Smither Files for CD-22 Special Election

Smither files for CD-22 Special Election, is only candidate on Special and General Ballots

(AUSTIN) ““ Bob Smither, the Libertarian nominee for Congress from Texas District 22, announced today that he has filed as a candidate for the Special Election to fill the remainder of Tom DeLay’s term. Both the Special Election and the General Election will be held on November 7th.

Democrat Nick Lampson is Smither’s only opponent on the General Election ballot, and has opted against filing in the Special Election. Smither made the following statement:

“The unusual circumstances surrounding Congressional District 22 this year have created an election process that is ripe with confusion and unpredictable turns. When the Governor called the Special Election to coincide with Election Day I asked my campaign team what option would be the least disruptive and least confusing, while simultaneously conveying my commitment to the district.

I decided to file as a Libertarian in the Special Election. The other candidates for both elections have spent weeks maneuvering between different ballot strategies and taking positions that only serve to confuse the voters. The Special Election itself certainly adds to the electoral turmoil. The voters need to have a consistent viable choice for limited government though, and I will provide that choice. I accordingly decided that filing for this election, just as I did for the General, would be the least confusing and most consistent option in an otherwise convoluted process.

Over the past week many voters suggested that I consider filing as a Republican since I have indicated I will caucus with the GOP. I appreciate their support and reiterate that if elected I will be supporting the Republican choice for Speaker of the House. I decided to file as a Libertarian though because it is the party I belong to. A candidate must be honest with the voters, and it is important to me that when the voters see my name on the ballot they will know exactly who I am and what I offer to the residents of CD-22. I first took an interest in politics in 1964 as a Barry Goldwater volunteer, and I am proud to have many Republican supporters who share my commitment to smaller government, lower taxes, and individual freedom. In return I will honor my promise to caucus with the GOP. As a Libertarian I ask CD-22′s voters for their support as the only small government candidate on the ballot and the only viable choice to prevent the election of a liberal Democrat.”

Kevin Tunstall, Vice Chairman of the Texas Libertarian Party, made the following remarks.

“Bob Smither’s decision to file creates a point of consistency and stability in an otherwise tumultuous election. Bob is the only candidate who will appear on both CD 22 ballots, and the only candidate who can beat liberal Democrat Nick Lampson.

As Election Day nears the experts and voters alike are coming to the realization that Bob Smither is the only candidate standing in the way of the Democrats, and possibly even a Nancy Pelosi speakership. Last Week Congressional Quarterlyredesignated CD-22 as a likely Democratic pickup. They gave one caveat: ‘Smither may present a more viable choice to the traditionally conservative voters of our district.’ “

Smither has been endorsed by former GOP Congressman Bob Barr (R-GA), who is best known for leading the impeachment of Bill Clinton. His candidacy has gained nationwide media attention as the only viable chance that conservative voters in CD-22 have at defeating liberal Democrat Nick Lampson.

The Experts Agree: Bob Smither is our the best chance to beat liberal Nick Lampson

“[T]he Libertarian Party nominee Bob Smither presents a much easier option for voters who are unfamiliar with the write-in effort or do not want to vote for Sekula-Gibbs. Smither has said that, if elected, he would organizationally align with the Republicans and back the re- election of Illinois Republican J. Dennis Hastert as Speaker. Smither may present a more viable choice in his own right than most alternative party candidates. He has drawn attention and praise locally for his efforts on behalf of missing children: He co-founded the Laura Recovery Center “” an organization based in his hometown of Friendswood, Texas, that aids in the search for and return of missing children “” that is named in tribute to Smither’s daughter Laura, who was abducted and killed in 1997 at the age of 12.” ““ Congressional Quarterly, 8/28/06

“Libertarian Bob Smither, an electrical engineer who is well known through his work with a child-welfare foundation, is the only name other than Mr. Lampson’s on the ballot and he has announced that if elected he will vote for a Republican for House Speaker. That could be meaningful if Republicans lose enough House seats this fall that control of the House hinges on a single seat. Why not throw their backing behind Mr.
Smither, much as moderate Democrats in Connecticut are supporting Joe Lieberman??” ““ Wall Street Journal “Political Diary,” 8/18/06

“Republicans must focus solely on one issue. Does a write in campaign have a chance of success? I don’t believe that it does, and therefore we should consider supporting Bob Smither. Nick Lampson could be the one vote that elects Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the U. S. House of Representatives. Bob Smither will vote for a Republican Speaker.” ““ Jerry Patterson, former Republican State Senator and current Texas Land Commissioner

“With the departure of Tom DeLay, it is important to do everything we can to ensure the 22d District continues to be represented by a conservative. Bob Smither is that conservative. Bob is a genuine fiscal conservative with a firm desire to see a return to constitutionally- limited government as intended by our Founding Fathers. Write-in campaigns rarely succeed, and that is also why I ask that you join me in supporting Bob Smither as the only candidate who can defeat the liberal Nick Lampson.” ““ Bob Barr, former Republican Congressman from Georgia

[NOTE: The preceding is a press release, reproduced in it's entirety, from the Smither Campaign]

posted by disinter
  • Timothy West

    I gave some the other day, not much, but better than nothing. I’ll hit him again in a week or so.

    http://www.smither4congress.com/donate.php

  • Pingback: Mike Linksvayer » Experts agree to bark like dogs

  • http://www.originaldrugmanualforkids.com JT Barrie

    I read through the piece on website and have yet to find anything that indicates that smithers is REALLY a Libertarian – rather than a pro choice Republican like Neil Boorst. Anyone who is for mass incarceration scams like the Controlled Substances Act, military interventionism, big police and military budgets, and shredding all but the 2nd amendment for national security and public safety is NOT a Libertarian – despite loud pronouncements of such by lapdog media people.

    Texans should know what a Libertarian sounds like: they have Ron Paul from the Houston burbs. That guy gave a rousing speech that made Democrats look like the wimps they truly are in denouncing GW’s “War on Islamofacism”. Ron Paul knows where the real fascists live: 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
    Where does Smithers stand?

  • http://www.originaldrugmanualforkids.com JT Barrie

    I read through the piece on website and have yet to find anything that indicates that smithers is REALLY a Libertarian – rather than a pro choice Republican like Neil Boorst. The lapdog media routinely call authoritarian HUGE government Republican candidates “libertarian” due to their stance on only one issue: abortion rights.

    Texans should know what a Libertarian sounds like: they have Ron Paul from the Houston burbs. He stands firmly against military spending binges and a drug war without standards. That guy gave a rousing speech that made Democrats look like the wimps they truly are in denouncing GW’s “War on Islamofacism”. Ron Paul knows where the real fascists live: 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
    Where does Smithers stand?

  • Timothy West

    I will go to Washington with a goal of making our central government smaller and less destructive, and I will never vote for a spending bill whose funded program is not clearly authorized by our Constitution.

    Sounds pretty Ron Paul-like to me. What, you think he’s a dangerous plant put here by Neil Boortz to decieve you?

    It’s amazing how the LP is being pummeled by infiltrators from the Democrats, the Boorsters, the Republicans, the Socialists, the Neo-Cons, Pro Life, Pro Choice, The Sinister Reformers….. Seems like EVERYBODY wants to be libertarian these days!

  • http://freelancify.com Nigel Watt

    He does say he opposes the War on Drugs. He’s clearly a libertarian as well as a Libertarian.

  • Devious David

    His own statement, as Tim West put it would seem to indicate that Smither would be voting “No” an awful lot. So, maybe he’s not “Dr. No”, but he can be “Mr. No”. The Fairtax is a pretty nasty thing, but his insistence upon Constitutional Integrity as he puts it sure does limit what he would/could do.

    Although, the FairTax is in direct opposition to that. Strangely all FairTaxers seem to make that oversight but make the insistence that the 15th Amendment would have to be abolished. If that did happen, then what enumerated power of the Constitution does the FairTax fall under? I keep getting the message from FairTaxers that the Constitution is important, but it’s not important.

  • http://360.yahoo.com/pong_god Robert Mayer

    Bob Smither has often stated that he wants to portray himself as “Ron Paul” style candidate. His (soft) Fair Tax support notwithstanding, Smither is definitely a libertarian. It would great to add a “Mr. No” to the halls of Congress, and even better if we also get a “Dr. Hell No!” in Michael Badnarik.

    DD, I think that is the 16th Amendment to which you were referring regarding the Fair Taxers.

  • Stuart Richards

    The FairTax plays well in the district… so let him campaign on it. Changing the taxation system is such a fucking third rail that it’s not like he’ll ever be able to do anything with it.

  • http://www.ilovephysics.com Chris Moore

    I can’t find the following information on Mr. Smither’s site, and any time someone else has broached the subject, they have received threatening letters from Mr. Tunstall, yet no reply:

    What is Mr. Smither’s stand on the Iraq War and foreign policy in general? I can look past his support of the FairTax, but I NEED to know his foreign policy principles before sending money.

  • Andy

    It’s too bad that another Libertarian candidate, say Michael Badnarik, is not in this district. I’m willing to agree to disagree with other Libertarian Party members in certain instances, but I’m really uncomfortable with anyone who promotes this “Fair Tax” sham.

    I’m not sure where Smithers stands on the war in Iraq, but if he supports it that is a definite deal breaker for me. If he does not support it then he should be more vocal about it because that is one of the biggest issues facing us right now.

  • Devious David

    Yes, thank you for the correction, Robert. 16th Amendment.

    I agree completely on the strategy of the FairTax as a campaign tool. The guy likes the stupid thing – a lot of people do, so let him run with it. BTW. Why hasn’t Smither been on BOORTZ yet? I am still waiting for him to be on BOORTZ. I think I might have mentioned before, my strong sentiment that Smither should be on BOORTZ. BOORTZ might do all kinds of crazy stuff to help Smither. Maybe a FairTax rally in the district or something. Even BOORTZ would get some cheap pandering and promotion for himself in such a case. Get the guy on fricking BOORTZ.

  • Andy

    If the “Fair Tax” is stupid, which I believe that it is (and I could add evil to that), then why should anyone running as a Libertarian support it? What other stupid ideas do you think that Libertarian Party candidates should include in their campaign platforms? How about supporting the war in Iraq? How about supporting the Patriot Act? Those are really stupid ideas so LP candidates could get lots of votes with those!

    Boortz is such a phoney. I wonder if he’s on the Republican payroll. How about book Smithers on The Alex Jones Show (www.infowars.com) so Alex can tear him a new @$$#0!# over his support of the “Fair Tax” scheme? Michael Badnarik has been on The Alex Jones Show several times (opf course Michael and Alex have a lot of respect for eachother), so why not Bob Smithers?

  • http://360.yahoo.com/pong_god Robert Mayer

    Chris & Andy,

    I cannot speak directly for Bob Smither, but I would venture a guess that his stance on the Iraq War is probably similar to that of Ron Paul. While Dr. Paul has been an outspoken critic of the Iraq War from the outset, I suspect that Smither is probably being low key on this issue due to its divisive nature. The reality is that he needs to woo a majority of the Republican voters in his district to have any chance of winning and I suspect he feels that making reduced federal spending, lower taxes, and Constitutional compliance his marquee issues is his best strategy for achieving that goal.

    I’ll try to see if I can gather some more specific information on his Iraq War views.

  • http://www.ilovephysics.com Chris Moore

    “The reality is that he needs to woo a majority of the Republican voters …”

    He must also woo libertarian donors.

    If he doesn’t intend to run aggressively on an anti-war platform, then that is fine. But he MUST have a position. I would normally assume he would support a non-interventionist foreign policy, but I’ve seen a lot of “libertarians” recently pushing for War on Islam.

    I’m also worried by Mr. Tunstall (TX vice-chair) sending threatening emails to those who have asked about Mr. Smither’s foreign policy views.

  • Andy

    Bob Smithers’ support of the “Fair Tax” is enough to make me leary about him.

    What’s Offensive In The Boortz Fair Tax Book
    http://www.lewrockwell.com/cox/cox8.html

    I’m not an “all or nothing” or “throw the baby out with the bath water” type of person. I can still support people who I don’t agree with 100% on everything. However, I just think that this “Fair Tax” proposal is a really, really bad idea for libertarians to get behind. This thing is a wolf in sheep’s clothing or a Trojan Horse.

  • http://360.yahoo.com/pong_god Robert Mayer

    Andy, I totally agree with you about the dangers of the Fair Tax. However, from my communications with Bob Smither, I think it would be fair to say that his support for the Fair Tax is based on 1) the current system of taxation is a horrific mess, and 2) the Fair Tax is the best alternative proposition that he’s come across thus far.

    In any case, I’m convinced that the Fair Tax is a non-issue in that I don’t see it gaining any serious traction in Congress in the foreseeable future.

  • http://360.yahoo.com/pong_god Robert Mayer

    Chris, I know Mr. Tunstall personally and find the idea of him sending threatening emails to people simply for asking about Smither’s stance on the Iraq War a bit hard to fathom. Perhaps there’s more to these requests for info than you’ve elaborated on.

  • George Whitfield

    Hello Chris and Other Commenters,
    Look on the Resources page of Bob Smither’s website and along with “Our Constitution” he provides “Libertarian Positions” with this description:
    “In today’s political climate Libertarian positions occupy the rational middle ground between the polarized positions of the two established parties. Here is a summary of Libertarian positions contrasted with those from the Right and the Left.” Click on “summary” and you will find a insightful chart that I think the Washington state Libertarian Party originally published. Bob Smither has adapted it as a handout for his campaign and his contact information is listed. In the chart it contrasts the position held by the Left of “UN Led US Military Actions” with the position held by the Right of “Military Adventurism (Nation Building) with that held by Libertarians: “Non-Interventionist Foreign Policy and a Robust National Defense.” I think this clearly shows that Mr. Smither does not favor the US war in Iraq.

  • Bill

    I am a resident of Texas CD22 and intend to vote for Mr. Smither (twice). I find it interesting that the merits and worthiness of his candidacy are more widely accepted across the political spectrum within his own district, than within his own party. I consider myself a little “l” Democrat and believe that there is no other option amongst the candidates in this election. We cannot wait for the “perfect” candidates, we need to begin to change Congress now with candidates who move us closer to true freedom and liberty.

  • http://www.stateofworldliberty.org Nick Wilson

    But…I…like…the FairTax. I think it is potentially the best political idea in a long time. It appeals to conservatives who want to get rid of the income tax while, more importantly, is the best way to get liberals to support our economic policies. Seriously, every single liberal I have ever talked to thinks it is the best idea they have ever heard of. By enabling the poorest members of society actually make money, we could actually get rid of welfare and the income tax simultaneously, and that alone should get many libertarians behind it. It also encourages recycling and reusing secondhand goods, so it is good for the environment. More than that, as people realize that by reducing spending they can cut their tax burden, we will see the government forced to shrink itself to the barest essentials. Those who have megamansions and drive big hummers will be hit the hardest, but then they are also the ones who proportionally would require the most gov’t protection for their property.

  • http://www.stateofworldliberty.org Nick Wilson

    But then, I’m more sympathetic to classical liberalism than purist libertarianism. I really think the left is easier to reach than the right. I would say I sympathize with the left more in their progressivism, egalitarianism and environmentalism, although just about every policy they have ever done since socialism became the status quo has been completely counterproductive to these liberal ends, thanks to a complete lack of understanding of economics.

    I hope Smithers wins – he’s thankfully not an LP hardliner. The “I’ll caucus with the Republicans” appears a desperate ploy (and I doubt anyone in the district is fooled per se.) But if it works at getting a Libertarian elected to national office, then great. I will consider it another reformist/moderate victory. But if a Tom Delay-type is nominated to be the next Speaker, I could no longer support him, as that would be pure abdication of principle for political purposes. See, even “unprincipled” moderates can draw principled lines.

  • http://www.stateofworldliberty.org Nick Wilson

    Oh yeah…and don’t forget anti-corporatism – someday I will write a book on how the rise of socialism has parallelled the rise of corporate power, and thus how the left have committed suicide via centralized government.

  • http://freelancify.com Nigel Watt

    Wait, how is the “I’ll caucus with the Republicans” a desperate ploy? I’d rather Hastert be speaker than Nancy Pelosi too.

  • Pingback: A Second Hand Conjecture » Smither Campaign Update

  • paulie

    I’d prefer Pelosi.

    The unfair tax is very dangerous. It puts the whole country on the dole, makes tax resistance a lot harder, does NOT get rid of the IRS (someone has to collect taxes – duh), does NOT shrink government, makes it a lot more attractive to be an employee as opposed to an entrepreneur, and in actual (rather than theoretical) implementation would end up with both a sales tax AND an income tax. That’s the hidden motive behind it – a massive expansion of government to fund more wars abroad and more invasions of privacy and a bigger prison-industrial complex at home.

    It could definitely gain tracion as the neocons invade more countries and the regime puts together more fake terrorist attacks on the homeland.

    BTW I saw a sticker today that says Bush=Guts. It’s been puzzling me all day if this is true, does Cheny=Sphincter, or Rumsfeld?

  • http://360.yahoo.com/pong_god Robert Mayer

    Bush = Nuts, perhaps.

  • http://www.reformthelp.org Nick Wilson

    Nigel,

    Note I said a “Tom Delay type” which would fall squarely in the authoritarian big government department. I’d prefer neither Hastert or Pelosi – a Ron Paul or a Jeb Hensarling would be much better. Actually, I’d just rather have someone from the party opposite the party controlling the Senate so they can kill off each others’ excess via partisanship.

    Paulie,

    I’ve heard them all before and I still don’t buy them. It’s not nationwide welfare, it’s a rebate of your sales tax costs. It can be collected via states, which is the constitutional form of taxation. It taxes big corporations with the most consumption much harder than small businesses and sole proprietorships. Sales tax infrastructure is already in place. Every person I have ever met who advocates the FairTax also advocates the complete revocation of the income tax. It reminds you that you are sending money to the government every time you buy something. Post a link to a counterargument with substance, please.

  • Andy
  • Andy

    There Is No Such Thing As A Fair Tax
    http://www.mises.org/story/1975

  • http://www.ilovephysics.com Chris Moore

    “It taxes big corporations with the most consumption much harder than small businesses and sole proprietorships”

    No it doesn’t. In fact, big corporations would be in a better position to actually realize a (relatively) significant reduction in compliance costs. And with the elimination of capital gains taxes, you could see even more money flowing into the stock market, which means more capital for big corporations.

    “Sales tax infrastructure is already in place.”

    Not in 5 states.

  • Andy

    As much as I’d love to see a libertarian elected to Congress under the Libertarian Party banner (there’s Ron Paul but he’s under the Republican label), I’m really uncomfortable with this Bob Smithers guy becuase of his support of the Fair Tax. I suspect that there’s going to be a big move to get this atrocity passed and I don’t want to see the “Libertarian” label attached to it because it is NOT a libertarian proposal.

    I’m not against gradualist proposals if they actually lead towards liberty, such as legalizing marijauna for medicinal use, but the Fair Tax does NOT lead towards more liberty. The Fair Tax does nothing to reduce the size of government. It does nothing to reduce government spending. It does not shut down the Federal Reserve and stop fiat currency. All it does is change the method of extortion.

    The Fair Tax could end up making things worse because it will be harder to avoid than the income tax.

  • Andy

    Neal Boorzt says: “the goal of AFFT was to develop a system that would raise the same amount of revenue for the government as our current income tax system, but which would be less intrusive, abusive, coercive, and corrosive.”

    Why would anyone who claims to be a Libertarian endorse a new tax plan that would raise the same amount of revenue as our current income tax system? I thought that Libertarians wanted to REDUCE government revenue.

    How would the Fair Tax be “less intrusive, abusive, coercive, and corrosive”? Everytime I purchase something I’d have to pay it. What if I refused to pay it, or what if a business refuses to collect it? People will be FORCED to pay the tax by the government, just as they are now with the income tax.

    I prefer what Harry Browne said, abolish the income tax and replace it with nothing.

  • disinter

    Houston blog “Isolated Desolation” interviews Smither:

    http://isodes.blogspot.com/2006/08/10-questions-with-bob-smither.html

  • disinter
  • Timothy West

    His answer to number 10 was very weak. Anyone so minded would savage him. He needs to make a clearer case that entitlement programs designed to work in the 1930′s cannot hope to be reformed as they are becuase they are outdated in 2006 America., and that by not addressing his problem head on, Republicans an Democrats are harming the country. You must make your morality stance more powerful than the oppositions.

    Would you still drive a Model T in a era of modern cars? We can do better, and we have nothing to lose by proposing same, unlike the D’s or R’s. We can take the high ground on entitlements.

  • http://www.tom-hanna.org Tom Hanna

    Regarding the Fair Tax, opponent Andy actually makes the major argument for it:
    “How would the Fair Tax be “less intrusive, abusive, coercive, and corrosive”? Everytime I purchase something I’d have to pay it.”

    It makes the full cost of government obvious to every voter/taxpayer with every trip to the grocery store, convenience store or Wal-Mart. Lots of people don’t realize the full cost of government because of the current system. Hell, many people think of their tax refund as free money from the government and, unfortunately, these people are allowed the same vote as those who understand the truth. The Fair Tax itself doesn’t fix the problem of high taxation, but it does put the issue squarely in front of every voter every time they buy something new.

    It also gives a backdoor opportunity for armchair anarchists like myself to opt out of taxation without living in a unabomber style cabin by simply buying everything used rather than new, but that’s a side benefit.

  • http://www.tom-hanna.org Tom Hanna

    And, for what it’s worth, Andy was mistaken. He should have said “Everytime I purchase something NEW I’d have to pay it.”

  • paulie

    It’s not nationwide welfare, it’s a rebate of your sales tax costs.

    Everyone gets a government check, and you can bet they will view it as getting money from the government, much as they see “refunds” now. The tax will be presumed just like the withholding; the check would be seen as a benefit.

    It can be collected via states, which is the constitutional form of taxation.

    By what right does the fed gov require it of states?

    It taxes big corporations with the most consumption much harder than small businesses and sole proprietorships.

    If you can choose between being a corporate employee and not having to fill out tax forms, or starting your own business, which are you more likely to do?

  • paulie

    Every person I have ever met who advocates the FairTax also advocates the complete revocation of the income tax.

    Irrelevant. It is much easier to implement a new tax than repeal an old one. Even if it is possible to repeal the income tax temporarily, it would undoubtably be back at the first “emergency” – and you can bet one would be forthcoming shortly. There’s a difference between proposals and actual implementation, which involves compromise. The most likely bipartisan compromise is one in the direction of more government – ie both a sales tax and an income tax.

    While rank and file sales tax supporters are tricked by promises of doing away with the income tax, the hidden agenda is to have both to create more regime revenue for more wars and more tyranny, which the income tax is becoming inadequate for – especially since more people are stopping their tribute payments. The sales tax is harder to resist, which is one of the real reasons behind it.

  • paulie

    Post a link to a counterargument with substance, please.

    These should get you started

    Against the FairTax Proposal by Jim Cox
    http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig4/cox4.html

    What’s Offensive in the Boortz FairTax Book
    http://www.lewrockwell.com/cox/cox8.html

    The Crackpot FairTax Trade
    http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig4/cox6.html

  • paulie

    Also, Andy already posted links (see comments 27 and 28). What do you find non-substantive?

  • paulie

    It also gives a backdoor opportunity for armchair anarchists like myself to opt out of taxation without living in a unabomber style cabin by simply buying everything used rather than new, but that’s a side benefit.

    I can see this now. Used condoms? Used toothpaste? Used mouthwash? Used underwear? The possibilities are thrilling.
    You’re going to buy food used? Well, I guess a billion flies can’t be wrong….

  • paulie

    It makes the full cost of government obvious to every voter/taxpayer with every trip to the grocery store, convenience store or Wal-Mart. Lots of people don’t realize the full cost of government because of the current system. Hell, many people think of their tax refund as free money from the government and, unfortunately, these people are allowed the same vote as those who understand the truth.

    http://www.mises.org/story/1975
    Problem #1:The FairTax hides the amount of sales tax being paid. Boortz explains how “the FairTax was designed as what’s called an ‘inclusive’ tax””that is, the tax is included in the list price of the product.” He reasons that “since our current income taxes are figured on an inclusive basis””that is, they are taken out of our paychecks, not added to them””it was decided to handle the sales tax in exactly the same manner.”

  • http://360.yahoo.com/pong_god Robert Mayer

    Paulie, you forgot used toilet paper!

    The link Andy posted in #28, Mr. Vance’s article, is probably the best I’ve read arguing against the Fair Tax. Another thing to consider is that the proposal, as presented by the Fair Taxers, is an absolute BEST CASE scenario. As we all know, federal government programs NEVER turn out to be as good as advertised. And if this proposal doesn’t even come with the caveat of repealing the 16th Amendment, then it’s a virtual certainty that we’ll end up with both the federal income tax AND federal sales tax. Consequently, we’ll end up less free.

  • John Dieter

    30% Government Sales tax is a 30% prohibition on buying and selling. They smuggle dope from Mexico for 30% profits, what makes you sales tax supporters think they wont be smuggling toilet paper too? And selling it out of their garages? And what will the Fed do to stop these “Tax Cheats”?

  • John Dieter

    ok I’ll tell you. They will require a Federal sales tax number be presented before you can buy or sell anything. (Kroger card anyone?) They will require every purchase or sale of every thing (new OR used) be reported on tax forms (or you wont get your “rebate”). If they notice anyone stops buying toilet paper, that person will be arrested for being a “tax cheat” and questioned as to “where are you getting your toilet paper!” and if YOU dont bust the neighbor YOU are buying smuggled toilet paper from YOU wont get your “rebate” ever again.

  • http://www.ilovephysics.com Chris Moore

    Yes, John, but the agency doing all of that will not be called the “IRS”. So government will have to be less intrusive.

    And I really did find the cure for diabetes in Kevin Trudeau’s “Natural Cures” book … and the “Magic Bullet” is the best blender ever … and that GT Xpress waffle-maker I keep seeing on TV must be the greatest cooking appliance ever … and I can receive thousand dollar checks every week sitting on my ass doing nothing … and I can buy real estate for literally less than $200 and resell within days for hundreds of thousands.

    I really think Boortz should be doing infomercials. He is the master of product puffery.

  • Andy

    “They will require a Federal sales tax number be presented before you can buy or sell anything.”

    Sounds like the Bilical “Mark Of The Beast” to me.

  • IanC

    … why do the Rapture-ites always have to raise their heads? It saddens a soul. ($50 goes to the first person who can quote to me where in the KJ Bible the word “rapture” is used.)

    The number 666 (alternatively in the Dead Sea Scrolls as 606) is the qabbalistic numerological value of the name Nero (the number value changes on the way you spell Nero.) In his day, Nero was refered to as “The Beast.”

    “The Beast *IS* a man, and his number is 666.”

    … that has NOT ONE IOTA of a thing to do with the modern world, people. Find something realistic to be afraid of, please. Reality has enough boogey-men to offer to keep us from having to start inventing them to get our quota.

    For the record, yes; I am an atheist.

  • http://www.ilovephysics.com Chris Moore

    “Find something realistic to be afraid of, please.”

    There are plenty of realistic reasons to think the FairTax to be really bad policy.

  • IanC

    Chris Moore — that’s fine and dandy. But comparing it to rapture mythology ain’t one of them.

    I’m a strange one on this subject; I don’t really care about it; to me the FairTax thing is a minor third-rail at best. You can boonswoggle people all you want with how the taxes are raised; I don’t give a damn.

    I care about how effectively those dollars are spent, what *upon* — we all here agree that too much money is being drawn from our pockets; so does Mr. Smither. So he’s a bit misguided or deluded? Who gives a damn? Elsewise he’s on the money, by and large.

    Or at the very least he’s a *damned* sight closer to it than anybody else likely to wind up with the reins to the nation. We gotta start *SOMEWHERE,* right?

    Either way; there’s no way in hell he’s going to get the FairTax implemented anytime soon. So let’s first GET HIM INTO OFFICE … and *THEN* start bombarding him with letters against the FairTax if he really starts pushing it.

    Know what I mean?

  • andrew

    There is no perfect candidate. That would mean a person you agree with 100% on all issues.
    Even though Libertarians are guided by principals, and we all have the same end-game in mind, every single one of us will have a different theory as to how it is reached.
    It does not matter to me if he wants to gradually elimate, step down, rearrange or how he wants to get rid of the taxes. Just tha t he does.
    A huge step in doing so would be getting income tax taken out of the Constitution – which he is for. He will not succeed, but he at least has a plan.
    He signed the pledge, that to me is PROOF POSITIVE that he is against the war, if it is not – then why do we have the pledge?

  • Timothy West

    yes, why? The pledge is pure shit.

    The idea that someone only becomes a libertarian becuase they sign a pledge writes off anyone that might agree with you otherwise on 90% of your issues. Political parties dont need loyalty oaths. Only secret societys and restricted clubs do that. It’s pretty stupid otherwise. You want as many people as you cn get into a political party.

    it doesnt DO anything. Anyone that wants to decieve can do so, and anyone too dumb to understand what it really means wont know what they signed.

    It’s useless. Get Rid of it.

  • http://www.ilovephysics.com Chris Moore

    Some people vote for and contribute to the campaigns of individual candidates, not parties. I am one of those people. I cannot legally vote for Smither, but I can contribute to his campaign. As I’ve said, Smither’s stance on the FairTax is wrong, but it is not that big a deal to me. His foreign policy position does matter to me very much, and before I can support him monetarialy, I need to know what it is.

    Some libertarians may find the FairTax so disgusting that they cannot in good conscience vote for or support someone who promotes it. That is their business.

    And Tim is right. The pledge doesn’t mean anything. There are several Libertarians (who signed the pledge) running for congress this cycle that openly support the Iraq War and War on Islam in general. That is why I have to ask where Smither stands.

  • IanC

    Tim West — it’s also completely ineffectual, on an ideological level. I for one read it to mean that I won’t overthrow the government or society at large with firepower. Without a legal aide or guide to oversee and explain the signing, it means whatever the reader *reads into it.* And that’s what I read.

    Elimination of the pledge is a third-rail. Getting rid of it certainly wouldn’t suddenly expand LP membership to any degree. And shocker — further where we disagree! — Andrew’s statement only meant that he treats the signing of (granted, *his version of*) the pledge is a *positive proof.*

    That doesn’t imply that failure to have signed is a negative proof.

    Ahh, well. The whole point is: Support Smithers already! He may be “misguided” … but he is a ‘REAL’ Libertarian, with a shot at CONGRESS.

    Suck it up and help him out, people!!

  • Timothy West

    I’ve donated once, I will again.

    I’ve had too many people tell me that the pledge was the exact reason they were not party supporters to think that getting rid of it would not have a positive effect. It wont make the LP major league, but no ONE thing will, save about 100 million dollars. That would.

    IanC – thats what I thought I was signing.

    The Pledge is a dishonest instrument. It relies on a verbal sleight of hand. To that end, it’s a unprincipled instrument used by unprincipled people to mask their true intentions and positions. Real principled people dont have to hide their positions behind such tools. They state them openly. The idea that only pledge takers are “principled” libertarians makes me sick, which sucks becuse I’m already sick. I dont need anymore fucking big L Libertarian puke to make it worse.

    sorry -my chemo and the effects (barfing, mood swings) is making me a real irritable nasty confrontational bastard today.

  • paulie

    Paulie, you forgot used toilet paper!

    Silly me. At some of the better motels, they now charge a deposit on it – per square.

    ”¦ why do the Rapture-ites always have to raise their heads? It saddens a soul.

    While not a Rapture-ite or Biblical literalist, I do find a lot of ominous parallels between corporations’ and the government’s increaing use of SS numbers, interlinked databases, REAL ID, surveillance cameras, checkpoints, RFID chips and implants, etc., with the Revelations account of the mark of the beast.

    It also reminds me of the SS number in Nazi Germany, a literal tattoo in the death camps. With today’s technology, it’s an electronic tattoo, but government plans for the roundup have already been drawn,
    http://www.oilempire.us/redalert.html

    Can the mass slaughter of a people who permit themselves to be treated as cattle be far behind?
    http://educate-yourself.org/nwo/nwopopcontrol.shtml

  • paulie

    Why hasn’t Smither been on BOORTZ yet? I am still waiting for him to be on BOORTZ. I think I might have mentioned before, my strong sentiment that Smither should be on BOORTZ.

  • paulie
  • paulie

    Why hasn’t Smither been on BOORTZ yet? I am still waiting for him to be on BOORTZ. I think I might have mentioned before, my strong sentiment that Smither should be on BOORTZ.

  • paulie

    BOORTZ might do all kinds of crazy stuff to help Smither. Maybe a FairTax rally in the district or something. Even BOORTZ would get some cheap pandering and promotion for himself in such a case. Get the guy on fricking BOORTZ.

  • Wes P

    In case you haven’t figured it out, paulie’s links explain why we don’t want Smither on Boortz.

  • Andy

    “”¦ why do the Rapture-ites always have to raise their heads? It saddens a soul. ($50 goes to the first person who can quote to me where in the KJ Bible the word “rapture” is used.)

    The number 666 (alternatively in the Dead Sea Scrolls as 606) is the qabbalistic numerological value of the name Nero (the number value changes on the way you spell Nero.) In his day, Nero was refered to as “The Beast.”

    “The Beast *IS* a man, and his number is 666.”

    ”¦ that has NOT ONE IOTA of a thing to do with the modern world, people. Find something realistic to be afraid of, please. Reality has enough boogey-men to offer to keep us from having to start inventing them to get our quota.

    For the record, yes; I am an atheist.”

    Why do you ASSUME that I’m religious. I’m actually NOT religious. I was just making the comment that the government ID number to buy and sell sounds like the Mark Of The Beast. Does it not sound like this? I NEVER said that I believed in or advocated any organized

  • Andy

    religion. Stop jumping to conclusions!

  • Andy

    “A huge step in doing so would be getting income tax taken out of the Constitution – which he is for. He will not succeed, but he at least has a plan.”

    Getting rid of the income tax and replacing it with a national sales tax – aka The Fair Tax – is like taking one step forward and then taking one step back. All they’d be doing is replacing something bad with something that is just as bad, or maybe even worse.

    There is a mountain of evidence that the income tax is a complete fraud. Read about by clicking on the links below.

    http://www.tax-freedom.com/

    http://www.givemeliberty.org/

  • paulie

    In case you haven’t figured it out, paulie’s links explain why we don’t want Smither on Boortz.

    I don’t know whether Smither agrees with Boortz on the war and domestic surveillance or not. I do know they agree about the “fair tax” (no step forward and several steps back). My links point out that Boortz is a scumbag. Beyond that, it’s for Smither to figure out whether this is what he wants to be associated with. I sure hope that if in fact he has a real chance of getting elected to Congress that he stays far away from Boortz.

  • Andy

    I’d like to go on Neal Boortz’s radio show so that I could debate him and expose him as a fraud.

  • matt

    Alex Jones (crackpot) is seen as being able to help us get libertarians in office and Boortz is seen as a liability. And we wonder why we can’t get into office.

  • paulie

    Boortz is the crackpot. Don’t tell me you didn’t read the links.

  • http://www.lpnm.org Joseph Knight

    The “fair” tax is an abomination that should be resisted wherever encountered.

    The FAIRTAX: A TROJAN HORSE FOR AMERICA?
    By Claire Wolfe & Aaron Zelman
    http://www.jpfo.org/fairtax.htm

    “Vote Libertarian – DOUBLE TAX baby boomers & the ELDERLY”

    “Vote Libertarian – GOV’T CHECKS for EVERYBODY”

  • matt

    Alex Jones= Illuminti, end of world, George W. Bush worships the son of darkness.
    Boortz= adult min wage workers are losers, Islam is a violent relegion.
    And you think Boortz is the crackpot?

  • paulie

    yes

  • paulie

    Boortz=Saddam had more military than Hitler, rich should get preferential treatment in gov’t disaster relief, gov’t should spy on anyone who is antiwar. Crackpot!

    As for what Jones says, why not?

  • matt

    …rich should get preferential treatment in gov’t disaster relief…Not that I am for class warfare but since the top 50% of wage earners pay 96% of the taxes isn’t that more like just getting some of their stolen funds back.

  • IanC

    Andy — if it quacks like a duck…

    Finally; again — the FairTax is a third rail. Get over it.

    Smither’s stance on the war… is a real issue.

    Tim: Without legal persistance or definitions, the Pledge means exactly what you and I took it to mean.

    The key is how significant the initiation of force clause is. Without any grammatical separations, the Pledge does NOT mean that you do not believe in the initiation of force at all. Merely that you do not believe in the initiation of force to cause political or social change.

    The sleight of hand is that used by those whom would make the pledge into something more than this. Certainly the “NIFP” *LANGUAGE* is there… but much like the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution, it can only mean what it means, and no sleight of hand can change it.

    2nd Amendment: [...], the rights of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” — clause.

    (cont’d)

  • IanC

    “I do not believe in or advocate the initiation of force to enact social or political change.”

    No separating clause. Without being an independant clause, the initiation of force statement is WHOLLY LIMITED to social and political *CHANGE.*

    Furthermore; as the pledge has no absolutes saving a declaration of values, it is WHOLLY POSSIBLE to participate in the current US government — and even vote FOR a tax — without being seen as an advocate. It’s that empty a shell.

    Don’t let *ANYONE* fool you into thinking the verbage means anything but this.

  • http://www.ilovephysics.com Chris Moore

    Furthermore, Ian, what exactly constitues “force” could be debated considering Dictionary.com has 36 different definitions for the term.

    To a physicist, force is an influence that causes a change in motion of a body. If you consider that definition in a more abstract sense, then a political party whose mission is to change the “direction” of political thought would be in violation. In fact, using any of more than half of the definitions of force would result in a pledge that allowed NO social or political change. Period.

  • paulie

    Not that I am for class warfare but since the top 50% of wage earners pay 96% of the taxes isn’t that more like just getting some of their stolen funds back.

    No they don’t. That’s just the kind of nonsense you get from listening to Boortz. You’re not factoring FICA, current state sales taxes, etc. Read his full statements for context. It’s in the links.

    The messages after yours are a bit much to untangle at the moment. maybe later.

  • IanC

    Chris — given the phrasing, it’s fair enough to use the ‘Randian’ definition of the phrase itself — I’m not too concerned about that issue.

    The point that far too many “NIFP”‘ers make — in my admittedly subjective experience — is that the Pledge means we cannot initiate force or permit it to be initiated. That’s not what the Pledge says at all; and while the ‘NIFP’ makes a good guideline for those already aware, as an actual political standard it is a miserable failure.

    I’ll take the most common break between what makes one an anarchist in end-goal and a ‘minarchist’ in end-goal: Is taxation inherently, no matter what, theft? The anarchist and those whom use the ideology of anarchism say yes. Those whom recognize taxation as the expectations by the state of the people to fulfill debts to the state due to actions incurred by the people individually, obviously say no.

    But this is something none of what I refer to as anti-statists want to hear.

    (cont’d)

  • IanC

    So … what is and is not the initiation of force? Who can say? Anyone? Is anyone reading this whom calls themselves libertarian even REMOTELY willing to accept that the majority definition of initiation of force is what ought to apply?

    If we cannot agree here… then how, possibly, can MILLIONS of people agree sufficiently for a cohesive society to be built on said principle?

    That is why I concern myself with the three avowed principles previously mentioned:

    – Advocate responsibility & ‘honor’ regardless of the agency involved.
    – Defend all freedoms currently in place, regardless of for whom.
    – Cultivate the development of new freedoms and increase in quality of freedoms already in place.

    Less fuzzy, but still vulnerable; it further leaves one with interesting stances: Murder *could* be okay, if the person doing it is willing to pay the price for it (and then does).

  • http://www.ilovephysics.com Chris Moore

    “I’ll take the most common break between what makes one an anarchist in end-goal and a ”˜minarchist’ in end-goal: Is taxation inherently, no matter what, theft?”

    It is possible to believe that taxation is theft and still be a minarchist. There are many that believe that a government should hold the monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force, but believe funding for government could be accomplished through either user fees, donations or some other voluntary method.

    “… then how, possibly, can MILLIONS of people agree sufficiently for a cohesive society to be built on said principle?”

    That was my point about the pledge.

    But some (like me) believe it to be morally wrong to initiate physical, violent force against another, and believe it to be equally wrong to advocate government do the same. I don’t particularly care what MILLIONS of people agree to.

  • Andy

    “Alex Jones (crackpot) is seen as being able to help us get libertarians in office and Boortz is seen as a liability. And we wonder why we can’t get into office.”

    Alex Jones has far more credibility than Neal Boortz.

    http://www.infowars.com

    http://www.prisonplanet.com

    http://www.jonesreport.com

  • Andy

    “Alex Jones= Illuminti, end of world, George W. Bush worships the son of darkness.
    Boortz= adult min wage workers are losers, Islam is a violent relegion.
    And you think Boortz is the crackpot?”

    Yes, Boortz is the crackpot. I’ve got a ton of respect for Alex Jones.

  • Andy

    “Andy ”” if it quacks like a duck”¦

    Finally; again ”” the FairTax is a third rail. Get over it.

    Smither’s stance on the war”¦ is a real issue.”

    “if it quacks like a duck…” What in the heck are you implying? If you are trying to imply that I’m some sort of religious fanatic you are WAY off base. I don’t attend any church and haven’t for years and probably never will in the future. You don’t even know me. Just because I pointed out that a government ID number to buy and sell sounds like the Biblical “Mark Of The Beast” does not mean that I advocate any religion. Even if I did, so what? However, the fact remains that I do not advocate any religion, unless one considers libertarianism to be a religion.

    The “Fair Tax” issue is not something that we should just sweep under the rug or gloss over. Some people in the libertarian movement have jumped on this bandwagon and it is a subject that needs to be debated. I think that it’s a bad issue and I would advise

  • Andy

    libertarians to stay away from it.

    Yes, you are right that the war is a big issue, but I also think that it would be really destructive if the Libertarian Party and/or the greater libertarian movement got behind this “Fair Tax” sham. I’d hate to see the “Fair Tax” get lumped in with the word libertarian because it is far from being a real libertarian proposal.

  • Andy

    “Alex Jones= Illuminti, end of world, George W. Bush worships the son of darkness.
    Boortz= adult min wage workers are losers, Islam is a violent relegion.
    And you think Boortz is the crackpot?”

    Yeah, there is no New World Order. Only crazy people talk about it.

    http://www.freedomdomain.com/nwoquote.htm

    Bush and occult stuff, what are you crazy?

    http://www.infowars.com/bg1.html

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/02/60minutes/main576332.shtml

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skull_and_Bones

    Globalist groups don’t really exsist.

    http://www.cfr.org/

    http://www.trilateral.org/

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilderberg_Group

    http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=358df7bd-7a54-41e4-9366-df1733597c30&k=96354

    The war in Iraq is good. Spying on American citizens is good. The Fair Tax is good. Neal Boortz supports those things so he’s a real libertarian.

  • IanC

    Andy — don’t keep your panties in a knot. I made no assumptions or presumptions about you. I spoke about the words you used and the ideas they represent. Who the fuck cares if it seems like “The Mark of the Beast”? To even BRING IT UP invokes the ‘Rapture.’ So you’re guilty there. You might very well also be an atheist. It’s irrelevant.

    Finally — the FairTax isn’t likely to ever pass. Once it becomes a major issue (once taxation itself is up for debate in government) THEN we can discuss it. Now, it’s a third rail. It DESERVES TO BE GLOSSED OVER. Why? Even if misguided, at the very least those whom advocate it are trying to GET SOMETHING DONE.

    Sometimes, stirring up the pot is better than letting it sit and fester. Even if all you’re doing is adding more shit.

    You’re far from alone on your resistance to the FairTax, even within the LP. There’s absolutely no danger of its passing. It’s a third rail. Let it go.

  • Andy

    “Andy ”” don’t keep your panties in a knot. I made no assumptions or presumptions about you. I spoke about the words you used and the ideas they represent. Who the fuck cares if it seems like “The Mark of the Beast”? To even BRING IT UP invokes the ”˜Rapture.’ So you’re guilty there. You might very well also be an atheist. It’s irrelevant.”

    There are a lot of people that are interested in the connection between the “Mark Of The Beast” and what is going on today, some of them are religious and some of them are not. It’s just a paralell.

    “Finally ”” the FairTax isn’t likely to ever pass. Once it becomes a major issue (once taxation itself is up for debate in government) THEN we can discuss it.”

    How do you know that the Fair Tax is not likely to ever pass? At one point most people thought that we’d never have an income tax. I’d say that we should nip the Fair Tax in the bud.

  • http://fortbendlp.org K Tunstall

    Mr. Moore, with all do respect, allow me to “clarify” your assertion that I am “threatening” individuals. There are two persons disseminating false and slanderous statements concerning Mr. Smither via email lists. One statement is that Mr. Smither is pro-war. The other statement is that Mr. Smither intends on shifting the tax burden onto the poor of our society. Both of these statements, though acceptable as a matter of opinion, can NOT be made as a statement of fact unless supported by evidence. These “lies” are thus engineered and intended to hinder Mr. Smither’s fund raising activities. As such, these actions constitute Libel!

    http://www.medialaw.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Public_Resources/Libel_FAQs/Libel_FAQs.htm

    Regardless of how you feel about Mr. Smither, please be advised that my response to actions by these two perfidious individuals remains consistent with retaliation against THEIR aggression. What remains to be seen is what remedy, if any, may be pursued in time.

  • http://www.ilovephysics.com Chris Moore

    Mr. Smither has made no statement concerning whether or not he is or isn’t pro-war. I read Robert Noval’s (one of those that you threatened) statements. He was merely trying to find out what Mr. Smither’s views concerning war were. That those views are being concealed, and that when people pose questions concerning those views they receive threatening emails (with no response to the question) leads me to assume that he is pro-war. Also, Mr. Smither’s support of the FairTax to many means that he wishes to shift the tax burden onto the poor.

    Bob Smither, through omission, is pro war.

    He also supports shifting the tax burden onto the poor due to his support of the FairTax.

    Anyone who disagrees vehmently with a pro-war and FairTax stance should NOT support Bob Smither either financially or otherwise.

    Now sue me for libel. I dare you.

  • IanC

    Ahh.. ‘But he started it!!!’

    … not involved, that’s me.

    Andy; either shit or get off of the pot. The FairTax isn’t worth the effort at this point. It’s not even close to the floor. The Income Tax wasn’t resisted when IT reached the floor either. Your debate amounts to “Just because we cannot imagine it doesn’t mean it can’t happen.” The same is true in reverse. Apply Occham’s Razor. It’s a Third Rail, one you need to look past.

    I’m outta this thread! Have fun, y’all.

  • http://fortbendlp.org K Tunstall

    Feel free to email and “ask” Bob his positions (as opposed to sending hate mail as others have done). I am sure he will respond. That aside, it is not that an individual posts his / her “opinion” which I find disturbing. It is deliberate attempts to defame and or discredit a candidate which has already been vetted by our state party.

    As I have previously stated to others, if one disagrees with a candidate on certain issues, they are certainly free to state their opinions and withhold any support from said candidate. To purposefully attempt to slander someone with libelous intent is another issue altogether.

    The fact that you would defend those who slandered another speaks volumes in and of itself.

    Regarding Smither and Boortz….I have attempted to contact Boortz and he has not responded.

    Regarding Alex Jones….I have not contacted him. Perhaps I will do so now.

  • http://www.ilovephysics.com Chris Moore

    “The fact that you would defend those who slandered another speaks volumes in and of itself.”

    I have only defended Robert Noval, although he is perfectly capable of doing so himself here:

    http://www.smallgov.org/?p=349

    I do not know about any others.

    Please point to any instance where Mr. Noval libeled Mr. Smither and I will publicly apologize to you. I can’t find a single instance.

  • Marianne Volpe

    Hi Chris,

    I don’t think you have anything to worry about. Mr. Tunstall needs to read the information on the website he references re libel/slander:

    “The defamatory statement must also have been made with fault. The extent of the fault depends primarily on the status of the plaintiff. Public figures, such as government officials, celebrities, well-known individuals, and people involved in specific public controversies, are required to prove actual malice, a legal term which means the defendant knew his statement was false or recklessly disregarded the truth or falsity of his statement. In most jurisdictions, private individuals must show only that the defendant was negligent: that he failed to act with due care in the situation.”

    Robert Noval’s questions about Smither’s stands do not even merit a case – they were merely questions. Most of us are still waiting for a public statement of some kind by the candidate on the Iraq War.

    Marianne

  • paulie

    The unFair tax is exactly the kind of thing which is likely to pass, since it gives the regime the tools it’s looking for – under the guise of making taxes simpler, fairer or less burdensome. What better way to achieve a total state of tyranny than under the guise of liberty and with the support of the libertarians?

    http://www.jpfo.org/fairtax.htm

  • Andy

    “The unFair tax is exactly the kind of thing which is likely to pass, since it gives the regime the tools it’s looking for – under the guise of making taxes simpler, fairer or less burdensome. What better way to achieve a total state of tyranny than under the guise of liberty and with the support of the libertarians?”

    Yeah, I know that back in the ’90′s some sell out “libertarians” came out in support of NAFTA and GATT, but of which are frauds that real the libertarians opposed.

    The same thing could happen with the so called “Fair Tax.” I’d hate to see the libertarian label attached to this monstrosity.

  • http://freelancify.com Nigel Watt

    OK, so the “Fair Tax” is dumb, but as for the rest of Smither’s positions, they’re only objectionable if you make wild and ridiculous assumptions about them.

    We’re actually getting stuff done in Texas. We’re distributing WSPQ door hangers, going to community events, fielding strong candidates, and even getting some of those candidates elected.

    Personally, I’ve gotten 4 LTEs published in one of the top ten newspapers (by circulation) in the country expounding libertarian views, I extend libertarian viewpoints and encourage support of the LP through my blog, and I’ve convinced friends and family to vote Libertarian. And I’m a 17-year-old college student.

    I don’t know whether you anons have done anything for the LP or not, but seeing as you’re too chicken to tell us who you are, I doubt it. Accomplish something before you try to rain on our parade. (If you want to send real rain to Texas, be my guest, however.)

  • disinter

    Nigel,

    I, for one, appreciate what you are doing. Thank you!

  • http://www.ilovephysics.com Chris Moore

    “but as for the rest of Smither’s positions, they’re only objectionable if you make wild and ridiculous assumptions about them.”

    Apparently NO ONE knows what Mr. Smither’s views are on the war in Iraq and foreign policy in general. Some claim (rightly) that that in itself is objectionable.

  • http://www.lpnm.org Joseph Knight

    Mr. Tunstall, PLEASE sue me for libel! I need the money.