The TX Gubernatorial Debate

Libertarians are linked to the Right for a very good reason, because we are Right! What was Barry Goldwater, a liberal?

Here’s the breakdown:

Libertarians on Economics – 100% Right Wing

We’re more free market than anyone else out there with the sole exception of a handful of Economic Conservatives like Walter Williams, Rush Limbaugh, Larry Kudlow, National Review guys, Wall Street Journal types et.al.

Libertarians on Civil Liberties – 50% Right Wing

We oppose Gun Laws, Restrictions and outrageous licensing fees for hunters and anglers, Nanny State laws that the liberals want to impose on us like seat belt laws and lower speed limits, restrictions on our free speech through political correctness and affirmative action. Drugs are split these days, with some conservatives supporting it and some liberals supporting it. Only on Pro-Choice and a Tolerance for Gays and a few other sexually-oriented civil liberties issues do we side with Liberals.

Chicken costumes are getting cliche’. Everyone uses it these days. Try something different.

Besides, quite frankly, Werner should just drop out of the race and endorse Kinky.

Does it make any sense in the world to have two libertarians running against each other for Governor of Texas??

Kinky can win this thing. Imagine if he loses by just 2 points that Werner got. How will we libertarians feel then?

Werner DROP OUT AND ENDORSE KINKY WHILE THERE IS STILL TIME!!! Stop splintering our libertarian movement. You might get a Cabinet appointment from Kinky out of it?

What I’ve read on this site has tentatively convinced me that Kinky Friedman is not libertarian. That said, Dondero’s pleas for Werner to drop out remind me how valuable reforms like IRV would be, and how it would valuable a third-party coalition strategy could be in getting us there.

I know this is old hat for most of us, but here’s how my IRV might look if I lived in Texas:

Werner
Strayhorn
Friedman
Some write-in friend of mine who lives in Texas
Bell
Bevo

…
999,999. Perry

But here’s the rub: if voting for say a Green, under the understanding that Greens would vote for a Libertarian in an adjoining district, were the price to get there, could you do it?

I’m going to venture to guess that most people here would not go that far, and this is one reason why the two-party system is so entrenched.

Dondero, enough with the “we”. Speak for yourself, because you don’t speak for most libertarians.

I am not right wing and Rush Limbaugh is not free market.

And you say, “Drugs are split these days, with some conservatives supporting it and some liberals supporting it. ”

which is obviously BS.

The “right’s agenda” that you want to believe libertarians agree with, is the opposite of libertarian.

Brian is right. I’ve always been struck by Dondero’s use of the word “we,” as if he was speaking for a majority of libertarians. I knew that wasn’t the case and just assumed he had a tapeworm or something.

Kinky may be better than Perry and the other Republocrat choices, but he’s not a libertarian. I managed to catch bits and pieces of the debate last night, and the bits I saw of Kinky, quite frankly, were very disappointing. I was expecting to see something refreshing and dynamic, but my impression was more like, “what’s Boxcar Willie doing up there?”

Maybe I need to catch a replay of the entire debate, but until then, it pretty much killed any thoughts I had of NOT voting for Werner.

First of all, Eric, shut the hell up. Ditto to Brian’s comment.

Second, from what it sounds like, from a non-ideological standpoint, Chris Bell is charming a lot of people by appearing very moderate and levelheaded. I’m not agreeing with him at all, I’m just saying he seems like the strongest candidate in the race on terms of pure political appeal to your average person, maybe in the center of the Nolan Chart. Strayhorn and Perry are both squarely in the authoritarian quadrant. Kinky seems center-libertarian and Werner is libertarian.

Finally, Michelle, are you sure your perception of Kinky’s performance was not tainted by your bias against him? (I don’t know, I didn’t watch it, as I am living in Japan temporarily.) While Kinky is not my ideal candidate, I lean towards supporting him because he has put electoral reform as the centerpiece of his campaign, which will only benefit Libs in the long term.

EOC: yes, there is… I use it with bloglines (my fav way to track rss)

Try http://hammeroftruth.com/wp-commentsrss2.php

Free market =/ “right-wing”

Current system = right-wing

Free market = free, fair

Dondero, as a conservative I’m sure you don’t think much of book learning. But you ought to consider what the word “liberal” means, and what the word “conservative” means.

Were the students who were beaten and killed in Tienamen (sp) Square “conservatives?”

Are the opponents of Islamicism in Iran and elsewhere “conservatives?”

No. They were/are liberals. As was Adam Smith. Capitalism = liberalism. Conservatism = despotism.

Is Osama bin Laden a liberal or a conservative? How about the Saudis? How about the current Chinese regime?

Words have meanings. You throw them around as if they don’t. The language of the right – which is undeniably linked to oppression, racism, inequality, slavery, etc. – is now Orwellian in its double speak.

So-called Libertarians have been linked to the right for 30 years now, and it has gotten them NOTHING. The right is ALWAYS the wrong side of history.

UndercoverAnarchist,

I believe in the Four Quadrant political spectrum, not the two-dimensional spectrum. Perhaps you’ve heard of it, sometimes called the Nolan Chart, or New Political Spectrum, or World’s Smallest Political Quiz.

Those groups you mentioned above are not either Liberal or Conservative but rather Authoritarians.

They are low on economic liberties and low on civil liberties.

Bin Laden is off the charts Authoritarian; in the Pol Pot category.

Yes, Dondero, but Islamic fundamentalism is by definition CONSERVATIVE. Opposition to Communism is by definition LIBERAL. Are you going to tell me that there is any definition by which the Saudi Government is not right-wing? Not unless you are either stupid or dishonest – but then again, I get the impression that you are both.

I dislike getting caught up in “liberal” and “conseravtive” labels. To begin with they have become “loaded” words which people take to mean a vaetiy of things, and that is my second poiint. Despite people putting so much stock into these labels they don’t mean a dam thing. libertarians straddle tradtional termnology. right vs left, hawk vs dove, liberal vs conserative, these are short cut words which are not worth debating over. Shouldn’t we focus our efforts on what if ethical and what is not ethical, instead of arguing over what we lable people and postions?

s against the war

Brian,

Your assessment is bass ackwards. The libertarian movement includes EVERYONE in the Libertarian Quadrant of the New Political Spectrum. That’s anyone who scores above 66/66. What your are talking about is a tiny minority of a tiny minority of the libertarian movement.

The extremists you mention are off-the-charts L. Neil Smith/Ernie Hancock/Tom Knapps types at 100/100+, basically Anarchists. That’s maybe 0.5% of the Libertarian Quadrant, or libertarian movement.

I’d say the Libertarian Party represents maybe about 10 to 15% of the libertarian movement, maybe 20%. But certainly just upper corner.

RLC, Reason Magazine, Cato Institute, Americans for Tax Reform, Americans for Limited Government, Club for Growth, National Review, Young Republicans, Wall Street Journal et.al. combined represents virtually the other 80 to 85%.

Then beyond that you even have moderate libertarians like the folks at http://www.gopprogress.com.

Brian says “regarding the Blogs as evidence…”

Are you fucking kidding me? You’re not serious are you. That was the most idiotic statement I’ve ever heard you say.

I deal with libertarians every single day of my life. It’s my business. The percentage of libertarians that “blog” is maybe 10% at most. No libertarian I know has ever even heard of Hammer of Truth. A few know of Tom Knapp. Certainly many know of Richard Winger and Ballot Access News (but only from a Newsletter, though technically it’s now also a Blog). Certainly many occasionally log onto to the Libertarian Party’s National site, and the RLC.

But that’s still a very tiny percentage of libertarian activists.

Most don’t have time for “blogging”, cause they’re too busy out putting up signs or walking precincts.

Sometimes I’ll mention the Libertarian Blogs and the various battles that go on here, and their eyes just glaze over.

Stuart, why would you want a Socialist as Governor of Texas? Chris Bell served on term in the US Congress. During that one term he racked up a Libertarian index score of about 20, well into the Authoritarian area. He’s a Nanny-State from the word go. With a Governor Bell, smoking would be banned statewide, and your guns? Forget about it. He might let you keep a hunting rifle, if you go through the registration process. This guy was awful as a Houston City Councilman, and worse as a Congressman. Look at the record.

I’d take Sheila Jackson-Lee over Chris Bell. At least Seheila is an honest Authoritarian. Bell is an Authoritarian with a nice smile.

As juvenile as I find namecalling, Eric, I can’t resist to call you a turdwad. First of all, the LRC is in no way pro-war. The old LP plank had its flaws which was why we tried (unsuccessfully) to replace it with a more comprehensive one but still one centered on pacifism. We generally take a more assertive approach than complete isolationism, realizing the world is more complex than that, but we are not in any way “Liberventionists” who advocate the LP to change into military hawks and declare unconstitutional wars. Secondly, anyone still defending the War in Iraq is an idiot. Thirdly, “The percentage of libertarians that “blog” is maybe 10% at most.” And the % of Libs who send in letters to the editor to LP News is what? 40%? Fourth, Strayhorn is a pure authoritarian. Fifth, any Democrat=socialist authoritarian while any Republican=American hero? Finally, you’re an idiot for wasting your time here. Anyone who supports REAL fascism and politicians who support it is not libertarian.

Another question for Dondero: Why does your idol George Bush want to bring LIBERAL DEMOCRACY to the Muslim World? “Liberal democracy” – his words.

I am 100% pro-western. I believe that my western values are superior to the values of other cultures and I’m proud of my belief in the superiority of my values. My western values are freedom, democracy, liberty, justice, equality, and REASON. These are LIBERAL values which fascists like you hate. Even our president mouths these values while simultaneously doing everything in his power to undermine them. What are conservative values? Unquestioned obedience, state power, dogma, classism, and blind faith. The left represents the interests of the poor and dispossessed; the right represents aristocracy, monarchy, and the moneyed interests. These are not opinions, they are facts. Words have meanings.

UA, While I think Dondero is an idiot as well, you are making some complete misrepresentations of the left as well. “The left represents the interests of the poor” Give me a break. If you call the trillions that we have spent on the war on poverty as representing the poor, you are clueless. Most of that money has gone to the “moneyed interests” that you claim the right represents. The left loves them as well. The left could careless about the poor. They only use them as a tool to get elected and make the poor dependent on gov’t so that they will continue to get their votes. If they cared about the poor they would get gov’t out of the way so that individuals and charities could step in and start doing the job that the gov’t is miserably failing at. If gov’t is involved they should help as many of the poor as possible to become independent, relying more on themselves and their community than on the gov’t. (con’t)

The lefts prized public educational system has completely failed the poor as well as the middle class leaving many of the poor unable to function in our society or think for themselves again reinforcing their dependence on gov’t.

While the republicans are no better on this issue, don’t blind yourself and think that the democrats are any good either. They have both have failed the poor as well as the middle class miserably.

EOC: let’s talk… Got some ideas you’ll be interested in, I suspect. I’ll email you.

Right, of course the Left has failed at helping the poor. But I would argue that most leftists (establishment leftists aside) do care strongly about these issues. They do hate corporations, they want to end war, they want to help the poor, workers and the environment. They are just stuck in a space-time continuum where the only solution they see (as well as the only option they really have to vote for) is socialism.

I think the same can be said, less strongly, for the (non-establishment) Right – they want to be safe, they generally don’t like big government and high taxes and genuinely care about the state’s impact of family values. But they are stuck where a militarist, big government, authoritarian party is the only option claiming similar values.

That’s why there’s tons of ground for new pro-freedom and social justice, anti-corporate, reformist, progressive, small government party. Libertarians must reclaim liberalism from socialism, and conservatism from fascism.

Nick, while that’s a true quote, the hard part is realizing that the liberals don’t see themselves as socialists or anything wrong with it if they do, nor do the conseratives consider themselves as fascists (quite the opposite, the fascists are the opposition), and calling either side those names moves people farther from the intended goal.

This is why Macho flash doesn’t and hasn’t worked, this is why the LP hasn’t been elected much, and most of all, this is why despite Libertarians being for ‘both kinds’ of freedom, we’re seen as some weird out of place group: they don’t see us in the middle between these two factions, they see us as fringes on the outside of both (mostly right-side). It’s time to reclaim the middle, and with it, a majority voice.

So you believe we libertarians are aligned with Leftists who disagree with us on everything with the sole exception of Pro-Choice on abortion and Terry Schiavo, huh?

I can’t think of another single issue where I agree with Leftists on. Certainly not affirmative action, political correctness, gun rights, seat belt laws, smoking bans, blocking libertarian petitioners from gathering signatures for their initiatives, property rights/against eminent domain, spending limits, rights to access for hunters and anglers, or recreational off-road vehicles access.

The quote should read:

“Libertarians must work to reclaim liberalism from fascism, and conservatism from centrist squishy moderation.”

If there is any one single publication that could be considered the “heart and soul of the libertarian movement” it is without a doubt the Wall Street Journal.

Question for ya? What was the only major media that covered the Republican Liberty Caucus National Convention in Orlando last month?

Answer: The Wall Street Journal.

Which national publication has given more coverage to libertarians, Ron Paul, and the entire libertarian movement in the last few decades per capita than any other?

Answer: The Wall Street Journal.

Nick,

You are exactly right the LP has a gapping wide hole that we can fill because the leadership of both the R and the D are so out of touch with the people they purportedly represent. If you look at the Nolan chart almost all of our rep. both R and D are in the authoritarian half of the chart. My guess is that most people are a bit higher on freedom than their representatitves and ripe for the taking if we can put out a rational, moderate agenda.

The real answer for the poor is much less gov’t not more and the only party that is pushing for that is the LP party. There is no reason why we can’t take the “poor” card from the democrats as we are really the only ones with solutions. It is obvious that the R party has failed us in regards to economic issues so that is another area that is ripe for the taking. Both parties have failed in personal rights issues. We have a tremendous opportunity to fill a gaping hole in the political spectrum if we can work together.

Sorry, that was me.

TerryP: Amen. Some of us have been saying for a while. Like him or not, Carl Milsted’s quiz2d.com data shows conclusively that you are correct, and the key to having 30%+ of the votes (a minimum to win and be respected) is going to take avoiding the edge positions and staying toward the middle ground, providing a ‘libertarian moderate’ message. This, sadly, pisses of the extremes of all flavors, and they call the moderate view ‘unprincipled’ or ‘faux libertarian’ etc. I wish they’d wake up.

Post Nov 7th, expect to more from me on this. For now, back to working on websites for major candidates…

“Libertarians on Economics – 100% Right Wing”

It depends on which part of the so called “right wing” you are talking about.

“A survey by LP Director Bill Winters, for example, showed that fully ’40% of LP members supported the War in Iraq.’”

I’m not sure how recent or how accurate that survey is, but I will say that pro-war “libertarians” are holding the movement back. There is a HUGE anti-war sentiment out there on which the Libertarian Party should be capitalizing. Pro-war so called “libertarians” turn a lot of these people off. War is the health of the state and war of aggression based on lies have nothing to do with liberty.

“Most don’t have time for “blogging”, cause they’re too busy out putting up signs or walking precincts.”

Most aren’t out walking precincts or doing any kind of activism, they are too busy sitting on their asses and talking amongst themselves.

The so called “Islamofascists” have a lot in common with the so called “religious right” in this country.

If you look at the top half of the Nolan chart (the libertatian half) it forms a triangle. Our problem as a party is that each corner of the triangle is what gets the most play in the media and is where many activists on each side want to pull us. While people such as UA and Paulie are not likely in the far left corner, they have a way of trying to pull the party in that direction.

I score 100/100 on the Nolan quiz, and have since 1993, when I finally read enough economics to get an accurate understanding of the minimum wage issue. In 1992, I scored 100/80, which was good enough to vote Libertarian but not enough to join the party. I took the pledge seriously and did not join until I could sign it in good faith.

As far as pulling us in that direction, you’re right; that’s where we’ve always been and must return to ever amount to anything. The temporary coalition between conservatism and libertarianism was an aberration of the 20th century.

http://mises.org/story/2099

“Right now, there are a ton of people who are politically homeless because they are pro-immigration and anti-war, and are not being served by the corporate parties.”

The corporate parties ARE pro-immigration! They want more voters, more welfare recipients, more cheap labor, and more bodies to join the military. The merger with Mexico and Canada is the next step towards the New World Order.

If they are pro-immigration then why are they throwing more money at border enforcement and scrambling who can deport more immigrants, punish employers, etc?

What they want is the Real ID, which is being sold as an anti-immigration idea, and RFID equipped passports which will be required for travel to Mexico and Canada by 2008, thus qualifying the US for the technical definition of one giant prison.

Authoritarians love border checkpoints – the more the better. Fears of immigration, just like fears of drugs and terrorism, are just excuses they use to exploit to get the public to give them more powers to spy on people, round people up, put people in cages, harass people, etc.

The whole idea is based on the government holding collective property over the whole country, an anti-liberty concept.

Meanwhile, the fastest growing voting population (Latinos) are saying in surveys that neither major party is speaking up for immigrants’ rights and they want to become more active.

“If they are pro-immigration then why are they throwing more money at border enforcement and scrambling who can deport more immigrants, punish employers, etc?

What they want is the Real ID, which is being sold as an anti-immigration idea, and RFID equipped passports which will be required for travel to Mexico and Canada by 2008, thus qualifying the US for the technical definition of one giant prison.”

It’s all an act. They want more immigrants to come here and in fact give them the incentives to come while at the same time pretending to fight it.

This is classic problem-reaction-solution. The government created the problem. Now millions of Americans are pissed off because of all of the illegal aliens. So now the government offers the solution of issueing National ID cards – which will lead to implantable microchips – meanwhile they are working on deals to merge the USA with Mexico and Canada in a North American Union. Brilliant scheme!

Andy.. Was it hard to get fitted for your tinfoil hat?

I support the right of citizens of NAFTA countries to travel among them without visas. Does that make me an NWO advocate? I am for a NWO. One with no state. Is that essentially the same as a super state?

Dondero: Members of the left support open immigration, gay rights and marriage, they’re against the Patriot Act and domestic spying, they’re agianst church-state union, they’re against war-mongering military adventurism (unlike you and your fasicst allies), etc., which are all libertarian positions. Many support Democratic / soft-socialism economic policies because they’re ignorant to the alternatives. And furthermore, even the organized left is NOT in favor of emminent domain abuse. You’re wrong there.

Also, I’m convinced that the anti-gun left is by and large a myth. It is Rosie O’Donnel and a bunch of suburban soccer moms. Other than that, most people don’t give a fuck if you have a gun, so long as it you use it responsibly.

Andy, the Republican Liberty Caucus has been doing the Operation Politically Homeless Quiz at countless Young Republican Conventions over the last decade or so. You can check this all with Sharon Harris of the Advocates for Self-Government.

During that time, YRs have consistently scored in the Libertarian Quadrant of the WSPQ. They average around 70/70.

Interestingly, their axis seems to be more Libertarian to Centrist rather than Libertarian to Conservative.

Paulie, you say I am “pulling the libertarian movement to the conservative right”?

Really? How does that explain that I’m very Pro-Choice on abortion? I’m a rock ‘n rolling Heavy Metal/Punk Rock dude. I like my music, fast, hard and loud. I favor drug legalization. I’m very, very, very much in favor of every sexual freedom you can imagine, so long as it doesn’t involve minors or scare the horses. One of my biggest issues is Swinger’s rights, and pushing for more topless and nude beaches in the US. I also hate prohibitionists and battle them on every issue you can think of: smoking bans, drinking age laws, you name it.

Is that conservative?

Who is the Number One Gun Grabber politician in the United States?

Chuck Schumer, of course.

And what Party affiliation does he hold?

Democrat, of course.

It was Senate Republicans who battled Schumer on all his idiotic gun banning crusades over the years.

You’re so pigheaded that you can’t even give them credit for that?

“Who is the Number One Gun Grabber politician in the United States?

Chuck Schumer, of course.

And what Party affiliation does he hold?

Democrat, of course.

It was Senate Republicans who battled Schumer on all his idiotic gun banning crusades over the years.

You’re so pigheaded that you can’t even give them credit for that?”

I NEVER said that I like Chuckie Schumer or the Democratic Party in general. In fact, I despise them. Yes, Republicans have blocked some of their crappy bills, but Republicans have passed plenty of garbage themselves and sometimes a bad Republican bill gets blocked by Democrats.

I don’t like to get involved in this “Who’s the lesser of two evils between Democrats and Republicans” game because I see it as counterproductive. Both of these parties SUCK!

Andy: You are a square peg. You seem like a Constitution Party type with your anti-immigrant rants, but then you turn around and villafy the religious right. You are clearly opposed to state power. So how can you empower the state with the ability to decide which human beings may cross imaginary lines? If you don’t want people coming here for welfare, then concentrate on ending welfare. Don’t concentrate on telling me who I can hire to work for my business. Don’t concentrate on empowering the state to prevent free human beings to seek a better life, to market their labor, to provide for their children. In doing so, YOU are playing into the statist’s hands.

“If you don’t want people coming here for welfare, then concentrate on ending welfare.”

I’ve been working on trying to end the welfare state for over 10 years now. Are we any closer? It doesn’t appear that way.

Paulie, that stupid-ass Non-initiative of force cult like pledge is for Anarchists NOT libertarians.

Question for ya, Paulie. Are all libertarians anarchists?

Is there any difference between libertarianism and anarchism?

If so, then being an Anarchist you must admit that libertarians are more moderate and mainstream than you are, and that you ONLY represent the tiny fringe of an already tiny fringe of the broader libertarian movement.

If everyone who scores over 66/66 on the WSPQ is considered to be a “Libertarian” than YOU MUST acknowledge everyone else in the movement who scores less than you as a libertarian; that’s from 99/99 all the way down to near Centrist area of 66/66.

“Question for ya, Paulie. Are all libertarians anarchists?

Is there any difference between libertarianism and anarchism?”

Ah, the old libertarian anarchy vs. minarchy debate.

I think that a person can be an anarchist or a minarchist and still be a libertarian.

An anarchist is a purist. A minarchist can believe in a high degree of freedom on all issues but does not believe that it is possible to have no government.

I’m kind of a whichever-we-can-get-archist. Philisophically, I’m an anarchist, but I don’t know whether or not we will ever achieve this. If we can achieve this than great, but if not than minarchy is the next best thing. I believe that government as it exsists should obey the Constitution, but I do not consider the Constitution to be the be all and end all. Freedom goes further than what the Constitution has to offer, but on the other hand what the Constitution has to offer is a lot better than what we have now.

Very good article, Andy.

I pretty much agree with moderate LPers and the reformers, politically. I don’t think it is wrong for me as an individual to debate intricasies online and to be an extremist, while simultaneously being pragmatic. But one thing I do resent is the appeals to the right. We’ve been down that road. It leads nowhere. There’s a difference between being a moderate, and being Republican light. Some fail to see that difference.

“But one thing I do resent is the appeals to the right. We’ve been down that road. It leads nowhere.”

Libertarians should reach out to the left, right, and center, and especially to non-voters.

I agree that a lot more focus should be on marketing to people on the left, however, I would not completely abandon those on the right because there are still potential converts there.

“I’m enjoying the Harry Browne articles.”

Harry Browne was one of the best writers and speakers that the Libertarian Party had. His death was a great loss to the movement.

“Harry Browne was one of the best writers and speakers that the Libertarian Party had. His death was a great loss to the movement.” — Andy.

Truer words were never spoken. The avuncular and white-haired Browne was an urbane, witty and dignified man who looked and spoke like a man who should have occupied the White House. He was also smart. His acceptance speech in 1996 was one of the best in the annals of third-party history and I’ve long considered my vote for him that year as one of the proudest votes I ever cast. I remember seeing him in the lobby of the Marriott Marquis Hotel in Atlanta during the Libertarian Party’s 2004 national convention and privately wishing at the time that he was running again. He gave the party stature — and class. I’m convinced that if the crazy billionaire from Texas hadn’t run again in 1996, Browne would have easily captured more than a million votes.

If the party had nominated a savvy candidate with even a shred of credentials, I probably would have voted for the LP’s presidential nominee in 2004. I liked Gary Nolan and probably would have supported him.

When I interviewed Nolan for a magazine article prior to the Atlanta convention, he told me, with a slightly mischievous grin, that he would consider his candidacy a success if he drew enough conservative votes away from the GOP to deny President Bush a second term, adding that such a scenario would create “gridlock,” thereby preventing either party from engaging in profligate and wasteful spending. He had the right idea. Playing a role in Bush’s defeat, he said, would also “allow the cream to rise to the top,” placing the media spotlight squarely on the Libertarian Party — instead of Nader — for influencing the outcome of the election.

But instead, the Libertarians foolishly chose an obscure guy who struck me at the time as just another right-wing Republican.

Why the LP nominated a completely unknown candidate who had only raised $8,000 prior to the party’s 2004 convention, remains something of a mystery. Something for the history books, I suppose. All I know is that Karl Rove was certainly happy. Of course, the dumbstruck Badnarik, taking full advantage of his sudden and unexpected fame as the party’s accidental presidential standard-bearer two years ago, has milked the Libertarians for all they’re worth ever since. We’ll see the results on November 7th.

In the meantime, the LP should abandon its conservative counterfeits and become a real player on the national scene. And that entails, as you, Paulie and many others HoT bloggers have eloquently advocated, reaching out to those in the middle and on the left, to the millions of Americans hungry for real political change.

You’re right, too, about Walt’s appearance at the debate at Cornell University which was aired by C-SPAN. I told him the same thing. He rambled too much. Fortunately, he did much better in his one-on-one interview on C-SPAN a few days before the election. But, hey, give the guy a break — he was 79 years old, suffering from back cancer and was pretty tired by that point in the campaign.

U_A. I had to run some errands, but I’m back now. I hope you took my comments in the spirit they were intended. I look at young guys like yourself, Paulie, Nick Wilson, Derrick and others on the HoT website as the last best hope for this country. Maybe you can shape the LP into the party this country so desperately needs.

Your concerns were certainly valid. I admire Ralph Nader with ever fibre of my being — and if I had a magic wand… By the way, some of the radio interviews I did in 2004, especially the Thom Hartmann Show and a few other “liberal” hosts, were particularly brutal. It was as though Ralph had no right to run.

Darcy, you are actually on to something. Some did speculate Karl Rove was behind Badnarik’s nomination in 2004 for the LP. After all, Karl is from Texas, Austin area – same as Badnarik, and knows TX politics like the back of his hand.

I’ve often wondered the same about David Bergland in 1984. Bergland was arguably the very worst Presidential candidate ever run by the LP. He only got 228,000 votes in a race where the Republican Ronald Reagan was a shoe-in. How is it that he could have failed so miserably? An accident? I’m not so sure.

Undercover Anarchist, that was uncalled for. Where in the bloody hell did you ever get the idea that I “hate Mexicans?”

I’m asking you nicely for a retraction here. If not, I will notify the List owners.

1. I am completely fluent in Spanish, and have even written a best selling book on the matter, “Vacation Spanish.”

2. I have been all over Mexico; at least 12 different Mexican states from Veracruz all the way up to Baja.

3. I’ve taught ESL all over Mexico including Tampico and Guadalajara.

4. I’ve had tons of Mexican girlfriends in my life in just about every Mexican city you could name.

5. I’m a huge fan of Mexican music: Tejano to Ann Barbara-style pop. (Though, I don’t like Norteno).

6. I drink Mexican beer all the time.

7. I live in Houston which is half-Mexican.

8. I think we need MORE MEXICAN WORKERS IN THE US!!! Not less.

Notify the List owners? What the hell does that mean?

Don’t be such a pussy. You always had a good attitude about my viscious insults before. Fine. I take it back. Feel better? Don’t sue me, Mr. Hacker.

And would you PLEASE look up “liberal” in the dictionary and stop misusing the word. Please???