Libertarian Moses

Libertarian Moses

Sad, but true. Courtesy of Phil Maymin.

posted by disinter
  • Peter Borah

    Maymin for President ’08!

    Seriously, this is good stuff, best of luck to Mr. Maymin.

  • http://www.chuckmoulton.org/ Chuck Moulton

    He’ll only be 33 in ’08. Perhaps ’12.

  • http://www.chuckmoulton.org/ Chuck Moulton

    And not born in America. No presidential run for him.

  • Peter Borah

    Haha, good point. I’ll try to think before posting next time. ;)

    Still, an excellent candidate, we need more like him.

  • http://freelancify.com Nigel Watt

    Hey, if the Reps manage to get an amendment in so Ahnold can run, we can run Maymin.

  • undercover_anarchist

    Excellent candidate indeed, but how about looking down instead of up? How about a truly WINNABLE race for Mr. Maymin in ’08? Perhaps a state legislative office? Plus, at that level, his authoritarian immigration position cannot offend potential libertarian donors.

  • undercover_anarchist

    I think a good alternative to the term “major parties” is “government parties.”

    Example: In Michigan, anyone can run as a Democrat or Republican. These parties are essentially public institutions, organs of government. You sign up, pay the fee or supply the signatures, and you’re on the primary ballot as a D or an R. And then, ANYONE can vote in the primary (just not both), or in some states, ANYONE can register as that party and then vote (sometimes with time restrictions, but never can the party itself say “we don’t want him, he’s not a member”).

    Contrast that to the nomination process of the Libertarians or Greens or whoever. In all but a few states, the party itself decides who it nominates. There are no primaries. In this way, the Greens, Libertarians, etc. are LEGITIMATE, PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS – REAL POLITICAL PARTIES as opposed to the ORGANS OF GOVERNMENT masquarading as political parties known as Democrats and Republicans.

    Ever think of it that way?

  • I’ll ‘not’ be back…

    Nigel,

    Don’t even think it! It is better that a good candidate wait than to hope for that amendment.

    If you want the opposite of conservative, establishing that precedent is tantamount to treason. A foreign born individual with possible allegiance to a distant land holding the office of president is against the very founding of this nation.

  • disinter

    How about a truly WINNABLE race for Mr. Maymin in ”˜08? Perhaps a state legislative office?

    I will have to agree on that one…

  • paulie

    It’s not absolutely necessary to qualify to serve as President to run.

    For example, in 2004 the Peace and Freedom Party ran a lifer prison inmate, who presumably would not have been able to serve if elected. Also, I believe the Socialist Workers Party or one of the socialist parties ran a non-citizen for President or VP or both.

    On the other hand, these parties were not on enough ballots to even have a mathematical chance of winning, so it would probably look better for the LP to at least run someone who is qualified to serve if elected.

  • http://freelancify.com Nigel Watt

    #8 – I wasn’t suggesting that I would like that amendment, just saying it could happen.

  • paulie
  • Devious David

    Paulie, just because the LP candidate won’t win doesn’t mean that someone who is ineligible should be on the ticket. That’s a surefire way to give the opposition fodder for discrediting the whole thing. Of course, they’ll use whatever necessary means to do so, if they acknowledge the LP candidate at all.

  • http://myspace.com/phuturesound Derrick

    Ha. This column cracks me up.

  • Hey… yo… pauli(e)

    12: Ack! Put it back in the closet! ;-)

  • They’re on to you!

    Quoted from the link on 14:

    The final group consists young people. These people are typically aged 16-30 and range in knowledge from being really, really well informed to having just finished reading Anthem. They typically favor a much more reasonable and completely palatable (and maybe even workable) brand of Libertarianism, but they are usually too busy arguing with each other on the internet to be bothered to vote.

  • http://www.lpnm.org Joseph Knight

    “REAL POLITICAL PARTIES as opposed to the ORGANS OF GOVERNMENT masquarading as political parties…”

    I agree. I think ALL elections should be non-partisan and that political parties should have no “official” standing or “official” role in any election.

  • Michelle Shinghal

    From 14- I feel soooo left out. What about women who know that real feminism is about personal freedom and responsibility. That starts with doing the right things (and learning from the wrong), taking care of yourself (and your loved ones), nurturing your marriage (or recognizing if you are being abused and leaving). I think the Libertarian Party is a great political home for women and though our numbers are few, we are here.

  • Where are all the women at!?

    Couldn’t agree more Michelle

  • paulie

    Paulie, just because the LP candidate won’t win doesn’t mean that someone who is ineligible should be on the ticket. That’s a surefire way to give the opposition fodder for discrediting the whole thing. Of course, they’ll use whatever necessary means to do so, if they acknowledge the LP candidate at all.

    I agree. Did you read to the end of my comment? I was just pointing out it isn’t as firm a barrier as generally assumed.

    Where are all the women at!?

    True. We need more diversity. And, uh, other good stuff.