An agenda has been published at:

This published agenda includes the line “Discipline of Angela Keaton 30 minutes”.

I am deeply disturbed by what appears to be a very autocratic and arbitrary action by the LNC against one of its members who was elected by the party members at a national convention.

The LNC operates its meeting under Robert’s Rules of Order. The Libertarian Bylaws State


The rules contained in the current edition of Robert’s Rules of Order, Newly Revised shall govern the Party in all cases to which they are applicable and in which they are not inconsistent with these bylaws and any special rules of order adopted by the Party.

Robert’s Rules of Order require that notes be taken and that the meetings minutes be drafted and approved. Robert’s rules go on to state

The minutes should show:

All main motions (except such as were withdrawn) and motions that bring a main question again before the assembly, stating the wording as adopted or disposed of, and the disposition–including temporary disposition (with any primary and secondary amendments and adhering secondary motions then pending;

From the September LNC minutes (not yet appearing at but can be found at [read more]

Media appearances: Bob Barr 2008 vs. Harry Browne 2000

Data for Bob Barr from

Here is a summary of just the interviews and events Bob did between August 2 and November 3rd. This list does not attempt to include news stories or news coverage that resulted from speeches, events, public appearances, news conferences, news releases etc.

From August 2 through November 3rd Bob did at least:

31 national TV interviews including 15 on CNN and 8 on Fox News Network
31 local TV interviews
90 radio interviews
38 newspaper interviews
8 magazine interviews
3 news conferences
36 speeches, most at Universities
1 debate televised on C-SPAN

The only thing I know of to compare it to is Harry Browne’s list of campaign appearances from 2000. This is not an apples to apples comparison, since Browne’s list covers a longer period of time, and there are many more news shows and outlets now than there were then. Nevertheless, [read more]