Only if they have no sense of humor.

> The “next ten days” part bothers me though. What’s taking so long?
> Multiple sources in my grapevine told me that it would be this
> weekend. Apparently, unless TPW is slow to report, it hasn’t yet
> happened.

I spoke directly with Mary, and she estimated it would be late this week (I said within 10 days to provide a limit she would beat). Obviously, the grapevine wasn’t as accurate as the information I received. Keep in mind that she probably contacted me early because I had promised to make the legal maximum contribution as soon as she committed to running, and not because I’m in any way more important than other people.

The reason for the delay is that you only get one chance to make a first impression. She wants her web site to look good and to have the ability to take credit card contributions, and there are a few other matters that protocol requires before making a public declaration.

> A few minor weak points: unlike both Kubby and Root, she has no
> claim – as far as I know – to the allegiance of any constituency
> outside the libertarian movement.

Well, she is big in the FIJA movement, which goes well beyond the LP. I don’t think anyone has a big outside constituency, but I agree she isn’t ranked first among the candidates in that regard (I’d say she’s third by that measure).

> What “hook” can we use to get her more media attention than LP
> presidential candidates received in the last few cycles?

In my view, the critical hook in 2008 is the Ron Paul Youth, who can create an activist base this year that will cause an explosion in LP support and influence in the upcoming years.

In that light, I think a mistake is being made by people thinking Ron Paul’s support is primarily a Republican thing, and an even bigger mistake is to assume that the average Paul supporter agrees with his positions on abortion and immigration, and the biggest mistake is to think that those of his supporters who ARE Republicans are the most likely to defect to the LP. Ron Paul Nation polls revealed that only 35% of his activist supporters voted Republican in the previous election (and the election returns this year made clear that his support among Republicans was much smaller than his overall support). Exit polls in the elections suggested that secular, pro-choice, independent voters were most likely to choose him. And note how the campaign started to fade in December when his staff began to turn from the war and civil liberties to immigration and “national sovereignty.”

Ruwart is strong here for a few reasons. One is that Paul has publicly supported some of her previous activities. Two is that her disagreements with Paul are all on issues where she is closer to the Ron Paul Youth than Ron Paul. Three is that she is not a novice to Internet communication, which is where the Ron Paul Revolution developed and where all those young people still are located. I believe she will consciously target the Ron Paul Meetup Groups, and a press release along the lines of “Ron Paul favorite declares for Libertarian nomination” with his letter nominating her to be FDA Commissioner and his strong praise for her HEALING OUR WORLD libertarian book will allow those hardworking LP members who have been participating in Ron Paul Meetup Groups to be able to use their new connections to gain support for her (I also think that, after the Republican Party nomination in September, Paul is more likely to publicly endorse her than any other candidate, but I don’t want to hang my hat on just that point). Again, one reason for her delay is to have a place for people to go and start connecting (including a forum for open discussion) once things are official.

> Also, it concerns me that she is still unlikely to beat Bob Barr for
> the nomination if he decides to seek it even after she does.

Barr will have a certain support base, but I think that Ruwart’s campaign will gain the majority, especially since she is the perfect example of someone who can answer the tough questions in an appealing way. Restore ‘04 and the Ruwart campaign have important synergies, even if she is not the driving force behind it, and to the extent we work for Restore ‘04, we are helping to tip the balance in Denver toward a candidate who is proud of our ENTIRE philosophy. In any event, a campaign between Barr and Ruwart will definitely bring to a head the issue that threatens the future of the LP, and I think we will make a solid case for the inspirational value of a hard-core campaign, especially with a candidate who has put in many years of the long, hard study time needed to support it.

> To be honest, I don’t know for sure why Kubby has declined in his
> skills as a communicator. He was certainly a solid communicator in
> 1998 and 2000, and even in 2007 was doing much better than now.

I’d rather not speculate on the reasons, but the fact is that he should have been able to win the California straw poll, and did not, primarily because of his weak performance in the debate. There are few people in this movement I respect more than Steve Kubby, and had he been a more active and better communicator for the nomination, I think he could have earned the nomination easily and I would have been proud to have had him as our standard bearer. Had Ruwart not decided to run, I’ve never doubted whom I would have supported among the declared candidates.

> I would be interested in talking to Dr. Ruwart and any staff she may
> have in anticipation of a prospective run. Do you have any contact
> information you can share? If there is a website, it has not to my
> knowledge yet been made public.
>

Among her staff, the only one whose contact information I have right now is the campaign treasurer:

Mary Ruwart for President
Treasurer Geoff Neale
12903 Grubstake Gulch St
Bee Cave, TX 78738-6104
Phone: 512-554-1523

I’m sure he’d love a call (especially one that includes reading numbers from a Visa or MasterCard).

Right now, I think Mary is swamped with the last minute preparations and EMILY work (the reason I got an early heads-up), and I’ve only been able to speak with her once. If you have any urgent matters that you think need to be addressed before her announcement, you can certainly email her directly, as her address is no secret. I don’t have any inside track or special access number, as I’m not a part of her campaign staff (although I guess my contribution makes me an FOM and might get me and my wife a night in the Lincoln bedroom if she wins in November).

It was good meeting you in San Diego and I agree with your points above.

I am a big fan of Dr. Ruwart’s books. She is also an articulate speaker.

The “next ten days” part bothers me though. What’s taking so long? Multiple sources in my grapevine told me that it would be this weekend.
Apparently, unless TPW is slow to report, it hasn’t yet happened.

A few minor weak points: unlike both Kubby and Root, she has no claim – as far as I know – to the allegiance of any constituency outside the libertarian movement.

What “hook” can we use to get her more media attention than LP presidential candidates received in the last few cycles?

Also, it concerns me that she is still unlikely to beat Bob Barr for the nomination if he decides to seek it even after she does.

I hope you still meet with Steve Kubby while you are up in Mendo.

To be honest, I don’t know for sure why Kubby has declined in his skills as a communicator. He was certainly a solid communicator in 1998 and 2000, and even in 2007 was doing much better than now.

I would be interested in talking to Dr. Ruwart and any staff she may have in antiipation of a prospective run. Do you have any contact information you can share? If there is a website, it has not to my knowledge yet been made public.

I know this very well.

Near as I can tell, the Bush Administration doesn’t “openly support torture.”

Debatable, but I don’t feel llike debating it. When I said some Republicans,
I said nothing of administration.

What makes you think I was referring to the adminstration rather than, say, their presidential contenders for 2008 in the televised debates, or some other Republicans? The word some means some, not all.

And, no, I’ve not seen anyone calling for “literal ‘Crusades’,” certainly not in the Administration.

Does white house resident Bush/shrub count as a matter of his own adminstration? He has publicly called it a Crusade. On more than one occassion if I am not mistaken.

Paulie – The Republicans of 1800 were the Jeffersonian anti-Federalists.

I know this very well too. That’s why I said that the Republicans of 1800 supported slavery and Indian wars, and by 2012 or perhaps earlier, I would not be surprised if the party that calls itself Republican today will as well.

Naturally, that may seem to be a far-fetched and unrealistic claim to many. So I brought up the examples that I did and asked whether, in say 1998, you would have believed me if I told you that they would openly stand for these things today.

They’re claiming waterboarding ISN’T torture.

Much as Hitler claimed that he invaded Poland in self-defense.

The Republicans of today are a lot more like the Republicans of 1860-2008. They never changed.

This, I know too.

But not at all like the old ones.

The old ones weren’t perfect either. Think slavery and Indian wars.
Will today’s NSGOP continue to stand for all the bad things they do today a few years from now? Probably. But I won’t be too surprised if they also come out openly in favor of chattel slavery and Indian wars, too.

Perhaps also Eugenics.

One never knows what discarded evil doctrine and/or practice they might dig up out of the dustbin of history.

For those who don’t know, in a separate matter unrelated to her running for the nomination, an older edition of her Healing Our World is available for free in electronic form at http://www.ruwart.com/Healing/, but the current edition is well worth the price for activists because of the data it provides for libertarians looking for real world examples to support their positions. Her Short Answers to the Tough Questions is also a good resource for candidates who need help in crafting good sound bites (Harry Browne’s LIBERTY A-Z: 872 LIBERTARIAN SOUNDBITES YOU CAN USE RIGHT NOW is also excellent).

Paulie, consider a bit more care with your words. Near as I can tell, the Bush Administration doesn’t “openly support torture.” They’re claiming waterboarding ISN’T torture. And, no, I’ve not seen anyone calling for “literal ‘Crusades’,” certainly not in the Administration.

From what I can tell, waterboarding is torture, and it’s unjustified, IMO. And I don’t believe the Iraq War was justified, either. I’m as much a critic of W as anyone, but I believe overstating one’s criticism diminishes one’s credibility.

/past

If only the Republicans of 2008 were the Republicans of 1800

Give them, say, four more years (if even that long), and I would not rule out the GOOP (aka NSGOP) in fact openly coming out for the repeal of the 13th Amendment which outlawed slavery.

That may seem far fetched to some, but how many people would have believed even ten years ago that they would now openly support torture, and, in some cases, openly support colonialism and imperialism and literal “Crusades” against the Muslim world?

And, supposing for instance that Russell Means wins his campaign for President of the Lakotah Nation, can we in fact say with confidence that literal Indian wars between the US government and Native American tribes are really a thing of the oast?

We may, in fact, soon see the Republican Party be much more like the Republicans of 1800.

If only the Republicans of 2008 were the Republicans of 1800.

Personally, I thought Paul received a fair number of votes considering the scant media attention he actually obtained.

Media attention is doled out before votes are cast. Media attention used to be doled out based on two factors—opinion polls and fundraising. When Ron Paul challenged the favored candidates in fundraising, the media stuck with the opinion polls.

Given that Ron Paul inspired one of the largest, most active, and most enthusiastic grassroots efforts in all of American politics, media attempts to portray him as a fringe candidate lacking any meaningful support are especially troubling.

The opinion polls were held up throughout 2007 as the ultimate fair arbiter of media coverage, and even airtime in debates. The polls turned out to be a sham. Supposed front-runner Rudy Giuliani rarely escaped the low single digits in the actual voting. Supposed long shot Mike Huckabee (polling at 4% with Ron Paul for most of the year) turned out to be one of the three major contenders.

Why were the polls so far off? We found out in New Hampshire that many voters only made up their minds in the last week before the primary. Yet not one single poll showed “undecided” as the leading response.

Oh heck yeah! The people at the Ron Paul Meet Ups are just fantastic. All of the ones that I’ve spoken to are open to the Libertarian Party as well.