W.A.R. and Peace
From the Root for America campaign:
There has been a lot of debate and misinformation spread about my supposed views on war and peace. It’s time to set the record straight. I’m no pacifist and that’s a good thing, because no pacifist has ever been, nor ever will be, elected President of these United States.
I am a strong patriot who loves his country, will defend his country with honor, and is always respectful of our troops who are willing to put their lives on the line for our freedom. But I am most definitely not “pro war.” To the contrary, I am a Libertarian who believes in dramatically altering and re-focusing our foreign policy, foreign aid decisions, war on terror, military objectives, and military/defense budget.
The Libertarian Party advocates a non-interventionist policy in the affairs of other nations. I agree 100% with this stance. It’s time to stop gallivanting across the globe to “nation build” and stuff democracy down the throats of others.
It’s time to admit that the Iraq war, as well as the supposed “post war planning” was a disaster. It is time to admit that while there is a “war on terror,” the war in Iraq had (and has) little do with it. It’s time to admit the war in Iraq has distracted us from the real “war on terror” we are waging against the Taliban in Afghanistan.
It’s time to admit that the war in Iraq has fostered terrorism and civil war. It’s time to admit that our troops are dying in the middle of a sectarian civil war that, to be blunt, is none of our business.
It’s time to admit that our injection into the foreign affairs of others often causes more problems than it solves. It is time to admit that our foreign policy in many cases has caused, as Ron Paul put it, “blow-back.” In other words, by choosing sides we create new enemies and grudges against the United States.
Worse, we often choose the wrong side. As an example, we supposedly deposed the Sunni regime of Saddam Hussein to make the world a safer place for America and our allies such as Israel. Yet it is Shiite-supported Hezbollah that is now attacking Israel, as well as our forces in Iraq, NOT Sunni. It turns out that we did not make the world a safer place. Quite to the contrary, by choosing sides in a war that was none of our business, we made Iraq, and the world, a much more dangerous place. And we did no favors for our ally Israel.
It’s time to admit that our military has been stretched to the breaking point- which has endangered our security at home. It’s time to admit that this occupation of a small country in a far-away land is damaging our economy, and bankrupting our country for future generations. It’s time to admit that if we can’t afford the costs of a war in small, lightly populated countries like Iraq and Afghanistan, we should aim to avoid future wars at all costs (unless we are responding in self defense).
Most importantly, it’s time to admit that no war should be fought in a foreign land under the guise of fighting for the rights and freedom of others, while being used as an excuse here at home to expand government, violate the constitutional rights of Americans, and take away our freedoms. As Benjamin Franklin once said, “They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security.”
There are a significant number of libertarians (I among them) who believe that only a direct attack or an imminent attack from a foreign enemy can justify our use of the military to defend our country. Of course, there are a few libertarians who would object to a military response even under those conditions, rationalizing that it must have been our country’s fault in the first place, or that non-violence takes precedence over self-defense.
And there are some libertarians who hold a more hawkish view on foreign policy. No less a figure than Ayn Rand wrote that America had the right to invade dictatorship nations and institute successor governments that respect the natural rights and freedoms of their citizens.
Dictatorship nations are outlaws. Any free nation had the right to invade Nazi Germany and, today, has the right to invade Soviet Russia, Cuba or any other slave pen. Whether a free nation chooses to do so or not is a matter of its own self-interest, not of respect for the nonexistent “rights” of gang rulers. It is not a free nation’s duty to liberate other nations at the price of self-sacrifice, but a free nation has the right to do it, when and if it so chooses.
This right, however, is conditional. Just as the suppression of crimes does not give a policeman the right to engage in criminal activities, so the invasion and destruction of a dictatorship does not give the invader the right to establish another variant of a slave society in the conquered country.
A slave country has no national rights, but the individual rights of its citizens remain valid, even if unrecognized, and the conqueror has no right to violate them. Therefore, the invasion of an enslaved country is morally justified only when and if the conquerors establish a free social system, that is, a system based on the recognition of individual rights.
—- Ayn Rand, The Virtue of Selfishness
Chapter 13 – Collectivized “Rights” (1963)
However, while Ayn Rand advocated a moral position for pre-emptive war, when one looks pragmatically at war as a policy, one cannot ignore how it has historically been both costly in terms of lives and treasure. Moreover, the government almost always uses war as an opportunity to expand its size and encroach upon our own civil liberties.
The fundamental basis of libertarianism is ownership of one’s life and honestly acquired property. Very few other actions of the government can do more to infringe upon basic libertarian values than waging a war upon others. Waging war almost always results in the expansion of government and the military-industrial complex, which in turn results in waste, corruption, debt, budget deficits and ultimately higher taxes upon the wages and property of Americans. War, while sometimes unavoidable, should be seen only as a last resort. And when war is waged, its mission should be to eliminate the threat to our country in a manner that minimizes the loss of innocent life.
One action by voters can go a long way to preventing future wars under any circumstances. Electing a Libertarian as President can certainly promote policies that will dramatically reduce, though not eliminate, our risk of being attacked by other nations. That will only happen however if a tough-talking, patriotic Libertarian like myself is the Presidential candidate. No weak-sounding pacifist Libertarian will ever break the 1% of the electorate barrier, let alone wage a credible, realistic campaign to actually win the White House.
America is a nation of parents – mothers, fathers, grandmothers, grandfathers – whose number one concern is the safety of their children. They will only choose to elect a President who talks tough to our enemies and makes it clear that America will always respond quickly to any threat to our security. That is the attitude that makes America’s parents feel that their children are safe at night. That makes it all the more necessary to nominate a Libertarian candidate with national defense views that do not appear weak – because a popular, credible LP candidate who does well at the ballot box leads to the election of LP candidates at every level of office from water commissioner and school board to mayors and state assemblyman. It also leads to ballot access in states across the country in the 2012 election.
Given that war is an act that we should aspire to avoid, here are some of the policies a Wayne Root administration would advocate to reduce the likelihood of involving America in future wars:
* We must rapidly and dramatically reduce foreign aid and U.S. military bases around the world. In particular, it is time to end our defense of wealthy countries such as Japan, South Korea and the nations of Western Europe. As a Libertarian and fiscal conservative who stands strongly against welfare and entitlement programs for able-bodied individuals here at home, I believe it’s high-time to stop supporting welfare for able-bodied nations as well.
* More specifically, we must also starve terrorism by stopping the flow of foreign aid to nations that support terrorism. Douglas Casey once defined foreign aid “as a transfer from poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries.” Our government has given billions of dollars to tin-pot dictators around the world, many of whom are enemies of America and democracy, all while we are denouncing terrorism and funding wars to fight it. It’s time for this misguided and naïve charade to end. Let’s start by eliminating financial support to dictators, with the ultimate goal of cutting foreign aid to a bare minimum everywhere and only if absolutely required for national defense. Let’s bring these monies home to the American taxpayer in a time of economic uncertainty.
* We need to change our system of funding defense. The current system encourages cost overruns and time delays. Figures compiled by the Government Accountability Office showed that 95 major weapons systems exceeded their original budgets by $295 billion in the past seven years. This is a disguised corporate welfare scheme, which is bad for your pocket book and dangerous to our national security. Considering that the entire U.S. budget deficit was $160 billion last year, cutting waste in these 95 programs alone is a great way to reduce the U.S. budget deficit. We need to minimize the number of contractors that are paid based on cost plus. If you were told that you would get $2 for every $1 you spent, how much would you try to spend? Think of the waste and corruption involved in our entire military-industrial complex. Think of the billions of dollars wasted to fatten the wallets of politically connected defense contractors. It’s time to start applying the same criticism, cynicism, and fiscal discipline that we do to welfare (for individuals) to the U.S. defense budget. Waste is waste, whether it’s dressed up as “patriotism” or not. Dramatically cutting waste from the defense budget will automatically dramatically cut the size and scope of government spending- which leads to dramatic reductions in the tax burden to American taxpayers.
* Remove the barriers to free trade, thereby increasing the interdependence of other countries on the success of ours. Nineteenth century French economist Frederic Bastiat once wrote: “When goods don’t cross borders, soldiers will.” Or to put it another way, greed is good. Create wealth for another nation, and that nation will rarely, if ever, risk damaging or losing that wealth by starting a war.
* Eliminate the international “war on drugs.” This policy will eradicate the huge profits that terrorist groups and terrorist nations reap from the monopolistic prices the “war” creates. The current misguided policy wastes billions of dollars and unwittingly subsidizes America’s enemies around the globe. To be blunt, what farmers in Afghanistan or Columbia grow on their properties is none of the business of the United States of America. But if we stop increasing the profits that this “war” creates, it’s much more likely that they will be harvesting grains instead of poppies and coca leaves.
* Reduce our nation’s tax burden. Competition for industry will compel other nations to also lower their tax burdens, which will decrease their capacity to build weapons of war. And the wealthy society that America creates with a low tax burden will cause others to want to emulate our way of life.
* Open up the Arctic and Gulf of Mexico to oil drilling. This will increase the supply of oil and reduce its price, thereby squeezing the budgets of the socialist oil-rich kingdoms that fund terrorist groups. As long as we are dependent on foreign oil for our energy needs, we will be funding our enemies and thereby encouraging terrorism. America must find a way to develop energy independence so that we can starve the terrorists. Without the money that funds terrorism, terrorism will eventually end.
* The so-called “war on terror” must be aimed at our enemies, not our own American people. Warrantless wiretaps are a violation of the constitution and must be ended immediately. PERIOD. It’s quite simple: if the government has proof of a possible crime being committed then get a judge to issue a warrant. Many provisions of the Patriot Act should be repealed. The so-called “Real ID” program is yet another abuse of the rights of privacy of American citizens. “Real ID” will be a bureaucratic boondoggle run by the same government bureaucrats who lost one laptop and thereby exposed the private information of millions of U.S. veterans to identity thieves. Worse, “Real ID” will turn America into a Big Brother-like police state. As long as the Homeland Security Administration is in place, our liberties will be in jeopardy.
* Bring private industry and American ingenuity into the “war on terror.” Government’s attempts to make us safer against terrorists are often irrational. Seven long years after 9/11 there are still only 50 Arabic-speaking FBI agents out of 10,000 agents in our country. Some people are only half-joking when they state that TSA means “Thousands Standing Around.” If we want the “war on terror” to be a success, without compromising our liberties, we need to get the government largely out of it and bring American private industry into the efforts. Make sea ports, train depots and airports responsible for their own security. I can almost guarantee you they will not be requiring that you dispose of your toothpaste and water bottles. If an airline believes that the best way to protect its passengers (and keep its insurance costs down) is to require ID, search bags and arm pilots, that’s should be up to them. If we want to apprehend Osama Bin Laden and other terrorists, have Congress issue letters of marque and reprisal, as currently authorized in the Constitution, to allow American companies to earn billions of dollars for successfully capturing these thugs here and abroad. Never underestimate a motivated company’s capabilities with billions of dollars at stake to get the job done. Remember how back in 1979 Ross Perot, with the assistance of retired Green Beret Colonel Arthur “Bull” Simons, rescued his employees taken hostage by the Iranian government? Now, imagine unleashing that same level of can do spirit with results-oriented American companies leading the way. That’s how you fight the “war on terror.” Good old American capitalism can triumph when given the opportunity.
* Lastly, if the day should come where war is necessary, it cannot be implemented in contravention with the restrictions imposed by our Constitution. We must reject the notion that the President has the power to declare war. The entire concept of an imperial presidency is anathema to our Constitution’s checks and balances. In a Root Administration, wars and offensive military actions will require Congressional authorization, as our Constitution dictates – preventing a President from ever again involving this nation in unpopular wars without the full support of the American people. And while a military response in self-defense of this nation in the hours after being attacked does not require immediate Congressional approval, the President must seek a timely ratification after the fact. This is clearly a standard that prevents future unnecessary, unpopular or controversial wars or military actions, yet allows America the leeway to defend herself without debate or delay.
Ideally, these policies of a Root Administration will decrease the risk of war and terrorism.
Of course, we cannot assume that non-interventionism will always be sufficient to avoid conflict. There are other groups, cultures, and nations that do not share even slightly the Libertarian “live and let live” sentiment, and will not necessarily act in what we consider a rational manner. Pretending otherwise may well lead to the deaths of many Americans in future terrorist attacks.
We’re already familiar with how many in this country are infected with envy. The envious people amongst us seek to punish or even destroy those who produce the most and reap the rewards of industry. And the politicians these people elect enthusiastically serve their cause, engaging in productivity sapping redistribution-of-wealth schemes in the name of “fairness.”
It’s naïve to believe that people in other nations do not hold similar views. They blame the West for their own failings and the United States, in particular, for representing the epitome of Western Civilization. Islamic Jihadism preaches hatred and destruction of “infidels.” And as long as mothers hate us more than they love their own children, some teenagers and young men (and increasingly women too) will strap explosives to their bodies and detonate them to kill the targets of their hatred – regardless of what a Libertarian administration might do.
Unfortunately, battling this Islamic extremism, hatred and violence is not new. In 1786, long before our foreign interventionist policies of today, Thomas Jefferson, then the American ambassador to France, and John Adams, then the American ambassador to Britain, met in London with Abdrahaman, the ambassador to Britain for the government of Algiers. They were attempting to negotiate peace with Muslim countries that were engaging in piracy and enslavement of Americans. In a letter to John Jay, Jefferson wrote the following of how Abdrahaman justified attacking innocent Americans:
The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman [Muslim] who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.
—Joseph Wheelan, Jefferson’s War: America’s First War on Terror, 1801-1805
The United States government for years tried appeasement, making payments in ransom and tribute amounting to 20 percent of its annual revenues to Muslim nations during the year 1800 for the safe passage of American ships or the return of American hostages. But our most Libertarian United States President Thomas Jefferson – who hated most all forms of federal power, dramatically reduced the size of the military budget, and warned of foreign entanglements – felt compelled in 1801 to send a U.S. Naval Armada to Tripoli to wage a war against “Barbary Pirates.”
We are in a contest between two civilizations: ours, which values rational thought and individual liberties; and theirs, which is based on theocracy and subservience to an all-powerful government.
During most times we are able to largely ignore our enemies because our own wealth protected us from any threat they could pose. In the long run, free countries with free economies will always outgrow socialist tyrannies.
But technology is making weapons of mass destruction both cheaper to produce and easier to transport. As this trend continues, the risk of a country – or its terrorist agents – being able to harm us will increase.
If the day should come that weapons-of-mass-destruction become affordable to tyrants, and if such tyrants think very little of giving such weapons to terrorists who share a common goal of our destruction, in spite of our libertarian non-interventionism, we may have to rethink our foreign policies and strategies. We know now that some terrorists are willing to fly a plane into a building. If it were possible, these same murderous thugs would not have hesitated to set off a nuclear device in the middle of Manhattan, Hollywood or Disneyworld.
Fortunately, I do not believe it is too late for non-interventionism and our other Libertarian, free market policies to be the solution to avoiding unnecessary war. But we must be vigilant and prepared if we are proven wrong.
In summary, a Wayne Root administration will never unilaterally engage in pre-emptive war and it will implement and champion Libertarian policies that reduce the likelihood of Congress ever having to declare war. A Root administration will stand ready to defend America should she ever be attacked, or if Congress concludes that irrefutable proof exists that our being attacked is unavoidable. And wherever possible, we will employ the superior power of the marketplace to preserve our safety.
If you believe in a future where America does not engage in nation-building, yet our nation remains vigilant and strong enough to defend ourselves from foreign attack, join the Wayne Root campaign to restore America to its constitutional tradition of limited government and non-interventionism.
April 28th, 2008 at 4:40 pm
It is time to admit there will be no Root Administration. It is time to admit WAR will not be the Libertarian Party nominee. It is time to admit WAR is a delusional slimy used car salesman with nothing but lemons in stock.
April 28th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Rotten lemons. With big…big black spots! Ya. Ya…get that image. Take it. Big moldy spots. Hmmm, no one gonna buy that lemon Mr. Root.
April 28th, 2008 at 4:45 pm
Wow! This is a long, thoughtful piece. It’s very thorough. All I have read from Root’s critics is that he is pro-war and that his beliefs are somehow vacuous.
But when I look at this official detailed position, it’s clear that he can’t possibly be pro-war. And here he is quoting Ayn Rand, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and even Doug Casey.
The guy graduated from Columbia with a degree in political science, so he’s obviously intelligent and he evidently knows something about philosophy.
April 28th, 2008 at 4:49 pm
Like I said before. I suspect Wayne has campaign workers come in here and use generic names for these canned statements. Always unlinked, always Root 100%. Prove me wrong “Aaron”.
April 28th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
From neo-con to non interventionist in 6 months( or less) flat. Absolutely the fastest conversion of this sort in history!
I’ll hand it to the W.A.R. and his campaign handlers . . . he has put his finger up into the LP winds and like a very astute Bill Clinton, proclaims “the era of big government is over” . . no, er actually “The era of W.A.R. supporting the war on terror, fighting “islamo-fascists”, and “they hate us for our liberty and prosperity” IS OVER!”.
What’s next, W.A.R. no longer supports a gold standard AND a fiat (money) standard (at the same time)? He has now read and mastered Mises, Menger, Bohm-Bawerk, Rothbard, Hayek and every other Austrian economist in 3 months?
FYI, W.A.R.’s support for opposing money standards is clearly stated in the North Virginia Patriots radio interview on 4/21.
Folks, let’s forget about W.A.R.’s endorsement for a McCain/Lieberman ticket. That’s “old news” as W.A.R. is known to say. Of course it’s “Old NEWS” as Libertarians reject this unanimously!
I can certainly understand the W.A.R. campaign trying to do damage control on this most important position and policy that the Bush government has taken, but is anybody actually believing that such fundamental conversion is REAL? I believe it has 95% probability of being contrived, 5%
probability of being sincere.
April 28th, 2008 at 4:53 pm
You want me to prove a negative. I’m just looking at what’s published here. I’m finding it very hard to find anything objectionable about it. Sure, I probably have a nit here or there, but overall this is very well written, just like some of his other official pronouncements.
April 28th, 2008 at 4:55 pm
April 28th, 2008 at 4:45 pm
Wow! This is a long, thoughtful piece. It’s very thorough. All I have read from Root’s critics is that he is pro-war and that his beliefs are somehow vacuous.
But when I look at this official detailed position, it’s clear that he can’t possibly be pro-war. And here he is quoting Ayn Rand, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and even Doug Casey.
The guy graduated from Columbia with a degree in political science, so he’s obviously intelligent and he evidently knows something about philosophy.
Like I said, W.A.R. has money . . . to buy the best handlers and writers to appear “Libertarian”.
Apparently Starr has a short memory of all the various positions which W.A.R has held regarding foreign policy since his foray into Libertarian Party politics! I’m not even going to go into ALL the speeches, interviews, etc where his positions have contrasted in virtually every way.
No question in my mind . . . W.A.R. is the Mitt Romney of the the LP!
April 28th, 2008 at 4:56 pm
Steve LaBianca,
I understand that you are a big fan of Mary, and that you dislike Root, but I have no reason to doubt this man’s sincerity on this issue. Is there anything else that he’s written that is this thorough on the subject?
April 28th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
Come on, Steve, that makes no sense to me. You can’t on the one hand criticise the man for not raising enough money and then later criticise him for having the money to buy the best handlers.
April 28th, 2008 at 5:15 pm
Okay, I’ve now read this three times. This is brilliant!
Not only has Root presented a defendable Libertarian position, which is great for us internally, he has done so in a way that he can deliver the exact same message in the Fall to the voters at large.
If he’s got a team of handlers cranking out this stuff for no money, I’m impressed. And if he’s doing this without highly-paid handlers, I’m still impressed.
Forget for the moment who you favor for the nomination, if any of our candidates were to present this message to voters, is there any part of this that one can legitimately criticise? I don’t think so.
April 28th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
Nomination, shit. I wouldn’t vote LP if he got in. Probably wouldn’t vote. Join the disenchanted masses.
April 28th, 2008 at 5:19 pm
I just hope Root stops calling himself a conservative, stops implying that libertarianism is or can be right-wing, and stops mentioning Reagan in nothing but glowing terms.
Sincerely,
Alex Peak
April 28th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
Aaron Starr is a real person. Whether he actually wrote the messages attributed to him is another question. Unfortunately, anyone can post anything on this site, uslng any name they choose.
As for Wayne Root, I had a mildly positive impression of him until he (or someone in his campaign) called for Mary Ruwart to withdraw from the Presidential contest. That was just plain low!
April 28th, 2008 at 5:22 pm
I would not even vote for WAR if he began quoting Menger, Bohm-Bawerk, Mises, Hayek, Rothbard, Kirzner, Reisman, Block, Salerno, DiLorenzo, Hoppe, Hulsmann etc.
April 28th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Hello David Nolan. Yes, it really is me.
April 28th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Of course, I am assuming that you really are David F. Nolan.
April 28th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
My feelings about W.A. Root are the same as Mr. Nolan’s. He seemed like a decent guy, if a bit manic. But his tactics lately are sub-Clintonian, if not Nixonian.
April 28th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
So apparently W.A.R.’s anti-war stance consists of rehashing fox news-style comments about a supposed clash of civilizations with “jihadists”.
He’s no more anti-war than Bush, who said the exact same things about nation-building right up until he started onto the axis of evil discussion.``
April 28th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
Aaron,
I agree, today’s article from Root’s campaign fits the Libertarian viewpoint well. And, is brilliantly written.
What became of the long well written article by Root that considered a dream ticket for 2008 to be McCain/Lieberman? It too was well written.
Anybody have a copy. Seems his archived articles no longer contain this eye-opener. Each time Root writes an article it contains a new point of view – and the old info disappears. You would have thought Root worked for the CIA.
April 28th, 2008 at 6:13 pm
This press release says “It is time to admit that our foreign policy in many cases has caused, as Ron Paul put it, “blow-back.”
Funny how in the North Virginia Patriots radio interview just one week ago,
http://www.mypodcast.com/cached/nvp_20080421_1719-216354-102389-2-25.mp3
W.A.R couldn’t even REMEMBER “blowback”
He called it “feedback”! HAHAHA! The shows host had to tell him the word, and it still took him more than a short pause of time to acknowledge that “blowback” was the correct term! Yep, W.A.R., as a Ron Paul fan, he couldn’t even remember (the MOST key word for the Ron Paul explanation of the terrorists attacks of 9/11!
Folks, this is more evidence that sounding good does not mean that substance is behind the rhetoric.
April 28th, 2008 at 6:13 pm
Some of my fellow radicals are being too harsh on Wayne. There are many good points here, and I like the way his thinking is evolving. Obviously the change is incremental and there are specific areas I disagree with, which I will elaborate at another time when I have more time. But there are many good points too.
Let’s not pretend it’s all black and white. I would like to encourage Wayne to keep evolving in our direction, even if he is in my opinion not far along enough yet. I don’t think we accomplish that by some of the kind of statements that have already been put up here.
April 28th, 2008 at 6:15 pm
He wants to have it both ways. He supported the Iraq war “in the beginning”, and now everyone is just supposed to overlook this huge error in judgment. Anyone who was convinced by the Bush administration’s extremely flimsy evidence does not deserve to hold political office, never mind run for President on the LP ticket.
I’ve recently heard him twice on conservative talk radio bashing Ron Paul for wanting to “lose” the war on terrorism. Now we’re supposed to believe he’s a staunch interventionist? If he gets the nomination I’m staying home on election day.
April 28th, 2008 at 6:15 pm
W.A.R. has his OWN money, Aaron! this has nothing to do with his lack of or ability to “raise funds”. Come on Aaron! Be real.
April 28th, 2008 at 6:19 pm
Now had Alan Keyes had done something like this may he would be the CP nominee right now.
Root is smart enough at least to know where the party stands on interventionism and smart enough to try and turn aside fears he would support a neocon foreign policy. Maybe this is political posturing I don’t know but even so, it’s smart politics. He’s not going to try and be a square peg in a round hole.
And he’s smart enough not to listen Mr. Rittberg and his one-man band so-called Libertarian Defense Caucus. McCain awaits you Mr. Rittberg along with a whorehosue in Tiujana.
April 28th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
“The fundamental basis of libertarianism is ownership of one’s life and honestly acquired property. Very few other actions of the government can do more to infringe upon basic libertarian values than waging a war upon others. Waging war almost always results in the expansion of government and the military-industrial complex, which in turn results in waste, corruption, debt, budget deficits and ultimately higher taxes upon the wages and property of Americans. War, while sometimes unavoidable, should be seen only as a last resort. And when war is waged, its mission should be to eliminate the threat to our country in a manner that minimizes the loss of innocent life.”
Calling this a pro-war piece makes zero sense to anyone who chooses to read it. If any of our other candidates had put out this piece, we’d be cheering him or her on.
If Steve Kubby had submitted this position paper, if anyone called him a warmonger, he’d look foolish.
Perhaps there are other reasons to not vote for Root, but this position on foreign policy sure as heck ain’t one of them.
April 28th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
W.A.R. now proves he is clueless as he talks about the “real war on terror” against the Taliban and laments Shiites attacking Israel. Perhaps Root should use his hair and teeth to fight “the real war on terror”.
Root says a lot in his concluding weasel words:
“In summary, a Wayne Root administration will never unilaterally engage in pre-emptive war and it will implement and champion Libertarian policies that reduce the likelihood of Congress ever having to declare war.”
I guess pre-emptive war is OK as long as it is not unilateral.
Maybe Root does work for the CIA, Barr did/does. Or maybe he works for the Mossad. Most likely he works for his own ego.
April 28th, 2008 at 6:27 pm
You’ve got a lot to learn about the LP if you think that about Aaron Starr, kid.
April 28th, 2008 at 6:27 pm
Paulie Says:
April 28th, 2008 at 6:13 pm
Some of my fellow radicals are being too harsh on Wayne.
I’ve said nothing how good or bad ANY of the points made in this release are!
The spotlight I’m trying to focus on is the believability of a conversion in a few months, from strong supporter of a interventionist policy, to a strong supporter of a NON-interventionist policy.
I maintain, this conversion isn’t genuine, it is intended to lure non-believers into the W.A.R. camp. Nobody about-faces on such a fundamental position as the role of foreign policy from totally interventionist with all the trimmings of “islamo-fascism” and “they hate us for our freedoms and prosperity”,to totally non-interventionism, and the motivation is “blowback”.
I don’t care how smart or educated W.A.R. is, this about face as a genuine change is only accomplished with starting with a clean sheet of paper. W.A.R. is the ONLY person who would have accomplished such a genuine conversion, in such a short period of time, in history! A much more likely explanation (19 to 1 odds to speak in W.A.R. forte) is pandering, and knowing what the target audience want’s to hear!
In other words, this is way too coincidental to be real.
April 28th, 2008 at 6:29 pm
Hey Aaron how about getting the LP office to do something like this on a regualr basis, like weekly?
MHW
April 28th, 2008 at 6:29 pm
April 28th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Perhaps there are other reasons to not vote for Root, but this position on foreign policy sure as heck ain’t one of them.
That reason is that this isn’t really W.A.R.’s position . . . it is only his position “paper”.
April 28th, 2008 at 6:31 pm
“You’ve got a lot to learn about the LP if you think that about Aaron Starr, kid.”
Sorry that I don’t know who Aaron Star is. yeeeesh. I mean, I see this in every Root Endorsement story, or comments from Root. There is always a glowing comment a few minutes after it’s posted. First off, I’m pissed to no ends about reading something about Root, then I see it being praised.
April 28th, 2008 at 6:36 pm
Aaron Starr Says:
April 28th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
If Steve Kubby had submitted this position paper, if anyone called him a warmonger, he’d look foolish.
Aaron, Absolutely true. Steve Kubby by contrast, embraced Libertarianism decades ago. He has lived and breathed Libertarianism ever since.
W.A.R. was endorsing McCain/Lieberman as little as two years ago. That’s a FAR CRY from what Setve Kubby was saying two years ago!
Or what Mary Ruwart AND Steve Kubby have been saying for 20 years!
You’re the one who looks foolish Aaron for even suggesting that such a comparison of Kubby to W.A.R. is anything but apples to oranges.
April 28th, 2008 at 6:38 pm
From the Root for America campaign:
There has been a lot of debate and misinformation spread about my supposed views on war and peace.
That’s absolutely right W.A.R. and it all points back to you. You, Mr. W.A.R. are the spreader of “misinformation” of your “supposed” views.
April 28th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
Hey Aaron how about getting the LP office to do something like this on a regualr basis, like weekly?
MHW
Sounds like a good idea to me. We’ll just have the national office hire Root’s team of well-paid handlers to do it.
April 28th, 2008 at 6:43 pm
I point out to everyone that for months I’ve been proposing Milnes/Ruwart as the best progressive alliance ticket. & who gets smeared (other than my usual daily smearing here)...RUWART. By WHO? W.A.R. I point out that well written seems to describe W.A.R.’s writings. The government has many good writers & researchers available. It is possible that could be passed on. SOMEBODY started the smear from Ruwart’s book. Researched. Posted by an operative. Handlers planted. Confidential informants. & I point out just as once a marine always a marine. T.K. Once a CIA always a CIA. B.B. The libertarian party is such an obvious & good target! Since the FBI specializes in surveillance & are armed for arrests & are good at court bamboozling, I mean testimony, I predict somebody high up in the LP or libertarian movement will probably get arrested before the convention. This is all to disrupt the convention & prevent the progressive alliance from getting any traction. I’m already screwed so they can screw somebody else.
April 28th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
Steve LaBianca,
I’ve been involved with this party since 1980, so I have a long history. I was almost 16 years old at the time.
If we required that every candidate saw the light over 20 years ago, we’d have very few candidates.
When it comes to candidates, I care about two things:
1) Can he or she articulate our positions in a way that resonates with the public.
2) Will he or she actually get the opportunity to speak to large segments of the public.
So far, I’ve seen three major pieces come from the Root campaign: One on eliminating all Federal taxes, one on a strategy for how to reduce spending through the use of impoundments, and this last one on foreign policy. Each one of them has been well-written from a Libertarian standpoint and presentable to the public at large.
In addition, I’ve seen that he gets on television and radio … a lot.
The man is obviously running a campaign. I wish our other fine candidates were doing the same.
April 28th, 2008 at 6:55 pm
Aaron Starr Says:
April 28th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Calling this a pro-war piece makes zero sense to anyone who chooses to read it. If any of our other candidates had put out this piece, we’d be cheering him or her on.
I didn’t call this a “pro-war piece” . . . The man who is W.A.R. is not the words in this “piece”. Nixon said “I am not a crook”. Bill Clinton said he “did not have sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky”, and W.A.R. says he is a non-interventionist in foreign policy.
Words are just words, whether written down or spoken. They may be good words, but they have to be legitimately associated with the speaker as genuine before they are believed.
In W.A.R’s case, his words have been all over the place on foreign policy, starting, with my own personal hearing of W.A.R. say very interventionist words in late March 2007, in Orlando. W.A.R. told me in an email 3 or 4 months after that, that Orlando was “old news”. Of course it is W.A.R. especially since you realized that pro interventionism wasn’t playing well to Libertarians.
See Mr. W.A.R. if you had played your cards right, you would have listened to Libertarians BEFORE opening up your big trap, tried to understand the non-interventionist position, and ultimately over time, embraced it.
Instead now, you are in damage control mode and swimming against the tide of your own “blowback” current and are failing to convince. That is of course failing except for your shill Aaron Starr.
Lest anyone think I am shilling for Mary Ruwart, I am on record here at TPW as stating that I am a volunteer for her campaign. Sorry, I am not shilling!
April 28th, 2008 at 6:57 pm
Come on, Who smears you here, Robert?:D
April 28th, 2008 at 7:02 pm
Aaron, you have your priorities and I have mine.
However, where your faith in W.A.R. falls apart is that his inexperience with, lack of embracement of, and confusion as to how it actually affect people, LIBERTARIANISM, will continue to, as has in the past, stump him when challenged, and has only one avenue to go . . . back down. Just listen to his interview on North Virginia Patriots radio . . . read what Marc Montoni said about him backing down on his beliefs of what the problems with the party are, etc.
THAT is why we are best having a candidate who is steeped in Libertarianism . . . W.A.R. is a lightweight when it comes to Libertarianism. Say THAT about Mary Ruwart. Go ahead, because then you would be exposed as a phony as well!
April 28th, 2008 at 7:03 pm
Mike Theodore writes:
“Sorry that I don’t know who Aaron Star is. yeeeesh. I mean, I see this in every Root Endorsement story, or comments from Root. There is always a glowing comment a few minutes after it’s posted. First off, I’m pissed to no ends about reading something about Root, then I see it being praised.”
That’s okay, Mike. I don’t expect people to know me. I’ve been a Libertarian for 28 of my last 44 years. I’m a long time activist, having spent most of my party life at the local and state levels.
It’s a pleasure to be introduced to you.
April 28th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
Delegates to the convention: You represent the best targets for the FBI/CIA/GOP/Rove think tank super computer researched & coordinated domestic surveillance & covert operations. read & weep: The Age of Surveillance by Frank J. Donner.
April 28th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
Good to know ya, Starr.
-Mike
Funky smellin’ kid in Schaumburg, Illinois
April 28th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
Steve La Bianca writes:
“That is of course failing except for your shill Aaron Starr.”
Pardon me??? I voice an opinion that is different from yours and I receive this invective? Do I really deserve that type of treatment?
If I was writing great things today about Mary Ruwart would you call me a shill for Mary?
April 28th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
Didn’t Steve Gordon write recently about finding a joint in his pocket? Steve, lucky you weren’t arrested by some random beat cop for something stupid (drunk & disorderly?) & that cop finds it there. How did it get there, Steve? One of your “friends” put it there?
April 28th, 2008 at 7:10 pm
Mike Theodore, you’re okay in my book.
April 28th, 2008 at 7:22 pm
The best thing that McCain could do is in fact to nominate Lieberman. this would steal some of the votes of the trogledyte Reagan Democrats and cause a major obstacle for the Obama Revolution. This is very smart of Root to think of this.
April 28th, 2008 at 7:25 pm
Aaron Starr Says:
April 28th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
“I’ve been involved with this party since 1980, so I have a long history. I was almost 16 years old at the time.”
I’m glad. Really. Longer than me, but I’ve voted Libertarian since then.
“If we required that every candidate saw the light over 20 years ago, we’d have very few candidates.”
I’m not talking about “requiring” every candidate, but to be the presidential candidate/standard bearer, the room for error is minimal.
EVERY one of our presidential candidates in the past were libertarians WAY before they ran for president as the LP nominee. Even then far too many mistakes were made. I believe that Harry Browne was the most knowledgeable, Libertarian through and through candidate we had. His campaigns may have left something to be desired, but his appearances and interviews were as good as we have ever seen in LP presidential politics. W.A.R. would be a disaster.
Harry god rest his soul, would run multiple circles around W.A.R. in terms of holding up against scrutiny. If W.A.R. can get this amazing amount of media, all the more reason NOT to nominate him . . he would be eaten alive! His exposure now is softball! The nominee will need to be able to play hardball! The Libertarian Party will be soiled for years to come with this man as our nominee. See, delivering the media is fine, but if you can’t walk the walk, the media and exposure, does just that: IT EXPOSES YOU! In W.A.R.’s case he would be exposed as a lightweight . . . and this would be a detrimental thing, not a positive one.
April 28th, 2008 at 7:28 pm
Aaron,
As your friend, I’m advising you not to continue shilling immodestly for a position piece that you ghost wrote.
Given the events of the last few days, you might do well to “chill.”
Mr. Theodore:
I’m Angela Keaton, an at large representative to the Libertarian National Committee. I smell like vanilla. I think that LNC members should restrain themselves during the nomination process. How do you do?
April 28th, 2008 at 7:29 pm
Aaron,
From Wikipedia – shill – is an associate of a person selling goods or services or a political group, who pretends no association to the seller/group and assumes the air of an enthusiastic customer.
If you did say good things about Mary Ruwart, yes you would be a “shill”.
So, are you not a shill for W.A.R.? Or are you on staff with the W.A.R. campaign?
April 28th, 2008 at 7:32 pm
Steve LaBianca writes:
“In W.A.R’s case, his words have been all over the place on foreign policy, starting, with my own personal hearing of W.A.R. say very interventionist words in late March 2007, in Orlando. W.A.R. told me in an email 3 or 4 months after that, that Orlando was “old news”. Of course it is W.A.R. especially since you realized that pro interventionism wasn’t playing well to Libertarians.”
Or there is another possibility. He’s learning more and evolving as he becomes more exposed to all of us and our ideas. I also met him in Orlando, at two LP of California conventions and in Las Vegas at the state chairs conference. Since first meeting him, I know he’s read both Rothbard and Ruwart (I bought him Ruwart’s Healing our World at the LPC convention; even got it autographed by Mary). He’s asked me intelligent questions since then that demonstrate an understanding of ideas.
When I first met him, did I think he was libertarian enough for me? No, I didn’t. But over time he has clearly picked up on the ideas.
The great thing about our party is that because we are grounded in ideas and principles, we have a positive impact on our candidates. In effect, the party is the brine that pickles the cucumbers. It doesn’t work the other way.
Not everyone had the opportunity that I had at the age of 15 of being able to pick up a book on libertarianism—Robert Ringer’s book, Restoring the American Dream, in case you’re curious—and then mining the bibliography until I was saturated with the essence of our ideals. I met Ed Clark when I was 16 and I would have proudly voted for him for President had I been two years older.
We need to be open to folks learning about us and becoming us. Very few people wake up one day and become 100% libertarians.
April 28th, 2008 at 7:35 pm
“From Wikipedia – shill – is an associate of a person selling goods or services or a political group, who pretends no association to the seller/group and assumes the air of an enthusiastic customer.
If you did say good things about Mary Ruwart, yes you would be a “shill”.
So, are you not a shill for W.A.R.? Or are you on staff with the W.A.R. campaign?”
I am not on staff with any campaign.
April 28th, 2008 at 7:37 pm
“Harry god rest his soul, would run multiple circles around W.A.R. in terms of holding up against scrutiny.”
Well, that’s something we can agree upon. I really do miss Harry Browne. I’d vote for him in a New York minute.
April 28th, 2008 at 7:42 pm
“I’m Angela Keaton, an at large representative to the Libertarian National Committee. I smell like vanilla. I think that LNC members should restrain themselves during the nomination process. How do you do?”
I like vanilla, but who doesn’t. Think I’m doing a good job restraining myself?
Aaron,
I wish I was around during the Browne campaign. Seemed like a great guy to be behind.
April 28th, 2008 at 7:46 pm
Much of it is nice. What’s missing is a call to actually get out of Iraq and a call to end US foreign aid to Israel and the Palestinians.
April 28th, 2008 at 7:51 pm
Mr. Theodore:
Mr. Starr is the treasurer of the Libertarian National Committee. He should be a bit more restrained in his support for Mr. Root.
You may shill for whomever you wish but those of us sitting on the LNC should not be too involved with the nomination process.
April 28th, 2008 at 7:53 pm
Aaron Starr, if you wrote this, and if Steve Gordon write’s Bob Barr’s stuff, then in my opinion, at this point, I’d have to say Aaron Starr is a better writer (according to my tastes) than Steve Gordon; not that I don’t hope both of you continue improving; and not that I’m claiming my writing is any good.
April 28th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
Aaron Starr Says:
April 28th, 2008 at 7:32 pm
Or there is another possibility. He’s learning more and evolving as he becomes more exposed to all of us and our ideas. I also met him in Orlando, at two LP of California conventions and in Las Vegas at the state chairs conference. Since first meeting him, I know he’s read both Rothbard and Ruwart (I bought him Ruwart’s Healing our World at the LPC convention; even got it autographed by Mary). He’s asked me intelligent questions since then that demonstrate an understanding of ideas.
Key word Aaron- “evolving” . . . in 3 months is no evolution Aaron, and you know it. Not even 6 or 9 months is evolution in embracing a political philosophy and its corollaries.
I knew this was coming as well . . . I said in an earlier post “What’s next, W.A.R. no longer supports a gold standard AND a fiat (money) standard (at the same time)? He has now read and mastered Mises, Menger, Bohm-Bawerk, Rothbard, Hayek and every other Austrian economist in 3 months?
Now, Austrian economists – most notably Mises and Rothbard support a Gold standard and NOT a fiat money standard.
However, as late as ONE week ago, W.A.R. is confused about a gold standard and a fiat standard . . . just LISTEN to the North Virginia Patriots radio interview with W.A.R. supporting a “Gold standard and a fiat (money) standard”! Definitely confused. Read some more W.A.R. You’re going to need it!
On second thought he reads, but does he digest??? I think not. He’s a light weight, period!
There still isn’t anything in your posts to warrant support for W.A.R. over Mary Ruwart. Good Exposure – great; Bad exposure – terrible. W.A.R. = bad exposure because he’s a lightweight.
Aaron, why don’t you run for president in W.A.R.’s place?
April 28th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
Oh, my bad. I agree with you. I like how LP leaders don’t put pressure on election cycles. I think LP members are doing a good job of doing that. To his credit though, it’s hard to keep opinions to oneself.
BTW, you’ll be seeing shilling up the wazoo from this useless splinter on the LP’s paw (me, if you didn’t catch that).
April 28th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
April 28th, 2008 at 7:46 pm
Much of it is nice. What’s missing is a call to actually get out of Iraq and a call to end US foreign aid to Israel and the Palestinians.
How about that! Also, listen to the North Virginia Patriots radio interview from one week ago:
http://www.mypodcast.com/cached/nvp_20080421_1719-216354-102389-2-25.mp3
W.A.R. says he supports removing troops from Korea, and Europe, but lo and behold, gosh darn it I guess he just forgot to include Iraq and other Middle East countries plus Afghanistan. Just an oversight as that region hasn’t had much attention lately! And lets not forget we have to make sure that our $1 billion of equipment can’t be left behind in Iraq. . . no no that is worth MUCH MORE than American soldiers lives!
April 28th, 2008 at 8:17 pm
Steve LaBianca wrote:
“Aaron, why don’t you run for president in W.A.R.’s place?”
Okay, Steve, an hour ago I didn’t like what you said to me, but now you’ve made up for it with this, so you’re back in my good graces.
Leaving aside the issue of time and lost wages with having to do a national campaign, while I believe that I’m a better versed libertarian than many or even most of our candidates, I don’t believe that I’m a polished enough presenter.
I’m honored though that you would consider me though.
April 28th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
Speaking of presentation skills, I’m going to give the Most Improved Presenter award to George Phillies. I’ve seen his ability to interact with the audience improve over the last year.
One very good thing about being a candidate running an active campaign for the nomination is that you have a real opportunity to hone your speaking skills.
Uh, oh, there I go shilling for Phillies again. My bad.
Somebody should stop me before I shill for someone else.
April 28th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
“Somebody should stop me before I shill for someone else.”
How about shilling for a Theodore Campaign. I may not be eligible, but it would be fun as hell.
Too bad I’m booked as running mate for Milnes.
April 28th, 2008 at 8:30 pm
Aaron Starr, did you have one too many Diet Dr. Peppers today?
April 28th, 2008 at 8:32 pm
The consistently observant Paulie has this to say:
Some of my fellow radicals are being too harsh on Wayne. There are many good points here, and I like the way his thinking is evolving. Obviously the change is incremental and there are specific areas I disagree with, which I will elaborate at another time when I have more time. But there are many good points too.
Let’s not pretend it’s all black and white. I would like to encourage Wayne to keep evolving in our direction, even if he is in my opinion not far along enough yet. I don’t think we accomplish that by some of the kind of statements that have already been put up here.
I think he might be missing the point. We have no way of knowing how fast any of the candidates are evolving towards libertarianism, since it isn’t exactly as though they’re in the legislature voting on these issues. For all we know, Root would stop evolving into a libertarian immediately after winning the nomination. Then where would we be?
April 28th, 2008 at 8:33 pm
I’d vote for you, Mike. I think my 16-year-old self might have made a decent president. And the LP could corner the funky smellin’ vote—a large silent-but-deadly majority.
April 28th, 2008 at 8:45 pm
Responding to my question Aaron Starr Says:
April 28th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
“Hey Aaron how about getting the LP office to do something like this on a regualr basis, like weekly?
MHW
Sounds like a good idea to me. We’ll just have the national office hire Root’s team of well-paid handlers to do it.”
In responding to Aaron’s reply I’ll say “Hey Aaron ever hear of Open Source? How about asking the members to come up with media releases, position papers, pamphlets, etc. for the party? I’ll bet there are more than a few LP members willing to put time, money and effort into making our literature and news releases look a lot better and be more frequent.”
BTW next time you come to a meeting in another state try introducing yourself. Shaking hands never hurt, nor does being polite. Especially since your are in a leadership role.
MHW
April 28th, 2008 at 8:46 pm
Frankly, Aaron, I think you WOULD make a better candidate than W.A.R. Way better.
We’ve met, twice I think, and I know that you are a long time Libertarian. Now you know, we are all reasonably intelligent people, but “evolution” takes more than 3 or 6 months. W.A.R., I have no doubt has a higher IQ than I have (mine is 135), but neo-con to non-intervention in 6 months? I am STILL learning after reading Atlas Shrugged in 1978, and epiphany’s come from time to time. However, this supposed rapid fire epiphany stream for W.A.R. is simply not believable. That’s the simple truth.
I’ve said many times before W.A.R. needs time. He should have taken my advise from 7 or 8 months ago . . . “please drop out of the LP presidential contest”. Try it in 2012, maybe. He just needs more time. Brilliant or not W.A.R. is still a lightweight. I don’t care HOW smart he is . . . it takes more than 6 or 9 months. Way more. Period! He’ll get burned under heavy scrutiny. And so will the LP.
But no. Instead, his pig-headedness is going to give him egg on his face.
Too bad, he could have been a valuable player in the fight for liberty . . . unfortunately his over inflated ego got in the way of the broader picture.
Now, about that run for president Aaron . . .
April 28th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
Wes Benedict wrote:
“Aaron Starr, did you have one too many Diet Dr. Peppers today?”
Actually, I’m suffering from Diet Dr. Pepper withdrawal. I was feeling under the weather this morning, so I couldn’t come in to work, which is where I get my Diet Dr. Pepper fix. At work, we subsidize our employees on the vending machines. Each can of soda is only $0.25.
Thankfully, I have Third Party Watch so that I can make a general nuisance of myself and keep myself occupied today.
April 28th, 2008 at 8:52 pm
“Thankfully, I have Third Party Watch so that I can make a general nuisance of myself and keep myself occupied today.”
That’s it, Aaron. I just met you, but I friggin’ love you.
April 28th, 2008 at 8:57 pm
In responding to Aaron’s reply I’ll say “Hey Aaron ever hear of Open Source? How about asking the members to come up with media releases, position papers, pamphlets, etc. for the party? I’ll bet there are more than a few LP members willing to put time, money and effort into making our literature and news releases look a lot better and be more frequent.”
BTW next time you come to a meeting in another state try introducing yourself. Shaking hands never hurt, nor does being polite. Especially since your are in a leadership role.
MHW
You’re a stand-up guy, Mike. The next time I’m in Chicago I should look you up.
That’s an interesting idea, sort of like wikipedia. I suspect that the media releases wouldn’t be timely enough, but the rest of your idea presents intriguing possibilities. One of the challenges is that many folks think they know how to write, but really don’t. There’s probably a reason why marketing folks are paid a lot of money.
April 28th, 2008 at 9:06 pm
Mike Theodore wrote:
“’Thankfully, I have Third Party Watch so that I can make a general nuisance of myself and keep myself occupied today.’
That’s it, Aaron. I just met you, but I friggin’ love you.”
Wow, Mike, I don’t know what to say. Too bad your name isn’t Michelle.
Actually, I’m saving myself for Susan Hogarth. She loves Dr. Diet Pepper as much as I do, so she’s my soda pop sweetheart. Maybe she and I can build a relationship on that. Perhaps I should stalk her more than I do now. Every time she ignores me is just further evidence of how deep her love truly is for me.
April 28th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
My god, your the treasurer for a national party? I love this place!
April 28th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
Everything smells like shit north of I-88
April 28th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
Ya, but it’d be better if this damned apartment wasn’t covered in god-damned potatoes! Damned cook county.
April 28th, 2008 at 9:35 pm
Mike Theodore,
The Libertarian Party has very few competent people and while some people think we don’t perform very well, I’m actually impressed with how well we actually do overall considering the limited human and financial resources currently engaged. That’s why I’m still bullish on the future of the LP. Some people think we need to tweak our message or tactics. I tend to think that if 10 or 20 good hard-working people were to join the effort, we’d do a lot more. If 100 or 500 effective people were to join the effort, we’d grow incredibly.
I’m often reminded of the disastrous state we were in here in Texas not long ago:
http://wesbenedictforlnc.blogspot.com/2006/07/texas-two-step-turnaround-2.html
And how we turned things around:
http://wesbenedictforlnc.blogspot.com/2007/11/belatedly-reporting-step-two-was.html
It’s not rocket science. Keep it simple and work fast and consistently, and drink lots of Diet Dr. Pepper.
April 28th, 2008 at 9:35 pm
Being a Libertarian in Cook County is not a fun prospect. The Nanny-Government capital of the world.
I’ve been all over the area. I grew up in the south suburbs in Cook County and went to college at Elmhurst College, so I got the conservative viewpoint there.
I live now in Will County…decent.
April 28th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
Jeff, I hear you. I’m gonna try and move to Colorado Springs when I’m 18. I have a good amount of family out there, and it’s the founding place of the party. There is no way I’ll even take a stab at Illinois politics. This place is a madhouse.
April 28th, 2008 at 9:44 pm
Mike,
I recently traveled to Texas on business. You should check it out. If I didn’t have a ball-and-chain that refused to move, I’d have moved down already.
April 28th, 2008 at 9:51 pm
I have that chain, but I’m leaving before it expands. This place is killing me. Colorado is the place to be for me. I love the weather, scenery, and C-130 practice flights. Texas isn’t far off. I’m gonna try to be an active LP member, so I’ll be there for state things and what not.
April 28th, 2008 at 10:12 pm
Mike,
I’m originally from Colorado. I live in Springfield Illinois now but if you decide to get involved in the Colorado LP, where I got my start, I still know plenty of people you should get in touch with.
April 28th, 2008 at 10:18 pm
wow, thanks. I imagine theres alot in Colorado. I’m surprised theres even an LP presence in Springfield.
April 28th, 2008 at 10:26 pm
Steve LaBianca wrote:
“Frankly, Aaron, I think you WOULD make a better candidate than W.A.R. Way better.”
Well, thank you. I’m probably better on the issues than most of our candidates and more well versed in the ideology. I’ve actually read Human Action—the first couple of hundred pages are slow, but the last six or seven hundred pages go by more quickly.
I’ve been at this for 28 years. I’m committed to our values and our organization, but all of that doesn’t make me a better candidate.
I have managed winning campaigns. Yes, winning campaigns. My significant other is elected to a large recreation and park district (over 135,000 constituents). I’ve even managed winning city council campaigns.
And after all that, I find that the most important part of the candidate is his or her ability to connect with people.
Once the candidate can connect with the voter, the voter is willing to listen to him.
Wayne Root has a way of making concepts appealing, especially on television. He has over 23 years of broadcast television experience.
I’ve worked hard on Wayne Root. I’ve gotten him to read our books and I’ve had the opportunity to educate him. I’m telling you right here and now that I’ve had enough interaction with him to tell you that he’s come a hell of a long way since we first encountered him in Orlando.
You see it as him pandering, I see it as my having worked really hard on educating him. He’s not the first person I’ve turned into a Libertarian.
Does he have further to go? Of course he does, but he’s a good study. And he gets better every day.
It’s not particularly important that the candidate can correctly explain epistemology or the Austrian business cycle. No voter remembers that after the campaign. It’s important that the candidate can get the voter to want to find out more about us.
A winning campaign at the presidential level is not one that gets 2-5% of the vote, though that would be great. A winning campaign is one where the candidate can get tens or hundreds of thousand of people to voluntarily give their name and address (and hopefully a donation) to the national party headquarters so that we can then sell the prospect on the ideas through LP News or through various publications we can get into their hands.
But you’ve got to get them into the store before we can get them to make a purchase.
Hey, I love many of our candidates to pieces, but I just don’t see any of the others getting folks into the door long enough to find out about us.
The voter education takes place after the campaign, after they contact us, not during the campaign.
Wayne Root might get them in the door, but it will be Steve LaBianca and Aaron Starr and many other good folks who will turn these prospects into libertarians.
April 28th, 2008 at 10:41 pm
Wes Benedict writes:
“It’s not rocket science. Keep it simple and work fast and consistently, and drink lots of Diet Dr. Pepper.”
Speaking as the official Libertarian shill of the Dr. Pepper soft drink company, I must state that Wes Benedict is right.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:00 pm
Damned. I like Dr. Pepper, but never the diet. I have alot of work to do before the campaign kicks off.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:09 pm
Mike Theodore writes:
“Damned. I like Dr. Pepper, but never the diet. I have alot of work to do before the campaign kicks off.”
Yes, you do. We will have to work on the indoctrination. I am declaring that soda purity shall rule all that read this blog. As part of your battery of tests, we will require that you recite the ingredients list backwards sometime in the next 30 minutes.
Be warned. Your computer is hooked up to deliver shock treatments should you be unable to articulate the correct answer on a timely basis.
Ready… Set… Go!
April 28th, 2008 at 11:12 pm
HAHA! Jesus christ. I haven’t met a funnier LP guy since Jim Burns.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:18 pm
Mike Theodore writes:
“HAHA! Jesus christ. I haven’t met a funnier LP guy since Jim Burns.”
Shhhh….Take that back. I’m not allowed to be funny. I’m a CPA. Don’t you realize that they’ll throw me out of the guild if anyone finds out that I actually crack a smile on occasion?
Besides, Daniel Imperato is funnier. He just doesn’t realize it.
Time’s a wasting. Better get those ingredients listed out fast.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:20 pm
Aaron, quit while you’re ahead.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:22 pm
caffeine, lemotretha, high fructose corn syrup, secrets, astremea, and phemiphonia.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:23 pm
Nope … that’s the regular Dr. Pepper. Try again before I send the soda purity police your way.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:24 pm
You’ve got only 15 minutes left.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:25 pm
Okay, to be nice. Here’s a hint.
http://www.drpepper.com/
Don’t say I never did anything for you.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:25 pm
Aaron,
For frig’s sake, listen to Wes.
Please, you are giving this young man a very warped view of the LP. You are not funny. You are not a plumb line libertarian. You don’t even drink diet DP whenever you are out.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:26 pm
Screw it, I’ll do it the hard way. Create an exploratory committee.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:26 pm
Wes Benedict writes:
“Aaron, quit while you’re ahead.”
Not until my plans for global soda pop domination are realized. You can’t stop me. It’s too late, Wes.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:28 pm
“Please, you are giving this young man a very warped view of the LP. You are not funny. You are not a plumb line libertarian. You don’t even drink diet DP whenever you are out.”
Don’t worry. My mindset is not changed that much from thirdpartywatch. Just a jokester.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:29 pm
Aaron,
Please let’s get you some help. You have had some break with reality. You are my friend. Let me get you some help.
It’s going to be ok.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:30 pm
Angela Keaton writes:
“Aaron,
For frig’s sake, listen to Wes.
Please, you are giving this young man a very warped view of the LP. You are not funny. You are not a plumb line libertarian. You don’t even drink diet DP whenever you are out.”
I see that Angela requires another round of shock treatments. Pity.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:32 pm
Less than 10 minutes remain before Mike Theodore has 1 billion volts administered through his keyboard. The question is can he find the website link before it’s too late.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:32 pm
Aaron,
I should have kicked your ass when M kept touching me during his Scientology healing. You are so wrong. You are just wrong, about everything.
You shouldn’t be allowed to pick out your own socks.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:33 pm
Disconnected it. I’m copying and pasting sentences and large reports.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
We live in a Coke and Pepsi world. Dr. Pepper is a fringe drink. Give it up! No one can compete with Perfect Harmony.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:35 pm
Jesus christ, this site gets heated. I have no idea what’s gonna go down now.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:35 pm
Angela Keaton writes:
“Aaron,
I should have kicked your ass when M kept touching me during his Scientology healing. You are so wrong. You are just wrong, about everything.
You shouldn’t be allowed to pick out your own socks.”
And what makes you think I pick out my own socks today. I have my servants do that for me as part of my soda pop world domination scheme.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:36 pm
The Real Thing writes:
“We live in a Coke and Pepsi world. Dr. Pepper is a fringe drink. Give it up! No one can compete with Perfect Harmony.”
That’s only because we don’t have Instant Runoff Voting and we can’t get Dr. Pepper into the debates. Only then will America finally wake up to discover they have a real choice.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:37 pm
Three minutes left, Mike.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:37 pm
Your servants? Yeah, I think I was your ED actually but sure, “servant” works.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:39 pm
Angela Keaton writes:
“Your servants? Yeah, I think I was your ED actually but sure, “servant” works.”
Yes, and you have to admit that you were much happier when you were serving me. Now, what socks should I wear tomorrow?
April 28th, 2008 at 11:41 pm
1 Billion votes were just administered through Mike’s keyboard. We’ll miss him so.
For future reference, the answer is:
Phenylketonurics
Caffeine
Sodium Benzoate
Artificial and Natural Flavors
Phosphoric Acid
Aspartame
Caramel Color
Carbonated Water
April 28th, 2008 at 11:43 pm
Sorry I’m late, folks. Just got popped away to get some brownies and coffee. What’s all this then?
April 28th, 2008 at 11:43 pm
It would just be better if we were all voted out of the LNC. Just be better.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:46 pm
Hate to tell you this, folks. But this comment page will follow you around for your entire political life.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:47 pm
Apparently Mike Theodore was away from the keyboard when the electrical current was sent his way.
I guess he will survive for another day, after all.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:47 pm
Guys, chill out. Yes, we mostly sell Coke and Pepsi, but regular and diet Dr. Pepper combined are in third place and rising. Feel free to pick from one of those or maybe even grab a beer for a change, eh!
April 28th, 2008 at 11:48 pm
It’s 11:47 in Texas. I’m off to 7-11.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:49 pm
correction. If this doesn’t warp my mind, I don’t know what could.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:50 pm
Mike Theodore says:
“Hate to tell you this, folks. But this comment page will follow you around for your entire political life.”
Damn! I should have thought of that ahead of time. Steve LaBianca, I’m sorry but I guess I can never be President now. The skeleton in my closet has been exposed. The whole world now knows that I oppose age of consent laws when it comes to the drinking of Diet Dr. Pepper. I will never be able to withstand the grilling from Sean Hannity, if he were to ever find out.
Oh, well.
April 29th, 2008 at 1:49 am
April 28th, 2008 at 6:31 pm
“You’ve got a lot to learn about the LP if you think that about Aaron Starr, kid.”
Sorry that I don’t know who Aaron Star is. yeeeesh. I mean, I see this in every Root Endorsement story, or comments from Root. There is always a glowing comment a few minutes after it’s posted. First off, I’m pissed to no ends about reading something about Root, then I see it being praised.
interesting that you mention “glowing” comments. from my perspective it is usually some snipe that is posted from one of you kiddie porn gang members that is up first.
April 29th, 2008 at 1:52 am
April 28th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Rotten lemons. With big…big black spots! Ya. Ya…get that image. Take it. Big moldy spots. Hmmm, no one gonna buy that lemon Mr. Root.
in fact, you occupy the #2 spot on this thread shitbrick.
April 29th, 2008 at 1:59 am
Lest anyone think I am shilling for Mary Ruwart, I am on record here at TPW as stating that I am a volunteer for her campaign. Sorry, I am not shilling!
to us you are just part of the kiddie porn gang. nuff said.
April 29th, 2008 at 2:03 am
April 28th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
Steve La Bianca writes:
“That is of course failing except for your shill Aaron Starr.”
Pardon me??? I voice an opinion that is different from yours and I receive this invective? Do I really deserve that type of treatment?
If I was writing great things today about Mary Ruwart would you call me a shill for Mary?
no, to this ahole, you would just be another member of his gang, the kiddie porn gang that is.
April 29th, 2008 at 8:40 am
Aaron >>Yes, and you have to admit that you were much happier when you were serving me. Now, what socks should I wear tomorrow?>>
For christs sake please do not tell me that our national treasurer is a male chauvanist oink oink. Just keep talking Aaron…the more you talk the more people find out what you are really about. Keep it up bro, karma will eventually bite you in the ass.
April 29th, 2008 at 9:10 am
Nice try on Wayne’s part, but I don’t qualify this as non-interventionist:
What he’s saying here is “Libertarianism is a luxury. If that fails we need to go back to Big Government.”
Non-interventionists – unless they are pacifists – do call for defensive responses to attack. But non-interventionists – that is, Libertarians, do not call for their government to intervene in the affairs of other nations. EVER.
Freedom is not a luxury. It is necessity for people who wish to truly live as humans.
“Freedom when freedom is practical” is a rather disappointing rallying
cry for a political movement.
April 29th, 2008 at 1:16 pm
Agreed. Libertarianism is not about utopianism, it’s about doing the right thing. Should we support someone taking someone’s property? No, most Americans do agree that is wrong. Should we tell people how to run their lives? No, most Americans do believe that it is wrong to do that. It’s a very natural philosophy, but I don’t think the LP should be presenting the hardline version to the American people.
April 29th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
Aaron Starr wrote:
“When it comes to candidates, I care about two things:
1) Can he or she articulate our positions in a way that resonates with the public.
2) Will he or she actually get the opportunity to speak to large segments of the public.”
As a former state LP media director (CO), that was my job: articulating the party position to the public in a way that people get, and getting the word out.
Sounds to me like Root would make a good press secretary or spokesperson, but not Presidential fodder. Perhaps he ought to volunteer his expertise and “vast” media contacts to whomever actually gets the nomination to help promote them?
Root needs to get out of “Me, me, me” mode and into a little more JFK mode “Ask not…etc.”.
April 29th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
Mike Theodore said:
“Jeff, I hear you. I’m gonna try and move to Colorado Springs when I’m 18. I have a good amount of family out there, and it’s the founding place of the party. There is no way I’ll even take a stab at Illinois politics. This place is a madhouse”
As a native Chicagolander (on the Indiana side, and I miss the Dunes, the South Shore, and Wrigley Filed!), I hear you. As a former member of LPCO-El Paso County (LPEP for short), that affilaite, one of the busiest in the nation, went kaupt a few years ago after my wife and I left to come to CA and the others who ran the county got burned out. If you could work to get that place back up and running once you get there, all the more power to you. I can set you in contact with some of that old crowd there, which might be helpful.
April 29th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
One more thing: Why did Root (or whomever wrote it) need that long screed to rattle off an eye-glazing war policy that causes tuning out by the fourth paragraph?
The proper LP war policy is simple:
“Self-defense-based neutrality through superior intelligence and tactical firepower.”
That means:
1) We play nice if you play nice.
2) If you screw with us, expect your world to end.
3) We know what you’re doing when you’re doing it.
4) You can’t defeat us militarily if you try.
5) The lives and rights of our citizens are our first responsiblity, prioirty, and duty. Don’t f*** with them!
6) We will not attack anyone unless we are attacked.
7) The rest of the world needs to grow up and quit asking us to bail them out of their problems.
8) We’re going to fix our own problems first.
Dondero can spit his tequila out his nose on that one.
April 29th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
I forgot #9 and #10 there:
9) We will stay out of other nations’ business, unless they screw with our citizens.
10) We can and will have peaceful trade with other nations, so long as it is equitable and peaceful.
April 29th, 2008 at 4:29 pm
And I forgot the most important one, #11:
11) We will not start a war unless we declare it by a Congressional Declaration of War per the requirements of the Constitution.
And a lot of this is as much foreign policy as it is war policy, so it can be called that as well.
April 29th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
Forgot the Powell Doctrine, Michael.
April 29th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
“I believe the proper wording at the end of #5 is Don’t Tread on Us” Go reread you Gadsden T-shirt. Goddess only knows you wear it enough, those words should be permanently etched into your brain.
April 29th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
This is a simple waste of time!
April 29th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
Should’ve been in the comments section last night. It got funky.
April 30th, 2008 at 2:00 am
Nah, the Powell Doctrine misses the important issues of why we go to war and who declares it, and uses the broad and vague term “national security”. I’m more specific than that, although parts of the Powell Doctrine could be implemented as war rules once it is delcared.
April 30th, 2008 at 2:24 pm
My wife and I were watching a Root video a few weeks ago when she turned to me and said, “Doesn’t he give you the creeps?”
I had to agree. There’s something about him that makes me expect him to break out in tentacles.
So I’m no Root fan, but in his defense, It took from May 1980 to February 1981 for me to go from Rockefeller Republican to Reaganite to the Libertarian Party.
O.W.
April 30th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
That’s the thing, Michael. For any war we enter, we should go by the Powell Doctrine to make sure it doesn’t turn into an occupation like now.
May 2nd, 2008 at 8:15 pm
The piece is well-written, I’ll grant that. And there is no major libertarian faux pas, which I guess is something for which to be thankful. Aaron, did you write it? I notice that you did not deny doing so when the question was raised.
Either way, it’s not enough to convince me that Wayne Allyn Root would make a good LP presidential candidate. This essay is not the main reason I believe he should not get our nomination, but it does nothing to lay to rest any of my issue-oriented concerns about him. As a non-interventionist (if his recent shift in views is to be believed), Root still sounds as fundamentally nationalist and conservative to me as he did before.
Here are a few specific criticisms of “W.A.R. and Peace”:
(1) It sounds biased toward the wealthy.
“We’re already familiar with how many in this country are infected with envy. The envious people amongst us seek to punish or even destroy those who produce the most and reap the rewards of industry. And the politicians these people elect enthusiastically serve their cause, engaging in productivity sapping redistribution-of-wealth schemes in the name of ‘fairness.’”
This is true as far as it goes. But it shows no recognition of the fact that it is poor people, not the wealthy, who suffer most at the hands of big government. Under the Statist quo, the rich have been getting richer, and the poor getting poorer. Corporate welfare far outpaces the kind that most people think of when they hear the term “welfare,” and government programs allegedly designed to “help” the poor treat them like shit and generally give them just enough to get by, while providing nice salaries and benefits for the middle and upper class government employees who administer and staff them.
Seeing W.A.R. speak in person, I’ve gotten the same impression—that he identifies with the wealthy, and sees them as the main victims of government. That is sadly out of touch with reality. Most poverty in the U.S. is caused by government policies, and most of the huge, record-setting prison population in the U.S. is not comprised of people from well-to-do backgrounds. Many of the wealthy, on the other hand, have gotten significant boosts at taxpayer expense, e.g. Ross Perot.
(2) It sounds biased toward the right-wing.
Talking about a need to be “tough,” dismissing the “weak”—conservatives typically love this type of macho attitude. But it’s the kind of thing that gets George W. Bush called a “cowboy” by people around the world. The piece actually uses without irony the “greed is good” term made notorious by the stereotypical “capitalist” villain of the anti-free-market film “Wall Street.”
The piece identifies Root as “a Libertarian and fiscal conservative who stands strongly against welfare and entitlement programs for able-bodied individuals here at home…” There is no mention of the candidate being “liberal” on social issues or anything else.
Decrying “welfare and entitlement programs for able-bodied individuals” could theoretically be talking about corporate welfare, but I think most people will take it as talking about traditional welfare.
It’s almost as if “Millionaire Republican” Root (has he disclaimed that label yet?), or his handlers, are trying to see how much they can live up to the most harmful and damaging stereotype about libertarians and conservatives, that we are greedy, selfish, wealthy, and unsympathetic to the poor.
(3) It sounds too nationalist.
To be fair, this is an endemic problem both inside and outside the LP, and Root (or whoever wrote this for him) is no worse than many others. But I would be remiss not to point out the ubiquitous use of possessive pronouns in a way that reinforces nationalist, rather than libertarian, thinking, and promotes solidarity with the nation rather than with the cause of liberty—“our” troops, “our” allies, “our” enemies, “our” security, “our” military, “our” system of funding defense, “our” country, “our own American people,” “our” wealth. Inside the United States is called “at home,” and even civilizations are referred to as “ours” and “theirs!” It’s this kind of language that spawned the “Department of Homeland Security” (incorrectly referred to in the Root essay as the “Homeland Security Administration”).
Even though the piece is about international affairs, there are no references to universal human rights, the universal applicability of libertarian principles, the life, liberty, and well-being of the 95% of people outside the United States, or anything along those lines.
(4) Too focused on economic liberty.
“The fundamental basis of libertarianism is ownership of one’s life and honestly acquired property.”
This is a relatively minor point, but it’s in keeping with the previously-noted conservative-leaning tone of the piece in general. The above phrasing (“ownership,” “property”) makes libertarianism sound mostly about economics (which again mostly appeals to people on the political right). The word “propertarian” has sometimes been used to describe an undue emphasis by libertarians on property as opposed to other elements of liberty. An alternate wording of the language quoted above could have stated that the fundamental basis of libertarianism is non-aggression. It could have mentioned not only property, but the right to control one’s own body, the right to make one’s own choices, etc. The phrase “pursuit of happiness” also would have made a welcome addition.
(5) Implies the legitimacy of a “war on terror.”
“...the war in Iraq has distracted us from the real ‘war on terror’ we are waging against the Taliban in Afghanistan.”
Of course “we” are not waging war against the Taliban, the U.S. government and other governments are. But that point aside, is the war in Afghanistan a “war on terror?” When in power, the Taliban ran an oppressive regime that collaborated with terrorists, and they deserved to be overthrown, but at this point the situation there is more about an insurgency than about terrorism.
Is the phrase “war on terror” even one that libertarians should be using, given (a) how nebulous and open-ended it is, (b) how Bush and others have exploited it to justify restricting civil liberties in the U.S., and© how governments have a history of declaring disastrous “wars” against large-scale phenomena—drugs, poverty, etc.? I would contend that libertarians should avoid the term like the plague.
(6) Uses exclusionary language about the United States.
“America is a nation of parents – mothers, fathers, grandmothers, grandfathers…”
Uh, what about single and childless people? Gays, lesbians, and others? Don’t we get enough “family values” talk from conservative politicians? America isn’t logically a “nation of parents” any more than Iran or Italy is a “nation of parents.” It’s a meaningless, vapid thing to say. But once again, it is the kind of thing conservatives like to hear.
In an ideal world, where we had a Libertarian Party that was equally balanced between appealing to people on the conventional right and the left poles of the political spectrum, none of this would be as big a deal as it is. A Libertarian running for president with a bunch of conservative baggage would be no more of a threat to the LP’s future than one running with a bunch of leftist baggage.
However, the LP is sadly not equally balanced. We are seen by much of the public, and arguably accurately, as being closer to the Republicans than the Democrats. We have former Republican congressman Bob Barr on our National Committee (now taking a hiatus as he too mulls a run for president). The national office does more outreach to conservatives at events like CPAC than to the left. Many in the party, especially the leadership, seem bent on projecting a socially conservative, corporate type image. Trying to distance the LP from what are sometimes spoken of dismissively as “lifestyle libertarian” concerns like freedoms related to drug use, sexuality, freedom of expression, etc. (as if living a stereotypical suburban existence, conforming to socially conservative norms, etc., is not also a “lifestyle!”)
We’re like a ship tilting to starboard and taking on water. The more we tilt, the more water we take on from that side, and if we do not move to right ourselves and start bailing out, eventually we will keel all the way over to the right and sink.
Wayne Root’s personality, his issues, his style, all unfortunately, make his candidacy the equivalent of another big wave coming over the starboard bow. I am sure that his conversion to libertarianism is to at least some extent genuine, but I do not trust that it is as deep as we are being encouraged to believe. Part of my mistrust is based on the fact that I don’t see any evidence that he yet truly “gets” what is fundamentally wrong with the conservative outlook.
Ron Paul is of course also conservative and highly nationalist, and for the past year I have strongly supported Ron Paul—but for the GOP nomination, not the LP’s. Our party’s torchbearer should be someone with a consistently libertarian message, and Paul’s falls short in significant respects.
Yet even were Paul not a thousand times more popular and better known, I would still see him as a far, far better person than Root to represent the LP. And the comparison between the two men gets to the heart of the problems I see with Wayne Allyn Root.
Ron Paul is nice, idealistic, humble, and down-to-earth, not at all arrogant or self-important. Even setting aside his long record of not being corrupted by power, he is the kind of guy I would trust with it, because it’s evident that it doesn’t hold that much allure for him. He constantly reminds us that his campaign is about the message, not about himself, and he gives every appearance of meaning it. He does not appear to see himself as a knight on a white horse riding to our rescue, and seems about as far from a Donald Trump, a fast-talking salesman, or a slick game show host as any politician can be.
The comment by Old Whig that “There’s something about (Root) that makes me expect him to break out in tentacles,” is obviously ridiculous and over-the-top. Nevertheless, I know what he means. And I wholeheartedly wish I didn’t feel that way about anyone seeking our nomination.
May 4th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
The notion that the LP should ever be considered closer to either Republicans or Democrats seems kind of silly to me. That’s like saying that water may be closer to either Dr. Pepper or Mr. Pibb.
Oh, and speaking of renouncing the “Millionaire Republican” bit, I haven’t even seen Root renounce his endorsement of a McCain/Lieberman ticket.