Will A Blowjob Help?

****WARNING**** Two vodka/lemonade crudeness ahead.

I recently watched Spike Lee’s documentary on Katrina. There was a homeowner from St. Bernard Parish talking about her FEMA trailer’s lack of electricity. The interviewer asked when she thought she might navigate her way through bullshit excuses and receive service and she said that it would happen when she found out who to blow. I remember laughing my ass off at that comment. I remember being thankful for the laugh as I had cried at many other points in the film.

Sadly, Libertarian Party candidates are in the same bullshit situation in which the featured homeowner found herself. We are desperately trying to get the respect we are due. We are a legitimate third party running qualified candidates but we get no respect from mainstream news sources. Glen Bonnet emailed a news station and got this reply:

Since receiving a number of e-mails regarding the inclusion of the party
in our in-studios, we reviewed all of the libertarians running. Michael
Badnarik is the one libertarian who qualifies for inclusion and he has
been scheduled to appear.

Your Libertarian party and candidates are passionate about your cause. I
appreciate that. But passion alone will not win elections. Candidates
must show an ability to compete both on the ground campaigning and
financially. I believe we have fair criteria allowing any third party
candidate to participate. .. the bar is not set too high, the party
simply must get people to vote.

If you would like to review our criteria for inclusion, it is on our website at:
http://www.news8aus tin.com/content/ election_ 2006/?ArID= 171448&SecID= 539

Thank you for your note of concern,

Kevin Benz
News Director
News 8 Austin

For those of you coming on expecting something sexual from the title, here is your fuck:

We will include all candidates who:
1) Show a seriousness of purpose AND
2) Demonstrate significant public support.

To demonstrate Significant Public Support a candidate must meet at least one of the following criteria:

• The candidate has received at least 3 campaign contributions of $50 or more per 1000 residents of the constituency. This excludes contributions received from the candidate or his/her immediate family.
• The candidate has in the past been elected to the post he/she is seeking or won at least 30 percent of the vote for the same political office within the last 6 years.
• The candidate is the official nominee of a political party that received at least 10 percent of the vote in the last Texas gubernatorial election or presidential election in Texas, or received at least 15 percent of the vote in a prior election for the office he/she is seeking.
• The candidate, during the previous eight years won his/her party primary election or received votes greater than 10 percent of the total registered voters in the constituency.
• The candidate has received 10 percent or more of the vote in a poll conducted by an experienced, independent pollster with less than a 5 percent margin of error.

The circular nastiness of this should be evident to all. MSM exclude us based on polls that do not mention us. The double edge sword makes me identify with the homeowner in St. Bernard Parish even though I know she set the bar too low with a blowjob. If she took the ass fucking we are getting, she would have enough electricity to light up the Superdome.

posted by michelleshinghal
  • DAP

    I do not believe it is correct to place the blame on the mainstream media. If Americans wanted to hear about Libertarian candidates, then the media would pick up on it. You may say that Americans do want change in leadership, or a strong third party, but this is not the same thing. (cont”¦)

  • DAP

    (”¦cont) There is a term in economics called “rational ignorance.” Rational ignorance is defined as: “The decision not to acquire information because the cost of doing so exceeds the expected benefit.” Voters do not believe that who they vote for will make much, if any, difference in their lives. Therefore, they put little energy in deciding who to vote for. If, however, voters were somehow put in a position where they knew their vote would be decisive on who is elected, then there would be a huge demand for information on candidates. As the suppliers of this information, the mainstream media sees that there is no demand, and therefore does not supply information on third party candidates. The only hope for Libertarian candidates is to somehow transcend this “rational ignorance” and thus become viable candidates first, and the mainstream media will follow. Good luck with that.

  • Michelle Shinghal

    Do you demand accurate coverage? In Texas, the news stations report 4 candidates for governor. There are five. Does viewer taste dictate truth? The answer is and should be no.

    Journalism should be fact driven. Leave opinion for the new Nick Lachey wedding buzz in the Enquirer.

  • DAP

    So, you contend that Texans demand to hear about Libertarians, but the mainstream media refuses to supply?

  • Derrick

    Michelle, the TX LP is doing great compared to other state chapters. For a Texas Libertarian candidate to get 10% in a poll is definitely within the realm of possibility. IMHO, the best thing you can do is keep putting out those door-hangers which have the World’s Smallest Political Quiz on them. Put out 100K of them, and then put out another 100K. Keep that up and before you know it, a good candidate will hit 10% and start getting serious news coverage. It’s downhill from there.

    It most definitely *is* a Catch-22 situation. The media doesn’t cover the candidates or include them in the debates, because they don’t register in the polls. The polls don’t include the candidates because they aren’t mentioned in the media. The only way out is to keep fighting for media coverage and building support in other ways, such as with the door-hangers. Keep at it and you will get there.

  • Michelle Shinghal

    That is somewhat accurate. I talked to several hundred people last week who had no idea there was a libertarian on the ballot for governor. The news only reports Rs and Ds with the exception of Kinky and Grandma. 138 people gave their addresses- mailing and email- to obtain more info on our candidates. Will that translate into votes? Who knows? They will at least be better informed than the average news viewer. Losing would not make me pissy if the playing field were just a bit more even. (coverage not cash)

  • disinter

    I let them know my thoughts on the matter:

    http://www.news8austin.com/content/contact_us/viewer_center/feedback/

    I recommend you do too.

  • Who

    This is classic. If you go here

    http://www.debateproject.com/introduction/index.cfm

    and click on “Click here to give us your input” you can tell the Debate Advisory Standards Project what you think about their candidate inclusion policy. Ha!

    Just another example (although I’m sure unintentional, yah right :) ) of what a sham the electoral system is in this country. The reality is that two corrupt and immoral political parties have a strangle hold on power and they ain’t about to give it up.

  • DAP

    Michelle: Why would the Texas media refuse to supply Texans with what they demand?

  • disinter

    Who,

    The input link isn’t working for me…

  • disinter

    DAP,

    Because those that own the media have a larger interest to keep Republicrats in power in order to maintain their media monopolies? Why do you think they donate to campaigns/PACs and lobby congress?

  • Who

    >Who,
    >
    >The input link isn’t working for me”¦

    Exactly. We all know how much they value our input now, don’t we?

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

    One of the reasons we started the Libertarian Reform Caucus is because some of us got sick of Libertarians whining about how badly everyone treats us. It’s so easy to point the finger at everyone else but so difficult to point it at ourselves and question if what we are doing is working. Honestly, I think the ground rules the dude set are fair. Why should they give a Libertarian 1/3rd of the airtime if they only get 1/100th of the vote? His criticism of the LP is completely valid and, I think, reasonable. The LP has confined itself to a radical corner of American political thought and lost (or did we ever have?) touch with the average American voter. In doing so, we have enabled government to grow unchallenged. Until we start acting like a real party instead of like a debate society and advocate realistic and attainable policies, they have no reason to include us. The burden of proof is on US, not THEM. Chicken before the egg? It doesn’t matter. Quit scapegoating and get with reality.

  • Thomas Gellhaus

    You two must be kidding if you think that it is entirely the LP’s fault the media doesn’t report on us !
    We are in a Catch-22, and always have been. And to say “why 1/3 the airtime when we get 1/100th the vote??” WTF ?
    Day after day the typical citizen is bombarded with lousy economics in their news, by media that – get this – is NOT objective, and doesn’t mind a huge government, as long as they “get theirs” like the rest do.
    There IS bias in the media, and while I agree that we can do more to get the word out to people, the media ought to present all candidates equally in a 3-4 person race. Perhaps if it did, that 1/100 of the vote would become a LARGER percentage. People don’t vote for what they barely understand.

  • Michael Hampton

    Michelle, they included Michael Badnarik based on those qualifications, not excluded him.

  • Devious David

    The circular reasoning, chicken and egg, catch-22 isn’t accidental. It’s engineered. How stupid do you have to be to understand that? About as stupid as your average LRCer.

    When the polls don’t include the Libertarian candidate and you try and answer that your vote is going to the Libertarian, they put you down as “undecided”. That means you aren’t ever going to poll high enough, which means you aren’t going to get enough support because you aren’t going to win. Not to mention that you have to jump through 1000 hoops and sometimes when you make it through all of them, they invent new ones. Which means you aren’t going to win, which means you aren’t going to get enough support.

    Watering down and selling out the message isn’t going to make one bit of difference except turning people that do care about those ideas to lose interest and insure that the debate is never shifted out of the establishment’s favor. The fact is that the deck is naturally and artificially stacked against us.

  • Devious David

    Only a fool beleives that the powers-that-be wouldn’t make it so that no matter who the lemmings voted for, things wouldn’t change. It’s obvious and plain as day – the evidence is overwhelming. Every possible incentive is in place for such an arrangement.

  • Michelle Shinghal

    Michael, I have noticed that Badnarik is included and am happy that he is, but TX libertarians have a candidate in nearly every race in the state. Including one candidate is a bit like saying you are not a racist because you have a (pick ethnicity) friend.

  • http://threestooges.net/ Rob Davidson

    >> Michelle: Why would the Texas media refuse to supply Texans with what they demand?

  • http://threestooges.net/ Rob Davidson

    DAP, your logic is completely circular. How in the world can Texans (or anyone else for that matter) “demand” to know more about something if they are never allowed to even hear about it in the first place?

  • R. E. Lee

    On the other hand, I’ve seen LWV Election Guides in the newspaper with “failed to respond” next to the Libertarian candidate’s name.

  • Tom Bryant

    We can’t change the media, but we can change ourselves. Instead of complaining about that which we can’t change, why don’t we look at what we can change.

    We run candidates that refuse to answer questionnaires. We run candidates that refuse to talk to the media. I just participated in a Meet the Candidate’s tv show for a large city. I was the only third party candidate to show up. The same thing happened in 2002 when I ran.

    Our party does not develop relationships with the media. When was the last time your county chairman did lunch with the local political reporter?

    Our candidates, largely, are paper candidates. They don’t raise money, knock on doors, leaflet neighborhoods, or have a webpage. They aren’t exciting stories.

    The fact that this media outlet included Badnarik, a candidate raising significant money and really campaigning, shows us exactly what we need to do to get covered.

  • Timothy West

    polls for badnarik 2004 in New Mexico suggested that the more people knew about libertarianism, the less likely they were inclined to vote for him.

    True, the deck is stacked against any third party by design, and libertarianism is currently only appealing to a very small number of voters…although it seems to be ever so slightly more appealing in this election cycle than in past ones. Wonder why?

    The broad philosophy behind the party, that people should live free, is applied very narrowly in steps in practice, with each step down the ladder getting narrower and weeding more and more people out on the way to ‘true libertarian’ status. One only arrives at support after a heavy filtering of possible supporters.

    An LP that can have both fairtaxers and anarchists, old school greens, constitutionalists and georgists alike that can co-exist without eating each other is a LP big enough to matter and overcome the obstacles.

    the more outside influences, the better.

  • undercover_anarchist

    I didn’t read beyond the title, but the answer is probably yes.

  • bac

    Wow, you people are on the internet complaining about mainstream media coverage. Of course, mainstream coverage means having only a small sound bites. Podcast (audio and video) and email are a very good way to get lots of information out to people about the candidates. Yes not everyone has internet connections but if a story gets popular on the internet it will trickle up to the mainstream news. Publish information on social news sites and get some podcasts listed on iTunes and other podcast listing places. Create a website that will feature all of the Libertarian candidates video, audio and written publications.

    If you are tired of beating your head on the mainstream media’s wall then try the trickle up theory.

  • Timothy West

    Welcome the fairtaxers. Welcome the anarchists. Welcome the disgruntled Republicans. Welcome the enviro gang. Welcome the Georgists. Fucking let them all in. Let in anyone that has interest in individual liberty.

    As long as they believe in the only principle that matters, the AMERICAN principle that people should be more free rather than less, let em in. Lets start crafting policy positions that will attract them to us on the left and right. I’m not scared that the LP might become “something else”, I’m EXCITED that it might. Thats the only thing keeping me in the LP at this point.

    Libertarians that hide themselves behind a wall of self imposed requirements arent principled, they’re scared. They’re scared shitless that libertarianism itself might pick up new ideas and might change and I say fucking about time it changed and I hope it speeds up.

    The LRC’ers are the radicals. We challenged an entire party
    in a very RADICAL fashion. You “radicals” are actually Conservatives. :D

  • disinter

    Michelle, they included Michael Badnarik based on those qualifications, not excluded him.

    Actually, they didn’t include Badnarik until some Texas Libertarians brought it to their attention that he met their “criteria”. I will send you the exchange when I get home tonight.

  • disinter

    The fact that this media outlet included Badnarik, a candidate raising significant money and really campaigning, shows us exactly what we need to do to get covered.

    Badnarik has raised a lot of money, $100,000 of which going to his campaign manager’s “firm”, but where is his media coverage? I haven’t seen much other than this inclusion.

  • http://www.reformthelp.org Carl

    If ballot access is difficult, then you get respect just for being on the ballot. In North Carolina the Libertarian candidates got covered when we were on the ballot. Yes, it was expensive and required help from national, but we got our money’s worth.

    If you have 15 people, you cannot have a real debate. There has to be some criteria for getting the valuable stage time.

    If you have an idea that is mainstream enough such that VICTORY is theoretically possible, and is different enough from both the R and the D to be worthy of consideration, then you can get yourself high enough in the polls, raise enough money, etc.

    OTOH, if you have ideas that less than 1% of the population agrees with (like defaulting on the debt, opening the borders completely, etc.) then the barriers to getting in the debates are onerous indeed. Whining is your primary option.

  • http://libertyforamerica.net/blog/24 Equal Opportunity Cynic

    Of course this vicious cycle has been around at least as long as the LP, but it’s reassuring to see the media nail down its criteria to something easily measured, if not easily attained.

    Tom Bryant (#22), bac (#25): Right on. We can sit and wait for millions of voters to suddenly flock to a party they’ve never heard of, or we can step up the outreach and help people see that true change can be attained. New media is a key to this effort; does every Libertarian candidate have a MySpace account, to pick a trivially simple example? If not, why not?

    I also think a third-party coalition strategy could be helpful in breaking down the media obstruction. Make it clear that a large plurality, maybe a majority, is NOT satisfied with the two-party morass. Then we can debate our solutions versus those of the Greens, the Constitution Party, whatever.

  • http://libertyforamerica.net/blog/24 Equal Opportunity Cynic

    One more thought: If you think that Channel 8 in Austin is too restrictive, and you’ve initiated a dialogue with them, contact the advertisers. Maybe News 8 thinks 2% of its market is insignificant; it would be interesting to see if, say, Stan’s Heating & Air Conditioning, 512/929-9393 (just to pick the banner ad off their site) feels the same way.

  • Michael H. Wilson

    Here’s a hint I got from a U.S. Senator once upon a time.
    Find out the home address of the reporters covering your campaign and if they live in your district make sure that they have a flier on their porch, or in the mailbox on a regular basis. It also helps to include their neighbors and maybe some of their fellow workers. Thus you have the appearance of a larger campaign when in reality it might be smaller.
    And answer those forms and plan to walk as much of your district as possible Got left out of the debate then picket the forum with your followers.
    Don’t bitch. Go to work.
    As someone who has run in three campaigns there is no magic bullet. There is only work. And don’t go soft just to get another one percent of the vote. Study the issues. There is no big issue that we cannot come up with a decent sounding reply to. Just ask for help.

    M.H.W.

  • Michael H. Wilson

    Michelle my comment “Don’t bitch” was not aimed at you.
    One other point y’all. This requires planning. Too many Libertarian candidates get in the race at the last minute and expect to be treated fairly by the media. That ain’t gonna happen. 18 months before the election is the time to start putting a campaign together. And I’ll say it again. Don’t go soft on the issues just to get another point.
    With the public schools suffering from a 30% dropout rate the system has nothing to brag about.
    M.H.W.

  • undercover_anarchist

    I agree.

    Getting on the ballot should not be easy.

    In Michigan, establishing “ballot access” for a political party is very difficult. But once attained, the party can nominate paper candidates at a whim, and only needs to get a pittance of votes in order to stay on the ballot. (1% of the winning candidate for SOS – i.e. about as many votes as one could expect to get by mistake).

    Therefore, third party candidates get no respect, and 99% of them DESERVE none.

    Simple solution: Have difficult, but not insurmountable ballot access laws for parties. Let parties “nominate” candidates by whim. But require each candidate to collect X number of signatures (perhaps 1000 for a congressional race) to appear on the ballot.

    I think this way would earn candidates respect, due away with paper candidates, and raise the profile of third parties in general.

  • http://www.vtlp.org/ Hardy Machia

    To get respect for our candidates we need to consistently get candidates elected to offices higher than the town level. This means the State House level.

    Badnarik might get 10%, but we need to focus on creating a sustaining effort.

    When special interest groups want to get something done in my state, they will pick 10-15 races. They will help elect those candidates, then they will help get them reelected and build from there.

    This is the Vermont LP’s and the LNCC’s goal this year. Nuts and bolts of political success that we can build on in 2008. We are running 7 candidates for State House. With half of what Badnarik is paying his campaign manager’s firm we can pay for 5 direct mail pieces for each of our 7 candidates and win 1, 2, 3, or maybe 4 of our races. $50k.

    http://www.vtlp.org/

    I’m looking for 100 people to make a $40 donation in the next 7 days. That’s $1/day up until the election. If we raise the $4000 for Vermont candidates, then I’ll match the $4k.

    Hardy

  • Devious David

    I think we need to look at DailyKos as see the accomplishments they are making with $5 and $10 donations. Libertarians aren’t doing enough with those small donators, even though our base is awfully small.

  • http://darianworden.tripod.com D Worden

    “Quit scapegoating and get with reality.”

    I always love it when LRCers say things like this then immediately blame those goddamn purists for every failure the LP has ever had. It’s almost as good as when they start endless debates complaining about how the LP is just a “debating society.”

    Seriously, just let us advocate for liberty our way. Just because we take principles more seriously than you do doesn’t mean that we’ve never done anything to get the LP more media and more voters. If you aren’t going to help us at least stop wasting our time by blaming us for every LP failure.

  • Michelle Shinghal

    Therefore, third party candidates get no respect, and 99% of them DESERVE none.

    99% of Republicrat candidates deserve no respect either.

    I would not dare ask that we are covered with a front page endorsement, but the press should at least mention the correct number of candidates in a race.

  • http://libertyforamerica.net/blog/24 Equal Opportunity Cynic

    D Worden:

    As something of a naive outsider, it amazes me that the tent can’t be big enough to include both “purists” and “reformers” uniting to get something done. I mean, tons of Democrats or Republicans aren’t thrilled with their own parties’ candidates, and they may even work to get those they dislike replaced (Lamont-Lieberman; Chaffee-Laffey). But once the primary is over, with the obvious exception of Lieberman who sticks out like a sore thumb, they generally rally around the candidate and go focus on beating the other parties.

    Why can’t we stomach intramural debate in this same way?

  • Nicholas Sarwark

    I would not dare ask that we are covered with a front page endorsement, but the press should at least mention the correct number of candidates in a race.

    All the print coverage I’ve seen of the Texas gubernatorial race does seem to mention all five candidates. Is this just a problem with TV coverage?

  • Michelle Shinghal

    Here is a link to the Dallas Morning News voting guide.

    http://www.vgt2004.org/a-dallas06/build-my-ballot.go

  • Michelle Shinghal

    We have libertarians running active campaigns, receiving donations and answering questionaires. Why no mention of their candidacies?

  • Nicholas Sarwark

    Note that the voter guide is a third-party application from eThePeople (http://www.vgt2004.org/vgt/). I think you need to focus your complaints there re: lack of inclusion of Libertarians, since it would result in a great many voter’s guides being updated.

  • Michelle Shinghal
  • Michelle Shinghal

    There are a couple of tiny mentions buried in some of the articles. One example would be Strayhorn’s staff refusing to respond to Chris Bell’s attack. He said that he would not respond to the libertarian and would not respond to Bell.

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

    As a frequent critic of the Libertarian Party, I must say I’ve been deeply impressed with this year’s LP candidates. My improved over the last few years.

    I think under the new leadership team, the LP is way on its way to professionalizing itself. And not a moment to soon.

    Latest: Longtime Libertarian Ed Thompson, former Mayor and current City Councilman from Tomah, Wisconsin says he’d “consider” a run for President on the LP ticket in 2008.

    He’d add a great deal of credibility to the Party.

    More details at http://www.mainstreamlibertarian.com

  • http://UnCivilDefence.blogspot.com MRJarrell

    The media are satisfied with the status quo and will continue to ignore libertarian candidates. You can see the same thing in states like Indiana where libertarians actually enjoy good press relationships.
    I am reminded that Martin Luther was ignored until he found a hammer and nails. So were the Sons of Liberty until they found some face paint and costumes. The press doesn’t care about whining, percentages and money raised. None of that translates to the almighty rating numbers. Nails and paint and tea in the harbour are what it takes, not suits and a Republicrat outlook.

  • Nicholas Sarwark

    There are a couple of tiny mentions buried in some of the articles. One example would be Strayhorn’s staff refusing to respond to Chris Bell’s attack. He said that he would not respond to the libertarian and would not respond to Bell.

    Here’s a question. What were the last five public campaign appearances by Mr. Werner?

    If you’re just on the ballot and not actively campaigning, you’re not going to get more than a couple of tiny mentions.

    Not that I’m saying that Libertarians don’t get shut out even when they are actively campaigning, but Werner’s website doesn’t indicate much shoe leather being expended.

  • Michelle Shinghal

    Nicholas, I will have your answer in a few. I deleted the last email from them and am working on finding it.

  • http://libertyforamerica.net/blog/24 Equal Opportunity Cynic

    MRJarrell (#47):

    I admire your outlook, but I think it’s a false dichotomy. Put on the metaphorical suit and go woo the press. (I credit Stephen Gordon for his talk at the LPMA convention helping me see how important that is.) But then use the 21st century equivalents of the Wittenberg church door, mainly the Internet, to get your ideas around the self-appointed gatekeepers.

    Why are these mutually exclusive? Of course the MSM has self-interested contempt for the new media, but when sites get Kos-like traffic they’re forced to acknowledge them. So how do we build this infrastructure?

  • http://UnCivilDefence.blogspot.com MRJarrell

    EOC-I live in a state where all of our candidates have done just that, they’ve used the internet and wooed the press and when they are mentioned in an article it is more often than not in passing.

    They’re not mutually exclusive, it’s just not working. The internet is not the answer, it is simply part of the equation.
    How do we build on a non existent infrastrucure? I haven’t clue because I don’t see how it can be done given the current situation where the powers that be and their incestuous partners in the press are concerned.

  • Michelle Shinghal

    Just in from Matthew Moseley- active candidate for TX 112–Dear Mr. Moseley:
    Thank you for your email. The points you and Mr. Nelson raised will cause us to re-examine how best to conduct our Candidate Quiz feature next time. (When you refer to Voters Guide, I assume you mean Candidate Quiz.)

    The quiz is designed to quiz the major party candidates on the issues the Editorial Board feels are most important. It is not being billed in any way as a voters guide.

    While Libertarians didn?t receive questionnaires to fill out earlier this year, they are being invited (as you know) to every single candidate interview session that we do and we are mentioning them in every single candidate recommendation we publish online and in the paper. We do this out of respect for the ballot status earned by
    Libertarians. It is more, I suspect, than most major newspapers do.
    Again, we?ll re-evaluate our Quiz feature next time around with your concerns in mind.
    Sincerely,
    Keven Ann Willey

    V

  • Michelle Shinghal

    got cut off— Ms. Willey is the
    Vice President and Editorial Page Editor

    The Dallas Morning News

  • http://libertyforamerica.net/blog/24 Equal Opportunity Cynic

    But it’s not counterproductive to build relationships with the media. I guess I just have lower expectations — it takes hours and hours of investment in a relationship that may not pay off tangibly, or may pay off in spades.

    If you’re talking about allocation of resources — Do I take the reporter out to lunch or do I spend time getting my campaign video on the Web site? — then your point is well taken. But I’m thinking in terms of going from no media engagement to minimal engagement, i.e. getting on first-name terms with the reporters. That should be a no-brainer.

  • http://UnCivilDefence.blogspot.com MRJarrell

    It doesn’t hurt to build them, EOC it just doesn’t make a difference in the long run.

  • http://www.vtlp.org/ Hardy Machia

    We have decent relation with the media in Vermont, but I don’t expect them to cover any of our candidates just because they are on the ballot.

    In Vermont’s State House races this year, our candidates are using direct mail to target the likely voters. It is the most cost effective way to get you message to them. As for the media, we encourage supporters to write letters-to-the-editor over ads, since they are more likely to be read.

    The media I’m waiting for will come when it is ready, and I hope to see it November 7 after we elect 1, 2, 3, or 4 Libertarians to the Vermont State House. That’s news, then the media will cover us, and will continue to cover us through out the year.

    Hardy Machia
    Donate $40 to the VTLP State House campaigns this week and I’ll match the first 100 donations. (http://www.vtlp.org)

  • http://darianworden.tripod.com D Worden

    EOC: “Why can’t we stomach intramural debate in this same way?”

    I’m guessing this question is directed at me so…

    I think a little debate and disagreement is healthy to a party. I usually don’t think about the party in terms of strict camps, but accept that it contains people more and less “radical” or “purist” than me.

    I just wanted to point out that I thought it was funny how some of the self-proclaimed practical and reasonable guys blame all the LP’s problems on the fact that there are too many “purists” in the party. Because, obviously, they know in their infinite knowlege that the American people don’t want to hear about principles or any of that high-falutin’ talk.

    And I think it’s kind of silly to expect all libertarians to think the same way about every LP candidate. I’ve supported LP candidates that I disagreed with some things about. If I disagreed significantly, than I wouldn’t have supported them. It all depends on what I personally think is best for liberty.

  • http://wesbenedictforlnc.blogspot.com/ Wes Benedict

    While not all of the articles are positive, the http://lptexas.org/news.shtml site lists 136 articles in mainstream newspapers that cover Texas Libertarians with more than a simple mention. In many cases, only one article was selected if the same topic was caried in various papers. Libertarians in Texas have been on multiple radio shows and and covered in multiple television appearances as well. The Libertarian candidate for Governor, James Werner, is interviewed by radio, television, or newspapers usually at least once per day. Of course, getting him into the state-wide televised debate would be wonderful, but at this point, they’re still excluding him.

  • Steve

    I wish this blog was “work-safe” With the sexual references and swear words, I can’t read it at work. As a leading source of libertarian campaign news, I wish you would respect your audience a litter more.

    I’m surprised my news reader didn’t get filtered today.

    Thanks,
    Steve

  • Derrick

    Man, I’m glad I don’t work at a company which is that uptight. That’s just nuts.

  • http://www.thirdpartywatch.com Austin Cassidy

    Umm, these requirements really don’t sound all that bad actually. If your district had 200,000 residents all you would need to do is raise $30,000-$40,000. Or commission a poll by a decent pollster that shows you at 10%.

    Or… run candidates in one-on-one Congressional races and try to capture around 20% of the vote, which should amount to filling this requirement for future races: “The candidate, during the previous eight years won his/her party primary election or received votes greater than 10 percent of the total registered voters in the constituency.”

    It’s not like they’re demanding you reach 10% or 15% in a poll and that’s it… really, there are a lot of different ways to qualify here and they’re not THAT difficult.

  • Michael H. Wilson

    Here’s another clue from the past. During the time between elections get your local libertarian group to invite a member of the press in to give a talk on public relations. Most newspaper and major television stations like to get their people out to do things like this. Try inviting two or three different people a year to speak on public relations. That is, of course, if your local group invites speakers to come and talk. It doesn’t always work to our advantage, but it just may. I have seen it work and someone may pick up a hint on how to get some free public relations.
    M.H.W.

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

    “Umm, these requirements really don’t sound all that bad actually.”

    I agree completely. If we can’t do one of those five things, we probably wouldn’t get more than 1% of the vote anyway. As I posited earlier, why should they give a candidate 1/3rd of the airtime when they can only get 1/100th of the vote. Even with the argument that theoretically that airtime could expose them enough to raise them to 1/20th of the vote, it’s disproportional airtime which takes away from the airtime of the candidates most likely to win. It’s the maintenance of the status quo, and I don’t in any way endorse it, but it explains a fairly valid reason why they don’t include us. If all of our candidates were running Badnarik or NH-caliber campaigns, they would be much more likely to include us. I agree with Mr. Dondero that we are getting better thanks to new leadership, and I think this can be partially attributed to the efforts of the LRC to push the LP to take politics more seriously.

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

    D Worden, Devious David:

    In this context, principle means crap until it can be translated into political reality. The assumption that I and other LRCers are not principled is severely flawed – maybe our principles vary slightly from yours, a factor you must take into account to make such a jump of logic.

    Martin Luther King and others have been able to successfully translate principled stances (that were radical at the time) into political reality only by appealing to the center. The LP, up until this point, has acted, figuratively, like the modern NAACP – all whining, vitriol and rhetoric, albeit much less successful – they had the benefit of a historically successful organization, we don’t.

    Until the LP writes it’s own Birmingham Jail letter, appealing to the center while carefully criticizing their apathy to change the political status quo, we will continue to whine about how badly everyone (the media, the major parties, the voters) treats us. And we will continue to fail.

  • undercover_anarchist

    I would say that the requirements are a little stiff, but there should be requirements and in many cases, they should be more difficult to attain than the current law.

    I’m iffy on making fundraising a criterion. In the absence of more restrictive ballot laws, it may be the only way. But if so, the bar should be a LOT lower than you guys have set. If you set the bar at $10,000 in $200 increments (i.e. 50+ donors), it would eliminate 99.9% of third-party candidates. The 0.1% left would get more respect.

    Ideally, I would like to see EVERY candidate have to collect some signatures and pay for those signatures to be validated. Maybe 1000 signatures plus a $500 fee for Congress. The $500 may be deemed too restrictive, though.

  • Pingback: Hammer of Truth » Texas Gubernatorial Candidate James Werner

  • Michael H. Wilson

    I can’t argue with you guys so here’s another tip.
    Get a box of thank you cards and use them liberally.
    Okay I know the word “liberal” may be offensive to some, but using the cards to thank speakers at your meetings shouldn’t be offensive. But if you’re a candidate send them to reporters who do interviews, to people who put out your yard signs, to those who contribute funds, those who walk the streets with you and anyone else you can think of.
    Maybe they’ll remember you next time around, or if not you the next Libertarian candidate who runs.
    M.H.W.

  • http://www.praisetoallah.org Weders?

    I think PraiseToAllah.org has the outcome of that comment.

  • http://www.christianpeper.com Christian Peper

    The most important factor is to welcome all that want more freedom. The libertarian party is not important, real freedom is. Most Americans don’t even know that they are slaves. The libertarian party should reach out to all that feel they are living in a repressive police state. Welcome all and stop with the libertarian purity tests.

  • Michael H. Wilson

    Here’s another hint for respect before I go to the grave.
    Invest in some bumper stickers and other stickers as well after this election that read “SUPPORT the BILL OF RIGHTS”. Maybe even buy some bus advertising. This isn’t controversial like gun ownership or drugs, or prostitution for that matter and plaster them on every car you can legally do so.
    Start the campaign in you town. The Repugnicans aren’t going to do this and neither are the Democraps.
    Then send out news releases about your campaign.
    M.H.W.

  • Michael H. Wilson

    BTW Bill of Rights Day is December 15th, so you have a whole month to get ready. I will be. Will you?
    M.H.W.

  • http://libertariansmither.blogspot.com Lloyd Laughlin

    Check out the recent update on SMITHER, TX,Dist 22:

    Lampson, D @ 41%
    SMITHER, L @ 25%
    Sekula-Gibbs, R @ 11%

    The Republican is a write-in candidate where voters will have to BOTH remember her name and spell it 1 click at a time on an alphabetical wheel on the district’s electronic voting machines.

    SMITHER CAN WIN.
    This is a ver conservative district that voted 64% for Bush in ’04.
    Lampson is an old time pro-union, big spending, Nancy Pelosi Democrat who “carpetbagged” in from across the state.

    Only Lampson and SMITHER are on the ballot.

    Smither needs $$$$$$$$$ and buzzzzzzzzzz.

    Help!

    http://www.smither4congress.com

    Lloyd Laughlin
    laughlinou@yahoo.com

    “MR. SMITHER GOES TO WASHINGTON”

    Please write the Houston-area and Sugarland-area newspapers and TV stations.

  • paulie
  • Pingback: Hammer of Truth » Something Funny Happened Today