George Phillies: The Libertarian Future is Here and Republicans Have Only Bad News Incoming

Written by George Phillies
June Liberty for America

The Libertarian Future is Here
and Republicans have only bad news incoming.

Exciting news from the Pew Trust. They just completed their latest study of American political opinions. They do these every few years, with careful statistical analysis. You can read the whole study at people-press.org/2011/05/04/beyond-red-vs-blue-the-political-typology/
The implications of the latest study are totally spectacular for the libertarian political movement. In particular:
*There are many more left libertarians than there are right libertarians.
*Libertarians are at least as large as Republicans. All liber-tarians need to do is to bring our supporters together.
*Are you wondering why you suddenly see “Libertarians should run no Presidential candidate and vote Republican”? Without libertarians, Republicans are completely dead in the water.

What did Pew do?

If you do not care how Pew came to its conclusions, skip to ―What did Pew Learn?
They asked a very large number of Americans a long list of questions. Then they used computers to do “cluster analysis”, meaning they looked for groups of people who agree with each other on lots of their questions. Of course, very few people agree with anyone else on everything. However, it turns out
experimentally that you can break voters into groups of people who agree with each other on most issues, and you can show that the space between groups has relatively few people in it, and everyone is in some group.
That outcome, well-defined tribes of people with similar sets of views, and few people with views midway in between, does not have to be the case. You could find, having asked your ques-tions, that people giving each combination of answers are ex-actly as common as people giving any other combination. You could, but you don’t. For example, you don’t find a lot of people who support gay marriage, believe that the social safety net is important, support government intervention to protect cli-mate, and … think that abortion should be totally illegal. You don’t find zero people like that, but they are rare, while people who support gay marriage, the safety net, and carbon emission control, and who are pro-choice, are common. That’s clustering.
The reason you do computer analysis is that computers are
relatively unbiased politically. They will find clusters that exist in your data, will not find clusters that are not there, and will tell you the odds that a cluster is real rather than random chance. If you are worried whether this approach makes sense, it is the same as the classical approach that decides whether two groups of not-entirely-similar birds are the same species or two different species.

What Did Pew Learn?

Pew found that you can divide Americans into nine political
clusters. That‘s way more clusters than a liberal-conservative line shows, and it is considerably more clusters than fit on the Nolan chart. What are these clusters?
“Bystanders” are young, politically disengaged, and amount to 10% of the population, but approximately zero percent of the registered voters. For political purposes, they don’t matter because they don’t vote. They could matter, if they became voters.

So what are the groups that matter politically?

Three groups of people that are mostly Democratic. There are ‘Solid Liberals’, amounting to 16% of registered voters, who take liberal stands most of the time. There are ‘hard-pressed Democrats’ who are religious and financially challenged, amounting to 15% of the electorate. Finally, the ‘New Coalition Democrats’ at 9% of the electorate take a positive view of our institutions, including business, and tend to be Latino and other minority groups. These groups differ on some questions; the liberals are much more socially liberal.

Count them up; the Democratic base is 40% of the voters.

Then there are the two groups that are mostly Republican, the
‘staunch conservatives’ at 11% of voters and the ‘Main Street
Republicans’ at 14% of the voters. The ‘staunch conservatives’ are very conservative on almost everything, and include the people favorable to the conservative tea party types. However, the Tea Party is much more complicated than the Staunch Con-servatives, and is not a unified movement. The Main Street Conservatives are also conservative, but less so. Observe that the conservative tea party types, who are not all the tea parttypes, the staunch conservatives, are a minority in their own party.
How do the Republican groups differ? Staunch conservatives think environmental laws hurt the economy and businesses do not make too much profit; Main Street Republicans are just the opposite. Counting them up, the Republican base is 25% of the voters, way less than the Democratic base.
Pew identified three totally different groups in the middle, which the Pew writers described as ‘Disaffected’, ‘Libertarian’, and ‘post-modern’. The three groups are very different. Post-Moderns might reasonably be described as Left Libertarians, while Pew Libertarians are actually ‘Right Libertarians’. Non-libertarians may be unaware of that there are right and left libertarians, let alone that they disagree. The Left and Right Libertarians are substantially split, even as the two groups of Republicans and the three groups of Democrats are badly split. The Disaffected may be described as very upset, but not in the same ways as some other people; they think that government is almost always ineffective and wasteful, and also government should do more to help the needy.
Left and Right Libertarians are both fiscally conservative and
socially liberal, left libertarians being younger and more diverse, while right libertarians are 2/3 white males. Oh, yes, left libertarians are young people, largely under 30. The Right Libertarians are 10% of the population, the Left Libertarians are 14% of the population and the Disaffecteds are 11% of they
population. Left and right libertarians differ on such issues as global warming.

My conclusions

There are many more left libertarians than there are right
libertarians. The ratio is almost 3:2. Counting even a few of the disaffected ‘government does not work’ people as libertarians, 25%+ of the electorate is libertarian, and that’s as many libertar-ians as there are Republicans. Now we see why Republican empty heads have been calling for Libertarians — mostly right libertarians — not to run a Presidential candidate next year, namely without the right libertarian vote the Republicans are in an impossible position. They have the same fine electoral chances as Massachusetts Republicans.
The Democratic block will not vote Republican. The Disaffect-eds see that Republicans will tamper with the social safety net to the profit of the Republicans’ plutocrat bosses. The Left Libertarians are overwhelmingly supportive of gay marriage and environmental protections, and will not go near Republican religious-anti-environmental types. Without Right Libertarians, the Republicans are stuck at a quarter of the vote, which is not even minority status in most places.

What Should Libertarians Do?

The Libertarian objective is to become the #2 and then then #1 party in the country. To become #2, one of the other parties must be sent to the grave. There are far fewer Republicans than Democrats, and their positions on issues dear to the younger generation are far less acceptable to that generation, so clearly the Republicans should be the first to go, the Democrats coming later.
Thanks to first-past-the-post elections, a 30% Libertarian bloc confines the Republicans to third-party status.
How do we unify left and right libertarian voters and others? We need to pound hard on the wedge issues that divide right libertarians from Republicans, and we need to remove some wedges that make it harder for left libertarians to support us.
The core wedge issues for pulling Right Libertarians away from
Republicans are the social issues, notably abortion and gay rights. An effective libertarian campaign will take hard core libertarian positions on abortion, gay marriage, gay adoption, and other GLBTQPL issues, forcing right libertarians to consid-er the ways in which right libertarians are least like Republi-cans. Opposition to the Asian land wars and to the national security military welfare state likely also help.
Libertarian Party supporters will correctly recognize that Liber-tarian Parties in the deep south and parts of the Mississippi river basic may not like a pro-abortion stance. Supporting abortion access is like supporting the right to vote for African-Americans. Both are the right thing to do, racist reactionary manques notwithstanding, even if supporting voting rights did cost the forces of virtue the votes of white racist bigots. All the
Southern white racists shifted from the Democratic Party to the Republican. In the modern era, the libertarian position that immigrants strengthen American society not only drives away Republicans but links right and left libertarians.
Core issues for uniting right and left libertarians are again the social issues, the belief that we are a secular rather than a reli-gious society, that we welcome immigration, that capitalism works, that we oppose the warfare national security state, and that America has substantially made the changes needed to give equal rights for all.
And now we come to a few wedges that need to be removed.
Right libertarians are somewhat to prone to fall for conserva-tive anti-intellectualism, expressed as global warming denial, evolution denial, and a completely unworkable environmental defense scheme based on litigation on an unprecedented scale. Anti-intellectualism may have a long American tradition be-hind it. However, we are the wealthiest and most productive country in the world because of our engineers, our skilled workers, and our learned professions, not because the ignorant assert their right to believe their wrong opinions.
For a somewhat different progressive democratic take on the same data, see dailykos.com/story/2011/05/08/973770/-Pew-typologies: Beyond-mere-left-and-right.

89 thoughts on “George Phillies: The Libertarian Future is Here and Republicans Have Only Bad News Incoming

  1. Robert Milnes

    I’ve read some of George’s delusions about the future Libertarian party gaining spectacular success. Like becoming number 2 etc.
    Not gonna happen.
    I believe what are called right libertarians in this study are actually counterrevolutionaries -like Ron Paul & Barr/Root. & Gary Johnson. They have more chance of success & drawing The Libertarian Vote/Cato 13% from the left to the right GOP. Or even worse grow the counterrevolutionary party-the Constitution party.
    In the extremely close Chilean election 1970, the leftist coalition was CLOSELY followed in second place by the Nationalist-USA equivalent to Constitution party.
    This explains why George is against me & PLAS. His hopes for the LP directly contradict mine.
    Libertarians are going to have to decide what to do. -support me & go for the close plurality victory. Wilson 42%, Clinton 43% that happens when a third party/coalition becomes viable.
    Or try to make the LP second to the democratic party replacing the GOP. Then according to this, eventually become the top party.
    Not gonna happen.
    The dem/rep duopoly is Waaaaaaaaaay to powerful.
    George’s strategy is a disaster in the making. Not only will it backfire, it will squander the opportunity presented by the Progressive Party Centennial of 1912.

  2. Michael H. Wilson

    George the problem is one of communications and I am not saying in my opinion. We have been accused more than once of not carrying about” the poor, the disenfranchised, those less fortunate than ourselves” ( that is a quote from a politician).
    Fact is we can address issues relating to poverty by calling for opening the urban transit market, the housing market, health care and attacking other issues that impact the lower class in our society. Properly written issue papers should be available to our candidates and the state parties to use regarding these issues.

    Long time ago someone told me that we had a free press so that information would be available to a large number of the citizens of the nation. Based on that idea that may have come from a teachers I now put the following on the back of all of the brochures I make up that I use; “Just as a free press is essential for the dissemination of knowledge and ideas so too is a free market necessary for the distribution of goods and services.”

    More than one person has said they like those words. Yea I get it!

    I’m probably going to be annoying Wes a lot this summer with ideas for brochures.

  3. NewFederalist

    “This explains why George is against me & PLAS. His hopes for the LP directly contradict mine.”

    Bob- are you a libertarian or a progressive? I thought you are a progressive.

  4. Eric Sundwall

    bob’s ‘our’ libertarian progressive . . .

    george – it’s not about issues, spectrum’s or ideology – it’s stranglehold on the voter that a single plurality style district creates – a deadly either/or which less people want to be associated with . . . the purpose of a third party is protest

  5. Milnes Follower

    I have to admit it. Sometimes I come on this site just to see what bat crap crazy things Robert Milnes posts and that Catholic Trotsky freak show. Oh the entertainment!!!!

  6. Kleptocracy and You

    @5 LOL – Have you heard the latest ?!

    Word has been crawling across the web all hour that Robert Woodrow Milnes has found his true home in the Monster Raving LOONEY Party.

    United States National Official Monster Raving Loony Party: http://usloonyparty.tripod.com/

    Milnes Chief Adviser “Screaming Lord Sutch” stated, “We are in it, to WIN it” !

    ~~~

    Milnes plans to get another $35 million from these LOONEY Party people ! Think that brings him to $370, 000, 000. Of course he will need every penny as inflation has met the Media Business and the word is the Knappster ain’t gonna be cheap this election cycle !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  7. Kleptocracy and You

    I borrowed this, hope some can enjoy !

    Top 12 reasons why I voted democrat…From a reformed Obama
    voter.

    When someone cannot explain why they voted for Democrats, give them this
    list. They can then pick their reasons from this “TOP 12″…

    1. I voted Democrat because I believe
    oil companies’ profits of 4% on a
    gallon of gas are obscene, but the
    government taxing the same gallon of
    gas at 15% isn’t.

    2. I voted Democrat because I believe
    the government will do a better job of
    spending the money I earn than I
    would.

    3. I voted Democrat because Freedom of
    Speech is fine as long as nobody is
    offended by it.

    4. I voted Democrat because I’m way
    too irresponsible to own a gun, and I
    know that my local police are all I
    need to protect me from murderers and
    thieves.

    5. I voted Democrat because I believe
    that people who can’t tell us if it
    will rain on Friday can tell us that
    the polar ice caps will melt away in
    ten years if I don’t start driving a
    Prius.

    6. I voted Democrat because I’m not
    concerned about millions of babies
    being aborted so long as we keep all
    death row inmates alive.

    7. I voted Democrat because I think
    illegal aliens have a right to free
    health care, education, and Social
    Security benefits.

    8. I voted Democrat because I believe
    that business should not be allowed to
    make profits for themselves. They need
    to break even and give the rest away
    to the government for redistribution
    as the Democrats see fit.

    9. I voted Democrat because I believe
    liberal judges need to rewrite the
    Constitution every few days to suit
    some fringe kooks who would never get
    their agendas past the voters.

    10. I voted Democrat because I think
    that it’s better to pay billions to
    people who hate us for their oil, but
    not drill our own because it might
    upset some endangered beetle or
    gopher.

    11. I voted Democrat because while we
    live in the greatest, most wonderful
    country in the world, I was promised
    “HOPE AND CHANGE”.

    12. I voted Democrat because my head
    is so firmly planted up my ass, it’s
    unlikely that I’ll ever have another
    point of view.

    =

  8. Robert Milnes

    Picture this people.
    Around 2010 the Tea Party think tank-zowie!-looks around & says-we are never going to be able to hijack the GOP. We could take over the Constitution party but it is lousy at ballot access. But hey-the LP is great at ballot access! & look at their 2008 ticket-Barr/Root. Tea Party wannabees.
    & their party hobo with a pen & clipboard is talking up Gary Johnson-one of us-with no backtalk (except maybe from that nutjob Milnes).
    Hmmmmmm. piece of cake to takeover the LP by getting our ticket nominated.
    Root/Johnson, Johnson/Root?
    Or whoever we spring on them at the last minute
    Just like the stunt Barr pulled at the last minute in 2008.
    Meanwhile we let the suckers think it is their party. 2 schmucks debating in NH long after the GOP debate is over & everybody gone! LOL!
    & they bump the nutjob Milnes, the fools!
    The counterrevolutionary ticket nominated by the LP then gets endorsed by the Tea Party. Gets good polling. Gets into the debates. Wins by very close plurality.
    Reverse PLAS/quarterback sneak/blitz.
    Tea Party President!

  9. Robert Capozzi

    Gp: An effective libertarian campaign will take hard core libertarian positions on abortion, gay marriage, gay adoption, and other GLBTQPL issues, forcing right libertarians to consid-er the ways in which right libertarians are least like Republicans.

    Me: I agree with much of this analysis, but this passage is problematic. First, what is the “hard core” L position on these matters? More important, who’s to say what the hard core L position is? Who has been anointed Pope of hard-core L-ism? Like you yourself say: “Of course, very few people agree with anyone else on everything.” Second, I may be watching a different movie, but most pols who get elected generally don’t take hard core positions on anything. Pols generally triangulate, soften, and smooth off the edges to avoid alienating too many on the fence.

    Gp: Supporting abortion access is like supporting the right to vote for African-Americans.

    Me: I’m pro-choice, but I strongly suggest that this is quite inflammatory. Do you REALLY mean to say this? Many Ls sincerely believe life begins at conception, and I cannot say they are “wrong,” only that I don’t agree that first-trimester, potential human life warrants extraordinary protections, i.e., denial of a woman’s right to choose how she controls her own body. Still, to equilibrate the pro-life view with the practice of disenfranchising African Americans is going to be quite offensive. No case that I can think of can be made for disenfranchisement. I respect the pro-life view, even if I disagree with it.

    Gp: Core issues for uniting right and left libertarians are again the social issues, the belief that we are a secular rather than a religious society…

    Me: This I submit is an oversimplification. I suggest that “morality” is often informed by spiritual/religious beliefs. Laws flow from a sense of morality and justice…at least they should! I don’t know if it’s possible to have a truly “secular” society. This is a bit of a nitpick, since I certainly agree that a specific religious perspective is inappropriate in a political context.

    Gp: …that we oppose the warfare national security state…

    Me: If the goal is to unite the vaguely right and left L voters, I’d say this is the more fruitful view. Even hawkish Ls tend to be far less interventionist than neocons. Of course, you can’t please everyone! In the bigger picture, I’d say IF GP’s contention is that the LP could become the second party by making adjustments, I agree. What those adjustments are, I’m not entirely sure what would work, but it does strike me that some tolerance for different strains of L thinking should be in the mix.

    Gp: Right libertarians are somewhat to prone to fall for conservative anti-intellectualism, expressed as global warming denial, evolution denial, and a completely unworkable environmental defense scheme based on litigation on an unprecedented scale.

    Me: Many “left Ls” are global climate change deniers and environmental litigationists, too. (I don’t know any L evolution deniers.) We green Ls are few, at least in the LM community. I suspect you’re correct that those vaguely aligning with L ideas that Pew is speaking of are greener than the LM is, generally. This is a problem. I find it dismissive to suggest that deniers are necessarily “anti-intellectual.” For ex., both the Cato and LvMI crowds tend to be deniers (or skeptics), but one would be hard-pressed to hang with these folks and conclude they are “anti-intellectual.”

  10. Steven Wilson

    The survey listed above is just another form of paper truth. In experimental design, you can build a survey to confirm whatever you want.

    It is not election cycle and people go on walkabout. This is not news. Escpecially for people who study voting patterns.

    Sometime around March 2012, the survey issued is going to indicate a turning back around. Big surprise. Well, not really. Maybe for you here.

    There are parts of Missouri where the only variable they require is on abortion. A coffee table that could speak, if it said “I am Pro Life” would get the RP votes.

    The constitution party in Missouri is stable. They look professional, hold strong meetings, organize on the move, and plan ahead. They are growing.

    Any RP soldiers looking to move on will go into the CP. Well, here in Missouri. I have no exact proof, other than what people here talk about.

    Roberts Rule guild underestimate the need for economy, and the book club cannot grasp the variable of abortion.

    Another form of Big tent craptown.

    Remain who we claim to be, or just close the door.

  11. Robert Capozzi

    11 sw, provocative, but I don’t get all your meaning. Who is the “guild” and what is it about economy they don’t get? Who is the book club and what don’t they get about abortion?

    Is it your sense that ALL MO is 100% pro life litmus test country? Even in KC and St. Louis and the burbs?

  12. Thomas L. Knapp

    Bob @ 10,

    You write:

    “Many Ls sincerely believe life begins at conception”

    Sincerity of belief is irrelevant — it is an irrefutable biological fact that life begins at conception.

    Unfortunately for abortion opponents, repeating that fact over and over is not sufficient to make their case, any more than denying it amounts to more than wishful thinking on the part of abortion supporters.

    Dr. Phillies tends to erroneously conflate state-leftist views with left-libertarian views when it comes to “life issue,” even to the point of identifying an affirmative role for the courts in putting the state’s seal of approval on spousal murder pursuant to insurance fraud as a sort of litmus test.

  13. George Phillies

    It is an irrefutable biological fact that life began four give or take billion years ago, and has continued continuously ever since.

    Details of genetic activity are modified continuously throughout life.

    However, anyone who believes that an unborn infant is a rational being is a bit out of touch.

    Fortunately, there actually is a test of consciousness, of identifying when a child distinguishes between it and the world, and the test is passed well after birth. (Curiously, some of the great apes also pass the test.)

  14. Thomas L. Knapp

    George @ 15,

    You write:

    “anyone who believes that an unborn infant is a rational being”

    An unborn infant is a human being.

    Many pro-lifers state that obviosity and pretend that it settles the issue.

    As you hint, the real question is whether or not that unborn infant is a “person” with rights.

    If it is not, that pretty much settles the issue — an abortion is not qualitatively different from excising a tumor or having a mole removed.

    Most pro-choicers, however, seem unwilling to grasp that nettle, preferring just deny the obviosity that the pro-lifers cling to.

    Presumably there’s a reason for that reluctance.

  15. Robert Capozzi

    tk, thanks, yes, that’s shorthand for “life with all the rights of all other humans,” or somesuch.

    gp, as commonly understood, I don’t know of anyone who’d argue that the unborn are “rational.” Offhand, I suspect most would say newborns aren’t “rational,” either. Of course, some might suggest that many ADULTS are not rational in any meaningful sense.

    Rationality, in short, is probably not a good test for whether unborn humans before certain stages of development can legally have their lives ended.

    For the LP could become a major party, I believe it should take a neutral stance on the matter. In some places, a great LP candidate might take a “hard core” (whatever that is) pro choice stand; in others, a great LP might be an unapologetic pro-lifer. I’m good with that. Abortion shows the limitations of a rigid “rational”/”scientific” perspective on politics.

    We ain’t just skin and bones amalgamated in a certain way.

  16. Steven Wilson

    @12RC

    I was referring to the members of the national LP. Although cynical, I was making the point that emotivism is 90% of a modern campaign.

    To make it something else is the action of a fool. “These people will care about what I talk about and that’s all that will matter”, LP candidate at national level.

    The parts of Missouri that I know well, around Cole county (Jefferson City) to Sullivan, to West Plains, to Branson. These areas have a great majority of Catholics. These are areas where the Constitution party is targeting, per a conversation I had with a CP candidate. A candidate who knows the main characters in charge.

    To blindly say we can pull one sub category from the elephant based on the national charter of stupid rules and lame decoder rings is how we lost soldiers.

    Group dynamics, at it’s basic format, is the manifestation of common ground. We are never going to end the RP by shouting our platform which does not match their belief structure. Which is why the Constitution party of Missouri is growing. The RP here is in shambles at the base.

    More than likely, Nixon will get another term. The lady dem up for re-election might get Sam Graves as a challenger.

    Abortion is not momentary here. Some voters only ask one question of the candidate. A platform, an article on line, a fashion template of websites, and anything else lame will not move them.

    If the RP implodes, it will be up to the individaul agent to decide the residual. Not us.

  17. George Phillies

    People are not robots. The clusters identified by the Pew typology are clouds, not points. However, the abortion, drug, and gay marriage issues are superb tools for separating most of the right libertarians from most of the Republicans, and for gatehring up the left Libertarians.

  18. Alaska Constitution Party

    The LP and CP and GP and others need to work together on issues of common concern. We have already been divided most excellently. Time to refocus with a macro-political view. It’s not about keeping up the reservation fences anymore. The fences are meant to keep us on the reservation…

  19. Don Lake, FYI, not necessarily a unilateral endorsement

    Alaska Constitution Party // Jun 15, 2011:
    “LP and CP and GP and others need to work together ………”

    Boy, Cody Quirk North, aka Alaska Constitution, sure does not stay on point.

    Isn’t he / she / it worried that some of the ‘Loyal Opposition’ might be offended at the human ‘flotsam’ floating around in international waters in the Eastern Mediterranean* after being murdered by premeditation of the (so called) Israeli Defense Force ???????

    * Unarmed Gaza Relief ships and USS Liberty, a non combatant vessel ……..

  20. JT

    I think the words “unborn infant” actually smuggle in the premise that it’s a person because of how people in general think of an “infant,” albeit one that’s located inside a woman’s body for a time. I’d replace that with perhaps “a mass of largely undifferentiated cells” when talking about early pregnancy (which is when the vast majority of abortions are performed). That’s obviously more of a mouthful, but also biologically accurate in that context.

  21. Robert Capozzi

    20 gp, repealing drug prohibition I can see. “Right” L leaners may be hit or miss on abortion and same-gender marriage. Part of the challenge here is we don’t have a model for what a right L leaner might look like, and what distinguishes the from left.L leaners.

    Would you expand on your theory?

  22. Alan Pyeatt

    For me, it still boils down to what a long-time Southern California activist said: we need a radical, principled agenda. Watering down our message to appeal to populism or republitarians doesn’t work, because the people that respond favorably to such an agenda just vote for the Republicans. But a radical agenda differentiates our brand and gives them a reason to vote for us, instead. I believe that fits in with Dr. Phillies’ analysis of the poll, and that’s all the wedge we need. Just provide a principled libertarian agenda, packaged well, and the rest will fall into place, ideologically speaking.

    Steve Wilson @ 19 points out our shortcomings, IMO. The outreach efforts I have seen have been more scattershot than focused, and I think we need to find more efficient ways to use our limited resources. So, I think our problems are more logistical than ideological.

  23. Robert Capozzi

    gp 28, I was hoping you’d expand on how you think the Pew Ls and “Post Moderns” might be brought over to the LP. I decided to read the report. It’s interesting. However, I now don’t see how you arrived at your conclusions even more. For ex., Pew L are 9% of the population, Post Moderns 13%. You conclude: “There are many more left libertarians than there are right libertarians. The ratio is almost 3:2.” I don’t consider myself left or right L, but this is a novel way to present the data. Most would say Post Moderns outnumber Pew Ls by 4 percentage points. Presenting it as a ratio is highly non-standard in demographic analysis. Some may call using the ratio stat disingenuous.

    Whether the description “relatively secular outlook on some social issues, including homosexuality and abortion” leads to a vote for the LP, I’m not sure. I know L atheists who are pro-life, for ex. The “key beliefs” of the Pew Ls doesn’t even mention the war issue. For ex., the Pew Ls ranked much higher on “Peace through Military Strength” (48%) than “Diplomacy best way to ensure peace” (33%). That doesn’t seem to support your hypothesis. Of course, what “military strength” actually means is open to MUCH interpretation.

    I agree Pew provides interesting information. Certainly the 9% Libertarian (apparently hawkish, which I’m not) is somewhat encouraging. I agree that the Disaffecteds and the Post-Moderns might contain future LP voters. But it looks to me like you’re jumping the gun with your conclusions.

    29 ap: … radical agenda differentiates our brand…

    Me: That’s been tried, too. Generally, our candidates get single digits or less, whether “radical” or “Republican Lite.” Phillies is taking a stab at developing a psycho-demographic model, which I give him credit for trying to do. It appears that he’s allowing his own biases to color his conclusions, which we all do to some extent.

  24. Don Grundmann

    ” Right libertarians are somewhat to prone to fall for conserva-tive anti-intellectualism, expressed as global warming denial, evolution denial, … Anti-intellectualism may have a long American tradition be-hind it

    Response – Well, Mr. Phillies, you who are sooooooooo ” intellectual.” The Constitution Party of California has a standing $10,000 bet to anyone who can disprove the science in the book ” Climategate ” by Brian Sussman which blows the hell out of the lie/fraud/scam/hoax of so-called ” global warming.” Oh, excuse me. The new marketing term, to cover up for the freezing weather of the last winter and so many other open failures of the scam, is ” climate change.” Either way if you are soooooo ” intellectual ” you should have no problem collecting on the bet. That is, except for your one BIG problem – that you are a coward. A stupid, fool coward at that. I say there is no way you will try to collect or simply defend your assinine statement because you are too cowardly to do so. And also you know that you would be blown out of the water and openly exposed as the fool that you are if you attempted to collect. So you will simply pull an ” Al Gore,” as you have already done, and refer to those who disprove the fraud and actually know, unlike a fool like you, science as ” deniers ” and simply refuse to debate. Declare that you have won the war and don’t dare to fight. Well Mr. Intellectual I am so glad that you wrote your screed above. It allows the American people to see what job killing environmental idiots are in the Libertarian Party. Nitwits, like you, who will use the fake ” science ” of a non- existent problem to impose job killing regulations on all parts of the economy with the results that ever more millions will lose their jobs and the elites like Al Gore will skim off, i.e.; steal from the working people; a ton of money as a payoff for their treason and betrayal. Yes, Mr. Phillies I am so glad that such a monumental ” intellectual ” like you will open up your skull and let the flies come out so that the citizens of the nation can clearly see how the Liberatrian Party will, if it ever came to power, destroy the economy just as well as the Democrats are already doing if not more so. Your ravings allow me to illustrate ever more easily how the Constitution Party is the real party for jobs and prosperity. We will put people back to work instead of, as clowns like you are doing, working to get them pink slips in order to ” save the planet.” P.S. – If you want to defend your ” intellectualism ” I would be glad to personally debate you on the topic of global warming, or evolution for that matter, any time. I will make you look exactly like the nitwit fool that you are. Take it as a personal challenge. I say that you don’t have the guts to back up your jaw flapping. You are just like your hero Al Gore – a hot air liar and nothing more.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Chairman American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  25. Thomas L. Knapp

    It’s all good and interesting (with the caveat that I don’t think “left libertarian” means what George thinks it means).

    George’s math is better than Milnes’s, but they still run up against the same problem — getting an identified demographic to identify with, support and vote for the candidates of a particular political party, especially a “third” party operating in an allegedly two-party, but de facto one-party, system.

  26. Cody Quirk

    “The Libertarian Future is Here
    and Republicans have only bad news incoming.”

    Except in Nevada; the NVLP isn’t doing so great and there’s another party on the rise in the Silver State

  27. Don Grundmann

    Mr. Phillies – I must also give a thank you to you for illustrating, via yourself as a spokesperson, the contempt which the Libertarian Party has for the family unit via your support of homosexual ( there is no such thing as ” gay ” ) marriage. An excellent defining point to illustrate with crystal clarity to the familes of our nation that the Libertarian Party is their sworn and deadly enemy. Your open and sneering contempt of those Libertarians whom you refer to as ” right ” should give them all the more reason to abandon your anti-morality sinking ship and come to the Constitution Party; the only party which is, in total opposition to yours, working to protect the family unit and the children of our nation. While you contemptuously sneer at them we will welcome them and respect their views. That will allow you and all of your fellow ” left ” libertarians to have your party all to yourself. Thanks.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Chairman American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  28. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    Donnie-G @ 32 and 35: Oh, yes, you just convinced me, with your wise words and eloquent phrases. You sure did convince me: never to go near the Constitution party, if it’s full of loons like you.

  29. Robert Milnes

    Tom, do you remember the 2008 contest between Clinton & Obama?
    LOL-rhetorical question Mr. Know-it-all.
    Remember South Carolina primary? Up to then Clinton had most of the black vote. What with Bill being the “first black president” & such history/loyalty.
    Until via polling, media reporting etc., blacks realized they could possibly win i.e. Obama could closely win the nomination. & whoever won the dem nom would probably win the election regardless of who the reps run.
    Something like that needs to happen with PLAS. Something like a lightbulb going on in the third party collective brain.
    You keep your thumb on the switch e.g. George’s math is better than mine.
    No it isn’t but people listen to you.
    How about -at least-taking your thumb off the switch?
    At the most-start talking positive-you can do it, & making some positive moves-& you know what they are.

  30. Robert Capozzi

    33 tk: … they still run up against the same problem — getting an identified demographic to identify with, support and vote for the candidates of a particular political party…

    Me: Stipulating first that it’s a long shot, here’s my hypothesis. Find a region where the Pew Ls, Disaffecteds, and Post Moderns are disproportionately represented. If possible, find one where the Tea Party/Staunch Conservatives are increasingly alienated from the GOP. Focus efforts in those places. Take a neutral stance on abortion, with some pro choice, others pro life. Take a reasonably pro-same-gender marriage position, with a few flavors. Make the case against war and adventurism mostly about money (we can’t afford it). Be green, though not global climate change hysterics. Rather than practicing the art of angry polarization, practice the art of “deep disappointment.” The majors are just too corrupt to be given the keys to the car. Speak commonsensically; don’t be Chicken Little. Avoid conspiracy theories like the plague. And absolutely avoid anti-religious positioning.

    GP lives in the area of the country I suspect such a message — if well executed – could gain pluralities. The GOP is looking especially weak in the Northeast. Play your cards right, and maybe get a MC. Spread that message more and more, and watch the GOP collapse in more and more regions. Interestingly, WY could be another place where this sort of message might play. Oddly enough, OR might be one, too! The center of gravity of such a party might be somewhere between Ron Paul, Gary Johnson and Drew Carey.

    I’m increasingly skeptical that the LP could fill such a role. Too much history; too many traps in the foundational documents. I don’t see how a major party could be rail against the “cult of the omnipotent state,” for ex. Maybe well after we’re all dead….

  31. Robert Capozzi

    Oh, yes, adding to the list of possible game-changing liberty parties, advocate something like a negative income tax paid for by deep cuts in military, discretionary, and Nanny State programs. This pulls in the Post Moderns especially.

  32. Thomas L. Knapp

    Bob @ 39,

    Yeah, the “negative income tax” has really been pulling in those “post-moderns” for the GOP since Nixon introduced it (as the Earned Income Credit).

  33. Robert Capozzi

    40 tk, the credit is tiny and restricted. But, in some ways, Nixon began a turnaround for the GOP. He was the end-Vietnam candidate, after all. After the extremism and reactionary-ism of Goldwater, GOP slid toward minor party status in the mid-60s. Nixon temporarily reversed that, but then it declined further.

    In SOME ways, Nixon positioned the GOP as somewhat more progressive-minded after its Neanderthal & green eye shades era. If Nixon had actually exited Vietnam, I do wonder whether he could have gained more traction with younger, more peace-oriented, live and let live people. Instead, the GOP has continued to follow-through with its two pronged strategy of combining the Know Nothings and the Crony Capitalists. It’s a tenuous coalition.

    No fan of Nixon, to be clear.

    Actually, I prefer the citizen’s dividend in concept to the negative income tax. But spending cuts’d have to offset it.

    If you read the Pew report, the Post Moderns like the welfare state, but I think they may be open to alternative approaches. A citizens dividend can be justified on Georgist-type grounds, and my contention is that it could play to this demographic.

    Maybe not. Maybe it’s hopeless. Maybe I need to just find me a shack in the mountains. ;-)

  34. NewFederalist

    Geez Grundman @ 32 & 35… could you possibly be any more abrasive? What purpose do such attacks serve? One would think you really don’t want to engage in any sort of intellectual discussion.

  35. AroundtheblockAFT

    My condolences, Mr. Grundmann, on being part of a family unit so shaky that it can’t survive having two gays living together as a married couple anywhere in America. Maybe you should look to the log in your eye instead of the alleged mote in Bruce and Larry’s?

  36. Robert Milnes

    A good thing about rightists/counterrevolutionaries like Grundmann is that they are not 100% wrong.
    Also they are capable of telling it like it is.
    & here it is…George. You are not going to get compromise & cooperation with them. Quite the contrary.
    On the linear political spectrum, rightists/nationalists/CP are right next to their exact opposite, revolutionary libertarians.
    George, Don’s cloud doesn’t want to work with you.
    It wants to suck you dry.

  37. Steven Wilson

    Grundman is a perfect example of the separation in belief structure. With all of the talk about fusion model, the primary bridge mechanism is compromise. The compromise is set and it is timed.

    All agents involved set the game with rules of behavior. Any variation without warning is a deal breaker.

    The constitution party is an extreme variant of the RP. Even if we could speak to them, the belief structures do not match. Any compromise is void, because the RP now a CP could’ve compromised to stay within the original RP. The agent of the RP didn’t compromise then and they will not compromise now. The naming device “extreme” requires a reference called RP.

    The agent moved structure due to the change of objective per structure. This action is internal.

    Reaching out to other parties and calling it common ground or central planning doesn’t nullify that what an agent believes is what they believe. This again is internal.

    Don Grundman and the others within the CP will not move. Identifying the end of a party like the RP is not news. I also heard that in 1992. The cause was an outsider with big ears. He was not an elephant.

    If RP and not conservative, Then CP and conversative.

    If the agent can change structure and maintain their own belief structure, then the void of compromise will reinforce the emotivism that carries the human through it.

    There is always more than one bridge.

  38. Michael H. Wilson

    Regardless of whether global warming is real or not there are some simple things that can be done to air pollution. One of the first is to open the urban transit market to competition. Unfortunately it seems just the opposite is happening.

    In Washington D.C. there is an effort underway to close the taxi cab market to competition and apparently the same has already happened recently in Atlanta where the market was more open. Has the LP spoken up in either of these situations?

  39. Michael H. Wilson

    Brain problem again. The above should have the word reduce in it so that it reads; Regardless of whether global warming is real or not there are some simple things that can be done to reduce air pollution

  40. Thomas L. Knapp

    Milnes @ 46,

    You write:

    “OK, Weiner is evidently resigning. Special election . Let’s move on it.”

    New York allows fusion, so the same candidate could be run on multiple ballot lines.

    The obvious first step would be to find out which parties are allowed ballot access for special elections, and under what circumstances.

    That would tell you whether a campaign is even possible, which is the first fork on the flowchart.

    If yes, the second step is finding a candidate whom multiple parties might be willing to get behind.

    The next fork is whether or not a ballot access campaign of some kind is required. If yes, then probably best to go with a single ballot line and ask other parties to endorse. If not, then the more ballot lines the merrier.

    I suggest finding a New Yorker who’s interested and able to help you answer the questions.

  41. NewFederalist

    … or just ask Richard Winger. He will probably know what is required right off the top of his head.

  42. Don Grundmann

    New Federalist – Yes, I am very abrasive with Mr. Phillies. I have personally seen his act before and his screed is simply a continuance of the same slime trail. I have ” had it up to here ” with the global warming/climate change crowd especially when they, as so well typified by Mr. Phillies, contemptuously dismiss their opponents as ” know-nothings,: etc. They then, as illustrated by their hero Al Gore, are too incredibly gutless to have such an intellectual discussion as you refer to. They simply declare that their opponents are ” deniers ” and run from providing any defense of their lunacy. So enough!! It is time to challenge them to put up or shut up. Their lies will kill minimally hundreds of thousands of jobs and bring ever more poverty – which is what they REALLY want – to our nation and to all people around the world. I have yet to meet ONE of these rodents who will back up their claim that DOOM, DOOM, and a thousand DOOMS are coming upon us because of their claimed fraud/lie. They simply claim scientific ” consensus ” – a ludicrous term that only a nitwit would refer to in regard to scientific issues – while totally ignoring the literally thousand of scientists who oppose their scam. Especially since the one book (and there are many many others ) which I refer to, ” Climategate,” does indeed blow the hell out of the whole hoax. The whole situation is an incredible demonstration of how dummed down the populace has become to believe such claptrap as they promote. If Mr. Phillies or any of his fellow clowns will come out from under their rock to debate then fine. I will believe it when I see it. Until then it will be hard to give them all the ridicule, scorn, and derision which these cowards and liars so richly deserve. They deserve the same and 1,000 times more contempt than he has against Christians and true scientists which drips off the computer in his ravings. I give no quarter to enemies of humanity and their lackeys such as Mr. Phillies.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Chairman American Indepedent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  43. Don Grundmann

    ” Don Grundman and the others within the CP will not move.”

    Response – Mr. Wilson – There are indeed core issues upon which I and my fellow members of the CP will not compromise. These include what are referred to as ” social issues;” i.e.; the value of human life and hence the importance of stopping abortion and the genocide which comes with it and the importance of stopping the homosexual movement in their attacks against the family and children by stopping homosexual marriage. Economic issues which are ” non-starters ” for compromise include the fraud/lie/hoax/scam of ” global warming/climate change;” a monstrous job killing and ( especially ) social control mechanism. National security issues would include the preservation of our Constitution and stopping our being ” assimiliated ” into the ” New World Order ” of tyranny and slavery for all of humanity. Other than such core issues we are quite willing to have compromise and appropriate discussions with all people and parties regarding the issues facing our nation. Unfortunately we find that the predominant opposition to such discussion comes from the support of our opponents for the culture and social destroying issues of abortion and homosexual marriage. As we will not compromise on such literally life and death issues neither will their promoters or, especially, the controlling and driving forces behind them.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Chairman American Indepedent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  44. NewFederalist

    BTW Dr. Grundmann I apologize for misspelling your name earlier. We may disagree on several issues but at least I can spell your name correctly!

  45. Eric Sundwall

    The Greens are the only real independent ballot qualified party in NY at the moment. The Independence Party will go with the prevailing wind. Conservatives will find a GOP tail wind. In the last four special elections in the last three years, only one LPNY attempt was made. They squished us like a bug . . . best bet for a spirited anti-war candidacy is the Greens at the moment.

  46. Don Grundmann

    Mr. Knapp – If your comment/” video ” in #52 above is meant to reference a Christian belief system it is unfortunately mislabeled and that is my error. The state recognized AIP in California is ON THE SURFACE a Christian organization but it has in fact been taken over by an anti-Christian control group which includes outright enemies of both Christianity and the party as it was originally created; the part of which I am indeed the Chairman. The anti-Christian control group; which is controlled by a combination of forces inclusive of the Anti-Defamation League, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the ” moderate ” faction of the Republican Party ( its ” establishment ” ); is completely opposed to Christianity and supports abortion, homosexuality in all forms and expressions, the United Nations in all of its functions, and many other positions which are completely opposite both the original AIP and their surface appearance of the moment. Hence the more proper labeling could be CP/CA.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Chairman REAL American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  47. Robert Milnes

    @56, Eric, agreed. I was going to suggest a Green on general principles in generally leftist/progressive NY. Your information is quite specific.
    OK, we need a left/progressive Green to step up to the plate for this special election.
    We need other parties to endorse this candidate.
    We need contributions and volunteers asap. I’ll see if I can get up there.
    We need marketing & voter education. Voters-esp. leftist/progressives who “work within the democratic party” & actually vote, to see & understand what we are trying to do.
    This is a big deal. A U.S. Congressional seat.
    A bigger & better Zeese campaign/experiment.
    Let’s go for it!

  48. George Phillies

    @51

    ‘…personally seen…” If readers are curious, that is one of the very few statements in the rant here. We were both in a Presidential candidate debate in California in the last election cycle.

    However, I have ended up sharing a podium with people who were far less connected to the reality that most of us share. The gentleman who claimed to be running for re-election as President — for his fifth term — comes immediately to mind.

  49. Steven Wilson

    @DG53

    I am well aware of the separation, I just believe PHillies is aware of it at this moment. The CP of Missouri is not as vocal on social isssues when in general public, but when a controlled arena is set, the abortion/marriage slant becomes an endless set.

    I have never made any attempt to use fusion model, but I understand the formula within game theory, and political science is propaganda model, not game theory.

    It does bother me that CP wants to “stop” marriage for homosexuals, when they are a party that promotes the constitution. And the constitution and founding fathers separated church and state on purpose. Marriage is a contract with GOD. Government modifies it through taxation models.

    “Dr.” Al Gore made his claim and that is super. I rather enjoyed scrappy do and his expose on cheese fries and the cosmic ring.

    For anyone to speak of a human as an aid to the planet’s immune system, they suffer from God complex. Our planet is in constant motion. It has perpetual upset stomach, anxiety disorder, and OCD.

    We need the planet. It does not need us.

  50. NewFederalist

    Got it. Special elections (or by elections as they call them in the UK) often provide an opportunity for minority parties to do well. IIRC the Liberals (before the current day Liberal Democrats) would do unusually well against Labour and the Conservatives in such elections.

  51. Don Grundmann

    ” And the constitution and founding fathers separated church and state on purpose.”

    Response – Mr. Wilson – Other than prohibiting a state sponsored/endorsed religion there is NO ” separation of church and state ” formulated by or found in the Constitution. This ridiculous and truly outrageous idea is the result of anti-Christians taking a private letter from Thomas Jefferson to the Baptists and blowing it up to support the REAL idea behind the phrase – eliminate Christianity from the public sphere. Of course when and if they could replace it with their own anti-Christian religion they would then have no complaint. In fact ALL people are religious – even atheists. The idea of ” separation of church and state ” is just another in a long and continuing line of attacks against the Christian foundations of our nation.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Chairman REAL American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  52. Don Lake, FYI, not necessarily a unilateral endorsement

    Robert Milnes // Jun 16, 2011:
    “George [Phillies], Don’s * cloud doesn’t want to work with you …………”

    * Donald J. Grundmann AND Donald R. Lake

    ……….. and scattered, WHICH Christian foundation ?????????

    ………… and behavior, that of a red robed martyr, and future resident of California’s Cocoran and Federal inmate island of Leavenworth, in North East Kansas !

  53. Steven Wilson

    @DG66

    The implications of a religion and country were identified as a problem due to the application of the anglican format and the british.

    No national language. No national church.

    Here in America, to use the naming device “christian” is like a dart being thrown blindly.

    What you believe to be christian has nothing to do with what I believe. The multiple forms of christian made the universal definition impossible to apply without force.

    The separation of church and state might be a letter for you, but in regards to application, there is no choice. What I do on Sunday morning is none of your business. I can say this because this IS America. This is not England.

    Your use of “christian” is still force.

  54. Michael H. Wilson

    I find it interesting that so many people who cannot have children are pushing to outlaw abortion. Very specifically that group is all male.

    Additionally there is a school of thought that suggest that abortion was originally outlawed because midwives did them. The male dominated medical establishment pushed for these laws to get midwives out of business and the laws had nothing to do with preserving life, but were all about money. Drive the midwives out of business!

  55. Michael H. Wilson

    This past Saturday and Sunday I was collecting signatures for a petition at a Gay Pride event. There were numerous church organization that had booths there showing support for the GLBT community. Based on what I saw and heard I would suggest that not all Christian churches feel the same way about homosexual marriage.

  56. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    MHW @ 70: Glad to hear that a. you were busy collecting signatures (I’m hoping for a good, liberty-oriented cause), and b. that there were Christian churches represented there. You give me hope.

  57. Don Grundmann

    Mr. Wilson – The Christian religion formed the predominant philosophical foundation of the nation. There is (was ) no ” force ” involved in this as it was simply the numerical superiority of those who professed Christianity. There were, and are, many different Christian denominations including ( especially in our time ) completely fake Christian churches, like the ones Jill P. refers to, which support and endorse homosexuality. No true Christian church supports homosexuality but they do support the recovery of those afflicted from the emotional pathology; known in Christian theology as ” sin. The fake churches, and the fakes that attend them, do support sin; i.e; perversion; and the permanent slavery of those afflicted to it.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Chairman REAL American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  58. Don Grundmann

    ” You sure did convince me: never to go near the Constitution party, if it’s full of loons like you.”

    Response – Jill P. – In the history of our nation it has been recognized, until only extremely recently, that homosexuality is an emotional affliction and the very idea of teaching its acceptance, endorsement, and promotion; especially to school children, would have been an absolute abomination and monstrous act that would have quickly earned a tar and feather trip out of town to any degenerate who tried to perform such a revolting and horrid attack upon children. Fast forward to our time and the people who work to defend children from such monstrous attacks, such as myself, are called ” loons ” by the same people who are now supporting these moral attacks. So in our ” modern ” times we have a total reversal where the moral degenerates are on the warpath. Rather than being run out of town they have corrupted the nation enough to not only count endless fake Christian churches in their camp but to be on the verge of achieving their ” Holy Grail ” – the mass indoctrination of all public school children into the endorsement, promotion, and acceptance of homosexuality which will occur when and if homosexual marriage is legalized. The moral molestation ( intended to lead to the physical ) which was once unthinkable is now salivated over by those who not only despise the Christian foundations which originally protected children but outrageously and blasphemously claim that a boutique/buffet fake Christianity which they practice actually supports such degeneracy; this in defiance of all Biblical doctrine and principles. Hence I am happy to be called a ” loon ” by those who will, without a second of hesitation or ( especially ) a speck of conscience, support the moral attack upon and degeneration of children. I am happy to be a member of the Constitution Party; the last political party ( a party of ” loons ” to you ) that is uncompromising in its defense of children. Every other party and every other person may betray them but we will not.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Chairman REAL American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  59. Don Grundmann

    ” I find it interesting that so many people who cannot have children are pushing to outlaw abortion. Very specifically that group is all male.”

    Response – Mr. Wilson – To give a clue to the clueless it is called being a ” man.” To stand up in defense not only of children who are torn to shreds by the killing/mutilation process, but females who are tricked, lied to, and exploited in order to have them kill their children. If you ever bother to find out the true history of abortion ( you can start by going to BLACKGENOCIDE.ORG ) then you may someday understand why men stand up for, and defend human life and the value of it while males, their wimpy inferiors ( also known as ” femen ” ), abandon women, females, and children for their own selfish and sick motives. Hopefully you will, someday, ” man up.”

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Chairman REAL American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  60. Jill Pyeatt

    Whatever you say, Donnie-G.

    (To everyone else: I’ll continue to pray for this poor, lonesome, and hateful man. He clearly has no idea how much his rhetoric shuts down any possibility for real conversation because he makes enormous leaps–for example, since I don’t spend my life shouting about the evils of homosexuality, I’m undoubtedly endorsing it and molesting children. That shows a definite flaw in reasoning.

    I’m also very pleased that Donnie-G hasn’t procreated, since chances were maybe one in 10 that his child might have been born gay.)

  61. Michael H. Wilson

    Mr Grundmann you may want to find out some of my life history and who I am before you are so rude as to tell me to “man up”.

    It might also help to read a broader selection of history.

  62. Don Grundmann

    ” Don, why would- anyone-want “ever more poverty…to our nation and to all people around the world.” I don’t get it.”

    Response – Mr. Milnes – I will try to keep the proper answer as short as possible.

    Racism has been an unfortunate sickness in human history but its greater development into a weapon against humanity came with the work of Charles Darwin entitled ” On The Origin of Species AND THE PRESERVATION OF FAVORED RACES. From this book came the development of ” Social Darwinism ( SD );” the application of Darwins theories to the molding of society. Specifically SD recognized superior ( caucasian ) and inferior ( all non-white but including the Irish ) genes and genetics.

    Some needed philosophy and then back to the ” why?”

    There are 2 basic philosophies ( P ) regarding this question – A) a Christian vision; and B) an anti-Christian view.

    Picture a table upon which is all of the riches of humanity. In this case it can be only the food. On one side of the table are the superiors and on the other are the inferiors.

    The Christian vision ( P-A ) is that God gave us the curiosity, ingenuity, and reason to be able to discover His ways and by that the ability to construct countless more tables: i.e.; bring prosperity to all of humanity.

    The SD view ( P-B ) is that since there is no God the only resources ( food ) which exist are on the table and there can only be one table. There can NEVER be any more. Their view is that the Inferiors are too dumb to do anything but breeed like rabbits. If allowed to do so they would soon eat up all of the food on their side of the table and would then go over to the side of the Superiors and take all of their food. They hence had to be stopped. This ” problem ” is also referred to by them as ” the white mans burden.” Their solution(s) is the ” why ” of why more poverty is wanted and needed.

    Hence they have initiated many actions to accomplish the solution of their ” problem ” – Abortion ( see here Margaret Sanger, the creator of Planned Parenthood who said that blacks are ” human weeds ” ), the creation of ” Eugenics ” ( race science, which was copied by the Nazis after its development by the SD believers in America ), creation of the bio-weapon known as AIDS, and many other attacks upon and weapons against humanity inclusive of the creation and perpetuation of poverty.

    As one famous eugenics supporter has stated ( and I paraphrase him ), in this case regarding the possibility of humanity finding an inexhaustable energy source, it would be like ” giving a machine gun to a kindergartener.” This is because greater energy means greater prosperity, greater wealth, and hence greater numbers of ” them ” – the non-white genetic inferior enemies of the Superiors. In the view of the Superiors the Inferiors must be stopped by any and all possible means inclusive of spreading poverty in order to solve their ” problem.

    Hence, Mr. Milnes, the genetic ” Superior ” elites ( SD true believers ) still exist to this day. Just open the phone book and see their local office known as Planned Parenthood or any other abortion clinic. I could give far more, and more in depth, examples of their continued influence such as being the engine behind the lie of ” global warming/climate change ” in order to produce the poverty, and hence lesser numbers of their enemies, that they desire. Suffice it to say that the predominant foreign policy objective of our nation has been since approximately 1973 what is known as National Security Study Memorandum 2000 ( NSSM-2000 ); the purpose of which ( being based on anti-Christian view B) noted above ) is to declare that the PRIMARY foreign policy objective of our hijacked ( by anti-Christians ) nation is to control the population of multiple nations throughout the world. Coincidentally of course they are all populated by non-whites.

    Bottom line – SD believers exist on today. And their work continues to this second. They are the Plantation Masters of our nation/plantation. And it is they who want more poverty around the world in order to control their ( still and forever ) genetic enemies/Inferiors. They control whole political parties such as the Democratic, Green, and Libertarian. They are the ” moderate ” Republican establishment. They work through many lackeys who are more than willing to betray the rest of humanity in order to get the crumbs of recognition, prestige, money, and other dog bones which fall from their masters table. Just ask Mr. Phillies.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Chairman REAL American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  63. Don Grundmann

    Jill P. – I am happy to have discussions on many different topics with many people of good will but I am no longer wasting my time having any discussions with those who have adamantly chosen evil and are totally dedicated to its victory over humanity. If they want ” real conversation ” they can start by renouncing the evil which they are busy in bringing upon and promoting against humanity. Until that time I am only interested in the defeat of their attack and that they crawl back under the rock from which they and their fellow rodents came. They are enemies of humanity and I will treat them as such.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Chairman REAL American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  64. Don Grundmann

    ” since chances were maybe one in 10 that his child might have been born gay ”

    Response – Jill P. – A) There is no such thing as ” gay.” This is a marketing/public relations term used by the homosexual community in place of the proper word ” homosexual.” B) No child is ” born ” homosexual as the condition is not one involving physical DNA but is rather an emotional pathology which results from the fracturing of the family unit; most specifically from resentment against the father. C) ” 1 in 10 ” is yet another lie from the homosexual community. The real figure is 2 to 3%.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Chairman REAL American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  65. Thomas L. Knapp

    “I am happy to have discussions on many different topics with many people of good will but I am no longer wasting my time having any discussions with those who have adamantly chosen evil and are totally dedicated to its victory over humanity.”

    So if you’re leaving the Constitution Party, where will you be going next?

  66. Robert Milnes

    George, @82 LOL!
    You have a good sense of humor, I note.
    You are a suit but not a stuffed shirt.
    You can do physics math.
    How come you are cloudy on political science math?
    Note, Tom said your math is better than mine. But that still means you are off.
    I say my math is better than yours.
    Wouldn’t it be better to have more than 2 or 3 candidates at your debate?
    At the beginning there are multiple candidates.
    At the end 2 or 3.
    Like Clinton, Bush, Perot.
    Hopefully Free & Equal will arrange multiple third party/independent debates for 2012.

  67. Robert Milnes

    Don, statistically lower birth rates go with higher income, generally.
    To wish poverty on everyone is to wish higher birth rates.
    I still don’t get it.

  68. Don Grundmann

    ” To wish poverty on everyone is to wish higher birth rates.”

    Response – Mr. Milnes – The promotion of poverty upon those considered genetically inferior by the Elites, and put into action plans by their lackeys such as Mr. Phillies and so many others, may indeed lead to higher birth rates but for the fact that the attack plans of the Elites via these ghouls are extremely comprehensive. These plans for genocide are of an extremely broad spectrum inclusive of abortion and, especially relevant for this discussion, its branch of ” international family planning;” i.e.; killing the non-white enemies of the elites not just in our nation but around the world. There is a ” division of labor ” for these death squads of the elites as in this instance we have their domestic branch, Planned Parenthood, and their international death squads under PP, the UN, or other cover organizations. Their whole purpose, as with the bio-weapon of AIDS which they created to aid their death program, is to exterminate the enemies of the elites; what they call, since they view humanity as a collection of animals like cattle, ” culling the herd.”

    Combined with their Social Engineering indoctrination of the populace that there are ” too many people ” ( while they never finish the sentence that there are, in their view, too many NON-WHITE people ), that children are not a blessing but a rock around the neck of the parents ( what about your career? ), and that ” freedom ” for females demands the ability to have an abortion at any time and for any reason results in a populace which has had the value of human life, the Christian perspective, removed as a predominant cultural perspective and replaced with the pro-choice animal religion of the Elites which celebrates ” survival of the fittest ” and ” the law of the jungle ” as ruling themes to exist ( not live ) by.

    The spectrum of attacks includes Social Engineering and psychological warfare, applied via the public school system, inclusive of the need of the elites to destroy the family structure by such means as the promotion of feminism and homosexuality.

    The end result is a docilized populace whose morality has been shattered as they are reduced to acting like the animals which they have been told that they are and which they have been trained to be. Having lost their humanity and heritage of freedom they are, like mice through a maze, easily guided and controlled to accept the fate which their Plantation Masters have decided for they and their children.

    They make the best slaves as they have been trained to imagine that they are free thinking and independent even as they parrot the beliefs which their Masters have declared they must have.

    It is a ” big picture ” which results in the slavery of humanity under a Plantation Master elite which administers their plantation via countless as sand shoe bottom lickers such as Mr. Phillies and others of this thread who are more than happy to betray everyone else so that they may eat the crumbs from the floor beneath their Masters table.

    Don J. Grundmann, D.C. Chairman REAL American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

  69. Thomas L. Knapp

    Bob @ 88,

    You write:

    “you said George’s math -in this matter-is better than mine.”

    Yes, I did.

    The non sequitur occurred when you followed up with “But that still means you are off.”

    It does not follow from George’s math being better than yours that his math is in any way defective.

    If you say that 2+2=3, and he says 2+2=4, his math is better than yours, and his math is not off.

Leave a Reply