Archive for August, 2007

h1

Paul supporters acknowledge Kucinich is a libertarian but still don’t understand electability

August 31, 2007

While it’s great that Ron Paul’s camp now clearly agrees that he and Dennis Kucinich are equally libertarian, the fact that they think a ticket would have Paul for President and Kucinich for Vice President shows that they still don’t quite grasp political reality. Because of George Bush’s Taint all over Paul and the rest of the Republicans, only a Democrat can be elected President next year. So the best hope for a libertarian President is Dennis Kucinich. But as Dick Cheney has shown, even a politician who actually derives his very sustenance from George Bush’s Taint can be elected Vice President, so that’s where we think Ron Paul would do the most good.

But despite the fact that the video above has the positions on the ticket reversed, we love the “crawl” at the bottom. Kudos to Ron Paul’s web campaigners. If we had as many nerdy virgins on our team as Ron Paul does, we could probably come up with something for YouTube that actually showed the ticket the way we think it ought to be. Alas, this blog is probably the most technologically advanced medium we’ll be able to muster, with everyone here so busy dating, spending quality time with their spouses and kids, and socializing with friends. There’s just no way we’ll ever catch up to the Paul campaign’s Internet supporters, which is the only group of people who spend more hours per day on the web than World of Warcraft gamers.

Advertisements
h1

Dennis Embraces Multiparty Democracy

August 30, 2007

Dennis underscores his libertarian platform against the war, and calls for a third party revolution for libertarian ideas if he is not the Democratic candidate.

Dennis’ bravery and passion inspires me to tears. He inspires every real American, with an anti-war message that long pre-dates anti-war Johnny-Come-Lately Ron Paul.

Let’s make sure the world is safe for democracy and make Dennis the Democratic candidate for president! And if we fail, let’s make sure the Libertarian Party finally gets Dennis — a mainstream candidate with eyes that see through the lies!

h1

It’s Time To Reform The Libertarian Party

August 30, 2007

While the Libertarian Party is presently hopelessly purist and exclusionary, we have an opportunity to take it back to a more inclusive time.

The LP was never meant to serve as a slave to the wealthy, corporatist interests it presently represents. These powerful interests, using their corrupt money and dirty politics, have taken the party in an extreme right direction and have ignored the Party’s history as a defender of individual liberty.

One of the most dangerous manifestations of this is the Libertarian purists’ assault on one of our most precious rights — the right to health care — and the accompanying freedom it provides. Namely, freedom from fear.

Royal libertarians have long advocated for a system of economic Darwinism that would return our nation to the worst predations of the imperial British system of years past. Our forefathers fought valiantly against this system to get us the rights that we enjoy as Americans today — public health care, free K-12 education, the school lunch program, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Royal libertarians fight this tooth and nail.  They have even sought to use federal power to overrule states’ rights to create single-payer health care systems as a violation of the “rights” of corporations!  Yet again, the federal government overrules the will of the people to enforce the will of the corporations.

Fortunately, not all of the Libertarian Party has gone completely off the deep end. The Libertarian Reform Caucus is fighting for common sense Mainstream Libertarianism, and posting new platform ideas that remove divisive purist issues and replace them with electable issues so that Mainstream Libertarians can win elections.

We salute the fighters at the Libertarian Reform Caucus for their efforts to bring the Libertarian Party out of the anarchist miasma and into the mainstream of social democracy that represents our future. And we encourage all Libertarians for Kucinich to embrace a mainstream platform by registering as Democrats to support Dennis and, failing that, making him the Libertarian nominee for president.

L4K will also be bringing the Libertarian Party into the mainstream by encouraging the Libertarian Reform Caucus to embrace further social democratic initiatives in the future. Victory is not the best option, it’s the only hope for America!

h1

Slapdown from the Watergate

August 24, 2007

When the LNC staff posted to their blog about the Iraq quagmire, we politely suggested that the best way to get the US out of Iraq was for Libertarians to support Kucinich.

The comment was immediately removed from the blog.

Of course, if there were some sort of policy on the LP Blog against comments supporting major party candidates, we’d understand. But then that doesn’t explain all of these pro Ron Paul comments that were left up on the blog:

http://www.lp.org/yourturn/archives/000608.shtml

http://www.lp.org/yourturn/archives/000521.shtml

http://www.lp.org/yourturn/archives/000615.shtml

http://www.lp.org/yourturn/archives/000610.shtml

This, coupled with the LP Executive Director’s gross misstatement of the Libertarian Platform’s position on abortion (which calls for an end to government interference in abortion at all levels of government, not just at the federal level, and certainly does not call for overturning Roe v. Wade):

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=ron_pauls_abortion_rhetoric

makes me think that Mr. Cory is endorsing Ron Paul.

Well, good for him. It’s a step in the right direction. Despite the fact that his paycheck comes from the contributions of dues-paying Libertarian Party members, he has correctly determined that Libertarians have no chance of winning the White House in 2008 and has therefore decided to back a major party candidate. Of course, his strategy is fatally flawed, because of George Bush’s taint on Ron Paul and all of the other Republicans, which will guarantee that the next President is a Democrat.

So, Shane, you’re halfway here. Just a few more steps in the direction of political expediency, and you’ll be on the winning team — Libertarians for Kucinich!

h1

Rethinking California’s Undefended Border

August 24, 2007

A recent commentator in California discussed the problem of so-called California out-of-state babies, children born in California hospitals to out-of-state parents. These children become entitled to state benefits such as education, and thus serve as a potential anchor for their parents to remain in the state. Our state authorities understandably are reluctant to break up families by extraditing parents of young babies. But the “right” of out-of-staters to live in California, yet another invented “right” contrived from the Constitutional right of freedom of movement between states, has become a serious cultural and economic dilemma for all Californians.

Yet again, activist judges have decided that the Constitutional right of US citizens to move through states automatically grants a “right to residency” in any state a person chooses – overthrowing the rights of the State of California (and thus the people of California).

Every year, millions of people from states other than California enter or leave the state.  Nobody is quite sure how many, since Sacramento doesn’t track the entries or exits.  Our porous border with Nevada, Oregon and Arizona allows people to come and go as they please – without having to apply for entry.  The Constitution doesn’t say that we cannot require out-of-staters to get a visa, nor does it say we cannot limit the length of their stay or restrict their ability to take employment that should go to lawful Californians – but federal activist courts have conjured up such “rights” out of thin air to please special interests.

Worse still, thousands of people who enter California from outside the state decide to stay and collect unemployment insurance, take employment that would otherwise go to Californians, or have children – who can immediately begin collecting California funded benefits like schooling and infant health care.

It’s alarming to note that many of the people who enter California from outside the state have criminal records and participate in illicit activities within the state – and our complete lack of border control and intrastate migration management renders our state government powerless to prevent terrorists from entering our state from rural, poorly policed areas like central Nevada.  If a terrorist attack ever happens in San Diego or Los Angeles, it will likely be California’s open borders that are to blame.

In some state hospitals, administrators estimate that 25% or more of the babies born have parents who are from another state. Many out-of-staters who have babies in California hospitals do not have health insurance and do not pay their hospital bills. This obviously cannot be sustained, either by the hospitals involved or the taxpayers who end up paying the bills.

No other wealthy, western states grant automatic residency to those who simply happen to stray within their borders.  EU states, for instance, allow freedom of movement for their citizens, but require a visa for a citizen of the EU to establish residency in a state other than their home state.  These visas are restricted in number, cost thousands of dollars to obtain, and can take months or years to process.  In many cases, they’re not available to residents of very poor or backwards member states like Bulgaria. These states recognize that residency involves more than the physical location of oneself; it also involves some measure of cultural connection and allegiance. They also understand that a right to free movement between states is not a “right” to stop moving and set up residency.

If only that was the case in this union!  In California, thanks to our activist federal government, we have to accept even poor, uneducated and culturally alien Alabamians and Arkansans as “residents” – whether we want them or not.  These “residents” have no cultural connection or allegiance to California, and they arguably harm our economy and way of life.  They often view California as just another place to collect benefits for a few years, or take a job at a lower wage than a Californian would accept.

Make no mistake, Californians are happy to welcome residents who follow our state residency laws and seek a better life here. California is far more welcoming and tolerant of newcomers than virtually any region on earth. But our modern welfare state creates perverse incentives for out-of-staters, incentives that cloud the issue of why people choose to come here. The real problem is not migration, but rather the welfare state magnet.

Hospitals bear the costs when out-of-staters enter the state for the express purpose of giving birth. But out-of-staters also use emergency rooms, public roads, and public schools. In many cases they are able to obtain Medicaid, food stamps, public housing, and even unemployment benefits. Some have fraudulently collected Social Security benefits.

Of course many Californians also use or abuse the welfare system. But we cannot afford to open our pocketbooks to the rest of the country. We must end the perverse incentives that encourage out-of-staters to come here, including the automatic residency assumption.

Our founders knew that unforeseen problems with our system of government would arise, and that’s precisely why they gave us a method for amending the Constitution. It’s time to end the invented right of “residency in California to anyone who wants it” by creating an amendment clearly indicating the rights of Sacramento to restrict who may enter, reside within, take employment within, and claim residency within our state.

h1

We are not purists

August 24, 2007

Contrary to the attacks from the extreme, far, far, far, so far they’re falling off the edge of right into crazy loony right supporters of Ron Paul, we are not “purists.”

Check out this graphic from Political Compass:

If we were purists, we would support Mike Gravel.  However, Mike Gravel lacks the funds, support, gravitas, and electable good looks of Dennis Kucinich.  Thus, we are realists — supporting the most Libertarian Democrat who can win the White House to deliver Liberty In Our Lifetimes ™.

And notice that yes, Ron Paul is even further to the right than Mitt Romney.  This stealth conservative might have fooled the MSM, but he won’t fool us!

h1

L4K Official Poll Results: 66.67% of registered Libertarians support Kucinich candidacy

August 24, 2007

While the poll put out by Ron Paul’s LibertarianLists.com web site is highly self-selected, we at Libertarians for Kucinich are excited to announce a poll that is even more rigorously self-selected.

Our latest baseline data indicates that Dennis Kucinich has an infinitely higher support level than Ron Paul among Libertarian Party voters — 66.67% versus 0.00% for Ron Paul.

Even more interestingly, when Ron Paul is run in a hypothetical election against more liberal members of his party, such as Pat Buchanan, Libertarians continue to support Kucinich by a consistent 2:1 margin.

In fact, 2 out of 3 Libertarians recommend Dennis Kucinich as part of a healthy political diet.

Now, we know that the Libertarian Purists and the Ron Paul campaign alike will attack our methodology and point out that our margin of error is 35%. However, they are just being political and are angry that our rigorous poll has 65% correctness.

Below are the poll percentage results:

1) Which of the following candidates would make the best president of the United States?

a) Dennis Kucinich — 66.66%
b) Ron Paul — 0.00%
c) Doug Stanhope — 33.33%
c) Some other Libertarian purist who will never, ever win — 0.01%

2) Which of the following is the greatest political tragedy of the 21st century?

a) We still lack a national health care plan — 33.33%
b) The federal government is overruling the rights of states to ban guns — 33.33%
c) Eric Dondero — 33.32%
d) The USA PATRIOT Act — 0.01%

3) Which of the following is the least unappealing option?

a) A night of sweaty debauchery with Hillary Clinton — 33.32%
b) A night of sweaty debauchery with Karl Rove — 33.32%
c) Are you serious? — 33.32%
d) Paying my income taxes — 0.03%

4) If Ron Paul loses the Republican Party primary, which one of the following actions would you support?

a) Having Ron Paul declare his undying support for Dennis Kucinich for president — 33.33%
b) Having Ron Paul get real and understand that only Dennis Kucinich could bring us Liberty in Our Lifetime ™ — 33.33%
c) Having Ron Paul donate his life savings to the Kucinich for President Campaign Committee — 33.34%
d) I am a purist Libertarian pantywaist who intends to vote for Phillies or Smith — 0.00%
e) I support Daniel Imperato and forgot to take my lithium this morning: — (-0.01%)

5) Who is the hottest?

a) Shane Cory — 33.33%
b) Stephen Gordon — 66.65%
c) Daniel Imperato after 11 drinks and a Social Security reform speech — 0.01%

6) Which is the most reliable way to get unbiased statistics about politics?

a) FOX News — 0.01%
b) CNN — 0.01%
c) LibertarianLists.com — 0.00000000000001%
d) LibertariansForKucinich.com — 99.967%
e) Other — 0.0000001%

7) If Dennis Kucinich loses the Democratic primary, should the Libertarian Party change its bylaws to allow him to become the Libertarian nominee?

a) Yes, because we need Dennis Kucinich in the White House! — 33.33%
b) Hell yes, because Dennis’s eyes see through the lies! — 33.33%
c) Are you kidding?!? Of course! — 33.32%
d) I am a Libertarian purist who hates real progress and thus am opposed to this incredibly good idea you’ve brought up — 0.01%