Emailed by Wayne Root to [email protected]:
Wayne Allyn Root, the 2008 Libertarian Vice Presidential Nominee, best-selling Libertarian author, and now full-time national media personality, will appear on FOX News on Sunday with his daughter Dakota Root to discuss their remarkable education success story called “Homeschool to Harvard.” Dakota,18 and home-schooled since birth, was not only accepted at Harvard University, but also Stanford, Duke, Columbia, Penn, Brown, Chicago, Virginia, USC and many other of the finest colleges in America. She will attend Harvard in the fall and fence for the Harvard team, one of America’s top fencing programs. Amazingly, the first classroom of Dakota’s life will be inside the famous halls of Harvard.
Proud father Wayne Allyn Root calls this story “the perfect Libertarian model for solving America’s problems- whether they be economic, social or education. The answer is always less government involvement, less government interference, as well as more freedom, individual initiative, personal responsibility, choice, and competition. More specifically in the area of education- school choice, vouchers, parental freedom, holding teachers accountable by firing the under-performing ones, and rewarding the successful ones…and making public schools better by giving them strong competition. It works for Coke and Pepsi, why not public schools? This idea of more freedom for the citizens, and less power for the government, solves most every problem. That is why they are the cornerstones of our Constitution.”
Just last week Root made 18 media appearances- including 2 appearances live in New York on FOX News. Root’s busy week this week is highlighted by the father/daughter FNC appearance, along with a dozen radio and television appearances across the country- including “The Big Biz Show” on CBS TV and radio in San Diego, CA, “The Gary Nolan Show” in Syracuse, NY, and “The Mike Ferguson Show” in Columbia, Missouri. Root is also addressing the Conservative Leadership Conference (CLC) in Las Vegas, Nevada on Saturday as the opening speaker to start the event, and addressing the Michigan Libertarian Party state convention on Saturday via Skype.
Next week Root will be in St Louis, Missouri for the Libertarian National Convention, where he is a candidate for National Chairman of “America’s Third Party.” His daughter Dakota will give his nomination speech in front of the Libertarian national delegates, just as she did at age 16 in 2008 for his Presidential nomination in Denver, Colorado.
—
Wayne Allyn Root
2008 Libertarian Vice Presidential Nominee
While I am far from a Wayne Root supporter – quite the opposite, in fact – I see no point in making snide remarks about a talented young lady who is making a mark for herself in the world.
Gwen, you don’t know what you’re talking about. Dakota Root had a 1600 on her SAT. If you don’t know, 1600 is a perfect score, a score which fewer than than 1 in every 1000 who take the test achieve.
she is also an Olympic contender in fencing and yes , getting into an Ivy League School IS REMARKABLE . are you suggesting Wayne bought her way in and she didnt deserve it on her own merit?
Dakota Root is an outstanding young lady and 1 of the reasons I came around to liking Root. Noone who wasnt a good man could raise a daughter like that.
what school did you go to Gwen? dont be a hater
I’m sorry but a rich kid getting accepted into a Ivy League school is not remarkable.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand-waving
The Ron Paul and Tea Party phenomena have been the biggest political manifestation of libertarianism in decades, and the LP has been at least as libertarian than they’ve been: http://libertarianmajority.net/2008
If the LP were actually “irrelevant”, then ex-LP members wouldn’t obsessively comment about it on IPR.
“Real libertarians are increasingly finding the LP irrelevant and Root is contributing to this perception. ”
I pretty much posted the same sentiment in another thread. Nominating Barr/Root was the kiss of death, and Root will be the final nail in the coffin as the LP becomes nothing more than an extension of the Republican Party’s Libertarian Caucus, and a 21st century version of Dixiecrat and paleoconservative ideology.
As I documented above, the LP’s web site was against the Iraq war even before it started. And the LP’s official position — its platform — has always been against intervention. The 2004 LP nominee certainly campaigned against the Iraq war. So it’s just silly to claim that the LP’s “first official stance taken on the Iraq War was in the summer of 2005”.
My claims about the LP in 2008 were to rebut the Bovard/Horton claim about the LP in 2008. I already said this @7 and @12. Learn to read.
Bottom line, Holtz. The first official stance taken on the Iraq War was in the summer of 2005 – over two years after the war started and about the time when opposition to the war was about 50%. This took the for of the “Iraq Exit Strategy” which was problematic to say the least.
To prove that I agree with myself about the “Iraq Exit Strategy”, I will provide a link to an article I wrote regarding this “safe” attempt made by LPHQ to follow the crowd:
http://lpva.com/Archives/Editorial/Blanton/20050711.shtml
This was the last straw for some libertarians, regardless of what your pro-war opinion is, was, or will be, Holtz.
Which brings us to your claims about the LP in 2008. So what!
The whole point is that the LP should have been on the record officially in 2002, certainly by 2003, against the war. Period. Too little, too late is not leadership – it was one more lost opportunity for the LP to get out in front of an issue.
The LP could be getting out in front of an issue now by going on the record with some sort of resolution against war with Iran.
Instead, the self-appointed face of the LP, the same Mr. Root that Holtz always runs to the defense of, is on record saying just the opposite:
http://libertarianpeacenik.blogspot.com/2007/07/wayne-allyn-root-calls-for-war-on-iran.html
Learn to read.
1) I offered the link @7 to rebut the Bovard/Horton claim that the LP wasn’t as principled as Ron Paul in 2008.
2) Nevertheless, the page quotes the 2008 LP platform’s stand against interventionism, and quotes the 2008 LP nominee opposing the war in Iraq.
Your claim that my “assertions are generally lacking in specifics” remains a smoking cinder.
The other link I gave (http://libertarianmajority.net/2008) is nothing more than 52 quotes and 13 video excerpts. That web page doesn’t have a single piece of commentary by me.
It also has nothing to do with the LP’s stance on the Iraq war.
His self-serving revisionist articles that he invariably links to as “proof” of his assertions are generally lacking in specifics, lacking in linked sources
I use links because I don’t want to waste IPR space re-refuting arguments that I’ve already eviscerated before. But since you asked for it, below is the payload of my article about how antiwar the LP web site has been.
The other link I gave (http://libertarianmajority.net/2008) is nothing more than 52 quotes and 13 video excerpts. That web page doesn’t have a single piece of commentary by me.
Blanton’s claim about “lacking in specifics” is simply laughable.
——————————–
Let’s roll back the clock, to the last pre-Benedict snapshot of lp.org in the Internet archive. The top 3 out of 4 headlines are antiwar and anti-intervention, while the 4th is about gun rights.
OK, now let’s look for July 1 and Jan 1 snapshots going backward, or as soon after those dates as the archive contains.
July 2007: 3 out of 4 headlines are antiwar, as is the poll.
Feb 2007: two items attack Bush/GOP as big-government, and a blog link attacks nation-building in Iraq.
Jul 2006: The first non-party-business headline is antiwar, two blog headlines promote medical marijuana, and another attacks GOP “values”.
Jan 2006: The top story attacks the Bush over mismanagement of 9/11 recovery loans. All three blog headlines are anti-war or anti-war-on-terror.
Jul 2005: The top headline calls for exit from Iraq; another headline echoes the Downing Street Memo allegations. The poll and top blog entry are also about Iraq.
Jan 2005: Only three issue links: supporting Bill of Rights, attacking corporate welfare for sports teams, and something about toll roads in Texas.
Jul 2004: Top two issues headlines: defending “Fahrenheit 9/11?, and protesting the Iraq war at the GOP convention.
Jan 2004: Only three issue links: taxes, campaign finance, and fathers’ rights.
Jul 2003: Pledge of allegiance, opposing eminent domain used for corporate welfare, opposing the broadness of disorderly-conduct ordinances.
Jan 2003: A picture of Bush and a headline attacking his “global warfare” —even before the Iraq war started.
OK, that takes our sampling all the way back to before the Iraq war. It’s simply nonsense to say the LP hasn’t been antiwar, or that the LP.org site hasn’t disagreed with the Right loudly and often. Antiwar and anti-right Libertarians need to stop making stuff up.
Prior to the “Iraq Exit Strategy” which called for continued intervention in the Mideast/Central Asia area, the main action item on the front page of LP.Org was regarding the estate tax in order to boost street cred with the CPAC crowd.
Many libertarians noticed the reluctance to upset Republicans during the time LPHQ was staffed by conservatives. Another example was the reluctance to call for the impeachment of Bush – especially after the LP support for the impeachment of Clinton.
The fact is that the LP did not want to upset pro-war “libertarians”, like Holtz, and didn’t make a big issue out of the Iraq war, despite the fact that pro-war libertarians were a minority in the party.
A number of libertarians would disagree with the pro-war Holtz, (who claims he is now against the war after being for it, but still rationalizes reasons why going to war was a good idea) that the LP made the Iraq war a significant issue, not to mention the Afghan war.
The truth is that the LP lost many actual bona fide libertarian activists over the war issue, no doubt making Holtz a happy man. The perceptions of these libertarians at the time tend to be more accurate than Holtz’s biased perceptions now, in my opinion. His self-serving revisionist articles that he invariably links to as “proof” of his assertions are generally lacking in specifics, lacking in linked sources, and abundant in superficial argument.
As usual, Holtz will likely want to debate about the war yet again – with him setting the parameters of the debate and framing the debate. The problem is, like with the LP, it is many years too late to bother with debate.
I’d rather just chuckle at the irony of Holtz whining about how his kids are going to have to pay for the war he supported.
Spin away Holtz. Let your inner “angrytarian” out. Explain once again how you favor limiting government – even Iraq’s government. Perhap’s using Root as a role model, you can show us how to win people over to your view using arrogance and empty slogans.
There’s more about Libertarians starting at about 16 minutes into the show.
Bovard says “I was very surprised that so many libertarians either took a powder on the war in Iraq or were actually in favor of it”. Time to check one’s premises, perhaps?
Bovard and Horton both repeat the canard that the LP hasn’t opposed the war in Iraq (wrong), and wasn’t as principled as Ron Paul in 2008 (wrong again).
Starts about 10 1/2 minutes into the show.
How unfortunate for the libertarian movement that Mr. Root is such an arrogant self-absorbed huckster, as demonstrated by his recent diatribes on David Nolan’s Facebook page.
Apparently, Root’s personality traits play well with the right-wing talk radio crowd, but we all know the vast majority of that bunch will never vote for a libertarian as long as a Democrat is in a race as the main feature of their ideology is hating liberals – which is also the main feature of Root’s rants.
To have such an unlikable man become the face of libertarianism on television is unthinkable. It will not bring electoral success to the LP and Root will not bring more people into the movement – this has already been demonstrated. The average person will (or has come to) believe libertarianism is all about Wayne Root, Glenn Beck and Neal Boortz because this is what corporatist media so often chooses to present as libertarianism.
Real libertarians are increasingly finding the LP irrelevant and Root is contributing to this perception. I just listened to Scott Horton interview James Bovard and they spent a few minutes discussing the LP. These guys are bona fide libertarians that have made careers out of radio and writing, respectively. Over the years, nobody has done a better job of making the case against statism than Bovard. LP members would do well to become familiar with their work if they aren’t already.
Take a listen to their recent conversation to find out what a lot of libertarians (small L) are thinking about Libertarians (big L):
http://antiwar.com/radio/2010/05/18/james-bovard-12/
Nexus- I could not have said it better myself!
I give Root credit. He is certainly working hard to raise his name recognition. It’s too bad he is too annoying for words.
Ernest Hancock vs Wayne Allyn Root NYC May 10th 2010
Ernest Hancock and his wife Donna travel to NYC to help distribute “Serf City” newspapers on the Subway system to promote the Manhattan Libertarian Party. That evening Ernest Hancock debated Wayne Allyn Root for LNC Chairmanship.
http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Article/068927-2010-05-16-ernest-hancock-vs-wayne-allyn-root-nyc-may-10th-2010.htm
Freedom Activism 101
http://ernesthancock.org/?p=234
The following aphorisms are the work of libertarian novelist L. Neil Smith. They have been the bedrock for libertarian activism in Arizona for the last 10 years and are the best explanation I can provide for the tactics of our past/future. Enjoy.
Never soft-peddle the truth. It’s seldom self-evident and almost never sells itself, because there’s less sales resistance to a glib and comforting lie.
Understand from the minute the fight begins that you’re going to take damage. Accept it. (You’ll always suffer more from the idiots and cowards on your own side than from any enemy.) Keep your overall goal in mind above all. Those who swerve to avoid a few cuts and bruises defeat themselves.
If you’re not a little bit uncomfortable with your position, it isn’t radical enough. How can you be too principled? Take the most extreme position you can. You’re claiming territory you won’t have to fight for later, mostly against your “allies.”
Go straight to the heart of the enemy’s greatest strength. Break that and you break him. You can always mop up the flanks and stragglers later, and they may even surrender, saving you a lot of effort.
Know, down to the last cell in your body, that the other guy started it. He’s the one who put things in an ethical context where considerations like decency and mercy have no referent. The less pity moves you now, the sooner you can go back to being a nice guy.
If you lose, go down fighting. It costs nothing extra, and now and again …
Remain the judge of your own actions. Never surrender that position by default. When the enemy screams “Foul!” the loudest, you know you’re doing him the most damage. Those who help him scream are also the enemy.
Second thoughts, failures of confidence, nervous last-minute course-changes are all detours and recipes for defeat. The time to think is before the battle – if possible, before the war – not in the heat of it.
It is moral weakness, rather than villainy, that accounts for most of the evil in the universe – and feeble-hearted allies, far rather than your most powerful enemies, who are likeliest to do you an injury you cannot recover from.
Know, otherhandwise, that the easiest, most humiliating path to defeat is thinking that to beat the enemy you must be like him. Avoid the temptation to set your values aside “for the duration.” What’s the point of fighting if you give up what you’re fighting for? If remaining consistent with your values leads to defeat, you chose the wrong values to begin with.
Never aim at anything but total achievement of your goal: the utter capitulation of the enemy. Every effort involves inertia and mechanical losses, so adopting any lesser objective means partial defeat. Total victory means you don’t have to fight the same fight again tomorrow.
The most dangerous and successful conspiracies take place in public, in plain sight, under the clear, bright light of day – usually with TV cameras focused on them.
Ever notice how those who believe in animal rights generally don’t believe in human rights?
The function of government is to provide you with service; the function of the media is to supply the Vaseline.
“Wake up America ,” you demand? America doesn’t need to “wake up” – by which of course, you mean pay attention to whatever you think is important. If America weren’t already awake, paying attention to what each individual thinks is important, your milk wouldn’t have gotten delivered this morning, and you wouldn’t have any electricity this afternoon.
You cannot force me to agree with you. You can force me to act as though I agree with you – but then you’ll have to watch your back. All the time.
You may never convince the other guy, but it’s often worthwhile to keep arguing for the effect it has on bystanders, especially his allies.
I predict that Dakota Root will rebel one day and become a member of the growing movement of the Socialist caucus of the Constitution Party.
Dakota Root/Miley Cyrus for Presidential ticket of the Constitution Party in 2050. Diversity, values, freedom and love.