Another Candidacy Rocks The Chicken Suit

A fusion candidate running on (at least) the Libertarian and Green ballot lines, John Murphy, has taken a cue from the Peirce campaign in Ohio.

According to a press release I got in my inbox, he plans on wearing a chicken costume.

On October 11, 2006 the Lancaster County Rotary club will hold a debate between two of the three candidates running for House of Representatives in the 16th Congressional District of Pennsylvania.

The Rotary Club has decided only to invite the two corporate owned candidates and not the corporate free candidate John Murphy. While the decision of the Rotary Club was certainly ill considered, it is unpardonable that both Mr. Pitts and Ms. Herr have not chided the Rotary Club for its oversight. “It is unthinkable”, said John Murphy, “that both Mr. Pitts and Ms. Herr did not suggest to the Rotary Club that common decency and fair play demand that all candidates be invited to address the members of the Rotary Club. I’m reminded of something Abraham Lincoln once said, “˜To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men’. If the two corporate candidates are so callous as to ignore this common courtesy, what can the voters expect of them?” concluded John Murphy.

Since neither Mr. Pitts nor Ms. Herr has insisted that the Rotary Club extend an invitation to Mr. Murphy, the Murphy campaign is forced to conclude that the two corporate candidates are too “chicken” to debate John Murphy.

Looking at his site, the guy isn’t really that libertarian, but he does have an impressive list of leftist celebrity endorsements, including Ralph Nader, Peter Camejo, Noam Chomsky, and Howard Zinn. He’s not fully our guy, but he’s a better alternative than the other two.

However, I do have to question the chicken suit. With the Peirce campaign, it was novel. But I’m left wondering if it will become the next big libertarian “thing” that we do because it’s cool, regardless of effectiveness. I mean, if all we are to the average voter is The World’s Smallest Political Quiz, chicken suits and NORML rallies… well that’s cool and all but it’s hard to take seriously. I could very well be totally off the mark here. But it’s been a concern of mine.

At any rate, I hope John Murphy embarrasses the duopolistic goons.

46 Comments
  1. 100% Libertarian or not, I still like this guy. He’s got balls:

    /2006/09/25/independent-candidate-fights-back-gets-arrested/

  2. Yes, but they are apt in pointing out that the major party candidates are “ducking” out of debating them.

    I kinda wish I had started this little meme in June, as it would probably be building national critical mass by now.

  3. Why/how did this guy get the Libertarian nomination? I don’t see how our cause is even remotely furthered by nominating this guy. Aren’t we supposed to be giving credibility to libertarian policies and not discrediting the validity of them?

  4. John Murphy is NOT running on the Libertarian ballot. He is running as an independent. The LPPa was not able to get a single US Congressional candidate on the ballot this year, do to unusually high signature requiremnts.

    John does have 2 county level LP endorsements, but he is not a libertarian. To his credit, he does favor a libertarian foreign policy and he is an outspoken activist againt the war. Were still working on about the empire at home.

    I like John because he has a habit of blurting out the truth in an animated cantankerous style. I consider him one of the new “Incredible Hulk” Greens, who would rather take a disorderly conduct charge in the capitol, than sing cum-bah-ya with the tree-huggers. I can honestly say, I’d love to see this guy get elected. At least CSPAN would be a lot more fun.

  5. this is a similiar campaign as Kevin Zeese’s “Unity Campaign” where he got the endorsements of Greens, Libertarians, and Populists in MD.

    http://www.kevinzeese.com/

    John Murphy was a former Green Party member in PA who got thrown out of the party for cussin’

  6. Speaking of Maryland Libertarians, is anyone else here one? I am from MD, and from what I can tell there is not much going on with the state LP chapter here.

  7. I’m all for the chicken suit protests and if I were in John Murphy’s district I’d vote for him.

  8. i would say he’s as libertarian as some of the LP candidates this year, especially those who support a border crackdown and Bush’s wars.

    Furthermore, the issues where he disagrees with us don’t tick me off as much as those two, which happen to be the very forefront of the national debate.

    I’d rather have candidates like Zeese and Murphy than warmonger, anti-immigrant LPers.

    As for chicken suits, I do believe I’ve heard of them being used in past years. It’s unlikely the Pierce campaign was the first to ever think of this. In fact, I remember recommending something like that years ago.

    I’m glad campaigns are picking up on this idea. They should do it more and embarass the chicken mono/duopolist poly ticks.

  9. Stuart writes:

    However, I do have to question the chicken suit. With the Peirce campaign, it was novel. But I’m left wondering if it will become the next big libertarian “thing” that we do because it’s cool, regardless of effectiveness.

    Chicken suits are so 90’s and the duck suit is like really uncool. The zombie look is the next big thing – chic, vogue, and totally undead. Protesters wishing to present a more formal look might wear the classic clown suit with matching accessories – nose, shoes and bicycle horn.

    For effectiveness, nothing beats the new thug look – black suit, shiny black shoes, black tie, white shirt, Raybans, and an earphone. A silver badge completes the thug look. To really work the thug look, look around every two seconds, flip your badge out and show it to everyone you see, tell everyone you see to get out of the way and move along, and arrive at the event in a black van with tinted windows.

  10. “Andy –

    I think you actually can if you register at your parents'”

    They don’t live in his district.

  11. Hmmmmm…yeah, just looked at it again and it says Chester co., I did see Lancaster Co. on something though….might have been just a newspaper article. Was this the local candidate your brother got signatures for?

  12. If Chomsky endorsed this guy, I’m going to run from him as fast as I can.

    Chomsky is good on a lot of stuff, although obviously not perfect.

  13. “If Chomsky endorsed this guy, I’m going to run from him as fast as I can.

    Chomsky is good on a lot of stuff, although obviously not perfect.”

    Chomsky is a leftist phoney and Murphy is not the perfect candidate from a libertarian standpoint, however, Murphy is certainly better than the Democrat and Republican candidates and is the only other choice on the ballot.

  14. Chomsky is a self-proclaimed socialist, the antithesis of libertarianism. Perhaps his social policy is somewhat similar to libertarians’ (in the same way that the ACLUs social policy is somewhat similar to libertarians’), but he is totally oblivious to correct foreign and fiscal policies.

    His biggest fan is Hugo Chavez, and look at his country (it sucks).

  15. Actually, his foreign policies are by and large better than the mainstream, as well.

    Socialist, incidentally, is not the antithesis of libertarian.

    It’s merely a form of economic organization; voluntary communes are no less libertarian than a real free market.

    State socialism and fascism are indeed the antithesis of libertarianism, but Chomsky claims (somewhat disingenuously) to be an anarcho-socialist, not a state socialist.

    It’s true that he does not speak out nearly enough about the authoritarianism of state socialists, but then some self-styled libertarians don’t speak out nearly enough about the authoritarianism of the corporate-theocratic-warmonger right.

  16. You’re right, [insert anti-establisment name here] for president!

    Now that we got that out of the way, I thought I might add a few more points. First, there is no such thing as social freedom without economic freedom. No one is truly free to act as they please if they cannot put their dollar bills where they please as well. An excellent example is in New York, where catholic nuns are forced to pay for abortions through taxation (which is the equivalent to murder in their book).

    As for his foreign policy, Mr. Chomsky believes the US should abdicate its power to the UN.

    The crux of libertarianism is the idea of private property rights, something Mr. Chomsky believes we should do away with. Need I say more?

  17. Paulie Cannoli

    You leave no room for anyone but you as a libertarian. You are defining libertarianism down to a small group that really does not exist which makes you ridiculous.

    I must give credit where credit is due,

    YOU ARE CONSISTENT………….CONSISTENTLY WRONG!!!!!!!!!

    Go where you belong, to the Anarchist Party, not here.

  18. Paulie Cannoli

    Thank you for consistently standing up for principle.

    We don’t ALWAYS agree but we start from the same point. What our candidates run on IS important. If you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything. Tyranny in the name of freedom is tyranny none-the-less.

    Now bring on those chicken suits.

  19. I am glad that Paulie stands up for his principles as well. To bad, however, that they seem to align more with the Green Party at times then they do with the Libertarian Party.

  20. You’re right, [insert anti-establisment name here] for president!

    OK.

    http://kubby.com/

    http://groups.myspace.com/stevekubby

    http://knappster.blogspot.com/2006/10/first-look-2008-series-end.html

    First, there is no such thing as social freedom without economic freedom.

    Ultimately, you’re right. But, for instance, I would have to say that relatively speaking, Holland is more socially free than America, and San Francisco is more socially free than Tuscaloosa, Alabama – despite the lack of economic freedom.

    As for his foreign policy, Mr. Chomsky believes the US should abdicate its power to the UN.

    A curious position for an anarchist, and one I oppose. I was referring mostly to his opposition to US wars of aggression and imperialism.

    Julian does not really deserve an answer, except this: if he thinks I’m consistently wrong, it must be because he never agrees with me. Therefore he never believes in less government on any issue? Hmmmmm..

  21. BTW, I’m already in the Anarchist Party. Which has room for plenty of folks.

    Here we are talking about the candidacy of Mr. Murphy, hardly an anarchist. That’s a candidacy I can endorse, although there are issues on which we disagree. So where does the idea that I am so exclusionary come from? Only because I’m unwilling to be in any coalition with warmongers?

    Mr. Knight,

    Thank you. BTW you were the first LP activist I remember meeting in person after I became open to the idea, back when you were doing your college tour.

    TerryP,

    On which issues, precisely, would you say I am not a libertarian? I score 100/100 on the Nolan quiz, and the last time I didn’t was in 1992, when it was 100/80.

    http://www.bcaplan.com/cgi-bin/purity.cgi

    My current score is 153.

    I have been hearing allegations from a number of folks here and elsewhere that I support state socialism, yet I’ve still to hear specific examples of positions I’ve taken in 1993 or later to that effect.

  22. Chomsky is a self-described libertarian socialist, or anarchist. Property is a social construct. Ultimately, the only legitimate property is that which I can defend for myself. Once the state gets involved, it is coercive. Fundamentally, we do not all have the same idea of what property is. You and I may agree, and our definitions may seem self-evident, but what about Menghe and Yinka?

    Point being: Chomsky advocates the abolition of the state. That is his philosophical base. Many “libertarians” want only enough state to defend their (white) privlelage. These people are more accurately called “fuedalists” than libertarians.

    Then again, Marx advocated the abolition of the state. The means by which that end is derived are important. I do not agree with Chomsky on everything (obviously), but I find his politics infinitely preferable to the average angry white Libertarian candidate whose sole promises is to deliver on the GOP’s broken promises. “The LP, we REALLY hate taxes!!!”

  23. but I find his politics infinitely preferable to the average angry white Libertarian candidate whose sole promises is to deliver on the GOP’s broken promises. “The LP, we REALLY hate taxes!!!”

    Hey, that’s not fair because some angry white libertarians love FAIR TAXES.

    Which reminds me, where the hell can I get some Karl Dickey costumes?

  24. Paulie,

    Here is a quote from you “to reach out to the libertarian left, The Republitarians need to be JETTISONED, since they serve to chase off the larger group we should be allying with.” I took that as meaning that anyone who mainly pushes right-leaning issues needs to be jettisoned from the party. You called them “The Enemy Within”. You said “No” but that becomes hard to believe when you capitalized jettisoned.

    Here is another place in a blog where I asked you not to try and make the LP party into the Green party.

    You said you “Wouldn’t dream of it. Actually, I have the opposite idea: I think the Green Party can be taken over a lot more easily. I read in 2002 they had 58 attendees at their national convention. I would like to re-write the Green Platform to make it ZAP/NAP compatible while remaining true to the Green Key Values.”

    Are these the key Green Party values you are talking about http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a39d813cd6fc7.htm.

    (con’t)

  25. If you align with any of this I have a hard time believing that you are not a far left-leaning libertarian. I have no problem with you being a far left-leaning libertarian, but I don’t believe that is where the party should go if we will have any chance of winning elections in the future. I don’t believe we need to “JETTISON” either the left or the right libertarians but need both to successfully take back our nation from the authoritarian demopublicans.

  26. I took that as meaning that anyone who mainly pushes right-leaning issues needs to be jettisoned from the party.

    And why would that make me a statist? I believe a left emphasis – that is, on areas where we already agree with the left – is strategically preferrable, but I don’t actually oppose smaller government on any issue.

    You said “No” but that becomes hard to believe when you capitalized jettisoned.

    OK, I’m lost – what did I say no to?

    Are these the key Green Party values you are talking about

    http://gp.org/tenkey.shtml

    Any and all of these can be worked toward through libertarian means.

  27. As previously mentioned, I don’t agree with the Green party platform. However, I think you’re overstating your case.

    If you align with any of this I have a hard time believing that you are not a far left-leaning libertarian.

    Why not the following….

    End Political and Racial Persecution by the Criminal Justice System: Freedom for all political prisoners and prisoners of racial injustice. Clemency for Leonard Peltier. New trial for Mumia Abu-Jamal.

    or:

    Civil Liberties: Support the Bill of Rights. No compromise on civil liberties and due process for “national security,” “anti-terrorism,” or “the war on drugs.” Repeal the 1994 Crime and 1996 Anti-Terrorism bills. End domestic political spying by police, military, and intelligence agencies.

    I have no problem with those points, why would you consider them wrong from a libertarian perspective?

  28. Paulie, you are right I did over state my case just a little as I am sure there are a couple items in that long list that are libertarian, however, almost all of them are not even close to being libertarian. I would appluad your efforts to re-write the Green party platform, I just feel like it will be a fruitless effort considering you will have to pretty much redo just about everything they believe in.

    I never called you statist. I just said that you seem to be trying to pull the party to the left most corner of the Nolan chart and that you seem to align with the Green party on some things. At least you have no problem endorsing candidates such as Zeese and Murphy, who are not libertarians, but align themselves more with the Green Party. Based on the site I sent you to earlier, I don’t believe that the LP and the Green party agree on much, especially on how we are to get to our goals. They for the most part are for more gov’t and we are for less. (con’t)

  29. Paulie, I believe you to be a libertarian. While you may actually be a 100/100 libertarian, your posts seem to indicate more of a left leaning bias. I will admit I am not an anarchist but probably lie more in the upper middle of the libertarian quadrant. My biggest issues are more of the economic nature, which would seem to put me in the republitarians you seem to want to JETTISON from the party, even though I likely agree with you on most every left leaning issue (including Iraq). My whole point is that I feel as a party if we are to overcome the authoritarian parties we need to include both the left and right side of the libertarian half of the chart by staying more in the middle of quandrant with our policies and rhetoric. When we get to the three extremes of the quadrant we lose most crediblity as a party, appeal to only a small cross-section of people, and are viewed as wackos. There is a large group of voters to go after and that includes both left and right libertarians.

  30. I would appluad your efforts to re-write the Green party platform, I just feel like it will be a fruitless effort considering you will have to pretty much redo just about everything they believe in.

    The Key Values (see link above) are more fundamental to Green philosophy than the platform planks. The platform planks are suggested means to achieve the values. I would favor a platform which uses libertarian means to achieve these values.

    I never called you statist. I just said that you seem to be trying to pull the party to the left most corner of the Nolan chart and that you seem to align with the Green party on some things.

    That would indicate that my suggested platform would answer “no” on some of the economic questions. That is not the case. I am a 100/100 libertarian; I don’t suggest any other policy. However, it’s true that our philosophy can be marketed in a way that is much more friendly to the left.

  31. See

    http://knappster.blogspot.com/2006/10/first-look-2008-series-end.html

    As to why.

    Based on the site I sent you to earlier, I don’t believe that the LP and the Green party agree on much, especially on how we are to get to our goals.

    True, but there’s no inherent conflict between green goals and libertarian means. I would suggest, ideally, a mixture of both.

    My biggest issues are more of the economic nature, which would seem to put me in the republitarians you seem to want to JETTISON from the party, even though I likely agree with you on most every left leaning issue (including Iraq).

    Then you misunderstood me; you are not who I would jettison from the party.

    Tom Knapp does a good job of explaining why we think the left is more fertile ground, so I won’t replicate the typing….just check out the link.

  32. Derrick writes, “Speaking of Maryland Libertarians, is anyone else here one? I am from MD, and from what I can tell there is not much going on with the state LP chapter here.”

    I’m a Marylander. And, yes, our state party is pretty small. We recently held a gun-raffle to raise money. We’re still working on signatures, we only have half as many as we need. The only guy in Maryland running under the Libertarian banner is McPeek for House of Representatives, and he’s less of a libertarian, in my opinion, than Zeese. We’ve endorsed Zeese for Senate and and Titman (sp?) for Judge.

    undercover_anarchist writes, “Chomsky is a self-described libertarian socialist, or anarchist. Property is a social construct. Ultimately, the only legitimate property is that which I can defend for myself.”

    I have to stop you right there. What about the property that others are voluntarily willing to help you defend?

    Respectfully yours,
    Alex Peak
    Membership Chair, College Libertarians of Towson

%d bloggers like this: