Get Involved!

The Boston Tea Party National Convention will be held at www.bostontea.us from Wednesday, May 26, 2010 at 7:00 PM ET to Wednesday, June 2, 2010 at 7:00 PM ET. Live events at times and places to be determined may also be held in St. Louis, MO, where the Libertarian Party’s national convention is being held over the same weekend.

Previously, the Boston Tea Party had a meeting in Denver while the Libertarian Party held a national convention there in 2008.

I’m sure you’ve heard the analogy of third party electoral politics to a hamster on a wheel — it runs and runs and runs, but never gets anywhwere. It’s a great analogy. And every time I sat down to start my campaign book … squeak … squeaaaaaak …

I had to go look, and when I did I discovered that my son’s hamster is different with respect to the analogy.

He doesn’t just run on the wheel. He runs on the wheel for about five minutes, then he stops, gets off, walks to the front of the wheel and looks. He looks at the wall of the cage, then he looks back at the wheel. Then he looks at the wall of his cage some more, and looks at the wheel some more. Then he gets back on the wheel and starts running again.

From analogy to cliche: The definition of insanity — or possibly the result of having a brain the size of a pea — is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

As a libertarian political activist, I could handle being a hamster on a wheel. But when the full weight of the fact that that damn wheel hadn’t taken me anywhere and that it was never GOING to take me anywhere landed on my consciousness, I was forced to choose between the insanity of returning to the wheel and the saner approach of taking a closer look at the cage wall and thinking about how one might actually chew through it.

In related news, Wayne Root has also recently indicated that he is no longer interested in seeking the Libertarian Party presidential nomination.

At this time, the candidates who have declared an interest in the LP nomination for POTUS are Robert Milnes, Angela Keaton (although it is not clear to what extent she was serious, or still interested), Joy Waymire, and possibly Michael Jingozian.

No candidates are known to be seeking the 2012 Boston Tea Party nomination for president at this time. Darryl Perry has indicated interest in a 2016 race.

Two days after the Indiana State Senate Judiciary Committee passed a bill that would only recognize marriage between one man and one woman, the Boston Tea Party of Indiana responded with a statement supporting equal rights, privileges, and immunities under the law to all people in Indiana. The party’s state committee called for “an immediate repeal of all state laws attempting or intending to restrict or define the term ‘marriage.”

“This week, we celebrate the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.,who warned us that ‘an injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere,’” said Douglass Gaking, chair of the Boston Tea Party of Indiana. “Regardless of how you feel about the moral decisions of the GLBT (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgendered) community, individuals in a free society must refrain from forcing their morals upon others.”

“Leadership is defined as inspiring others to devote their greatest efforts toward a common goal,” added Chairman Gaking. “Change happens through the inspiration of leaders who, as Ghandi said, are the change they want to see in the world. Coercion through legislation that threatens the liberty of our society is no means to encourage others to adopt the morals you hope them to subscribe to.”

The BTP’s resolution came two days after the State Senate Judiciary Committee approved SJR-13, a joint resolution that “provides that only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Indiana.” The resolution also “provides that a legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized.”

The BTP’s response cites a 1905 U.S. Supreme Court comment which declared the individual’s power of contract to be unlimited: “He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights”

The Boston Tea Party is America’s fastest growing libertarian political party. The party endorses candidates who agree with the party’s one-sentence platform: “The Boston Tea Party supports reducing the size, scope and power of government at all levels and on all issues, and opposes increasing the size, scope and power of government at any level, for any purpose.” The Indiana affiliate of the party was founded in June 2008 and endorsed the candidacies of Rex Bell for State Assembly and Andy Horning for Governor.

The complete BTPIN resolution passed on January 23rd reads as follows:

Whereas State Senator Carlin Yoder has proposed resolution SJR-13 which ”Provides that only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Indiana. Provides that a legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized. This proposed amendment has not been previously agreed to by a general assembly;”

Whereas, the Senate Judiciary Committee passed SJR-13 on January 21st;

Whereas the United States Supreme Court declared in Hale v. Henkel, 201 US43 in 1905, “[The individual's] power to contract is unlimited, … he owes no duty to the State, … since he receives nothing there-from, beyond the protection of his life and property. His rights are such as existed by the law of the land long antecedent to the organization of the State….. He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights;”

Whereas in a free society ‘marriage’ would be a private contract between individuals of no concern to the state;

Whereas the state currently grants special privileges and immunities to those under formal state-sanctioned marriage-contracts, and

Whereas discrimination against ANY voluntary segment of society by government entities is both abhorrent and a violation of the Bill of Rights …

Be it RESOLVED that the Boston Tea Party of Indiana opposses Senator Yoder’s SJR-13.

Be it further RESOLVED that the Boston Tea Party of Indiana supports the rights of all people in Indiana (including Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgendered (GLBT) people) to equal rights, privileges and immunities under the law and calls for an immediate repeal of all state laws attempting or intending to restrict or define the term ‘marriage.

I was recently asked to do a news report at Independent Political Report, a decent outlet for third parties to get their news published. The report was in reference to Alex Jones making an ass of himself at a recent event in Texas that the Libertarian Party there had co-sponsored to protest the closing down of some gun shows. This is the article that I had finally cut it down to:

Note: This article has been updated with new information.

Trouble started at a recent rally to protest infringements to the 2cd amendment set up as a joint effort by a few political activist organizations TAG (Texans for accountable government), The Ladies Liberty Alliance, and the Liberty restoration project. The event was also co-sponsored by the Libertarian party of Texas. Current LP national Director Wes Benedict was an original founder of TAG; current Texas LP Director Robert Butler is a board member. The rally was underway by the time Alex Jones showed up with his own megaphone and started shouting over top of the speakers at the protest. There are several videos on Youtube taken from the scene that day. But some of the highlights include Alex Jones arguing with the organized protesters saying “You don’t know what your doing.” and to “Get out of my face!”. In addition to calling current Texas Executive Robert Butler who sits on the board of directors for TAG “A gay lawyer.”

This Youtube video includes excerpts from Alex’s radio show where he claims that it was his rally that was disrupted along with highlights of some of the various videos taken of this event.

As the video plainly shows, the protest was already underway when Mr. Jones arrived with his entourage and started speaking on his own megaphone making it difficult for the people assembled to hear the speakers.

On his radio show he thanked all his listeners that in his words made the event such a success, but the video also clearly shows that he showed up with less then a dozen people and that the rest of those assembled were gathered by the organizations that put together the rally.

In response to the difficulties of this incident an apology was issued by treasurer and founder of TAG, Chuck Young.

“Dear Chiefs Acevedo and Carter,

I’m writing this to offer my most sincere apologies for the boorish behavior of Alex Jones during the
recent 2nd amendment protest at APD HQ.
Mr. Jones was not invited by us and is not associated with TAG in any way. I found his actions divisive,
immature, rude, hateful, and provocative in the worst sense of the word. I was especially aggrieved at
Jones’ hysterical antics because, as the video record shows, I started the rally with (roughly) the following

statement:
“I’m here today armed with nothing but the Constitution. In addition to our right to bear arms, this great
document preserves our right to peaceable assembly. The operative word there is PEACEABLE – lets
keep it that way!”

While we at TAG may oppose APD on various points of policy, I want you to know that we, and I myself,
respect and appreciate the consummate professionalism with which you and your officers have always
conducted yourselves, in every single dealing I and other TAG principals have had with you.

Regards,
Chuck Young”

In an email from Chuck Young I received after initially publishing this article Mr. Young said the following: “We almost never do street actions without accompanying lobbying. Jones KILLED the lobbying, because the mainstream types whom we were working with (GOP, NRA) got scared off. So he literally made sure that nothing happened in
terms of any substantive policy change.”

In response, Jim Davidson writes

Paulie is a jerk and not to be trusted, in my experience.

Trent is not always a jerk, but clearly has an agenda. I don’t find IPR very useful. Your mileage may vary.

and VTV responds,

So to be sure I wasn’t over-reacting I showed my article to Jason Seagraves (The original owner and editor of IPR) and he said:

“I see absolutely not one bit of editorializing in that article. Not one bit. It was a good article.”

He also went on to tell me that he has has his own problems with the ego of one Trent Hill.

I have also been receiving word that some members of the Texas LP are not at all happy with the censorship.

Several of VTV’s friends/supporters have written contact.ipr@gmail.com to complain about the alleged censorship.

IPR editor Trent Hill responds,

We have strict policies about editorials. You have seen the “final” version of the article, which was only created after 7-8 revisions. Throughout the revisions your friend, Neil, admitted that there was a slant and a bias to his wording by editing multiple times. Furthermore, the article had only a tenuous connection to third-parties, the sole subject matter which IPR covers. After all the revisions, the article still displayed an obvious bias–a conclusion which many of the other bloggers and readers agreed to. Neil has only posted 4 articles in the last 6 months–I run a business, not a charity. Neil’s articles were overly contentious, slanted, and he himself was openly combative with both the editor and other authors. So he was let go and his biased article removed. For the record:I detest Alex Jones and agree that his actions were reprehensible, as are many of his views.

The original posting was prompted by the following article from the Austin Post by Libertarian Party of Texas chair and Libertarian National Committee member Pat Dixon:

The ADL and Alex Jones

On January 28, I was invited by AustinPost to the annual Torch of Liberty award banquet hosted by the Austin branch of the Anti Defamation League (ADL). I was very impressed by the turnout of approximately 600, including many very influential people. 

You may know that AustinPost is asking you to sign a petition in support of the ADL’s "Austin is No Place for Hate" campaign. If you sign this petition, AustinPost will make a $5 contribution to ADL.

So what is the ADL?

The ADL began in 1913 "to stop the defamation of the Jewish people and to secure justice and fair treatment to all."  It has grown to support causes against defamation of any kind, whether religious, racial, sexual or other.  They have educational programs to teach and promote tolerance and acceptance of individual differences.  They also work as a type of private CIA to inform police of threats of violence. They defend separation of church and state, which I have previously supported (1, 2, 3).  They oppose government laws aimed to deny rights to homosexuals.  These are all principles I, as a Libertarian, support.

The highlight of the evening was presenting the Torch of Liberty award to Amy and Kirk Rudy.  Kirk Rudy is founder and boss of Endeavor Real Estate, made famous in this town as receivers of the Domain subsidies.  The key word I heard repeated throughout the evening and in Kirk’s acceptance speech was "TOLERANCE."  This is a key principle that we Libertarians adhere to.  About two minutes into this speech, he discussed how intolerance and extremism is used in the media and both political parties to vilify whoever they are targeting.  He didn’t mention my political party, so I guess we are innocent of such charges. He remarked how presidents from both political parties have been compared to Hitler. His remarks were nearly identical to a previous treatise of mine on the subject of intolerance and Hitler.

I took particular note of the presence of Austin Police Chief Art Acevedo in audience.  He was recognized during the ceremony as one of the advocates for the ADL:

It drew my particular attention because at the same time, Chief Acevedo was embroiled in a protest at the police station headquarters.  His department closed down a gun show (1, 2) which drew the ire of Texans for Accountable Government (TAG), among others.  TAG employed its first amendment rights to organize a protest of an abridgment of second amendment rights.

It should be noted at this point that I as a Libertarian support the second amendment and oppose gun control.  The ADL supports gun control and opposed the Supreme Court’s Heller decision.

Now is when this laborious prose hopefully draws more interest.  TAG planned to have a peaceful, orderly and effective protest.  That didn’t happen because of one man:

Alex Jones.

Witness what happens when the esteemed Alex Jones enters the fray:

Of course Alex couldn’t stop there and had to go further over the top:

So he took it upon himself to disrupt this peaceful assembly, accuse a volunteer of having a "hard on" for him, suggested that my executive director was "a gay lawyer", and generally marginalized himself.  TAG is distancing themselves from Alex in both voice and words.

 

Alex Jones is exactly the kind of person Kirk Rudy refers to.  If you want to speak and deliberate on an issue, fine.  If you want to throw intolerant bombs and appeal to the extreme elements in order to call attention to yourself, you don’t help your cause.

Regarding the ADL, I have not signed their petition.  In addition to their support of gun control, they also support laws for "hate crimes" which punish people for the thoughts in their head. There are those who believe such laws to be unconstitutional.  Do we really need a "thought police?"

Apparently we already have a "green police," so why not?

Additionally, the ADL maintains a list of people and groups they label as "extreme." From their website:

"Today, ADL’s Center on Extremism continues our mission to expose and document the groups and individuals whose ideologies and activities perpetuate hatred and extremism.  To this end, the Center on Extremism has created an online resource, Extremism in America, which serves as a guide to prominent extreme movements, groups, and leaders in the United States."

So would you believe that if you are a tax protestor, that you "perpetuate hatred and extremism?"  The ADL does.

Perhaps you think this is too reactionary and defensive.  Certainly the ADL would not support labeling the Libertarian Party and Ron Paul as perpetrators of "hatred and extremism," would they?  Of course, that has already happened in Missouri.  I guess if you are considered a "fringe" group it must be OK to pass laws against you and shut you down.

In conclusion, let me make the following points:
- It is precisely when words are most distasteful that freedom of speech is most meaningful

- It is entirely appropriate and encouraged to teach and practice tolerance
- It is appropriate for private organizations to monitor public information and advise government of threats
- It is inappropriate to punish people for thoughts
- It is appropriate to punish people for actions
- It is appropriate for Alex Jones to be marginalized

P.S. The graphic in the title of this article of longtime national director of the ADL Abraham Foxman in an caricature which perfectly conveys the message Kirk Rudy and I delivered.

“Madame Speaker, I rise to introduce the Free Competition in Currency Act of 2009. Currency, or money, is what allows civilization to flourish. In the absence of money, barter is the name of the game; if the farmer needs shoes, he must trade his eggs and milk to the cobbler and hope that the cobbler needs eggs and milk. Money makes the transaction process far easier. Rather than having to search for someone with reciprocal wants, the farmer can exchange his milk and eggs for an agreed-upon medium of exchange with which he can then purchase shoes…

Over millennia of human history, gold and silver have been the two metals that have most often satisfied these conditions, survived the market process, and gained the trust of billions of people. Gold and silver are difficult to counterfeit, a property which ensures they will always be accepted in commerce. It is precisely for this reason that gold and silver are anathema to governments. A supply of gold and silver that is limited in supply by nature cannot be inflated, and thus serves as a check on the growth of government. Without the ability to inflate the currency, governments find themselves constrained in their actions, unable to carry on wars of aggression or to appease their overtaxed citizens with bread and circuses….

At this country’s founding, there was no government controlled national currency. While the Constitution established the Congressional power of minting coins, it was not until 1792 that the US Mint was formally established….

The first step consists of eliminating legal tender laws. Article I Section 10 of the Constitution forbids the States from making anything but gold and silver a legal tender in payment of debts. States are not required to enact legal tender laws, but should they choose to, the only acceptable legal tender is gold and silver, the two precious metals that individuals throughout history and across cultures have used as currency. However, there is nothing in the Constitution that grants the Congress the power to enact legal tender laws. We, the Congress, have the power to coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, but not to declare a legal tender. Yet, there is a section of US Code, 31 USC 5103, that purports to establish US coins and currency, including Federal Reserve notes, as legal tender.

Historically, legal tender laws have been used by governments to force their citizens to accept debased and devalued currency. Gresham’s Law describes this phenomenon, which can be summed up in one phrase: bad money drives out good money. An emperor, a king, or a dictator might mint coins with half an ounce of gold and force merchants, under pain of death, to accept them as though they contained one ounce of gold. Each ounce of the king’s gold could now be minted into two coins instead of one, so the king now had twice as much “money” to spend on building castles and raising armies. As these legally overvalued coins circulated, the coins containing the full ounce of gold would be pulled out of circulation and hoarded….

These actions also give rise to the most pernicious effects of inflation….In the absence of legal tender laws, Gresham’s Law no longer holds. If people are free to reject debased currency, and instead demand sound money, sound money will gradually return to use in society. Merchants would have been free to reject the king’s coin and accept only coins containing full metal weight.
The second step to reestablishing competing currencies is to eliminate laws that prohibit the operation of private mints…
The final step to ensuring competing currencies is to eliminate capital gains and sales taxes on gold and silver coins. Under current federal law, coins are considered collectibles, and are liable for capital gains taxes….

Just as pernicious are the sales and use taxes which are assessed on gold and silver at the state level in many states. Imagine having to pay sales tax at the bank every time you change a $10 bill for a roll of quarters to do laundry. Inflation is a pernicious tax on the value of money, but even the official numbers, which are massaged downwards, are only on the order of 4% per year. Sales taxes in many states can take away 8% or more on every single transaction in which consumers wish to convert their Federal Reserve Notes into gold or silver.

In conclusion, Madame Speaker, allowing for competing currencies will allow market participants to choose a currency that suits their needs, rather than the needs of the government. The prospect of American citizens turning away from the dollar towards alternate currencies will provide the necessary impetus to the US government to regain control of the dollar and halt its downward spiral. Restoring soundness to the dollar will remove the government’s ability and incentive to inflate the currency, and keep us from launching unconstitutional wars that burden our economy to excess. With a sound currency, everyone is better off, not just those who control the monetary system. I urge my colleagues to consider the redevelopment of a system of competing currencies and cosponsor the Free Competition in Currency Act.”

This happened just 7 days after the Boston Tea Party National Committee passed a resolution calling on Congress to introduce and pass legislation; that would repeal the legal tender law; repeal the government monopoly over the creation of coins for use as currency and prohibit federal and state taxes on precious metal coins and bullion.

The Boston Tea Party was founded in 2006 with a one sentence platform, “The Boston Tea Party supports reducing the size, scope and power of government at all levels and on all issues, and opposes increasing the size, scope and power of government at any level, for any purpose.” In October 2008, the party’s National Convention adopted the four point program of the Campaign for Liberty. Their program calls for an end to overseas occupation, a restoration of privacy and other liberties, no increase in the national debt, and a thorough review of the Federal Reserve. Since October 2008, the Boston Tea Party National Committee has passed resolutions opposing the “banker bailout” and “stimulus” package, as well as a resolution in support of repudiating the National Debt and another in support of HR833, Ron Paul’s “Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act.”

Our chairman reports that the total membership on this site is now 1,656 active (non-blocked) members. Hurray! Our largest Facebook group has 1,467 members. Planning has commenced for our national convention in May 2010. It takes place here on this site.

http://www.bostontea.us/node/776

Get Involved!

The Boston Tea Party National Convention will be held at www.bostontea.us from Wednesday, May 26, 2010 at 7:00 PM ET to Wednesday, June 2, 2010 at 7:00 PM ET. Live events at times and places to be determined may also be held in St. Louis, MO, where the Libertarian Party’s national convention is being held over the same weekend.

http://www.bostontea.us/node/767

Two days after the Indiana State Senate Judiciary Committee passed a bill that would only recognize marriage between one man and one woman, the Boston Tea Party of Indiana responded with a statement supporting equal rights, privileges, and immunities under the law to all people in Indiana. The party’s state committee called for “an immediate repeal of all state laws attempting or intending to restrict or define the term ‘marriage.”

The President also claims he made the “financial rescue program”
“transparent and accountable.” Yet, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke
and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner both refuse to tell Congress which
banks received “bailout” money. And just 3 months ago the Recovery
Accountability and Transparency Board was exposed for having posted false
data, claiming 440 “phantom districts” had received nearly $6.4 billion
and only “saved or created” 28429.7 jobs. How is that “transparent”? More
importantly, how has the “recovered” money been handled? Has that money
been removed from circulation? It was “created” by the Federal Reserve
before it was given to the banks; if it isn’t removed from the money
supply, it will only further increase inflation. Until banks are no longer
allowed to practice the fraud known as fractional reserve banking and
interest rates are no longer kept artificially low the financial markets
will not be “stable”. There will continue to be “booms & busts.”

The President claims to have “cut taxes for 95% of working families… for
small businesses…. for first-time homebuyers… for parents trying to
care for their children & for 8 million Americans paying for college.”
These were NOT tax cuts, they were tax credits. By doing so, the President
& Congress are trying to encourage certain actions. He also claims to have
added two million jobs, the vast majority of which are government jobs,
most of the remainder are dependent on government contracts.
While I applaud his plan to eliminate capital gains taxes on small
businesses, I’d like to ask that instead of proposing more “tax credits”
and “incentives” he ask Congress to eliminate the income tax & abolish the
IRS. Doing so would greatly encourage economic growth without “steering”
their actions to those preferred by a group of bureaucrats.

The President laid out an energy policy that doesn’t allow individual
choices about alternative energy sources. While I support alternative
energy, it is not and should not be the government’s job to dictate which
energy sources people use.

He also claimed, again, that further government involvement in “health
care” will reduce yearly budget deficits and somehow cause medical costs
to go down, something that hasn’t happened since the government first
involved itself in the health care industry in 1965 with the creation of
Medicare.

The President says he wants to “freeze” spending, but “spending related to
our national security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will not be
affected.” And says he’s identified $20 billion in savings for next year -
$20 billion out of a $4 trillion budget is only a drop in the bucket –
0.5% (½ of 1 percent) to be exact, which is the equivalent of the average
household saving $251. But, I digress, President Obama claims he “go
through the budget line by line to eliminate programs that we can’t afford
and don’t work.” How about comparing the budget with the Constitution and
eliminating what isn’t authorized by the Constitution? Doing so would
result in cutting approximately 60% of federal spending and drastically
reduce or eliminate the amount of unfunded future liabilities – currently
estimated at $107 trillion. The government is bankrupt, the only solution
is decreasing spending, not simply “freezing” spending on certain
programs.

I would like to encourage the President to reconsider his foreign policy
and adopt the foreign policy of Thomas Jefferson, that of “Peace, commerce
and honest friendship with all nations–entangling alliances with none.”
This involves not only “trade agreements” – true free trade requires no
treaty – but also military intervention. There is no Constitutional
justification for having troops stationed in over 130 countries around the
world, nor the two “wars” that are being waged. the troops should be
brought home immediately.

The President talks about a lack of “faith” in the institutions, but i
think it’s a lack of respect. One of the reasons the people don’t trust
the federal government is because neither the Congress, the Judicial or
the Executive has any respect for the Constitution – the document that
established federal authority – or individual liberties. You give respect
to get respect! Why should anyone respect any government if the members of
that government don’t respect their constituents?

All in all, the President wants to continue expanding the size & scope of
the government while decreasing the amount of individual freedoms. I’m
again reminded of the word of Thomas Jefferson, “I would rather be exposed
to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending
too small a degree of it.”

Sincerely,
Darryl W. Perry
2016 candidate for President of the United States of America

http://dwp2016.org

At-Large Representative Boson Tea Party National Committee

http://BostonTea.us

Managing Editor Free Patriot Press

http://FreePatriot-Press.com

Joe Kennedy recently announced his support of HR 4248, the Free Competition in Currency Act, a bill endorsed by the BTP National Committee as part of the “Honest Money” Resolution. At-Large Rep. Darryl W. Perry said, “Joe Kennedy is the only candidate (in this election) that supports a Competitive Currency (establishing an effective monetary policy to maintain strong currency at home and a competitive currency abroad for balancing trade,) and an Audit/End of the Federal Reserve System.”

BTP Chairman Douglass Gaking added, “He supports Ron Paul’s Audit the Fed and Free Competition of Currency acts and takes a strict libertarian position on just about everything.”

In accepting the endorsement, Kennedy commented, “I am very excited to receive the endorsement of the Boston Tea Party. Before I was a politician I was a TEA Party Activist and like millions of others I see the looming problems with our government. Our great nation is rapidly racing toward bankruptcy. Taxation is growing without restraint and the freedoms and ideals we grew up with are vanishing. All the while our politicians have stopped caring and stopped listening to the wants and needs of the population. As a country we deserve lower taxes and a smaller, more responsible and less intrusive government. As TEA Party Activists we insist on more freedom, State’s rights and a government that listens to the people it represents not one that takes our money and turns a deaf ear to the population it supports. These are the needs of our nation and the foundation of the Boston Tea Party and my candidacy. I am running on Tea Party Principles and I will represent them fully in the Senate. My gratitude (goes out) to the Boston Tea Party for the honor of their endorsement.”

The Boston Tea Party was founded in 2006 with a one sentence platform, “The Boston Tea Party supports reducing the size, scope and power of government at all levels and on all issues, and opposes increasing the size, scope and power of government at any level, for any purpose.” In October 2008, the party’s National Convention adopted the four point program of the Campaign for Liberty. Their program calls for an end to overseas occupation, a restoration of privacy and other liberties, no increase in the national debt, and a thorough review of the Federal Reserve.

Previous IPR coverage:

Libertarian independent candidate Joe Kennedy will be in at least three more debates in Massachusetts US Senate special election Posted by Paulie 12/24

Hopefuls jab on war, taxes in bid for Kennedy seat Posted by Paulie 12/23

Massachusetts: Health Care, Afghanistan Top First Senate Debate Posted by Paulie, 12/22

Joe Kennedy Picks Up Endorsements and Momentum Posted 12/22 by d.eris

Scenes from first Massachusetts US Senate special election debate Posted 12/21 by Paulie

Darryl Perry: ‘A Kennedy Even Libertarians can Support: Joe Kennedy for US Senate’ Posted by Paulie 12/21

First two debates set in Kennedy successor race Posted by Paulie 12/21

Why challenge the two-party system? Somebody has to do it Posted by d.eris, 12/20

Green Party issues press release to support Libertarian Joe Kennedy’s right to debate Posted by Kimberly Wilder 12/19

More Joe Kennedy news coverage: Needham Times, Sun Chronicle Posted by Paulie 12/18

Martha Coakley, Scott Brown, Joseph Kennedy agree to series of debates in race for Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat Posted by Paulie 12/18

Rich Rubino at Politics DMZ: ‘Yes, Joe Kennedy can win the Massachusetts U.S. Senate Race’
Posted by Paulie 12/18

Boston Globe: ‘This Kennedy wants to cut government’
Posted by Paulie 12/18

Earlier Coverage

Darryl W. Perry, At-Large Representative to the National Committee, proposed the resolution, which reads:
Whereas, the currency of the United States of America is fiat and not commodity based, and
Whereas, Article 1 Section 10 of the US Constitution states “No State shall…make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts”, and Whereas, the legal tender law forces the use of a fiat currency, and
Whereas, fiat currency is the cause of inflation,
Be it resolved, The Boston Tea Party National Committee calls upon Congress to introduce and pass;
The “Honest Money Act” that would repeal the legal tender law;
The “Free Competition in Currency Act” that would repeal the government monopoly over the creation of coins for use as currency;
The “Tax-Free Gold Act” that would prohibit federal and state taxes on precious metal coins and bullion.

Perry wrote, “The quickest way to return to a commodity based system is to find businesses that will allow you to barter, and eschew the “system” altogether. The next best thing would be for Congress to pass the “Honest Money Act” that would repeal the legal tender law; the “Free Competition in Currency Act” that would repeal the government monopoly over the creation of coins for use as currency; & the “Tax-Free Gold Act” that would prohibit federal and state taxes on precious metal coins and bullion.”

Party Chair Doug Gaking states, “The Federal Reserve system is shrouded in secrecy and protected from accountability, and worst of all it is a monopoly enforced by our federal government. They secretly print money as they please and manipulate the economy in various ways, while the average American is confused and frustrated about why prices are fluctuating and the economy is in total chaos. The entire world economy is dependent on the product of these lies and secrets. The manipulations allowed by this system create artificial bubbles and make for an unnatural and therefore unbalanced economy. If money is freed by the passing of these two proposed acts of Congress, we will see a stabilized economy with exciting new opportunities for Americans.”

Since October 2008, the Boston Tea Party National Committee has passed resolutions opposing the “banker bailout” and “stimulus” package, as well as a resolution in support of repudiating the National Debt and another in support of HR833, Ron Paul’s “Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act.”

Perry adds, “Anything less than a 100% commodity based currency is a fraud. This includes the use of fractional reserve banking…Money isn’t a worthless piece of paper; currency can be…with a fiat currency, there is no reason at all to trust the banking system, or the currency.”

The Boston Tea Party was founded in 2006 with a one sentence platform, “The Boston Tea Party supports reducing the size, scope and power of government at all levels and on all issues, and opposes increasing the size, scope and power of government at any level, for any purpose.” In October 2008, the party’s National Convention adopted the four point program of the Campaign for Liberty. Their program calls for an end to overseas occupation, a restoration of privacy and other liberties, no increase in the national debt, and a thorough review of the Federal Reserve.

On Wednesday Sept. 9 President Obama addressed a joint session of Congress to push his health-care agenda. He opened his speech by saying he “would not let up until those Americans who seek jobs can find them…those businesses that seek capital and credit can thrive…(and) all responsible homeowners can stay in their homes.” While this is admirable, it is not the job of the President to ensure employment, housing or credit for anyone; something the President himself seems to be hypocritical about, later stating, “One of the unique and wonderful things about America has always been our self-reliance, our rugged individualism, our fierce defense of freedom, and our healthy skepticism of government.” Which is it? Are we to be self-reliant individuals or are we to expect to be taken care of by the President? I say, as do many others, we are to be self-reliant and not expect anything to be handed to us.

No one will deny the “hardship” of those without insurance, but to equate insurance to “health care”; and the claims that a failure to act on 100 years of proposed health reform has “led us to the breaking point” is dishonest at best and manipulative propaganda at worst. For part of the last 100 years, Congress understood that they have no Constitutional Authority to get involved in health care. However, for the remainder of the past century, it is the intervention into the health care industry that has caused the rapid cost increases. Further involving the government will not cause prices to drop, as has been proven in the last 40 years, since the creation of Medicare; only by removing government regulations and opening the free market to true competition among doctors, hospitals, insurance companies and alternative medicines will costs begin to drop.

The President want to make it illegal for “ insurance companies to deny you coverage because of a pre-existing condition; to drop coverage when (someone) gets sick or water it down when need(ed) the most; place some arbitrary cap on the amount of coverage (one) can receive in a given year or in a lifetime” and “We will place a limit on how much (someone) can be charged for out-of- pocket expenses… And insurance companies will be required to cover, with no extra charge, routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms and colonoscopies.” Increasing regulations on insurance companies will only increase costs, this proposal would be the equivalent of mandating auto insurance coverage for oil changes, tires and batteries; something I doubt anyone supports.

The President wants to mandate all individuals have and companies provide health insurance with “a hardship waiver for those individuals who still can’t afford coverage, and 95 percent of all small businesses, because of their size and narrow profit margin, would be exempt from these requirements,” any person or business not exempted would be required to pay a “penalty” – read TAX. One can only assume this “penalty” would be used to help cover costs of the “public option”, intended to “increase competition”, but in reality, it would do no such thing; only by allowing insurance companies to compete across State lines, will competition be increased. The claim that the public option supposedly would not be supported via ax-payer funding while at the same time “makes sure that no government bureaucrat or insurance company bureaucrat gets between” anyone and the care needed.

The President claims he “will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits;” without any detailed explanation of how this unconstitutional bill would be paid for, if not by using tax-payer funding.

In explaining past “reforms”, mainly the creation of Social Security Medicare, the President said, “You see, our predecessors understood that government could not, and should not, solve every problem. They understood that there are instances when the gains in security from government action are not worth the added constraints on our freedom.
But they also understood that the danger of too much government is matched by the perils of too little; that without the leavening hand of wise policy, markets can crash, monopolies can stifle competition, the vulnerable can be exploited.”
I’m reminded of two quotes; one from Thomas Jefferson, “No matter how many sad stories are read or how many times Ted Kennedy is mentioned; don’t let your emotions get in the way of seeing this attempt at “reform” is nothing more than one more step towards unconstitutional government control of the health care system.” The other from Benjamin Franklin, “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety”

No matter how many sad stories are read or how many times Ted Kennedy is mentioned; don’t let your emotions get in the way of seeing this attempt at “reform” is nothing more than one more step towards unconstitutional government control of the health care system.

Sincerely,
Darryl W. Perry
2016 candidate for President of the United States of America
http://BostonTea.us
At-Large Representative Boson Tea Party National Committee
http://BostonTea.us
Managing Editor Free Patriot Press
http://FreePatriot-Press.com

Resource-Based Economy Caucus formed in the Boston Tea Party.

On Wednesday, August 12th 2009 Neil Kiernan Stephenson, a member of the Boston Tea Party’s national committee announced the formation of a new caucus on his blog at Bostontea.us. An excerpt of this post follows:

“Due to the recent changes in my political ideology, I have decided to form a caucus that is in line with my ideas. This caucus still is in line with the platform of the Boston Tea Party, but suggests a different solution to getting us to the goals presented. The Boston Tea Party platform states:

“The Boston Tea Party supports reducing the size, scope and power of government at all levels and on all issues, and opposes increasing the size, scope and power of government at any level, for any purpose.”

This caucus would actually propose suggestions about how to remove the need for government entirely through the use of technology as a final goal.

The Resource-Based economy caucus:
The Resource-Based economy caucus is a caucus that seeks to bring about awareness of the advantages of implementing a Resource-Based economy. And to work towards that implementation.”

Neil went on to define a Resource-Based economy by quoting an article on the subject written by industrial designer and social engineer Jacque Fresco, director of the Venus Project. Mr. Fresco was recently featured in the film “Zeitgeist Addendum” where his concepts for social change through the application of technology were proposed as the solution for mankind’s problems.

Key points of the caucus:
1. We intend to offer alternatives to the current outdated solutions that are simply not working.
2. We will work to expose the dangers of a profit motivated monetary system, and spread awareness of the various ways this system is corrupted.
3. We will work to spread awareness of the technology that could liberate mankind from the monetary system and the profit motive.
4. We will offer dialogue as to the flaws of Socialism, Communism, and Capitalism and why none of these solutions will solve the problems of mankind. And offer the research of the Venus Project as data of an alternative to any of these outdated failed systems.

Time will tell how successful this caucus will be in spreading awareness of this radical concept.

To learn more about the Venus Project, and the Resource-Based economy idea by visiting their website at: http://thevenusproject.com/

FEC releases 2008 prez/congressional vote count: mixed media response

Ballot Access News is a site which focuses on why and how independent and third party candidates have so many ballot access hurdles to overcome. So, when the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) released its report on votes in the 2008 US Presidential race and Congressional races this week, Ballot Access covered the story in a straightforward way, and the FEC link was given.

And, at Independent Political Report, Peter Orvetti reported out an extensive list of third party presidential totals–with parties/candidates who received the highest totals featured on top. [See previous article on IPR.]

A different angle on the story came from The Hill. While The Hill does sometimes have third party news, they are heavily focused on the two major parties. The Hill’s reporting on the FEC election results was used to mock alternative parties and third party/independent candidates, while seeming to avoid mention of the top third parties. The title (and focus) of The Hill’s article is, “Bill Clinton edges out Santa.” See the article: here.

The article in The Hill failed to mention important third parties and third party candidates such as: the Libertarian Party, Bob Barr, Ralph Nader, the Constitution Party, Cynthia McKinney, or the Green Party of the United States. Though, ironically, and apparently accidentally, the article did give some mention to the more genuine third party cause. In a list of what it called ” ‘extra-special’ affiliations”, such as the “All-Day Breakfast Party” and the “Rock the Boat Party”, The Hill article wound up mentioning “The Boston Tea Party”. (Does The Hill understand that they are a valid party?) And, the list also mentioned the “Green-Rainbow Party“, which is actually the Green Party’s name in Massachusetts, where the greens merged with the Rainbow Party. So, maybe, despite itself, The Hill article wasn’t entirely a negative for third parties after all?

Note: For more complete listings of alternative political parties, see the sidebar here at IPR, or go to the third party page at Politics1.com: here.

ALLOW SELF-DETERMINTION FOR PUERTO RICO
Boston Tea Party National Committee Endorses HR 2499

The Boston Tea Party National Committee passed a resolution “in support of HR 2499 To provide for a federally sanctioned self-determination process for the people of Puerto Rico” 5-0 (with 1 not voting).

Puerto Rico’s Governor Luis Fortuño says, “The reality is that the island’s current status does not enable the people of Puerto Rico to fulfill their potential for social, economic and political development.”

Darryl W. Perry wrote, “This bill calls for the first ever federally-authorized plebiscite on self-determination which will use a two-tier vote, unlike past plebiscites which were locally-authorized and placed all options on one ballot; thus ensuring no option received a majority. And even if a majority were reached, it would not necessarily have been accepted by the Federal Government.

HR2499 would require two votes, the first vote would determine if a majority of Puerto Ricans favor a change of status (i.e. something other than “commonwealth”/Territory of the USA). If a majority supports the status quo, new plebiscites will be held every 8 years. However, if a majority supports a change of status another plebiscite will be held with three options: Independence, Statehood or Sovereignty in Association with the United States (similar to the status of Micronesia, Marshall Islands & Palau).”

With the passage of this resolution, the Boston Tea Party becomes the 5th Party to support this bill; joining not only the Republican and Democratic Parties but also the Popular Democratic Party and the Puerto Rico Independence Party.

“HR 2499 has over 150 co-sponsors in the Congress. The American people want the Puerto Rican people to have a choice in regards to their sovereignty. It is the right of the Puerto Rican people to choose if they would like to change their status, and if so what that new status may be.” said BTP Chairman Doug Gaking.

In other BTP news, the national committee has endorsed John Wayne Smith for Governor of Florida, 2010. Boston Tea Party of New Mexico has endorsed Adam Kokesh for Congress, New Mexico’s 3rd district, 2010.

Also, Todd Andrew Barnett had a falling out with Kansas BTP chair Jim Davidson. Barnett writes, in part:

As of today, Jim Davidson and I are enemies. I can see why people can’t stand that prick. Therefore, because of his actions, he’s been banned from my show and that ban will never be lifted. I tried to extend an olive branch to him hours ago, but that ungrateful backstabber threw it back at me and spit on it. Honestly, he makes Eric Dondero and Dave Nalle look sane in comparison. And I can’t stand Dondero with a passion, given my complete and entire history with that jackass.

It’s better this way. I’m venting my frustrations, disappointment, and yes, goddamned bitterness over what Davidson said to me in Gmail. But he made his choice.

Now I’m making mine. Effective August 7, I will be resigning my seat as Secretary of the BTP. I only ran on this seat because Davidson asked me to. I didn’t want the damn seat, but because of this crap, I want nothing to do with it as long as it has his name attached to it. I will offer my last and final resolution on the Committee before my term expires.

This gives Doug and the Committee a month to transition my departure and find a suitable replacement for me on the Secretary seat. I got on this board because of Davidson, and I will not carry it further as long as his legacy is attached to my seat and this party.

Doug told me that he’s had people tell him that they won’t join the Party as long as Davidson is a part of it. For a long time, I could not fathom that; now I do. As long as Davidson, who is NOT a libertarian in my opinion but an unstable kook in my honest opinion, has any continued association with the Party, this organization will remain small and irrelevant. It will remain small and irrelevant anyway, but hey, that’s what you get for getting involved in third party politics.

Thank you all for supporting me. This has been an agonizing decision, and I wish everyone the best of luck. I hope my successor will do a better job than I ever could.

Barnett changed his mind in his next blog post, writing:

After having a discussion with BTP National Chairman Doug Gaking, I have, in one way reluctantly and another way with great mixed feelings, decided not to step down from my seat that I have set for August 7. I will serve out the remainder of the term until 2010, but I will not run again after that point.

However, my defunct, nonexistent relationship with Jim Davidson stands.

Yours in Liberty in Perpetuity,

Todd Andrew Barnett
Returning Secretary, Boston Tea Party

Also in BTP-related news, IPR received an anonymous video from “Libertarians Against John Wayne Smith”:

“Related videos” revealed an additional video from the group, featuring a previous IPR article among other things…

I attended the Tax Day Tea Party in Overland Park, Kansas on Wednesday. It was much fun.

According to the local Fox Snooze affiliate, there were a thousand people there. I did see a helicopter overhead, probably from Channel 9, so someone might even have counted the crowd.

There were all kinds of people there, from Vietnam veterans to Iraq war veterans in age, some very elderly, many young children. There were mostly white people, but the region is pretty pale. I did see a number of Hispanic folks and some other ethnic minorities.

My favorite protester war a pink pig outfit. It was fun to stand near the police and shout, “Look at the pig!” Then point at the one in the pink outfit. -smile-

I was able to pass out about 200 flyers for “Lawrencians for Liberty” including “Campaign for Liberty” and Boston Tea Party contact particulars. I also passed out around 200 flyers for http://www.alongsidenight.com/ the new agorism revolution project.

In Colorado Springs for the von Mises Circle earlier this month I was given by one of the organisers a stack of “Audit the Fed” flyers from the Campaign for Liberty, so I passed those out, too. Then it was off to the street to wave my sign at passing motorists. There was huge enthusiasm from the cars – lots of waving and horn honking and cheering.

My sign said, “No more taxes, No more wars, End the bailouts, End the war on drugs” on one side, and “Go Ron Paul” on the other.

Many people asked about the fliers and one had even read J. Neil Schulman’s book “Alongside Night.” She was excited to hear about the plan to make it into a film.

There were two sets of speeches, both with amplification. For a while, I stood between the two sets of speakers and had one blaring in my left ear, nearly canceling out every word blaring in my right. Many speakers introduced themselves and none stick out in my mind.

A politician was there with an “end the bailouts” petition. Many people signed that, including me, and many signed up at the Kansas City tea party booth, including me. So, I should get more e-mail, and that’s always swell.

There were many police but no violence. Many different messages were presented, and I was amused by quite a few.

If you missed out, and plan to be in the Kansas City area, check out the End the Fed rally coming up later this month.

If you plan to be in Lawrence, we’re doing two “Films for Action.” One is “America: Freedom to Fascism” this coming Sunday the 19th of April at the Woodruff Auditorium in the Kansas student union. The other is some “Money Masters” thing, which is critical of the Federal Reserve but, as I recall, promotes the completely idiotic approach of having Congress print money.

You should really get involved. It is the revolution of our time.

Get a shirt or something to declare your affiliation:
http://www.cafepress.com/bostontee

It is with a heavy heart that I report that one of our vice presidential candidates in 2008, Marilyn Chambers, has passed away.

Her story here.

Today we have 1,339 members on this site. We have 1,297 members of our largest Facebook group. Please ask your friends and family to join our party – committed to a smaller government on all issues and at all levels.

Many Tax Day Tea Parties are planned for this week, and another round of End the Fed rallies are planned next week. Get involved. The freedom you save might be your own.

Meanwhile, Carla Howell, a former Libertarian Party candidate who got 12% of the vote against Ted Kennedy for US Senate in 2000 and ran End The Income Tax initiatives in Massacusetts in 2002 and 2008, delivered this speech on April 15, 2009 at the TEA Party Event in Boston:

“I did NOT come here to Protest.

“I did NOT come here to try to change the minds of Democratic or Republican officeholders in Washington – or on Beacon Hill.

“I came here to change politics in America – just like the American Patriots who gave us the first Boston Tea Party.

“The Original Boston Tea Party was NOT a Protest.

“Let me say that again: the Original Boston Tea Party was NOT a Protest.

“The Patriots did NOT just hold up signs, give speeches, and complain.

“The Patriots stopped British ships from unloading Monopoly British Tea – their version of AIG.

“The American Patriots blocked the collection of taxes.

“That is why the Boston Tea Party mattered – and why we remember it today.

“Because it was direct political action, not just protest.

“And it was action that made government smaller.

“Those great American Patriots realized that
what they said and what they wrote – changed nothing.

“But action changes everything.

“Not just any action. Action that shrinks Big Government.

“They were right!

“Deeds, NOT just words.

“Direct political action, NOT just protest.

“Action that moves us forward, that moves us closer to small government – NOT the no-win strategy of holding the line, or just opposing more Big Government.

“This is the lesson of the first Boston Tea Party.

“Now it is our turn to live the lesson.

“Let me ask you a few questions.

“Do you believe that the Wall Street bailout is insane?

“Do you believe that the massive federal government borrowing is hurting your business and your family?

“Do you believe that government is too big?

“Do you believe government debt is too high?

“Do you believe government spending is too high?

“Do you believe taxes are too high?

“Now let me ask you the questions inspired by the Original Boston Tea Party:

“Are YOU willing to take political action?

“Are YOU willing to END the Big Government Insanity – and start voting to make government smaller than it is today?

“Are YOU willing to vote against every Big Government candidate – in every election?

“Now here’s the really hard question: Are you willing to vote against them even when you hate the other Big Government candidate more?

“Are you willing to vote FOR small government candidates and FOR small government ballot initiatives?

“Most political candidates who tell you they’re against Big Government, who tell you they are for ’smaller government’ talk your way — and vote the opposite. They vote for tax increases, debt increases, spending increases, and more Big Government programs. They vote for each year’s higher government spending. Their votes raise your taxes.

“The only way we can protect ourselves against these phonies and fakers is to ASSUME THAT EVERY ELECTED OFFICIAL IN AMERICA IS GUILTY OF VOTING BIG GOVERNMENT – UNTIL OR UNLESS HE PROVES HIMSELF INNOCENT by showing you his voting record. By proving to you that he voted small government while in office.

“Are you willing to vote against every officeholder who refuses to show you their voting record?

“To reclaim the American Dream, we must vote out every Big Government officeholder in our federal, state, and local governments. Every one. Democrat AND Republican.

“But we must NOT stop there.

“We must vote FOR candidates who campaign for, promise, and vote to reduce and remove today’s Big Government social and economic programs – and GIVE BACK EVERY DOLLAR SAVED TO THE TAXPAYERS.

“We must vote for candidates who campaign for, promise, and vote to reduce and END government borrowing, reduce and remove government overspending and waste. Starting now. Small government candidates who will give back every dollar saved to the taxpayers.

“We must vote for small government candidates.

“We must vote FOR ballot initiatives that shrink Big Government.

“Candidates and ballot initiatives that cut or end taxes.

“Candidates and ballot initiatives that drive down today’s Big Government spending.

“Just protesting Big Government will never give us what we want. Voting against Big Government will. Voting FOR Small Government will.

“Every Election. Every time. No exceptions. No excuses.

“This is the ONLY way we can fulfill the promise of the Original Boston Tea Party.

“I’m Carla Howell. I head the Center For Small Government. We’re on your side. Please join us.

“Because ’small government is possible’.”

Posted by Paulie.