A call for libertarians to “invade” C-SPAN

C-SPAN has been good to the LP over the last 15 years. I became a LP member because C-SPAN televised the 1991 LP Convention. C-SPAN re-brodcasts a lot of federal and gubernatorial races across the country and many of them have LP candidates participating in debates.

C-SPAN hosts a show called “Washington Journal” The call-in portion of the show is usually an hour but they do have call-in numbers for Democrats, Republicans and Independents. I am usually a C-SPAN junkie in the last 2 weeks of the election season and has only heard 2 callers saying they are voting for LP candidates.

My mission, if you choose to accept it, for the last 5 days of this election is to invade the Independent line with Libertarians telling which Libertarian candidate Americans should be supporting. C-SPAN is watched by millions of people every day!

The segment starts at 7AM EST (I know it’s rather early by many Libertarian standards, but it’s worth the time.)

Let the invasion BEGIN!

posted Nov 3rd, 2006 by chrisbennett
  • John Doe

    According to the website, the call in phone numbers are…

    Support Independents:
    (202) 628-0205

  • http://goldenliberty.blogspot.com AB

    7AM? That’s 4AM here on the west coast. You have to be crazy. Well, good luck to those who are actually awake then.

  • http://www.mainstreamlibertarian.com Eric Dondero

    C-SPAN should not be your main target. Talk radio should be. I got on Hugh Hewitt’s program last week to talk about Bob Smither. Hewitt was pissed after I brought Smither up and said he could win.

    Took me an hour and a half on hold to get on the show.

    Other shows I’ve gotten on that were relatively easy:

    Michael Medved and Mike Gallagher

    I also suggest Tammy Bruce, Larry Elder, and Laura Ingraham.

  • Dave

    This is a little of topic, but would it not make more sense to call the Libertarian party the Liberty party. That way we would not get confused with liberals. Also members of the “Liberty” party would still be called Libertarians (probably), but the party would be called the Liberty party. Just a random thought. I heard that people think libertarian means super ultra liberal because people confuse liberty of liberal. Maybe people would still confuse it, but I think the big Libertarian word with twists confuses people who hear it for the first time and dont know what the word means right away. Not claiming this is a plan to change the name or that I would ever contact the national party. Just a though. Comments? Liberty party… Green party. Simple names.

  • disinter

    You folks have fun, I think my time will be used more wisely sleeping….

  • disinter

    This is a little of topic, but would it not make more sense to call the Libertarian party the Liberty party.

    Bleh. What bugs me is that Libertarian candidates are listed as (LIB) on Texas ballots… I am certain there are some people out there that think we are the Liberal party….

  • disinter

    Speaking of C-SPAN:

    Also, Bill Redpath, national chair of the Libertarian Party, will be on C-SPAN call-in Saturday, November 4, between 9 am and 9:30 am eastern time.

    LINK

  • John G4lt

    We can’t even invade Free Talk Live into giving air time to the LP, why do you think we can do so for C-Span?

  • DEAN BERRY

    EXPECT A BIGGER, LOUDER 9/11. The amerinazis won’t go without a fight. And, yes, they’re just the type of “people” who would engineer another “terrorist attack” so they can declare martial law and suspend all elections. You heard it here first, folks. http://deanberryministries.org/index3.html

  • Rance Muhamitz

    John G4lt:

    You’re insane! FTL gives the LP plenty of time! The word libertarian is probably mentioned at least once an hour. Call in, bring it up, Mark and Ian will talk about anything…

  • undercover_anarchist

    I wish I could honestly say I were voting for an LP candidate.

  • http://freestateproject.org Seth Cohn

    yeah, we all know C-Span viewers are the unwashed masses, and convincing _them_ is the key to winning.

    C-span viewers are the least of our concerns, and they DO see some libertarians in debates etc. Focus on something that people _watch_… like getting a Libertarian on Oprah, Jay, Dave, or John.

  • ianbernard

    We’ll cover interesting candidates and we certainly talk about Libertarianism on a nightly basis. Promoting the party specifically would be something I’d love to do. We have really great rates. ;)

  • paulie

    C-SPAN should not be your main target. Talk radio should be.

    Way off course. Hate radio reich-wingers are in a very anti-liberty and anti-libertarian mood right now, and besides, that’s where the LP’s been focusing for the last 15 years or so; that aging market (I believe I read 60-65 years old on average) is saturated.

    Try the alternative weekly newspapers, they’re great at doing feature stories. LTEs to the dailies are good. NPR generally provides more in-depth coverage of third parties than the corporate networks. Smaller and medium markets, you can get any form of media you want pretty much for the asking.

    If you have ad money, target audiences which are likely to be friendly, yet haven’t heard the message. For instance, polling shows blacks are more likely to be quadrant (not pure) libertarians than white Anglos, yet least likely to vote LP. Put ads on BET.

    Young people are less likely to be wedded to a party. Put ads on MTV2 and Comedy Central. ETC.

  • paulie

    This is a little of topic, but would it not make more sense to call the Libertarian party the Liberty party. That way we would not get confused with liberals.

    It would be a pain in the ass. For starters you would have to re-do California which means 80,000 voter registrations plus margin. Then there’s other states. If you’re going to do that, at least pick a name that makes it easier, like Independence.

    Also, why is it such a problem to be “confused” with Liberal? We are the true liberals and always have been.

    Modern “liberals” have simply decided to use conservative (statist) means to achieve liberal ends. Some confused “libertarians” wish to achieve conservative ends (preserving the power of the ruling class) through libertarian or quasi-libertarian means. Both are confused, and can’t achieve their objective that way.

    We might as well point out that consistent libertarians are the only true liberals.

  • IanC

    Paulie — I always find it amusing when people talk about libertarians “Being confused with” liberals.

    I have ALWAYS had *EXACTLY* the opposite problem.

    Maybe that’s just endemic to AZ?

  • http://www.lpalabama.org/blog/14 paulie

    No, I travel all the time and it’s pretty much everywhere.

    People think we are reich wingers.

    I’ve had many people be genuinely surprised when I told them we are against the drug war, against the military-industrial complex, against the “USA patriot” and Military Commission Enabling Acts, against torture and wiretapping, against secret prisons and foreign occupations, against corporate welfare and eminent domain abuse, in favor of gay marriage and gay rights, against a police state on the border with Mexico, and against a free pass for out of control jackbooted thug cops.

    Most people just assume we’d be on the direct opposite side of all these issues than we actually are because they think we are reich wingers. And that is hurting us tremendously with the people who SHOULD be supporting us, while at the same time bringing in an unwelcome element which DOES disagree with us on these issues yet considers themselves libertarians anyway.

  • http://myspace.com/phuturesound Derrick

    Paulie, I know this is wild and crazy, but I’m gonna agree with both you and Dondero in the same 24-hour period.

    We definitely do need to reach out to the left. I lived in a progressive town for a while, and had a good deal of success connecting with people on issues like the ones you list.

    So yeah, I think we should hit ‘em on both sides.

  • http://www.lpalabama.org/blog/14 paulie

    EXPECT A BIGGER, LOUDER 9/11. The amerinazis won’t go without a fight. And, yes, they’re just the type of “people” who would engineer another “terrorist attack” so they can declare martial law and suspend all elections. You heard it here first, folks.

    No, I’ve known about that for a while. In fact there’s an open contract to hire people for it, involving an EMP explosion using a nuclear device from the former Soviet stockpiles traded for Afghani heroin.

    So far no takers, apparently, or they’re just waiting for the right time to implement the plan.

    Geard this from the same people who accurately told me what would happen in Florida on election day 2000 before it happened.

    So yeah, I think we should hit ”˜em on both sides.

    We’ve already hit ‘em more than enough on the right wing side. Time for some balance.

  • http://www.lpalabama.org/blog/14 paulie
  • http://myspace.com/phuturesound Derrick

    I like Kubby but he’s way too single-issue for me. The drug war is an issue for me, but it’s not my main issue.

    I think we need someone with more range.

  • http://www.lpalabama.org/blog/14 paulie

    Kubby is not single issue.

    He had a comprehensive platform for Governor of California in 1998, covering numerous issues. He’ll have a comprehensive platform for the Presidential election in 2008.

    Nor is he going to only focus on one issue in his campaign.

  • Andy

    “People think we are reich wingers”

    I’ve run into just as many people who thought that libertarians were part of the left wing as I have people who thought that libertarians were part of the right wing.

    This is why I keeep saying that the Libertarian Party needs to be built into a brand that is recognized by the public as not being “left” or “right.”

  • http://www.thechoicecity.us/ Seth A.

    Like him or not, Kubby is already out there campaigning. He was here in Fort Collins, CO last night, and spoke to a group of about 30 college students and local Libertarians: LINK

    It’s not covered much in the article, but Kubby was actually at his best when he talked about issues other than marijuana. He gave superb answers to audience questions about Iraq, about entitlement programs, and about the future of the Libertarian Party.

    I’m not prepared to endorse him at this point, but Tom Knapp’s not wrong when he calls Kubby the current leader in the nomination race.

  • IanC

    Andy — it is my suspicion that those whom accuse LP’ers of being left-wing, to you, are themselves right-wing.

    I’ve repeatedly had a right-wing friend of mine (she doesn’t even *THINK* she’s right-wing… but she is. You should hear her go on about Israel.) talk about how libertarians are all “extremists” and how what this nation needs is a “moderate” party that is about keeping “extremist government factions” out of the system.

    Every time I correct her, it just becomes worse. And she never does follow up on the investigative material leads I give her.

    Some people just do NOT want to hear the truth. Ah, well.

  • Timothy West

    if he LP starts trying to broaden it’s support base beyond simple anti government knee jerking and starts tying into the issues the left are concerned about, like global corporate control and resource hogging of commonly held natural resources, it’s gonna get big.

    If it wants to stay where it is, a new party is going to start that will combine the best of both the greens and the LP without the negatives of either.

    With luck and effort and money, such a party would swamp the greens and the LP within a few years.

  • http://myspace.com/phuturesound Derrick

    From this article about Kubby, to which Seth A. linked:

    Kubby, who wasn’t affiliated with SAFER, on the other hand, portrayed cannabis as a wonder drug that can be the cure for several of the human body’s ills – from stress and nausea to high blood pressure and spasmodic problems. I want you to leave this room and understand that cannabis is not a medicine, but the medicine,” he told the crowd [...]

    Also, check the photo of Kubby in the article, and the mention that he smokes an oz each day.

    This is bullshit, and exactly what is wrong with the LP. If Kubby gets nominated I am out of here, and probably permanently.

    Supporting legal weed is one thing. Evangelizing it as a cure-all while running for President of the freaking U.S. is another.

    We need a candidate who would not be widely considered a fringe weirdo. Kubby would be.

  • Timothy West

    want you to leave this room and understand that cannabis is not a medicine, but the medicine,” he told the crowd

    once again, he takes a winner issue and takes it ONE STEP BEYOND! MADNESS!!!!

    http://2-tone.info/lgsa/onestepbeyond_uk_front.jpg

    Libs seem to be incapable of judging where mainstream non libertarian support is/is not for our issues. If pot is good for sick cancer folks, then it must be good for everyone. If a bit of something is good, then unlimited amounts of it is surely better.

  • http://myspace.com/phuturesound Derrick

    Libs seem to be incapable of judging where mainstream non libertarian support is/is not for our issues.

    It’s a result of intellectual inbreeding. Most Libertarians have dropped out of the mainstream political discourse, and are off in their own little world.

    If we are going to win elections, we’ll need to leave Galt’s Gulch and engage with the outside world. I know it sounds scary, but it’s necessary.

  • Timothy West

    Not scary to me. I’ve been makin Wes Benidict ill with my whining for some years now. I now wanna see if I can make Mike Nelson shit himself.

  • http://freelancify.com Nigel Watt

    Are you saying Wes Benedict doesn’t engage the outside world? Do you have any idea what they’re doing in Texas?

  • Timothy West

    I didnt say that – he (Wes)made reference to West Virginians whining in another thread. So hence the reference.

  • Macintologist

    I think the best way for Libertarian candidates to do well in races is to simultaneously outflank the Democrats on left-wing issues like the Patriot Act and the Iraq War, and outflank the Republican on right-wing issues like tax cuts and federal spending. Appeal to both groups on separate occasions, tell each of them what they want to hear, downplay what they don’t want to hear. Play politics.

  • http://freelancify.com Nigel Watt

    Tim West – Got it. I misinterpreted what you said, I guess.

  • Timothy West

    you took a part of what derrick said and then put my reference to Wes on top of it. Look at the comments. I didnt even say it! :D No harm.

  • Bill Flanigen

    People will believe what they want to believe. I know of people that think libertarians want to legalize child pornography. Tell them different, and, oh, you’re just lying to make the LP look better.

    Sigh.

  • http://www.sundwall4congress.org Eric Sundwall

    Multiple interesting candidates vying for a coveted third party role in the biggest poltical race on the planet. Why is this a bad thing ? And we gaze at our knave-ills . . .

    Run it like the bigshots. Create hype and promote it. Kubby or anybody has to earn it. Promote the pageant, accept the winner. Get a million votes. Go Team.

  • http://www.phillies2008.com George Phillies

    Which publicity….?

    ALL OF THE ABOVE. And all the ones you have not mentioned.

    My personal modest time investment in unusual-place-outreach is Daily Kos.

  • paulie

    Tim

    if he LP starts trying to broaden it’s support base beyond simple anti government knee jerking and starts tying into the issues the left are concerned about, like global corporate control and resource hogging of commonly held natural resources, it’s gonna get big.

    If it wants to stay where it is, a new party is going to start that will combine the best of both the greens and the LP without the negatives of either.

    We agree as far as this goes. However I belive such a party can be fully ZAP/NAP compatible.

    I still have some dim hope it will be the LP and even dimmer hope it could be the Greens. Starting a new party from scratch, building momentum and getting on the ballot is a lot more difficult than most people who suggest taking such a step have any clue of.

    One thing that would make it easier is clever naming, such as “Independence” which sounds like Independent to most people and would thus make it a lot easier to get and stay on the ballot.

  • paulie

    Also, check the photo of Kubby in the article, and the mention that he smokes an oz each day.

    Uh yeah. It’s saved his life for over 30 years from virtual certain death within one year.

    This is bullshit, and exactly what is wrong with the LP. If Kubby gets nominated I am out of here, and probably permanently.

    In which case, good riddance.

    Supporting legal weed is one thing. Evangelizing it as a cure-all while running for President of the freaking U.S. is another.

    It is in fact a wonderfully versatile natural medicine and has many important uses as a plant in industry.

    We need a candidate who would not be widely considered a fringe weirdo. Kubby would be.

    Baloney. Kubby would appeal to a lot more people than past LP candidates. Not everyone would like him, of course, but guess what? You’re not going to please everybody.

    “The only things in the middle of the road are yellow stripes and dead armadilloes”.

  • http://myspace.com/phuturesound Derrick

    Uh yeah. It’s saved his life for over 30 years from virtual certain death within one year.

    That’s good. I think it’s safe to say, though, that the average American does not want a President who is stoned through all of his waking hours, whether or not it’s from his medicine.

    It is in fact a wonderfully versatile natural medicine and has many important uses as a plant in industry.

    I believe that. I’m just saying that the evangelism of marijuana shouldn’t be a part of our presidential candidate’s platform.

    Kubby would appeal to a lot more people than past LP candidates.

    Whatever. Maybe he would appeal to a lot of people you and I know. But, we also need to appeal to Aunt Mildred, and Bubba at the auto shop, and Ted the insurance agent, and all sorts of other whitebread types who make up the vast majority. Among them, he’d be considered a total wackazoid.

    Nope, we need someone who will be taken more seriously by the general public.

  • Andy

    During the American Revolution only about 1/3 of the people supported the Revolution, and out of that group only a small percentage did the actual fighting. 1/3 of the population were Loyalists to the British Crown or Tories. The remaining 1/3 didn’t care one way or the other.

    I think that a similiar situation exsists today and will likely always exsist. There are a lot of people who will NEVER accept libertarian ideas and these people fall into two groups: 1) people who are control freaks; 2) people who are unwilling to think for themselves and prefer to be lead around like sheep. These two groups of people will NEVER be libertarians and they probably make up at least 1/3 of the population. This is something that we need to recognize so that we don’t waste as much time and resources on people that are a lost cause.

    The apathetic 1/3 just go with the flow and don’t want to be a part of any political struggles. For that reason they SHOULD support libertarians but

  • Andy

    they are too apathetic to get involved even at a minimal level.

    We need to focus on the 1/3 – or perhaps 1/4 or 1/5 – of the people who are actually reachable for the libertarian message. The independent thinkers, the entrepenuers, the artists, the rebels, these are the people who are most likely to be receptive to the libertarian message. To heck with all of the establishment types!

  • paulie

    That’s good. I think it’s safe to say, though, that the average American does not want a President who is stoned through all of his waking hours, whether or not it’s from his medicine.

    The average American is not going to vote LP. The number of Americans who find Kubby’s medical marijuana use and activism to be a positive is a lot higher than the number who vote for the LP.

    Whatever. Maybe he would appeal to a lot of people you and I know. But, we also need to appeal to Aunt Mildred, and Bubba at the auto shop, and Ted the insurance agent, and all sorts of other whitebread types who make up the vast majority. Among them, he’d be considered a total wackazoid.

    For starters, you assume it will be an automatic disqualifier. I doubt it would be for all of them. Also, most of them wouldn’t vote LP no matter what. The number who would at least consider it with Kubby on the ticket is higher than with him off.

  • paulie

    We need to focus on the 1/3 – or perhaps 1/4 or 1/5 – of the people who are actually reachable for the libertarian message. The independent thinkers, the entrepenuers, the artists, the rebels, these are the people who are most likely to be receptive to the libertarian message. To heck with all of the establishment types!

    Exactly.

  • paulie

    That’s good. I think it’s safe to say, though, that the average American does not want a President who is stoned through all of his waking hours, whether or not it’s from his medicine.

    I seriously doubt that anyone who smokes every day for years, in about the same amount, actually feels stoned anymore.

    Also, I guess I have more faith that when the question is asked and answered, a lot of people will understand it’s medically necessary. Medical marijuana is at around 80% approval among average Americans.

    Lastly, are people so unaware of candidates’ chances to think that we’ll actually win? People who vote for Kubby, or whoever else gets the LP nomination, will do so because they like the message; not because they are expecting a win. This also means that the LP candidate’s health or drug use is less important than a major party candidate’s.

    Besides, Kubby’s condition is long term stable, and he’s in good physical shape as an avid skier.

  • disinter

    I wish I could honestly say I were voting for an LP candidate.

    The Fallacy of Divided Government

    http://www.aei.org/publications/filter.all,pubID.25104/pub_detail.asp

  • disinter

    If it wants to stay where it is, a new party is going to start that will combine the best of both the greens and the LP without the negatives of either.

    With luck and effort and money, such a party would swamp the greens and the LP within a few years.

    Then why don’t you and the rest of the retard circus go start this “new party”?

  • disinter

    #42 and #43 – bingo!

  • paulie

    Comparing a 35.8-percent increase in total discretionary spending during the first five years of the Bush administration to a 8.2-percent decline during the first five years of the Clinton administration, a growing number of conservatives and libertarians have argued that divided government, and a Democratic Congress, would be the best way to constrain further growth in public spending.

    But this is only part of the picture.

    Investigations are another big part.

    It’s not a panacea. Just a start.

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/rozeff/rozeff115.html

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/block/block63.html