289 Comments
  1. I wish him the best for being so brave to not care what other people think and describe some possible scary futures we are facing with the way this country is going, but I think he needed to do it with more tact in order to have a positive effect. That is very clear from his presentation and I am shocked he did it the way he did.

  2. Whew! That was heavy stuff. He just won the Constitution Party vote in Montana, which is actually significant. Good for 2 to 3%.’

    My prediction, Jones will get a larger percentage than any other Libertarian US Senate candidate in the Nation, and will throw the election to Democrat Tester.

    Burns has made zero attempt to reach out to libertarians in Montana, so he almost deserves this shallacking.

    It will be interesting to watch the network talking head on Election Night reporting “and 6% for Libertarian Stan Jones in Montana…”

  3. Money Quote 1: “The secret organizations of the world power elite are no longer secret. They have planned and are now leading us into a one-world communist government.”

    Money Quote 2: “We will have a new currency: the Amero. And a new constitution, modeled on the Soviet Union’s constitution.”

    Money Quote 3: “You will have a national ID card with a radio frequency chip in it. That’s already law in America and will be implemented by May 2000.”

  4. This dude is talking some absolutely batshit crazy, wingnut stuff. This is a prime example of why we don’t get taken seriously. For every viable candidate like Bill Peirce, there are two wackjob conspiracy theorists running under the LP banner. These candidates do heavy and irreparable (sp?) damage to the party every time they speak in public.

    This type of thing is an absolute embarrassment, and it has got to stop.

  5. “This dude is talking some absolutely batshit crazy, wingnut stuff. This is a prime example of why we don’t get taken seriously.”

    I call it speaking the truth. If you don’t realize this then you haven’t done your homework. Instead of making snide remarks, how about researching what he talked about and finding out whether or not it’s true?

  6. National ID in 2008 is a fact
    NAFTA/CAFTA/FTAA are facts
    Amero is in the works.
    The super highway is in the works.
    America already practices all 10 planks of the communist manifesto.

    Wingbat? Nutjob? He stuck to the facts Derrick.

  7. Andy,

    If it’s not on CNN or in time magazine, people are generally clueless.

    Then again, those that read nothing but are as well!

  8. Mike Nelson: How is this different than the “fear mongering” you tin-foil hat types accuse the GOP of?

  9. Here is the real deliniation of Libertarians. Not left vs. right; but crazy vs. sane.

    All the communist talk… Give me a fucking break. Like the powers that be have some altruistic motive to crush capitalism and bring about a worker’s paradise. Communism strives for a stateless society, totally antithetical to what this nutjob is talking about.

    In reality, this guy is the commie. He’s anti-trade, anti-free market. You know what I call a highway stretching from Mexico to Canada? Good for commerce. Good for freedom.

    Look at the comments above. Half of them are in support for this idiot, and the other half recognize him for the paranoid nutcase that he is. Instead of the non-initiation pledge, Libertarian candidates should take a mandatory psychiatric evaluation and sign an “I’m not crazy” pledge.

    This guys is a true embarassment and a discredit to the third-party movement. Just another excuse not to invite credible candidates to the debates. Good job. Join the fucking CP!!!

  10. “All the communist talk”¦ Give me a fucking break. Like the powers that be have some altruistic motive to crush capitalism and bring about a worker’s paradise. Communism strives for a stateless society, totally antithetical to what this nutjob is talking about.”

    Communism was FUNDED by the big bankers. Communism is NOT an idealogy for the poor to create a worker’s paradise but is REALLY meant to con the people back into serfdom.

    “In reality, this guy is the commie. He’s anti-trade, anti-free market. You know what I call a highway stretching from Mexico to Canada? Good for commerce. Good for freedom.”

    He’s not anti-free trade, he’s anti-global government and anti-corporate fascism.

    I’d suggest that you do some more research. Read G. Edward Griffin’s excellent book “The Creature From Jekyell Island: A Second Look At The Federal Reserve” which is available at http://www.realityzone.com. He gets into all of this stuff in that book. There are other sources but that’s start.

  11. “Look at the comments above. Half of them are in support for this idiot, and the other half recognize him for the paranoid nutcase that he is.”

    People who think that he’s a “parinoid nutcase” are people who haven’t done their homework.

  12. I must agree with Rick, all 10 planks of the Communist Manifesto are already practiced in the United States.

    I suppose the obvious is a bit too much for UA to take.

    I am having a hard time figuring out how a superhighway built by means of theft (eminent domain) is “good for freedom”…

  13. Andy.. I own that book, but I haven’t had a chance to read it.

    So Marx was a tool of the bankers? Lenin? Who and when exactly? Is Fidel a tool of the bankers? Was Che? Mao? Pol Pot? Kim Jung Il?

    Bankers = not the bad guys. I swear, your contempt for free trade and capitalism makes me wonder if you’re not a secret commie spy.

    Communists = misguided hippies and angry old college professors.

    Dictators = bad guys… Communist, fascist, Islamic, or what have you.

    Right-wing nut jobs running as Libertarian Party candidates = the real bad guys who disgrace and discredit legitimate campaigns and candidates.

  14. “Andy.. I own that book, but I haven’t had a chance to read it.

    So Marx was a tool of the bankers? Lenin? Who and when exactly? Is Fidel a tool of the bankers? Was Che? Mao? Pol Pot? Kim Jung Il?

    Bankers = not the bad guys. I swear, your contempt for free trade and capitalism makes me wonder if you’re not a secret commie spy.

    Communists = misguided hippies and angry old college professors.

    Dictators = bad guys”¦ Communist, fascist, Islamic, or what have you.”

    Man, you’ve got a lot to learn. Yeah, the big bankers are bad guys and they’ve got nothing to do with the free market. Communists are not just a bunch of misguided hippies and angry old college professors.

    I’ve got no contempt for capitalism as long as you are talking about free market capitalism. I’ve also got no comtempt for free trade as long as you are talking about REAL free trade.

  15. “Good for freedom because it allows people to travel more easily. Eminent domain for the purpose of road construction is constitutional, if inconveniant.”

    Just because eminent domain is legal for road construction it doesn’t make it good. Also, examine the people who are in charge of this. This is not good, it might sound good, but it’s a trap. Global government is the REAL agenda here.

  16. Dondero: Who cares if he scored the 2% Constituion Party vote? He was included in the debates and had an audience of thousands – possibly tens of thousands. He could have passionately addressed issues of importance to voters and scored 27% support from D’s and R’s. But instead he rambled about “secret organizations” and “radio frequency chips”, alienating 99.85% of the people watching. All while the words ‘Libertarian candidate’ appeared below him on the screen.

    Mike Nelson: Even if he’s right about any of that stuff, he still alienated 99.85% of the people watching. All while the words ‘Libertarian candidate’ appeared below him on the screen.

    Andy, Rick Rajter: Get real. Just because there is discussion of something (such as the Amero) doesn’t mean it’s a done deal. And, all of that put together doesn’t equal a “one-world communist government” orchestrated by the “secret organizations of the world power elite.”

  17. If so, that’s really “nutjob” enough for most people not to look past to what he actually has to say.

  18. Good for freedom because it allows people to travel more easily.

    A lot of the things the government mandates with the use of force makes things easy for some. So you are in favor of theft by force now? How is this good for freedom?

    Eminent domain for the purpose of road construction is constitutional, if inconveniant.

    And it is theft.

  19. Yes, quite the embarrassment to the Libertarian Party. But remember, the R’s and D’s run some nutcases too…we just need more normal folks to make these guys look like the exception, not the norm.

    The conspiracy nonsense, such as the “I don’t have to pay income tax” crowd, the “Federal Reserve is a private corporation” guys, and the “we lost the Revolutionary War and are a still a British colony” boys, have not done proper research. Going to a bunch of amateur websites and listing to Alex Jones is not research. I’ve encountered too many libertarians who have fallen for this and have done crazy things like revoke their citizenship or bring an inverted flag into the courtroom (to make it a “common law” jurisdiction).

    But let’s assume they are right. You aren’t going to get elected by trying to convince everyone that you’re right. You win elections by representing what the people want. The Libertarian Party should not be used a pulpit for this. The LP should win elections.

  20. The Federal Reserve system is not ideal, not truly free or independent, and is horribly flawed from a philosophical standpoint… But dealing in reality, it is the best system in the world. I know I’m going to hear “America is prosperous in spite of the Fed, not because of it,” but there’s no evidence to support this.

  21. “Yeah, I have a lot to learn. You really showed me.

    I live on Planet Earth. You might want to consider visiting sometime.”

    Don’t believe me, do your own research and see what you find.

  22. UA – How is a central bank “the best system in the world”? Additionally, how is it “good for freedom”?

  23. “The conspiracy nonsense, such as the “I don’t have to pay income tax” crowd, the “Federal Reserve is a private corporation” guys,”

    The Federal Reserve is both public and private. It’s a cartel.

    Nobody HAS to pay income tax. The government lies about their own rules. The only reason to pay is because of the threat of force or the use of force. Just because the government says something it doesn’t make it right or true.

  24. UA – What if I don’t want to be compensated, and would rather keep my property? If they then take my land by force, is that not theft – regardless of compensation?

  25. “It’s not theft. People are compensated. Back on Planet Earth, roads do need to be constructed.”

    If a person doens’t want to sell or wants a higher price than the government is willing to pay then it IS theft.

    You call yourself “undercover_anarchist” but what kind of anarchist support eminent domain, even for roads? I guess one that is “undercover.”

  26. “The Federal Reserve system is not ideal, not truly free or independent, and is horribly flawed from a philosophical standpoint”¦ But dealing in reality, it is the best system in the world. I know I’m going to hear “America is prosperous in spite of the Fed, not because of it,” but there’s no evidence to support this.”

    Now I’m wondering if you are the commie.

  27. “Voters don’t care about any of this shit.”

    How do you know this? Even if you are right maybe it’s time they pulled their heads out of the sand.

  28. The Federal Reserve is the best central banking system in the world. You dispute this? It is not entirely independent, but it is more so than most other central banks. It has presided over America’s greatest era of prosperity. It creates a stable investment environment. I never said it was good for freedom. But the argument could be made that it facilitates social mobility by allowing people to have a stable investment environment and to move out of their station in life. Hardcore Amish Libertarians would like to return to a currency backed by ornamentry. How have such systems worked throughout time? What end result have they produced? Massive income disparity. Societies with little or no social freedom. Sorry to keep bringing up facts here. They’re often unwelcome when they clash with Amish Orthodoxy.

  29. Andy,

    I’m glad you understand the Federal Reserve. There are some who insist that it is a private for profit corporation (and all the records showing profits going to the US Treasury is propaganda of course).

    I’m also sure you understand what is meant by the statement “I don’t have to pay income tax”. If not, I will clarify that I meant without negative reprocussions from the federal government, including being fined and/or tossed into jail. I’m talking about the Irwin Schiff followers and the dozens of similiar folks.

    Hey, I hate income tax as much as the next guy. But I’m not going to disrupt my life because I think I can convince a judge that “includes” means something other than “includes” (yes, that is a real get-out-of-taxes argument, lol).

  30. “The Federal Reserve is the best central banking system in the world. You dispute this? It is not entirely independent, but it is more so than most other central banks. It has presided over America’s greatest era of prosperity. It creates a stable investment environment. I never said it was good for freedom. But the argument could be made that it facilitates social mobility by allowing people to have a stable investment environment and to move out of their station in life. Hardcore Amish Libertarians would like to return to a currency backed by ornamentry. How have such systems worked throughout time? What end result have they produced? Massive income disparity. Societies with little or no social freedom. Sorry to keep bringing up facts here. They’re often unwelcome when they clash with Amish Orthodoxy.”

    It sounds like you should change your name to undercover_communist.

  31. Call me a commie because I rely on facts and history rather than conspiratorial conjecture.

    Mike – There is a difference between philosophy and reality. The book Freakonomics says that morality is the way the world should work; economics is the way that it does work. By that same token, anarchism is the way the world should work, and capitalism is the way it does. In the real world, roads need to be built. The Founders addressed issues like this in the Constitution. Sure, it can suck. But again, we’re living in the real world, not a libertarian utopia (which would have a MUCH MUCH lower standard of living, I might add).

  32. UA – So you prefer a centralized/planned banking system. Shall the government centrally plan everything, or just the banking system?

  33. “I’m also sure you understand what is meant by the statement “I don’t have to pay income tax”. If not, I will clarify that I meant without negative reprocussions from the federal government, including being fined and/or tossed into jail. I’m talking about the Irwin Schiff followers and the dozens of similiar folks.”

    I agree with people like Shiff, Bob Schulz ( http://www.givemeliberty.org ), Joe Bannister ( http://www.freedomabovefortune.com ), Aaron Russo ( http://www.freedomabovefascism.com ), etc… about the income tax. I’ve studied the issue over the past few years and I believe that they are correct. However, one can be right and still go to prison. The government will often lie about their own laws. I’ve had government officials lie to my face about the law.

  34. Mike – There is a difference between philosophy and reality. [blah, blah, blah]

    UA – that is a red herring, not an answer to my question. The question was:

    What if I don’t want to be compensated, and would rather keep my property? If they then take my land by force, is that not theft – regardless of compensation?

  35. I would prefer a free market in currencies, backed by various commodities and notes issued by independent banks.

    Of course, this would mean a much lower standard of living for everyone in America and the world.

    But it doesn’t matter. The Federal Reserve isn’t going anywhere.

    And it isn’t all that centralized or planned. It sets the discount rate. Often, the Fed cannot control interest rates. At the end of Greenspan’s tenure, he faced a “conundrum” when long term rates were not going up in tandem with short term rates.

  36. “Yes, because in Andy’s bizarro world, capitalism = communism”

    Where did I say that capitalism = communism?

    Are you denying that the big bankers funded communism? Do you believe that the big bankers have something to do with the free market?

  37. Andy,

    I’ve read the tax code and have their arguments to be absurd. The courts reach the same conclusion.

    I agree that in a perfect world, there shouldn’t be an income tax. But we don’t have a perfect world. We have a 16th amendment (yes, it was ratified) and a tax code that clearly states that an income tax is imposed on all of us.

    If we want to get rid of income tax, we need to elect the right people to congress. The key word is “elect”. We dont elect people to congress by getting tossed into jail after listening to men who make their living selling “get out of tax” packages all the while they pay theirs (Joe Bannister still pays income taxes *gasp*).

  38. If you would rather keep your land then be compensated for a constitutionally permissable use of eminent domain, then you are out of luck. Of course, in this case, you would likely be a lone hold out. If several of your neighbors also wanted to stay, you could band together to demand a more appropriate price.

  39. If you would rather keep your land then be compensated for a constitutionally permissable use of eminent domain, then you are out of luck.

    Yes, and a victim of theft.

  40. “One can be right and still go to prison.”

    Along these lines, I’d like to point out that one can be right and still lose elections. Can we please have a serious, badly-needed discussion about how many LP candidates are entirely disconnected from political reality?

    Wake up, people. The LP is a fringe organization even within the libertarian movement. Reason magazine laughs at us, all the think tanks and institutes keep us at arm’s length, 2nd Amendment organizations don’t want anything to do with us, etc.

    The major parties are bleeding disaffected voters. Our ranks should be swelling right now. But they’re not, in large part because we are widely known as complete kooks.

    What can be done to fix this situation?

  41. I think theft is a crime. Something constitutionally permissable is not a crime, is it?

    Depends on where you derive your rights I suppose.

  42. Do Eric Dondero’s favorite publications such as the Wall Street Journal and Investor’s Business Daily represent the forces of communism? How about his idol, Larry Kudlow? How about every reasonable, serious economist in the country? Are these all commies? And what about the list of communist characters I mentioned above – were they all tools of the bankers (aka the Jews)??

    Right-wing wacko anti-semitism, anti-capitalism thinly vieled as anti-“banker” anti-communism.

  43. Nick,

    No, I am quite certain I meant to post this video. Thanks for checking though. You are a very good citizen.

  44. Couldn’t agree more with Derrick’s comments in #55.

    I enjoy a good conspiracy theory as much as the next guy, but I have the common sense to understand that it is just a theory. I don’t have the uncontrollable desire to convince everyone about my beliefs whenever I have a pulpit.

    I’ve met some of them in person, and they ramble on about their theories continuously. It’s hard to get a word in edgewise, and takes a good 15-20 minutes to politely end the conversation. And if you dare question anything they say, it’s another good 15 minutes before you can get out of the conversation.

  45. “Right-wing wacko anti-semitism, anti-capitalism thinly vieled as anti-”banker” anti-communism.”

    You are displaying naive political correctness and denial of reality.

  46. Okay, Mike. I’ll play. Your scenario would not be “theft” in a legal sense. In your own moral world, then perhaps. But then I would ask you, “how did you come about your land?” We can search the title records – “title” of course dating back to the time when all land was owned and controlled by a monarch and parcelled out to dukes and other in-breds. We might even be able to trace “legitimate” ownership back to 1492. Then we run into some problems, don’t we. I believe it was John Locke who said that land ownership was only legitimate so long as there was enough of it to go around. We live in a constitutional republic with precadent and legal standards. Aka the REAL WORLD. Philosophically, I’m with the geolibertarians on land use and ownership. But again, this damn REAL WORLD keeps coming up. My wife is a realtor. I am a stockbroker. I want less government and more freedom. I don’t want to abolish the Fed, return to the gold standard, etc. I want candidates who aren’t kooks.

  47. “Along these lines, I’d like to point out that one can be right and still lose elections. Can we please have a serious, badly-needed discussion about how many LP candidates are entirely disconnected from political reality?”

    The guy in Montana stands no chance of winning anyway and neither does any other Libertarian candidate for higher offices. Furthermore, why do you automatically assume that nobody is interested in what he has to say? I’ve talked about stuff like this with numerous people who were “newbies” that were interested.

    “Wake up, people. The LP is a fringe organization even within the libertarian movement. Reason magazine laughs at us, all the think tanks and institutes keep us at arm’s length,”

    I don’t fully trust Reason or Cato.

  48. I am a stockbroker…I don’t want to abolish the Fed, return to the gold standard, etc.

    A bit of a conflict of interest eh?

  49. “I enjoy a good conspiracy theory as much as the next guy, but I have the common sense to understand that it is just a theory.”

    There’s conspiracy theory and conspiracy fact. I engage in FACTS.

  50. Derrick, you took the words right out of my mouth with this one:

    Even if he’s right about any of that stuff, he still alienated 99.85% of the people watching. All while the words ”˜Libertarian candidate’ appeared below him on the screen.

    I believe there is a substantial amount of truth to much of what he said (certainly not all), but a three-minute closing statement in a public debate is the worst possible time to bring up such a litany of topics.

    He would left a more positive impression on the crowd if he’d kept silent and done his Blue Man Group impersonation.

  51. Sure. I could be a snake oil salesman telling people not to pay their income tax and that the 14th amendment was never ratified, etc., selling books and bogus “liberty” coins, and there would be no conflict of interest. Then again, I’d be a fucking loser.

  52. “Of course not! Reason and Cato are run by the Jews, I mean, the bankers!!!”

    Who said that Reason or Cato was run by Jews? I’d say a more accurate statement is that both organizations are filled with softcore or phoney “libertarians.”

    I’m not saying that they are completely bad, just flawed.

  53. I think Mike Nelson brings up a good point. The TransTexasCorridor is a big deal in this year’s race. Theft is theft. Would you let your government buy your car, your spouse, your children in the name of common use?? I have had little to drink tonight, so this may be odd coming from me, but the living things may be “better” bought by the government. They can actually consent to leaving our company. Property is property. You own it and make decisions about its use. My grandparents are buried on a little part of the land left to my mother’s family. If some gov agency thinks they can dig them up to make a highway, they will have to do it after they bury me. Some things are just special without monetary value.

  54. Sure. I could be a snake oil salesman telling people not to pay their income tax and that the 14th amendment was never ratified, etc., selling books and bogus “liberty” coins

    Stan Jones does not do any of those as far as I can see, I may be wrong. He may actually be a principled libertarian, the kind that doesn’t sell his soul for a little cash, but I may be wrong on that as well.

  55. “Property is property.”

    That’s a very Eurocentric thing to say.

    Property is a social and legal construct. Different societies define it differently. And if “property was property” then we wouldn’t be here. Not only did we committ genocide so you could have your precious “property” that god forbid a road may be built upon, but we also completely and totally stole the entire western half of the country from another sovereign republic.

    So what is property?

    Black slaves were property. When they were freed, they had none. But “property is property” so fuck them.

    I don’t want my property to be infringed upon. But there is this thing called the Constitution that “libertarians” like to cite when convenient.

    And god forbid that the Libertarian Party allow a stockbroker in its midst. I’ve clearly “sold my soul.” I might as well be a Jew. Stockbrokers are pure commies, after all.

  56. My question is: Does the Libertarian Party want people who believe in the legal and financial framework of the US? Or just people who think that Wall Street is a bunch of communists and all laws are illegitimate? Where is the party for fiscally conscious social liberals who aren’t nutcase goldbugs rallying for the repeal of the Civil Rights Act?

  57. I would imagine that a stockbroker that understands that a centrally planned banking system is not “good for freedom”, and that understands that theft is not “good for freedom” could very well not be a communist.

  58. If you guys are so hardcore that even Cato isn’t libertarian enough for you, then you may find a home in the Center for a Stateless Society (c4ss.org), a market anarchist think tank which was formed just in the last week.

    Just for the record, I am philosophically anarcho-capitalist myself. But, I am also pragmatic about the current political reality and interested in helping to build the LP into a major, mainstream political force.

    The way I see it, with some mass appeal the LP can get the country to 85/85 or 90/90 on the Nolan Chart. Then, in 60 years some other 3rd party (the Boston Tea Party?) will have to go through everything we did, to move the country from 85/85 to 100/100.

    I just want to win some elections and start reducing taxes and infringements on our civil liberties NOW. Is that too much to ask?

  59. My question is: Does the Libertarian Party want people who believe in the legal and financial framework of the US? Or just people who think that Wall Street is a bunch of communists and all laws are illegitimate? Where is the party for fiscally conscious social liberals who aren’t nutcase goldbugs rallying for the repeal of the Civil Rights Act?

    I think the LP wants people that generally strive for less government. Not people that advocate the ues of force in order to line their pocketbook.

  60. No wonder no one votes for Libertarians. They are so nutty that only half the people support them on “libertarian” blogs.

  61. Damn U_A, I thought I was going to bed. Firstly, my genetics (my grandparents on one side) are from those robbed of our land. We bought it back. Deprivation of our property would be a double jeopardy sort of thing. Secondly, why is EVERYTHING black and white with you? The property I earnestly mentioned was that which is not living.

  62. C-Span even shot to laughing members of the audience during this nut’s speech. I can’t believe that you back this guy and at the same time don’t realize that it is our fault that we don’t get any mainstream coverage–be it debates or the mainstream media. This guy is not mainstream; he is a lunatic.

  63. DAP: I’m right with you. I am bowled over by the number of people here who support this type of candidate, and then have the nerve to wonder why the media doesn’t take us seriously.

  64. I do not care about this guy. DAP, are you in TX? If you are, you know about the TTC and the division here. If not, I suggest you research it. If it is not mainstream to point out that there are people being bulldozed over in this land grab, then I am happy to be on the fringe. The TTC- the very thing this guy mentions (I admit he could have framed it better) is a fiasco waiting to happen.

  65. I certainly don’t advocate the use of force to “line my pocketbook.” The Fed is a reality. You want to fight it? Fine by me. I’m more concerned with the rights of GLBT, abortion rights for women, the rights of immigrants (and the rights of businesses to employ them), freedom from domestic spying and infringement on constitutional liberties, etc. I said that I would prefer a free market of currencies backed by various commodities and independnet bank notes. What else do you need from me? Making the Fed a primary campaign issue is a losing proposition. Making gold a primary campaign issue is a losing propsition. Making all this conspiracy crap a campaign issue is a guaranteed losing proposition.

  66. I agree with DAP, Derrick and the others. The question is, “Is the LP to be a reality-based political party or not?” If not, just move the “debating society” to the mental ward and speed things up.

  67. I’m more concerned with the rights of GLBT, abortion rights for women, the rights of immigrants

    Really? What about their property rights?

  68. Michelle, you’re right about the eminent domain thing, and it also is a hot issue with voters. We can stand on the side of liberty *and* win elections with issues like that (as long as we don’t come across as kooks.) Check out what Arin Sime is up to. That’s the way to do it.

  69. Being against eminent domain is a mainstream concern. Communist takeover is not. The point is this: the nice people in Montana gave a Libertarian his chance to debate, and see what a laughingstock he has become.

  70. The question is, “Is the LP to be a reality-based political party or not?”

    UA, you are correct. We should all just roll over and get fucked in the ass whenver our rights are taken away because it is “reality”. We wouldn’t want to appear un-realistic or something crazy like that. By George, it it ain’t on the boob tube, then it can’t be real!

  71. I fully support legally defined, constitutional property rights. 99.9999999% of people view property rights from this perspective.

    You do realize the constitution can be amended, don’t you? So no matter how many rights you were to lose due to an amendment, you would support it simply because it was in the constitution and “legal”?

  72. Property is a social and legal construct. Society defines what is property. Natural rights are right to action. Property is defined by society and adminstered by the state. You get a title to your property. It isn’t a natural right. I respect and support property rights as defined by common law and the constitution. That makes me an ass-fucked, soulless, sell-out. No, it makes me a reasonable person.

  73. This is the saddest fucking comment thread I’ve ever read on HoT. The LP in a nutshell.

  74. Freedom speech is a right to action. Freedom of the press, religion, etc.

    “Property” – meaning land – is legally defined and adminstered by government.

    There is a huge difference.

    No, I would not support the loss of actual rights by constitutional amendment. i.e. the flag burning amendment, marriage amendment, etc.

  75. This is the saddest fucking comment thread I’ve ever read on HoT.

    Where shall I send the box of tissue?

  76. If I work and buy a hairdryer, it is my property. (I Hope We Can Agree On That) If Miss America is in town and her hairdryer breaks in the midst of an ad campaign, should she be able to take mine? What if she offered me $30 for the dryer I paid $25 for? Is that right? What if it will take me $60 in time to replace the dryer? She may be doing an ad to feed starving children. Would she then be right in taking my property at a price that would not meet my effort to replace it? This may seem simplistic, but it is the same.

  77. “Where shall I send the box of tissue?”

    Send it to Miss America. She’ll need it when she loses the pageant because Michelle won’t sell her the damn hairdryer.

  78. Timothy, It is sad, but it is about a small part of the blue man’s speech and a big issue in TX.

  79. “Property” – meaning land – is legally defined and adminstered by government.

    Well by all means, if the government creates a law (legally defines) and administers it, then it must be just. How silly of me to think otherwise.

  80. That’s not the same, Michelle. Chattle property and real estate are not the same. You are not granted a title to your hair dryer by the government. There is not a finite supply of hair dryers – there can always be more made.

    To make it clear – I think that land ownership and use “rights” (more accurately, “privelages”) should be extended, not receeded. But there is no “real estate” without the state. It is NOT the same as a hair dryer or free speech.

  81. Not what I said, Mike.

    You are just a “sell-out.” if not, take out the title to your land and rip it up. Otherwise, you are using the government’s force to “line your pocket book.”

  82. Derrick, Perhaps you should take the TAKS test. (another TX issue) If you do, you may not pass the reading comp portion. Miss America has no worry of losing the pageant- she is already crowned. She was doing an ad campaign as a part of her job.

  83. Michelle: OK, you’re interested in talking about eminent domain, and not the blue man. Do you have any suggestions on how to present the eminent domain issue to voters in such a way that we win elections?

    As I mentioned in a previous post, I think Arin Sime is doing a tremendous job. There is widespread unhappiness all over the country about the Kelo vs. London ruling. Our ranks should be swelling because of this, but they’re not. How can we capitalize on this issue?

  84. Forgive me, it’s 1:30 a.m. EST and my eyes are bugging out. I should have left the office long ago. Damn this thread.

  85. Derrick, I am going to read your link now. Give me the appropriate time for a response.

  86. You are just a “sell-out.” if not, take out the title to your land and rip it up. Otherwise, you are using the government’s force to “line your pocket book.”

    How am I profiting from the government’s use of force?

  87. Michelle: OK, you’re interested in talking about eminent domain, and not the blue man. Do you have any suggestions on how to present the eminent domain issue to voters in such a way that we win elections?

    This is also simple. If there is any opposition to a land grab, the developer must find another way. The only way that the common good clause can be used is if it is a purpose that is a constitutional common good. An example might be, ummmm your house is on the bay and national security depends on us buying (at a fair price) your property. Increasing the tax base is not a reasonable basis for taking someone’s property.

  88. This is totally opinion and not researched, but I think that it is probably less expensive to provide services to a paying homeowner than a corporation.

  89. Michelle: Regarding #114, I just think Sime is running a really strong campaign on the eminent domain issue, and thought you’d be interested in his site.

    Regarding #116, you’re right of course. Because of the way you worded it, I think the general public would agree with everything you said, too. I guess it’s just a matter of getting an audience with them. Which leaves us back at square one.

  90. I recognize that the recent Supreme Court decision has f’d up any semblance of constitutional common good. Perhaps we are all screwed. Left to the state, TTC will happen. Left to the voters, different story. Unfortunately, this was put to the voters in a different form and the voters left it to the state. (my understanding- I am not an expert on the subject)
    So, thinking that Texans are screwed, I have no issue with a man talking about what it is.

  91. Mike – You are profitting by using the government’s defined property lines, tracing back to the time of white conquest, to prevent others from having fair use of the land which you inhabit. Imagine you own 100 acres and only use a fraction of your land. Theoretically, a squatter could take up residence, improve your land, live off of it. Would you call the cops to have the squatter removed? If so, you are profitting from government’s use of force. The squatter does not share your royalist view on what is “property.” John Locke (or was it Jon Stuart Mill?) doesn’t share your view.

  92. U_A, we cannot atone for the sins of another person. If we call it what it was, can we not move forward? It is not too late to shape our legacy.

  93. I don’t understand the point of your post, Michelle (#121). I’m not asking anyone to atone for any sins. My point (and how the hell this tangent came into being is beyond me) is that “real estate” is a creation of the state, just as surely as the corporation is. That doesn’t mean I’m against real estate ownership. Again, my wife is a Realtor. But we have to recognize it for what it is. Real estate ownership by title enforced by the government is no less offensive than a fiat currency. Both form the legal and moral framework of our financial system. In libertarian utopia, things would be different. But by focusing on abolishing the Fed, we are limiting ourselves to a “debating society” and not a legitimate, credible political party. My point is that the “property rights” (aka real estate ownership “rights”) are just as surely a creation of the state as a central bank is.

  94. Theoretically, a squatter could take up residence, improve your land, live off of it. Would you call the cops to have the squatter removed? If so, you are profitting from government’s use of force.

    Theoretically, I could protect my land with the use of force by any means other than calling the police. Therefore, I would not be profiting from the governmen’t use of force.

    I do not support government intervention in property ownership, whether the amount of the property is finite or not.

  95. In the absence of government, who is to say who owns what land? What if I decide I own all of Michigan? Other people would go to their county clerk and get their government granted titles and say “no you don’t!”

  96. Wow… I agree with UA in about 66% of this thread.

    This dude is a nutcase: YES.

    The Fed is a good idea: NO.

    Geolibertarianism is where it’s at: DAMN STRAIGHT, HOMEBOY.

    I feel like I’m on acid now…

  97. Again, let me reaffirm my support for a free market of currencies backed by a variety of commodities and privately issued bank notes. I even hope to write a novel one day about an alternate world where the only “government” is voluntary confederations and the economy is based on a truly free market in which farmers (for example) deposit their grain and receive grain notes, which can be traded for other commodity notes or for private notes issued by independent banking clearing houses.

    I get it. But I hate the idea of a gold-backed currency. And I’m only saying that the Fed and its fiat currency work pretty well. Not that it’s ideal or “libertarian.” And the truth is, that when candidates base a campaign on “blowing up the Federal Reserve building,” it makes them look about as credible as this nutjob.

  98. Well yes, I agree that campaigning with the Fed as a major issue is silly. I wouldn’t have affirmative action at the forefront of any campaign I was running either, but that doesn’t mean I think it’s a great idea either.

    I think we’re basically on the same page… and I’m officially scared.

    :p

  99. Calm down you all. Chill!

    Listen to what I have to say here. I just spent basically, the last 6 months of my life, on and off in the State of Montana. As many of you know, I was there petitioning and campaigning for the Property Rights and Spending Limits intiatives. I met countless Libertarians during my time there.

    We are not talking Connecticut, Maryland or even Colorado here. Montana is a land of extremes.

    If this guy had been running in any other state (besides maybe Alaska), yeah, he’d be taken as an extreme kook. But Montana has shitloads of Constitutionalists and other conspiracy/gun nut guys. They were probably hootin’ and hollerin’ after the debate, screaming, “finally someone gets it.”

    Yes, he completely lost the more mainstream vote, turned ’em off in fact. But he secured the fringe vote, which in MT could be as high as 5 to 6%.

  100. I’m starting to think all you guys are raging schizos! First you all bash more mainstream libertarian groups like RLC, Cato, Reason, et.al. But then you completely turn around and bash this Stan Jones guy as a raging lunatic fringe Libertarian who shouldn’t be on the stage.

    Which is it? Do you all hate Mainstream libertarians or do you all hate Extremist libertarians?

    Just calm the ‘F’ down y’all! The libertarian movement is a Big Tent, just like the liberal movement and just like the conservative movement; big enough for the likes of Bill Westmiller, Ed Crane, Dave Boaz and Virginia Postrel, and big enough for folks like Stan Jones, Ernie Hancock, Tom Knapp and even L. Neil Smith.

    What matters is that we play to our audiences. Stan Jones inside the Beltway WOULD BE AN UTTER DISSASTER. Similarly, some Beltway Cato-ite talking to a group of Free Stater Libertarians in the Mountains of Western Monantan would all cause them to fall asleep.

  101. For those who are not aware, basically all Libertarian Party members in Montana think and act the way Stan Jones does. Mike Fellow, the State LP Chair and candidate for Congress is virtually the same. He’s a very nice guy, but out there when it comes to real world politics.

    There’s a breakaway group of Free State Project Libertarians in Granite County (pop. 950), in between Butte and Missoula. Every one of them is just like Jones. They’re well-meaning Libertarians, but very fringe.

    The more mainstream libertarians in the State are active in the GOP. There are a number of libertarian-leaning GOP legislators in MT.

    I don’t see the LP in MT moving in the mainstream direction. So, the best they can hope for is getting all the fringe, especially Constitution Party-type, vote, and make the best of it.

  102. “Yes, he completely lost the more mainstream vote, turned ”˜em off in fact. But he secured the fringe vote, which in MT could be as high as 5 to 6%”

    Dondero: Yes, that was my point ;-)

  103. Incidentally, for all of you all who diss the Constitution Party, take note.

    This year, the CP WILL elect a State Legislator in Montana. His name is Rick Jore. He is a former Republican legislator. In 2004, he switched to CP, ran again for his seat and won by 5 votes.

    A liberal judge, same judge that threw our libertarian inititives off the ballot this year, gave Gore’s Dem opponent the election.

    Well, Jore got the last laugh. For 2006, a group of libertarian-leaning GOPers got the State Party to NOT run a Republican against Jore this time. As a result he is a shoe-in for the seat which is in a heavily conservative/libertarian area.

    The CP is running no less than 25 other candidates for legislative seats. Most are paper candidates. But 2 to 3 of them have a real shot of winning.

    Even if Jore is the only one elected, this will REALLY screw up the liberals in Montana. Jore will make the Republicans look like moderate well-meaning guys.

  104. While the guys delivery leaves a great deal to be desired he was not incorrect in the basic facts. In 2008 you will have a federal ID card and it will likely have an RFID chip in it. The North American Union and its currency are being seriously discussed by the 3 governments involved and they are being quite secretive about it. Their Super Highway is in the development stages and will certainly occur, requiring the theft of enormous swaths of privately owned land. The communist manifesto has been adopted, for all intents and purposes by the US government.
    If he had delivered this message in a different manner this discussion would be moot.
    As for bankers (and corporations) backing communist regimes. Absolute truth. I saw it in China in the 70’s and some of those folks had been there for decades, funnels in hand. Hell, even the USG supported the Russians with aid. Facts are facts…but, delivery counts.

  105. For what it’s worth, Eric Dondero has publicly stated that he has “declared war on the Libertarian Party”

    If Eric thinks this guy is good for the LP, that alone should make you stop and think. Why would someone who wants to destroy the LP think an LP candidate is good? And it just so happens that this candidate is batshit crazy with a public pulpit.

    Put it together. Eric knows that this guy and his ilk is driving the LP into the ground.

  106. “While the guys delivery leaves a great deal to be desired he was not incorrect in the basic facts.”

    I agree. I guess I’m trying to argue that our candidates should be selective about which positions they present to the voters, and careful to word them in such a way that voters find them appealing.

    For better or worse, political races are a popularity contest. It is not necessarily about being right. It’s about convincing the majority of people that you’re right.

  107. Wow… I need to check HoT more often, I missed 136 comment. :P

    I’m a 100/100 anarcho-capitalist, and I still think this guy is nuts. It might be true, who knows? But it just makes the LP look even more like the party of lunatics who never got over their teenage rebellion. And there’s no way he convinced anyone in, what, 3 minutes?

    Watch Barry Hess’s recent debate on hessforgovernor.com for a good example of sticking to principle (mostly, I don’t like his immigration policy) while still seeming sane.

    Getting into a real debate is too big of a deal to be wasted by blowing your credibility with conspiracy theories, whether you believe they are true or not.

  108. Eric, I’d love to get in on some betting action on this one. If there are two major party candidates in this race, I say there’s NO WAY he’ll pull 5%, even in a somewhat “fringe” state like Montana.

  109. Robert Mayer,

    You have to remember to include the Smurf vote, which this man definitely has.

  110. And the truth is, that when candidates base a campaign on “blowing up the Federal Reserve building,” it makes them look about as credible as this nutjob.

    The truth is, people that put words into candidates mouths look like nutjobs. When did this guy advocate that?

  111. For what it’s worth, Eric Dondero has publicly stated that he has “declared war on the Libertarian Party”

    No, I think Eric is trying to point out that what is important to the people in your state, might not be important for the people in other states, and vice versa. I do no think that all Libertarians candidates should focus on the same issues everywhere.

  112. Tom, I admit I never took into account the Smurf vote. I knew Montana was well-known for its ranchers and buffalo, but I wasn’t aware they had an unusually high Smurf population. Could this possibly explain why the Constitution Party is doing so well there?

  113. Mike, your response had nothing to do with the statement you quoted. Why did you quote me?

  114. this guy needs no words from me or any one else.

    and the sad thing is that presented in the proper manner, he COULD have made some inroads to people outside the LP/CP community. A good presentation on the Real ID Act and pointing out that it will cost every driver >100 bucks to get their license renewed next time around would have helped him and the LP.

  115. Part of the problem is that he tried to fit too much stuff into his closing remarks. Any one of those issues could be explained well, given 5 minutes. But, it was just not cool to throw them all out at once like that.

    Another part of the problem is that the language was so dramatic. I know that when he said “radio frequency chip,” he meant “RFID tag.” But, Aunt Millie doesn’t know what any of that shit is about. She must have thought the dude was from another planet.

    Anyway, I need to find something to do other than post on this thread.

  116. Sorry I’m late.

    WTF. This guy is a complete and total dumbf—.

    First, the EU is pushed by the free market liberals of Europe. These are the closest allies libertarians have in Europe. It is a model for showing why free trade works – if anything, the EU has only sped the collapse of socialism in Europe. I don’t advocate that for the US, but for Europe, it replaced authoritarianism and war with stability and diplomacy.

    Secondly, the LP must stop this sort of crap. I’m not one for “Central Planning,” but the national and state LPs have to get a grip on limiting candidates like this. He’s a sloppy candidate and speaker anyway.

    The LP is suicidal to keep running candidates that damage any progress we’ve made. This is exactly the batshit crap that makes people like me want to leave the LP and start something new. We’re in the hole here, and it’s quixotic to pretend that we’ll ever get out by continuing our failed 30 year policy of radical shock tactics and lousy candidates.

  117. I would prefer a free market in currencies, backed by various commodities and notes issued by independent banks.

    Of course, this would mean a much lower standard of living for everyone in America and the world.

    Actually, it would result in a much higher standard of living.

  118. I think theft is a crime. Something constitutionally permissable is not a crime, is it?

    Slavery was constitutionally permitted at one time. Was it a crime? I say it was always a crime, regardless of what any band of thugs calling themselves “the law” proclaimed at any given point in time.

  119. were they all tools of the bankers (aka the Jews)?

    Red herring. Many bankers are Anglo-saxon. Others are East Asian, every nationality of Europe, etc.

    It’s not about nationality, ethnicity, and race – it’s about world domination and control.

  120. Even if everything he said was true, it doesn’t matter. One can take a stance against the Real ID card, the Patriot Act, etc. without sounding like a nut. If people don’t understand what “nut” sounds like, you should check yourself. You might not even realize that you come off that way to the average person.

    These are the people who are anti-government without any of libertarianism’s intellectual logic. They are blinded by their hatred for the State, seemingly more by political orthodoxy than any logical reason.

    They also ignore that there is a huge uphill battle that one must fight tactically if you want to change the State, via reaching the electorate. Things like pulling the communist card are not tactical because they fool no one (it’s corporate socialism, btw.)

    Libertarians have the burden of proof as the challengers of the status quo. Simplistic libertarianism is something we should all scoff at and reject. Without reason, “principle” means empty pigheadedness.

  121. In your own moral world, then perhaps. But then I would ask you, “how did you come about your land?”

    Good question. However, how do injustices commited in the past justify the perpetuation of injustice today? The state does not gain any moral claim to property because the history of land title is tainted.

    Of course not! Reason and Cato are run by the Jews, I mean, the bankers!!!

    Another red herring. Murray Rothbard, who was Jewish, was defrauded out of his position at Cato, and the organization has gone downhill ever since. Lately, they have more or less crossed the line to become open warmongering Republicans, although there are still some libertarians there.

  122. Mike – I’m sorry. I assumed that you had been following Libertarian politics for more than a few days. Blowing up the Fed building (and the UN) were keystones of Badnarik’s platform before he was nominated.

    So this guy is appealing to Montana voters. Guess what – a lot more than Montana voters saw the debate on CSPAN. He had us all look bad. And so he’s appealing to the CP vote, 2-5% of MT voters? That’s no way to win an election. And why the hell doesn’t he joint the CP? He’s an Ovarian Marxist who doesn’t think gays should be included in existing civil rights laws.

    Paulie, Mike, etc.: Okay.. So the next Quixotic quest for the LP is to not only reverse the poorly decided Kelo decision, but also to amend the Constitution to end “legitimate” uses of eminent domain as well? Good luck. And yes, having an easement on your property to build a road is just as bad as being enslaved. You got me. When you took that land from the Injuns, it became YOUR land!!! Damn gub’ment!

  123. If you guys are so hardcore that even Cato isn’t libertarian enough for you, then you may find a home in the Center for a Stateless Society (c4ss.org), a market anarchist think tank which was formed just in the last week.

    OK, I’ll call it my home.

    Just for the record, I am philosophically anarcho-capitalist myself. But, I am also pragmatic about the current political reality and interested in helping to build the LP into a major, mainstream political force.

    Those two are mutually exclusive. The practical reality is that no third party will become a major, mainstream political force due to institutional barriers in the winner-take-all system of government.

  124. Paulie… You act as if there are no sacrifices to be made for liberty and anarchy. A free market of currencies would absolutely result in a lower standard of living. People would sacrifice productivity exchanging notes, determining their value. Notes backed by various currencies would have values that radically fluctuated in relation to one another. The value of bogus gold is NOT constant. Look how much gold it would take to buy a house over the years, over the past few months, etc. Centralization has its benefits. The question is, how much freedom are you willing to sacrifice in order to achieve those benefits? The answer for most here is “none.” Fine. But don’t act as if pure liberty is the best of all worlds. The US Dollar is the currency of the world, facilitating exchange and economic activity. A variety of competing currencies would not have the same level of efficiency.

  125. The way I see it, with some mass appeal the LP can get the country to 85/85 or 90/90 on the Nolan Chart. Then, in 60 years some other 3rd party (the Boston Tea Party?) will have to go through everything we did, to move the country from 85/85 to 100/100.

    That’s a nice dream. But it’s highly unlikely.

    I just want to win some elections and start reducing taxes and infringements on our civil liberties NOW. Is that too much to ask?

    If you really want to be a pragmatist, yes, it is.

    It also would not be effective. When you cut back cancer just a little, it grows right back. You will keep trying to cut a little here and there and will never get anywhere.

  126. My question is: Does the Libertarian Party want people who believe in the legal and financial framework of the US? Or just people who think that Wall Street is a bunch of communists and all laws are illegitimate? Where is the party for fiscally conscious social liberals who aren’t nutcase goldbugs rallying for the repeal of the Civil Rights Act?

    http://www.modparty.net/

  127. “Murray Rothbard, who was Jewish, was defrauded out of his position at Cato, and the organization has gone downhill ever since.”

    That’s BS. Murray Rothbard and his ilk were the reason Ed Crain and David Boaz left the LP and started the Cato Institute. Rothbard has no love lost for me – he not only ruined the LP by purging the moderates, but he even “sold out” and became a John Birch Republican after doing so before he died. Few people have done more to ruin the libertarian movement than Rothbard, albeit, I understand that his work was the basis for much of it. That doesn’t excuse him from basically solidifying the party’s reputation as being the sort of wingnuts typified by this guy.

    I’d also like to see proof that the Cato Institute has ever turned into warmongering Republicans. I’ve never seen any evidence of that before.

  128. Hey, I would join the MN Independence Party if I lived there. They actually get things done with a reality-based, liberty-friendly platform and candidates who don’t sound like they’re guests of the Art Bell Show.

  129. Yes, he completely lost the more mainstream vote, turned ”˜em off in fact. But he secured the fringe vote, which in MT could be as high as 5 to 6%.

    Holy shit! Eric understands niche marketing. Wish I could say the same for the Reform Caucus folks.

  130. Paulie, thanks for that link. I hadn’t heard about them before. Although the front page photo is pure crap (look, we’re so diverse!), they actually sound like they could make a serious contention for moderate libertarianism and have maybe the most politically viable platform of any third party in existence right now. I’m actually really excited about this. In fact, I would say that their platform is closest to my own personal ideology.

    I think if they added a few more things about government reform (popular things like term limits on Congress, electoral reform, cutting corruption/pork, ending corporate welfare), take a more assertive pro-small business and entrepreneurship stance, repealing the Patriot Act, and maybe advocate the legalization of marijuana (medical, at least), they might be exactly the sort of party us moderate libs want, without the LP’s baggage.

  131. “Holy shit! Eric understands niche marketing. Wish I could say the same for the Reform Caucus folks.”

    As an LRC founder, I’ll actually agree with you somewhat. We advocate “big tent” marketing, which is the only way a third party will succeed in the long term. The LP is already so niche-confined that it is difficult to grow. A niche is a niche, and getting 5-6% still isn’t going to win us any elections.

    I mean, admit it. We pretty much have the pot-smoking, sci-fi novel-reading, computer programming comedian conspiracy theorist market cornered. Now how about targeting the average voter who we need to bring in to get more than 5-6% of the vote?

  132. Okay.. So the next Quixotic quest for the LP is to not only reverse the poorly decided Kelo decision, but also to amend the Constitution to end “legitimate” uses of eminent domain as well?

    I don’t really care about amending the constitution. I’d rather amend the idea that it’s the be all and end all.

    As an anarchist (maybe) you should be familiar with Lysander Spooner.

    And yes, having an easement on your property to build a road is just as bad as being enslaved. You got me. When you took that land from the Injuns, it became YOUR land!!! Damn gub’ment!

    I’m part “Injun” (Siberian native) actually. I don’t own any land.

    “Injuns” and other people who lack power in ths system are more likely than rich white people to be victims of eminent domain abuse by the government.

    Corporate shareholders are likely to profit from it. I wonder which groups are over- and under-reprsented among shareholders?

    We really should get over the idea that the regime…

  133. Nick: Check out the MN Independence Party, http://www.mnip.org/

    They’re a state party and they’re well beyond the national LP’s level of organization (which itself is good for a third party).

    Check out the “Ask Indie” feature. http://www.askindie.com/

    And be sure to check out Tammy Lee. http://www.tammyleeforcongress.com/ She raised $50,000 as of June 30 – aka about 25 times Bob Smither, or 1/10 of the Allen Hacker Outback Steakhouse Fund. And despite the presence of Repub, Dem, and Green candidates, she is making serious inroads. Businesses have her sign in their windows. Previous congressmen from both major parties have endorsed her. Unlike Fraudnarik, she has TV ads running on the financial news shows.

  134. ..(163)…helps the poor.

    A free market of currencies would absolutely result in a lower standard of living.

    Historically untrue. Look at, for example, China in the early 20th century. The point is not that it had a high standard of living, but that commerce was thriving and the economy grew.

  135. 10 Key Values of the MN Independence Party (1-7)

    1) A democratic process with integrity and broad citizen participation

    2) A justice system that is fair, wise, unambiguous, swift, affordable, and accessible to all

    3) A society that is inclusive, embraces diversity, and protects everyone’s rights

    4) Government policies which encourage and expect personal responsibility

    5) Government that is fiscally responsible: equitable in its collection of taxes, careful in its spending, and honest in its financial reporting

    6) Government that is a good steward: protecting the environment, preserving our public institutions, prudently managing public assets, and leaving for our children a better world

    7) Government that is controlled locally whenever possible

  136. (8-10)

    8) Rights of privacy and personal liberties under the US Constitution, the Minnesota Constitution, and the Bill of Rights of the United States shall be strongly defended

    9) An educated citizenry with the knowledge and understanding to preserve our freedoms and maintain our prosperity

    10) Political leadership that acts for the greater good and prepares us for the future

    I’m not saying that I want the LP to become this. I believe in vibrant, multi-party democracy. But while my philosophy is based on liberty and anarchism, we do have that pesky “real world” in which we live. And the MN Independence Party makes serious progress in that real world.

  137. I’d vote for a yellow dog if he ran as a Libertarian, but I don’t think I’d vote for this guy.

    Either –

    1) He’s right, and we’re all screwed anyway. Why bother getting involved, then? Just move to a rural area, get a bomb shelter, some rations, and an arsenal, and wait for the next revolution to begin. Running for office is the last thing you should be doing if you believe this stuff.

    (above scenario also applies to the Rapture Right-wingers of the GOP)

    2) He’s wrong, he’s discrediting the LP, and he’s ensuring that things like the income tax, the war on drugs, and Kelo NEVER go away. The only way these things are ever going to change is with a strong Libertarian Party either winning elections or influencing one of the majors to change them. People like this are doing more harm than good with regards to those goals.

  138. Damnit. I’m not “pro-emminent domain.” If not for the construction of the federal highway system, then perhaps the free market mass transit system would have flourished and the economy would have developed just as it has.

    But there are multiple facets to freedom. Some would argue that the very existence of those roads maximizes freedom. People can jump in their cars and drive. I would like to see a highway stretching from Mexico City to Toronto. A few farmers might have to give up their subsidized land (boo hoo, welfare queens) in exchange for compensation.

    I do not believe that the Constitution is the end-all, be-all either, as I have made clear throughout my comments. That’s philosophy. It is the end-all, be-all, legally, in the sense that it is the highest law in the land. When eminent domain was restricted to public use, the potential for abuse was minimal.

    I suppose Paulie believes that a non-standardized currency and a lack of a highway system are good for the economy.

  139. That’s BS. Murray Rothbard and his ilk were the reason Ed Crain and David Boaz left the LP and started the Cato Institute.

    Factually incorrect. Murray Rothbard was an important founding member. He was part of Cato’s original three-member board and suggested its name. After he came into sharp disagreement with other members, he left in 1981.-Wikipedia

    What this does not mention was that his signature of resignation was forged.

    I’d also like to see proof that the Cato Institute has ever turned into warmongering Republicans. I’ve never seen any evidence of that before.

    http://wconger.blogspot.com/2005/06/are-cato-and-lp-warmongers.html

    http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j103002.html

    There’s more, if needed.

  140. Oh, I’m fully aware of the MNIP. It just hasn’t made any inroads outside of MN.

    I really think us moderates need to pull all our crap together. The LRC, the Moderate Party, parties like the MNIP, etc. all need to either build a new party, like the Moderate Party (which equates libertarianism to moderate – a good thing for political leverage), or rebuild the Reform Party as a moderate libertarian party.

    I’m willing to wait with the LP and see what happens at the 2008 convention. If Stanhope or Kubby is nominated, or the platform regresses into stupid apolitical crap, I’m going to quit wasting my time with the party and move on to trying to build a moderate libertarian coalition with longterm quality control, to keep it both libertarian (principled) and moderate (pragmatic) enough and to make sure candidates aren’t making themselves look like lunatics.

  141. Hey, I would join the MN Independence Party if I lived there. They actually get things done with a reality-based, liberty-friendly platform and candidates who don’t sound like they’re guests of the Art Bell Show.

    What precisely are they getting accomplished?

    We advocate “big tent” marketing, which is the only way a third party will succeed in the long term.

    Incorrect. People don’t switch to third parties because they are a “big tent.” People who want big tents, middle of the road views and compromise stay in major parties.

    People join third parties because they are commited, uncompromising extremists.

  142. The LP is already so niche-confined that it is difficult to grow. A niche is a niche, and getting 5-6% still isn’t going to win us any elections.

    However, the LP does not get 5-6% – certainly not in presidential races or most non-two-way major office statewide races.

    This is because of a failure to understand niche marketing or, well, any marketing. When is the last time the LP had paid field reps?

    I mean, admit it. We pretty much have the pot-smoking, sci-fi novel-reading, computer programming comedian conspiracy theorist market cornered.

    I wish. If we did, we would be far ahead of where we are.

    Now how about targeting the average voter who we need to bring in to get more than 5-6% of the vote?

    How about getting to 5-6% first? That would be huge. It was enough to make the Socialist Party enough of a balance-of-power threat to get the major parties to start enacting its extremist agenda into law.

    Now, you would be an extermist to..

  143. Paulie,

    I’d say it’s unfair to say Cato is “warmongerers” because they supported the war in Afghanistan. I supported the war in Afghanistan too. Even leftist hippies who oppose all wars were relatively silent in protesting that one. One can be a pacifistic libertarian and general non-interventionist and still view the response in Afghanistan as valid against a regime that funded, supported and was intrinsically linked with an organization that directly attacked America. Defensive retaliation for an attack is still within the grounds of libertarianism and a non-interventionist approach to foreign policy – interventionism is offensive, retaliation in this instance was defensive. And don’t libertarians believe we have the right to defend ourselves?

  144. ..(173)…oppose this agenda.

    1) He’s right, and we’re all screwed anyway. Why bother getting involved, then? Just move to a rural area, get a bomb shelter, some rations, and an arsenal, and wait for the next revolution to begin. Running for office is the last thing you should be doing if you believe this stuff.

    Not necessarily. The objective should be to prevent the need for a violent revolution by peaceful persuasion. If elections provide a means of getting an audience, why not run? Even if it comes to a revolution, our chances of coming out of it better off rather than worse off depend on how well we get our ideas out there.

  145. “People join third parties because they are commited, uncompromising extremists”

    Those same people will leave third parties the second they feel they’ve strayed from principle, been “taken over” by some other ideological group, or are “selling out” in any way, shape, manner, or form.

    They’re not team players, and they think they know everything.

    They are well-intentioned, and often very nice people, but you can’t win elections with those people. If you’re not in this to win elections, you should get out.

  146. People can jump in their cars and drive. I would like to see a highway stretching from Mexico City to Toronto.

    It may well be a good thing, but I’d have the market decide that. There is no reason that a free market can’t build roads; in fact, during the 19th century most highways were privately built. Today, there are functioning private roads in Hong Kong and even parts of the US. I actually believe if it weren’t for government’s interference in the economy, the average person would already have private planes ot something even better that hasn’t even been invented because of them.

  147. “Factually incorrect. Murray Rothbard was an important founding member. He was part of Cato’s original three-member board and suggested its name. After he came into sharp disagreement with other members, he left in 1981.-Wikipedia. What this does not mention was that his signature of resignation was forged.”

    Ok, I was wrong – but it at least explains the fallout a little better. While I don’t know if we can ever know if it was forged or not – I’m not really buying it, and either way I would have fired him anyway – the Cato Institute was better off without him. He would have weighed that organization down and made them as irrelevant as he made the LP.

  148. Mike – I’m sorry. I assumed that you had been following Libertarian politics for more than a few days. Blowing up the Fed building (and the UN) were keystones of Badnarik’s platform before he was nominated.

    UA – I am sorry. I assumed you knew this post was about Stan Jones, who is not advocating such a thing.

  149. Derrick, we don’t know that he wasn’t taking a position that people in Montana don’t take seriously. What plays in Butte isn’t necessarily what plays in LA or Detroit. Whether you or I approve of what or the way he presented his closing statement (Hey, Nelson, where’s the rest of the debate?) he is the final arbiter of what plays to his constituency, not some out of staters. My only problem with him was his delivery. As I said, most of his basics were correct and, as you said he crammed too much into a 2 minute closing.

  150. When eminent domain was restricted to public use, the potential for abuse was minimal.

    tell that to 2002 Libertarian Party of Alabama gubernatorial candidate John Sophocleus.

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

    I suppose Paulie believes that a non-standardized currency and a lack of a highway system are good for the economy.

    Yes to the former, and the answer to the latter depends on whether by “national” you mean “nation-wide” or “regime-owned”.

  151. Now how about targeting the average voter who we need to bring in to get more than 5-6% of the vote?

    Here’s a novel idea. How about we target small-L libertarians? If we could just get our shit together enough to be taken seriously by them, the party would grow at least fivefold. As I said before, the LP is a fringe organization even within the libertarian movement.

    Visit any popular small-L libertarian blog, and you’ll find plenty of posters lamenting the fact that the LP is too full of kooks for them to support. *There’s* the niche we need to target.

  152. I’d say it’s unfair to say Cato is “warmongerers” because they supported the war in Afghanistan.

    1) It isn’t unfair

    and

    2) Many of them also support(ed) the Iraq war.

    Even leftist hippies who oppose all wars were relatively silent in protesting that one.

    Too bad for them.

    One can be a pacifistic libertarian and general non-interventionist and still view the response in Afghanistan as valid against a regime that funded, supported and was intrinsically linked with an organization that directly attacked America.

    I disagree. Even if we accept the discredited “19 Arabs with boxcutters” conspiracy theory as valid – which I will do ONLY for the sake of argument – this in no way validates the US regime’s mass murder of Afghani civilians or its occupation of Afghanistan.

    The Taliban regime merely asked for proof that Bin Ladin was guilty before handing him over. Wouldn’t the US demand the same if a foreign regime demanded the extradition …

  153. Unlike Fraudnarik, she has TV ads running on the financial news shows.

    Oh but Fraudnarik has a $100,000 “campaign manager” and 3 billboards… Much more impressive.

  154. Chris in NJ,

    Completely right. Luckily in the LP, the moderates have built up enough consternation over the years to create a critical mass in the LRC of current, former and new members to bring about big change in the party leadership and the party platform.

    Then again, I question if the self-inflicted barriers are too high already, and if the radicals retain their grip on the party control by advocating failed policies of the past 30 years, it will be difficult to ever reach enough consensus. The reality is that either the radicals quit the above sort of crap and advocating failed political strategies, or the party might end up splitting.

    Now that we have an organized critical mass of active moderates, in reality we can either take or leave the LP if they continue to ignore political reality by treating moderates as dispensable. At least now we have options. A moderate purge might be the death of the LP, not our first choice. That’s why we’re working for reform first.

  155. …(183)…of a US resident? Instead, Bush demanded unconditional extradition, an unreasonable request.

    you can’t win elections with those people.

    You can’t win elections anyway (at least, not major ones). The winner-take-all system insures that. However, you can “win” by influencing the debate, getting your ideas out there, tipping the balance over the margin of victory, etc.

    If you’re not in this to win elections, you should get out.

    If you think you are going to win major elections quickly, you should get out. It may be that one day it will be possible, but not soon. It is more likely that, if our ideas become that popular, they will be co-opted by the major parties.

  156. the Cato Institute was better off without him. He would have weighed that organization down and made them as irrelevant as he made the LP.

    I don’t consider the Mises Institute irrelevant.

    I hope the Molinari Institute and the Center for a Stateless Society become as big and bigger, too.

  157. Visit any popular small-L libertarian blog, and you’ll find plenty of posters lamenting the fact that the LP is too full of kooks for them to support.

    I’m sure I can find plenty of popular libertarian blogs which consider the LP too moderate or too conservative, or both.

  158. From Loretta Nall’s blog.

    Q: “You didn’t mention anything in your talk on Illegal Immigration. What is the Libertarian Party’s stance on that issue.”

    A: “The Libertarian party is rather split on that issue. My personal feeling, as well as my platform plank, is that if this is really an issue of illegal immigrants not paying taxes then the only fiscally sound idea is to naturalize them and add them to the tax base. Building a wall is a horrible idea. Most (in the 90%+ range) who cross the border illegally do so in automobiles. So why wall off a peaceful neighbor when that isn’t where the problem is? Deportation is also a pretty dumb idea. If we do not have control of the border then those who are deported will come back again. I feel that arresting a person, who is working to support their family and not causing any problems, just for the simple act of being here is both fiscally irresponsible and cruel. (…)

  159. …(189)…

    Why take someone who is working and contributing to the economy and place them in a cage and charge the taxpayers of Alabama $12,000 a year to house them?”

    I was really surprised to see the majority of heads nodding up and down during my comments on immigration. But, as business people they really understand what would happen to the economy if we took all the Hispanic people out of the jobs they currently hold.

  160. “1) He’s right, and we’re all screwed anyway. Why bother getting involved, then? Just move to a rural area, get a bomb shelter, some rations, and an arsenal, and wait for the next revolution to begin. Running for office is the last thing you should be doing if you believe this stuff.”

    Why run for office if he’s right? You’ve got to get the word out to warn people some how, so running for office is a good way to do that.

  161. “C-Span even shot to laughing members of the audience during this nut’s speech.”

    Laughing gibbering idiots.

  162. “Real estate ownership by title enforced by the government is no less offensive than a fiat currency.”

    All property is enforced by the government. If Miss America steals Michelle’s hair dryer the police would pay Miss America a visit.

  163. “Laughing gibbering idiots.”

    Hey I don’t blame them. If it wasn’t my party (and thus I wasn’t so angry at him for being a blathering, loony Libertarian candidate), I would would have been laughing at that goofy Libertarian Party too. Those crazy kooks. Always good for a laugh, eh?

    If I were the Reps, Dems and mainstream media, I would gladly invite the LP’s most idiotic candidates to the debates (of course, not the serious ones). Not only does he make his mainstream opponents look moderate in comparison, but he continues to keep the party irrelevant and cements the stereotypes about the LP that these parties want the average voter to have.

  164. “If this guy had been running in any other state (besides maybe Alaska), yeah, he’d be taken as an extreme kook. But Montana has shitloads of Constitutionalists and other conspiracy/gun nut guys. They were probably hootin’ and hollerin’ after the debate, screaming, “finally someone gets it.”

    I’d vote for this guy and I’ve never even been to Montana.

  165. “While the guys delivery leaves a great deal to be desired he was not incorrect in the basic facts.”

    Exactly. Whether or not one liked this guy’s delivery is a matter of opinion, but his points were valid, and that’s a fact.

  166. “‘Laughing gibbering idiots.’

    Hey I don’t blame them. If it wasn’t my party (and thus I wasn’t so angry at him for being a blathering, loony Libertarian candidate), I would would have been laughing at that goofy Libertarian Party too. Those crazy kooks. Always good for a laugh, eh?”

    They were laughing because they are brainwashed idiots.

  167. Not only does he make his mainstream opponents look moderate in comparison,

    Why is this automatically a bad thing? Moderation in the face of tyranny….

    but he continues to keep the party irrelevant and cements the stereotypes about the LP that these parties want the average voter to have.

    If he’s irrelevant, why are there 200 comments and rapidly growing in this thread?

  168. “One can be a pacifistic libertarian and general non-interventionist and still view the response in Afghanistan as valid against a regime that funded, supported and was intrinsically linked with an organization that directly attacked America.”

    The war in Afganistan was (is) just as big a fraud as the war in Iraq. If you want to talk about funding and training al CIAda, opps, I mean al Quada, look no further than the US government.

    My initial stance after 9/11 was that it was blowback from several decades of bad US foreign policy. I supported going after the “terrorists” but I did not support doing this by waging a conventional military invasion of Afganistan (bombing innocent people, etc…). If the government’s stroy was true, then the proper response would have been for Congress to issue a Letter Of Marque And Reprisal and to send in hit squads to take out the terrorists.

    However, after I strated researching the 9/11 attack (shortly after it happened) I began

  169. I don’t think a moderate purge of the LP is the answer. Despite it’s faults, it’s still strong enough to at least get candidates on the ballot pretty much anywhere at any time. It still has name recognition among the “small-l” community, even though some of it’s bad. The bad stuff can be turned around with time. I’m just as frustrated as you, but I think the LRC has to be given more than a few years to work. At least a decade would be fair, since the kooks have had 30 years.

    As I said, I often like the extremists as people and I know their hearts are in the right place. However, politics is a game of nuance and persuasion. These people don’t seem to get that.

    Running to “educate the masses” is pointless, as well, because most people are reasonably happy with their lots in life. Even if they’re not, the last thing they want is a politician (that’s what you are when you run) telling them how bad things are. We have to tell them how much BETTER things can be.

  170. No, I mean he makes the tyranny look moderate.

    It is relevant to us LP members because it gets to the crux of the debate between the reformists and the purists. Naturally us reformists think this sort of rant epitomizes the willingness of radicals to compromise all of the progress we have made towards making the party more electable. Even in the past few months, such progress should be obvious. And naturally, the purists want this sort of rhetoric as party policy, despite the fact that that strategy failed for 30 years.

    So which side is the saboteur? That’s the debate we’re having.

  171. to see holes in the government’s story. Holes like insider stock trading on the hijacked airlines that lead to a bank that had been run by a CIA guy, plans to invade Afganistan months before 9/11, government officials recieving warnings not to fly commercial, etc… I’ve been openly calling 9/11 an inside job since late 2001-early 2002. Since then a LOT more evidence has surfaced.

    However, whether you believe the government’s story or not, the way that the invasion of Afganistan was carried out should be regaurded as a crime. It was like saying, “A bunch of innocent people died on 9/11 so now we are going to go and kill a bunch of innocent people that had nothing to do with it.”

    You people who doubt that 9/11 was an inside job and who refuse to look at the evidence are the equivalent to Germans in Nazi Germany who believed Hitler’s lies. “Communist terrorists burned down the Riechstag and now Hitler is protecting us. Sieg Hiel!”

  172. “Despite it’s faults, it’s still strong enough to at least get candidates on the ballot pretty much anywhere at any time.”

    That’s exactly why we picked reform over schism as our strategy in the first place. The party infrastructure and organization is there – the question is if a VIABLE POLITICAL party is there (emphasis noted) or ever will be, and if the party can overcome this kind of crap that is dragging it back into the mudhills and keeping the authoritarians powerful.

    “the last thing they want is a politician (that’s what you are when you run) telling them how bad things are. We have to tell them how much BETTER things can be.”

    Yeah, exactly. That’s the point that is missed by so many libertarians thinking they are being principled by doing nothing but railing against the state, logic be damned, when it is not the pragmatic or principled way to go about the situation. You convince no one except your choir, leaving libertarianism in the gutter.

  173. Third of Americans Suspect Government 9/11 Conspiracy
    http://www.scrippsnews.com/911poll

    A recent poll found that 1/3 of Americans suspect that “something is up” with 9/11. When is the last time that Libertarians got 1/3 of anything? The 9/11 Truth Movement is growing a hell of a lot faster than the Libertarian Party.

  174. pissing off 1/3 of the public is easy.

    getting 1/3 of them to vote for you is difficult.

    you’re not comparing apples to apples

  175. Andy, none of us here except Dondero support the Bush Administration, are blind to its atrocities and fallacies or support policies of offensive military interventionism as far as I’m concerned. I’m just not willing to jump on the 9-11 is a big conspiracy train because of the fact that it is a great way to get not taken seriously.

    I support a thorough and independent re-investigation into the events and open records about the actions of the government leading up to it, but to make the full leap that it was a big scam simply to help the Bush admin gain favor, enact authoritarian policies and take over the Middle East is a big jump with a high burden of proof on your part.

    If it happened, why wouldn’t the virulently anti-Bush media, which loves sensationalism, be all over that crap? Seriously, they rightfully hate the guy, and enough compelling evidence that the Bush administration set up 9-11 would destroy him. It suggests evidence is flimsy, circumstantial and undefensible.

  176. to clarify, if you ask people “is government too big”, then combine the “yea”, “hell yea”, and “fuck yeah” votes, you’d easily get to 1/3, probably 2/3, actually.

    if you ask those same people “what do we do about it?”, I’d bet that fewer than 1/3 of them will say “go to the polls and vote”, let alone “go to the polls and vote Libertarian”.

    Many still think the GOP is the answer. Some think not voting is the answer. Some think buying a bunker and some rations is the answer. Therein lies the problem that a political party must face.

  177. “Andy, none of us here except Dondero support the Bush Administration, are blind to its atrocities and fallacies or support policies of offensive military interventionism as far as I’m concerned. I’m just not willing to jump on the 9-11 is a big conspiracy train because of the fact that it is a great way to get not taken seriously.”

    So people who speak the truth should not be taken seriously. Well then who should be taken seriously, people who parrot government propaganda?

  178. “Even leftist hippies who oppose all wars were relatively silent in protesting that one.”

    Leftist hippies were about the only people that I saw protesting the invasion of Afganistan back in 2001.

  179. I’m just not willing to jump on the 9-11 is a big conspiracy train because of the fact that it is a great way to get not taken seriously.

    By whom? Why does a party which averages a fraction of a percent and a movement which (when defined over-broadly) may have the soft support of 5-10% fear being taken “not seriously” by considering something which 36% of Americans and growing already believe?

    If it happened, why wouldn’t the virulently anti-Bush media,

    LOL. You consider their coverage of the Iraq war and the rest of the Bush Gang usurpation of power to be virulently anti-Bush?

    I would hate to see what a pro-Bush media would look like, then.

    It’s true that a majority of working reporters support the Democrats, but their corporate controlled outlets cater more to the Republicans. What little critique of the Bush regime they have had has been very surface, and until the last year or so they have been positively craven – as many still are.

  180. Or that the Bush administration successfully repressed the news media’s freedom, which would be a great story for the news media in and of itself. Seriously, it would have slipped by now.

    I have doubts too about the Bush administration’s role in 9/11 so maybe I’d be in the 1/3rd. That does not make me a conspiracy theorist – in fact, it means nothing, considering that a majority is skeptical of the Bush administration anyway. That could include people who think the Bushies knowingly ignored warning signs about 9/11 or that they knew specific details about it in advance and are not owning up to their failure by pretending they didn’t know. This would naturally include a lot of people, but I strongly doubt people fully on the “9-11 = Bush conspiracy” train is 1/3rd of the population. In fact, I only know people on this forum and maybe one or two other personal friends who believe it. The rest of us aren’t buying it.

  181. “If it happened, why wouldn’t the virulently anti-Bush media, which loves sensationalism, be all over that crap?”

    The media is not really that “anti-Bush,” they are pro-big government. They play up the Democrat vs. Republican thing to dupe people into believing that they really have a choice. Also, you are fogetting about FOX News, the home of neo-con Bush loving ass kissers.

  182. to clarify, if you ask people “is government too big”, then combine the “yea”, “hell yea”, and “fuck yeah” votes, you’d easily get to 1/3, probably 2/3, actually.

    If you keep it that abstract, sure. Try asking specifically what they would cut and how important it is to do so. Then throw in random questions about what they would keep or expand, and how important THAT is. Word both sets of questions neutrally and randomize their order.

  183. I have doubts too about the Bush administration’s role in 9/11 so maybe I’d be in the 1/3rd. That does not make me a conspiracy theorist – in fact, it means nothing, considering that a majority is skeptical of the Bush administration anyway. That could include people who think the Bushies knowingly ignored warning signs about 9/11 or that they knew specific details about it in advance and are not owning up to their failure by pretending they didn’t know. This would naturally include a lot of people, but I strongly doubt people fully on the “9-11 = Bush conspiracy” train is 1/3rd of the population.

    Correct. Only 12% in that poll said that they actively believe the regime carried out the attack. 24% said they suspect it might well be possible, but are not sure. Total 36% and growing rapidly.

  184. “That could include people who think the Bushies knowingly ignored warning signs about 9/11 or that they knew specific details about it in advance and are not owning up to their failure by pretending they didn’t know. This would naturally include a lot of people, but I strongly doubt people fully on the “9-11 = Bush conspiracy” train is 1/3rd of the population.”

    Not everybody in the 1/3 is a hardcore “9/11 was an inside job” activist. The 1/3 also includes people who don’t know all of the details but just suspect that “something is up” and that we aren’t being told the whole truth.

  185. I was in the 9/11 Truth Movement before it was cool. I’ve seen the Movement grow a lot since late 2001. The 9/11 Truth Movement has expierenced rapid growth while the Libertarian Party has shrunk.

  186. “You consider their coverage of the Iraq war and the rest of the Bush Gang usurpation of power to be virulently anti-Bush?”

    Yeah, pretty much. They’ve been pretty critical without trying to directly show their bias. You have to understand – reporters theoretically should strive for objectivity when reporting. Considering Haditha, Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and other similar cases of abuse recieved extensive and damaging coverage, they are able to express their bias by the selection of which articles they choose, but they’re not supposed to editorialize or be “critical”.

    “Corporate controlled outlets cater more to the Republicans.”

    That’s a dumb argument for why it hasn’t been disclosed. If they found compelling enough proof of a conspiracy, the amount of market attention, Pulitzers, etc. that media outlet would get would trump all political ties. Watergate was a perfect example of how something that could have been a conspiracy theory turned into a credible and accepted story.

  187. In fact, I only know people on this forum and maybe one or two other personal friends who believe it.

    And I know a lot of people who do believe it. Anecdotal evidence – so what?

    12% is still better than the most optemistic measure of “libertarian” and the 24% would not take you less seriously because of bringing this up, either.

    “Despite the strength of the case for impeachment, I do not think it will happen, because Bush has convinced Americans that his crimes against truth, the US Constitution, and the Geneva Conventions are necessary measures in the “war against terrorists.” As long as Americans understand 9/11 as an attack on America by “Islamo-Fascism,” the executive branch will have wide latitude in usurping liberty.”
    http://www.lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts178.html

  188. As much as I’d love to keep this up all night, it’s 3:47 in the morning (I’m temporarily in Japan) so I have to crash. I miss out on all the fun. Sorry.

  189. “Yeah, pretty much. They’ve been pretty critical without trying to directly show their bias. You have to understand – reporters theoretically should strive for objectivity when reporting. Considering Haditha, Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and other similar cases of abuse recieved extensive and damaging coverage, they are able to express their bias by the selection of which articles they choose, but they’re not supposed to editorialize or be ‘critical’.”

    What’s their solution? Vote for Democrats and everything will be OK.

  190. “As long as Americans understand 9/11 as an attack on America by “Islamo-Fascism,” the executive branch will have wide latitude in usurping liberty.”
    http://www.lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts178.html

    Paul Craig Roberts has jumped on the 9/11 Truth bandwagon. I guess he must be a “wacko” too now according to some of you people out there.

  191. Nick, see #217. Check it out thoroughly. The media ignore stories like this all the time.

    Look into their ownership a little. Lots of “defense” contractors. Tim posted a good chart lately about who owns the media.

    What about their FCC licenses? Their government “experts” they are so fond of? Their advertisers?

    Haditha, Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and other similar cases of abuse recieved SOME coverage – but not nearly enough.

    Where are they on this?

    http://antiwar.com/justin?articleid=9854
    For every Watergate they jump on, there are many JFK assassinations and days of deceit they ridicule or ignore.

    The “MSM” media has been very “embedded” in the wars on Iraq, Afghanistan and internal dissent – literally and figuratively.

  192. Jesus Christ, couldn’t he have been a bit more, I don’t know, moderate in his presentation? Perhaps exhibiting a concern is one thing, but to use this singular topic to use his debate time on, he’s practically screwed the pooch.

  193. re #41 (Tom Bryant)
    “I’m glad you understand the Federal Reserve. There are some who insist that it is a private for profit corporation (and all the records showing profits going to the US Treasury is propaganda of course).”

    Evidence? Dont make shit up. It does indeed return profits to the US-T, although it does donate some to charitable causes.

    re #48 (UA)
    “And it isn’t all that centralized or planned. It sets the discount rate. Often, the Fed cannot control interest rates. ”

    FYI:

    The Fed does indeed set the discount rate, along with the required reserve ratio, and the federal funds rate. When it comes to monetary policy (e.g. controlling interest rates) the Fed sets the federal funds target rate and engages in open market operations to reach it. I’m fairly certain that the required reserve ratio and discount rate have not changed for quite some time.

    The Fed is mandated by law to achieve:
    1. Low Unemployment
    2. Low and stable inflation
    3. Stable and moderate interest rates

  194. Yeah, DAP and the rest are right. Jones is a typical wing-nut libertarian but Conrad Burns rocks! You can tell Jones is a wing nut because he accuses our rulers of such terrible deeds. Hey, dipshits your rulers love you and would never, ever do anything but what’s best for you. But the rest of the American people know better and this is why the two parties will never be seriously challenged.

    You libs crack me up. Your fantasy is changing the world but the reality is in most places you couldn’t even be elected dog catcher.

  195. Sawark said.

    >>Here’s my answer to your video.

    hmm. my last comment didn’t post correctly. What i said was along the lines of:

    An error page? That’s quite a link!

    But the south park episode is irrelevant to this particular post. Thanks for playing, please try again.

  196. Mark #230, I was being sarcastic, which I thought would be apparent from my how I responded previously in this thread.

  197. The Fed can TRY to set the Federal Funds Rate, but it cannot dictate it. “Federal Funds rate” is misused all the time, even on CNBC. It is the average rate charged on overnight loans by moneycenter banks. The “discount rate” is the rate at which the Fed lends.

    After further review… What the guy says isn’t so completely off-base… It’s the verbiage. I GUARANTEE you that the “grand conspiracy” isn’t being done in the name of Communism. No one has grand designs of emulating the fucking Soviet Union. Come on!

    There is no conspiracy. Shit is converging, but there is no all-seeing power or cabal pulling the strings. Such fantacism has its roots in anti-semitism and in religious bigotry. It’s hard for some people to let go.

  198. Paulie Cannoli

    You really do support Bin Laden and his murdering band. I can tell in your comments here. You refuse to refute him. That can only lead one to conclude you oppose the US as a nation and support the complete destruction of us as a people.

    You are an immigrant to this nation. Are you a naturalized citizen? Being an anarchist, I doubt if you have bothered to become a citizen. I suspect you are an illegal with no standing here. If so, get out!!. If you even bothered to become a citizen, why? Your vile and venom against us indicates you have a hatred for all that is American.

    You have a right to express your opinions and I have a right to express mine. I believe you are what you are, an enemy of this nation.

  199. Paulie Cannoli

    I have a burning desire to meet you one on one. You refuse to do so. I am calling you a coward that hides behind a pen and will not show yourself. Let me know when you become man enough to show yourself. You know where to find me. Bring it on, asshole.

  200. Uhh…Julian…I tend to disagree with Paulie myself but I think you’re taking it a bit too far. First of all, I don’t see any evidence to prove your assertions. As for Paulie’s conspiracy theories, I don’t buy them either, but saying his belief in it equals support of al Qaeda is not a logical conclusion. Second of all, to suggest that one can look at the US vs. Militant Islam as an easy right vs. wrong situation oversimplifies the historic complexities that have led to the point we’re at. The US deserves criticism, as does al Qaeda. Neither side is really “in the right.” But the US is the only one we can really change.

  201. Every libertarian is an “enemy” of this “nation.”

    Al Qeada isn’t really “in the right.” Understatement of the year.

    There are Christian religious fascists and Muslim religious fascists. Chrisitans operate by seizing control of the US government. Muslims operate by attacking symbols of their enemy. Both are idiotic and causing death and destruction for a made up boogie man in the sky. It would be funny if it weren’t so sad.

    Luckily, the theocrats have not entirely taken control of the US. The corporatist, militarist regime of the US, heavily influenced by Christian theocrats, still absolutely pales in comparison to the evil that is embodied in bin Laden

    I only oppose the invasion of Afghanistan on the grounds that it was committed by a standing military, which I oppose the existence of. Other than that, it was a deserved and legitimate strike. The Taliban was the ultimate realiztion of authoritarianism. Even if you disagree with the means, be glad that it has been weakened.

  202. Undercover Anarchist, yes there are Christian Fascists. But that’s sooooo 1980s. Eric Rudolph is in jail. Falwell is an idiot that nobody takes seriously any more. Jim and Tammy Faye are no longer on the national stage. Robertson is about 90, one foot in the grave.

    You’re living in the ’80s Dude.

    It’s not the Christian Fascists who want to clothe my wife from head to toe in a Black Burka.

  203. Nick, I respect your view; supporting the War in Afghanistan but opposing the War in Iraq. If other Libertarian Party members adopted that position, they’d have so much more credibility with those of us libertarians who supported both wars.

    Your sane buddy. Which is more than could be said of so many others of your compatriots in the LP.

  204. Sorry, that quote from me from 1999, that I wanted to “Destroy the LP” was tongue in cheek. Though, some LPers took it seriously, unfortunately. I’ve repeatedly said over the years that it was basically an insider joke that got lifted from an internal Libertarian Republican site.

    Besides, I’m a dues-paying LP member. (Can’t bitch if you don’t pay your dues.) And just about everyone of my best friends in life is LP: Jake Whittmer, Bruce Cohen, et.al.

  205. Dipshit, I just said there isn’t a moral equivalency. But then again, evil is evil. Christian fascists are the lesser of the two… But on some level that’s only because they express so much of their power through the US government, that they don’t need to resort to overtly terrorist actions. Forbidding a woman to have a safe, legal abortion is an act of terrorism in itself. Truly radical right-wing Christians, the truly wacko 1-5%, would imprison or possibly execute gays. And in more real terms, our foreign policy is heavily influenced by Christian Zionists who want to bring on Armeggedon. Unlike the comments of this nutjob from MT, what I’m saying is the truth. There’s no grand conspiracy… No organized cabal.. Just the convergence of forces.

    The US regime is tempered by its corporatist faction. They are truly the lesser of all evils involved. As is, the US is an increasingly authoritarian nation. Bin Laden and the Taliban are totalitarians. Both are bad. One is worse.

  206. Correction Nick. I DON’T fully support the Bush Administration. He lost me with his support for that idiotic Port Dubai deal a few months ago. Plus, he’s too damned political correct wishy washy on the War. He’s only identified this War for what it is – a War on Islamo-Fascism – only once, maybe twice at most. He keeps using this stupid-ass phrase War on Terror. This ain’t a War on Terror. I don’t see any Peruvian Shining Path people trying to blow up buildings in Manhattan.

    This is a War on Radical Islam, and a War to stop Sharia Law from being instituted in the United States of America.

    Bush doesn’t get it. Or, maybe he does, but he’s been beaten down so much by the Liberal Media that’s he’s become a total squish, almost Liberal himself.

  207. There certainly is no comparison between the strike against the Taliban, and the misguided occupation of Iraq.

    If the existence of a standing military is a given, and we can look past the fact that a war hasn’t been declared since WWII (and thus, all wars have been unconstituional), then the strike against the Taliban in Afghanistan was entirely justified. The problem is that the Bush administration is filled with a bunch of draft dodgers who have no idea how to conduct a war. Hey, I don’t know – but all of the credible generals seem to think so.

    The murder of civilians, decimation of what civilization existed, and finally, the abandonment of the task before it was completed.. Absolutely shameful. And for what? To topple a stable, secular regime in Iraq? Saddam was an authoritarian tyrant, but on a list of evil world leaders, would he even have ranked in the top 10? Certainly not the top 5.

    The Taliban deserve death. It’s unfortunate that the Bush admin are a bunch of little bitches

  208. Dondero – You are truly a fucking nutjob, too! What is it? COmmunism or Sharia law?

    Don’t delude yourself. Bin Laden and his ilk don’t give a fuck about imposing Sharia law on the US. In order to be so dumb as to think that, you’d have to believe that he and his kind have genuine convictions. They don’t. They just want power. The power to repress. Just like your idol, Bush.

    If we gave up our support for the Zionist regime in Palestine, and we returned to constitutionally permitted national defense (i.e. bringing all troops home), there is no doubt that terrorism against the US and its targets would cease.. Or perhaps we migth find ourselves a victim of Zionist terrorism.

    Bin Laden and his kind mobilize disenfranchised youth around some very real issues. Our imperialist foreign policy is the ammon that people like Bin Laden need to recruit new terrorists.

    Also, very telling that Bush lost your support when he supported a free market policy. You’re really quite the libertarian!

  209. Really? The don’t want to impose Sharia law on the US, huh?

    Guess that’s why some crazed Muslim gunman walked into a Jewish Community Center a couple months ago and shot 6 Jewish women shouting “Allah-Ahkbar.”

    Guess that’s why in Minneapolis, MN you can no longer grab a cab at the Airport if you’ve had a beer at the Bar or are carrying a bottle of wine on you, cause the Muslim cabbies who have a monopoly will refuse you service.

  210. Ya know Undercover Anarchist, I’m starting to think you are hopelessly girlfriend-less. If you had a girlfriend you’d care that these Muslims want to clothe her from head to toe in an ugly Black Burka, make sure she can’t study or go to school, and keep her at her home unless accompanied by a male outside her house.

  211. There’s this little thing called Freedom, Dondy. If a retarded Muslim cab driver is willing to make an economic sacrifice by not picking up some drunken American asshole, THAT IS HIS FREE CHOICE. Do we need a civil rights act for drunken honkeys???

    Just because one deranged idiot shouted “God is great” while murdered (or attempting to murder) six Jews, that doesn’t mean that a sizeable group of Muslims want to impose Sharia law on the US. I know its hard for a Republican imperalist bastard like you to understand, but not everyone wants to rule everyone else’s life. I think Osama would be happy presiding over a totalitarian regime that spanned the old Ottoman Empire.

    Finally, Dondy… I’m happily married with a newborn daughter. Happily married. No swinging, nor Swinging for me. If anyone needs some Sharia in his life, it’s you, you sick degenerate fuck.

  212. Seriously, Dondero, you think I or anyone else here buys that shit? Anyone who continues to support the War in Iraq and who honestly believes that there is a sizeable political movement in America that will gain power and impose Sharia law on us is insane. There’s nutjobs in every religion and every ideology, some of whom are driven to the point of violence. If you think the Muslim killed the Jews simply because he wants to impose Sharia law on the US, you’re ignoring the history of racial and political conflict between these two groups. Radical Christian nuts kill abortion doctors all the time.

    And the taxicab drivers denying drunk people rides will be forced to change or go out of business, as they are now creating a huge demand for a new taxicab company to fill the gaps in service. A true libertarian realizes that free markets can fix such conflicts, and that interventionism in the Middle East is creating more anti-American sentiments, leading to a new generation of terrorists.

  213. there is no proof anyone can supply that “watered down libertarianism” will or wont work. First off, who measures? Second off, It’s totally subjective. What it means to various pithy writers who make their living off of the libertarian cottage industry ( and therefore have a personal money stake in what libertarianism is or is not) might be different from what it means to you.

    But there is considerable proof over 35+ years that the libertarianism that’s not watered down neither increased freedom for anyone nor “worked” in any provable way, and thats not subjective at all. There’s a public historical record that can be examined. From 1983 until 2002, the people firmly in charge of the LP every single year, didnt have any watered down libertarianism to blame. It was the voters, it was the media, it was the various conspiracies around the world….

    The reality is, PEOPLE DONT FUCKING ACCEPT THE CENTRAL PREMISES OF HARD ASS LIBERTARIANISM.

  214. You both miss the point. This is not an economic issue THIS IS A CULTURAL ONE!!!

    Their prohibitionist attitude is entirely inconsisten with our American ideals of freedom AND BOOZING IT UP!!!

  215. They dont accept that the government is inherently evil. They dont accept that the R’s and D’s that they vote for are satans tools on earth. You can point out the truth to them all day and night long, and it might even BE the truth, and they’ll still vote for R’s and D’s. Voters hate weird people, strange people. You know how voters view hard ass libertarians? The same exact way they view homeless people on the street. To be

    They dont accept that no government is better than some government. They wont even begin to consider it. ( well, maybe 1 in 10,000 might) The LP and libertarians are so far removed from the worldviews of the average voter that you my as well be speaking klingon. THEY DONT SHARE YOUR PREMISES. They dont see government as inherently evil. They cant comprehend a nation without a government. They WANT to follow a leader. Not every person is suited to self employment, or self government. Most people are totally unsuited to governing themselves.

  216. And at the same time some of our candidates are convinced there are secret conspiracies in support of Communism–a philosophy surviving in a few ninth-world backwaters and third-rate university economics departments–the real fascists are active a bit closer to home.

    Mr. Padilla, who was kidnapped by the Bush Administration and locked in a military gulag for three years, has finally had contact with an attorney, and the alleged case against him has had contact with a judge. The case collapsed. The dirty bomb tales had no evidence behind them. An entirely unrelated set of charges were brought up.

    And Padilla’s attorney, as officer of the court, asks that the case be quashed because Padilla, for the three years of his captivity, was systematically tortured by the Bush Regime, right here in America.

    Inland at Daily Kos retyped the Pdf of the filing

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/10/11/2338/1538

    which is, let us say, indescribably vile.

  217. “Their prohibitionist attitude is entirely inconsisten with our American ideals of freedom AND BOOZING IT UP!!!”

    Unless they are lobbying Congress to outlaw booze and impose Sharia law, they are theoretically not prohibitionists. In fact, they are partaking in the great American freedom to be stabbed in the back by their own stupidity. If you don’t like it, start a taxi company and put them out of business. If you were a taxicab driver, should you be forced to give someone a ride with a shirt that say “Allah will crush you American pigdogs”? You lose the money by not giving them a ride, but maybe for you that’s the lesser evil.

  218. yah, but now try to get them to make the leap that while we have elected leaders that do vile things, that those vile things make the entire notion of american governace vile. That what’s at the root of the LP, that all government is evil and must be replaced with some fantasy world of stateless no government.

    One might be easier to do than the other. The LP is missing a speed switch somewheres, the one that goes from 0 to 25 is there, but the one that spreads the distance from 25 to 100 is gone. Bush is a evil man, therefore the entire system is evil and must be replaced altogether wih a thorem?

    What happened to the notion that Bush is going to get his becuase of the same reason that Nixon did – becuase the system is stronger than the evilness of one person or any small group of people? Bush is going to KILL the Republican Party. His crimes are going to make Watergate look like nothing.

    The LP SHOULD be poised to take it’s place.

  219. George, that sucks. I had not been following the Padilla story very closely, but I definitely will now. That’s embarassing and, sadly, unsurprising.

  220. The bottom line is that people get really freaked out when our candidates stand up in public and start talking about completely dismantling the government.

    Things the public can swallow: cutting taxes and spending, legal marijuana, school choice, bans on eminent domain.

    Things the public cannot swallow: eliminating 97% of all government agencies overnight, heroin in vending machines, completely free market education, selling off the national parks.

    I believe that voters support change in the libertarian direction, but they are not willing to instantly give up everything that is familiar and embark upon some completely alien Galt’s Gulch experiment.

    Our candidates need to stop spouting extremist rhetoric, and instead put forth some practical solutions which the public can embrace.

  221. they need to go after the POLICIES. fashion realistic libertarian PUBLIC POLICY. Something the LP has never been good at…becuase when your core supporters deny that government should even exist, you might not be ready to be elected to GOVERN.

    The LP is such a mass of self-condradictory impulses, it’s amazing it doesnt implode any second. :)

  222. Cool, Dondilldo is back! Eric you rock. Now can you give me the address where I can send my Lieberman campaign contribution again? Thanks.

  223. Talking about ‘selling the national parks to pay the national debt’ is much less crazy than the secret conspiracy silliness described above. When you hear people claiming that the extremely active, extremely well funded, legally heavily equipped opponents of the 16th amendment, the opponents who were there watching the ratification process state by state as it took place, somehow failed to notice that the ratification had been invalid, well, that’s so silly as to beggar the imagination.

    Selling national parks won’t work at all, and the voters will not support it, but at least there are national parks, and voters understand needing to sell property because you are out of cash, but there are no communist conspiracies to merge America and Canada.

  224. Nick it is all most impossible to start a taxi business in most American cities because of regualtions.
    As for most of the other b.s. I’d be happy if you could just bring those 280,000 troops we pay to keep abroad home.
    So what did you do today to advance the cause of liberty?
    M.H.W.

  225. If you go to the city with a big enough crowd of concerned citizens and tell them that the monopoly taxicab drivers are not meeting the city’s needs, it’s highly likely the monopoly can be challenged. I can understand libertarians getting on board deregulating the taxi industry, but I don’t understand Libertarians getting on board with forcing Muslim taxicab drivers to give drunk Americans rides if they don’t want to.

    “I’d be happy if you could just bring those 280,000 troops we pay to keep abroad home.”

    Me too.

  226. Wait – did the Soviet Union even have a Constitution?

    Furthermore, i’m interested in the etymology of the word “batshit.” I understand bats are pretty weird, but isn’t batshit just fecal matter like any other kind of fecal matter? Or is it really strange fecal matter? I mean, it seems “batshit” is the most extreme word for nutball crazy and I’m just trying to wrap my head around how it ever got that connotation.

  227. some things dont work very well unregulated. It’s important to know what those things are. I submit the press and the media at large are demonstrably worse off and of less actual service to the country in their current “unregulated” state than they were 30 years ago.

    other (most) things dont need any oversight. Some things (small number) do need government oversight. Public Utilities come to mind. Private oversight generally leads to corruption becuase it’s so much easier to bribe and buy off that way.

  228. Hmmm….fascinating stuff. In fact, in light of history, it is actually pretty hilarious at how meaningless it was.

    That said, I still am not convinced that the Republican or Democratic leadership are pushing for a new American Constitution built upon this – such organizations stay in power because of economic inequality (the Right relies on the poor to feed their corporatism and the Left relies on the poor because that class forms the basis of their arguments for socialism) and while definitely socialism has taken hold in American politics, the extreme revolutionary zeal of this document is no where to be seen. Even liberals are wary of calling themselves socialists (thus why socialists hijacked the less offensive “liberal” label from classical progressive liberals.)

    Making such an analogy is one of many reasons why this guy sounds like a nutball who is living in a world that simply does not exist in reality.

  229. re Tom Bryant

    Sorry, I missed the sarcasm. It’s hard to tell with the rest of the garbage people spew all over these comment pages.

    My apologies.

  230. God spare the libertarian movement from itself. Nutty conspiracists, lunatic Mises Institute shills and Republicans in libertarian drag.

    Rothbard had no right to a board position and was a very destructive individuals who constanlty spread rumours about others that were false. And the the bulk of Cato people are strongly antiwar and have continually spoken out. But the Mises Institute nutcases (and the confederates, racists, anti-Semite and other such ilk they hang out with) have spread the false story that Cato is pro war. And anyone who quotes Raimondo as an accurate source of information about anything needs ot have his head examined.

  231. My above comments were are the comments here not the video. The vidoe is pure bullshit from a paranoid, delusional lunatic who is an embarassment to libertarians everywhere. God, I’m ashamed to call myself a libertarian considering the nut cases that run around using that label. After 30 years in this damn movement it is clear we’ve been taken over by asylum escapees. I shall henceforth drop the label libertarian. I don’t want to have anything to do with extremist nuts, conspriacists, Rockwellian lunatics, Rotbardian Radical Vanguards or any of it.

  232. Getreal,

    If the LP isn’t 100% you yet, then maybe you should run for office and present the public with your version of what the LP is – instead of crying on here like a little baby.

    Please let us know how it goes.

  233. “Look into their ownership a little. Lots of “defense” contractors. Tim posted a good chart lately about who owns the media.

    What about their FCC licenses? Their government “experts” they are so fond of? Their advertisers?”

    Also, check out local, state, and federal government Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports (CAFRs) and see how much stock the government owns in various corporations.

    http://www.CAFR1.com
    http://www.cafrman.com

  234. “But the Mises Institute nutcases (and the confederates, racists, anti-Semite and other such ilk they hang out with)”

    Let’s see, Ludwig Von Mises was a Jew, Murray Rothbard was a Jew, but the Mises Institute is anti-Semetic. Yeah, this makes sense….

  235. “but there are no communist conspiracies to merge America and Canada.”

    Yeah, that’s right. There is no plan for a North American Union. Only a bunch of “kooks” would talk about stuff like that.

    Building a North American Community
    http://www.cfr.org/publication/8102/

  236. “You really do support Bin Laden and his murdering band. I can tell in your comments here. You refuse to refute him. That can only lead one to conclude you oppose the US as a nation and the complete destruction of us as a people.”

    Julian, you really to support George W. Bush and his murdering band. I can tell from your comments here. You refuse to refute him. That can only lead one to conclude that you support the New World Order and the complete destruction of the freedoms that we still have left.

  237. “Their prohibitionist attitude is entirely inconsisten with our American ideals of freedom AND BOOZING IT UP!!!”

    Yeah, that’s right. We don’t want those pesky Muslims commin’ over hear and startin’ a War On Drugs. Oh, wait a minute…

  238. If anything, the people who want to bring Taliban-style government to the US are “conservative” Republicans, not Muslim burka-pushers. They seem to want to “combat” Islamo-facism with their own fascism. You know, the whole “they hate us for our freedoms..so lets be just like them” thing.

  239. Julian:

    I’m not answering any questions from you until you answer questions from me. Did you already forget that?

    I have a burning desire to meet you one on one. You refuse to do so.

    Uh, yeah. Sorry, but you’re just not my type. But thanks for having a burning desire to meat me, or whatever.

    If it burns too much maybe you should get some penicillin.

    I am calling you a coward that hides behind a pen and will not show yourself. Let me know when you become man enough to show yourself.

    I have nothing to prove, so let me know when you become mature enough to defend your opinions without childish threats of physical violence.

    If you beat me up, would that make you right? If I beat you up, would I be proved correct?

    Of course, you’ve previously denied that you want to murder me and …

    “I never mentioned a fist fight. Let your mind do some thinking.” – Julian
    “I am crazy and proud of it.” – Julian

  240. “I am one of the casualties, mentally, and am proud of it.” -Julian
    /2006/02/15/exporting-democracy-one-bloodcurdling-scream-at-a-time/#comments

    So, if you don’t want a fight and you don’t want to kill me, what do you want?

    Bring it on, asshole.

    Well, sorry, asshole isn’t my thing.

    But, again, good luck in finding the right man to fulfill your physical needs – whatever the hell they are.

  241. I guess Ron Paul must be a “conspiracy kook” since he has warned against the North American Union.

    Either that or a retard.

%d bloggers like this: