The people thinking the LP should not address issues and should instead stick solely to electing people to office have just been smacked. It's nice to see the LP taking a stance on their principles! Political expediency be damned, this is one thing the LP should be doing frequently. I'm with you..sic 'em!
Huzzah to the LP ... I have a feeling I know where these "brass ones" came from. A few more signs like this and they might even see a few more dollars coming in from activists ;}
It isn't 'hypocritical' to change one's mind. We should want people who disagree with us to change their minds. It's childish to call them 'hypocritical' as soon as they do. I don't think it makes the LP look good at all.
Although there were arguments over troop levels in Viet Nam, 'too few troops' wasn't nearly as obvious as in the case of Iraq. Mostly the hawks complained that the target list for aerial bombing was too restrictive. If the writer wants to evoke Viet Nam there are many better parallels. Maybe I'm nitpicking, but to me the writer doesn't seem on top of the issue.
I'm surprised that 'Iraq Exit Strategy' doesn't get a mention. Has HQ come around to seeing it's a dog? Better late than never, and I wouldn't call them 'hypocritical'. 
David,
I'm assuming that Shane Corey is referring to the IES when he mentions the "Libertarian solution" ... but I note, as you do, that it isn't specifically referenced.
I thought about mentioning it (including my early defense and later re-thinking of it), but didn't wish to appear, um, hypocritical.
Regards,
Tom
The press release concludes 'The Libertarian Party is fielding congressional candidates across the country who favor the withdrawal of all military forces from Iraq.'
I thought that this, the support of withdrawal by Libertarian candidates, was what was meant by 'the Libertarian Party solution'.
It shouldn't be assumed that everyone reading the press release would know about IES. If IES is 'the Libertarian Party solution', that should have been specified.
IES declared 'It is feasible that, given a year for training, the Iraqi security forces would be able to control the insurgency', and withdrawal was implicitly conditioned on the fulfillment of this quasi-prediction.
From the reports I've read, it seems at least doubtful that this condition has been fulfilled.
David,
Steve Gordon, the LP's communications director, wrote the release. Having worked with him in the past, I can attest that he does have an ear for nuance.
My guess would be that he intentionally wrote the release in a way that could be interpreted to refer to the IES had it been adopted and successfully implemented, or to withdrawal a la the Badnarik proposal, etc. That way, supporters of the IES can feel like it got its nod, but opponents of the IES don't have to have a cow over it being dragged out and paraded around.
I haven't discussed the IES with Gordon lately, but my second guess is that even though he supported it, he'd rather let it go gently into that good night, as non-controversially as possible, than stoke up another fight over it.
All of which is an aside. I'm just glad that the LP put the war, and a clear endorsement of withdrawal, atop its front page, and hope it continues to do so on a regular basis.
Regards,
Tom
I did so want to have another cow.
Richard Posner argues that agriculture subsidies in Switzerland may be efficient because Swiss cows attract tourists, especially when equipped with bells.
http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/
The contribution of bovine flatulence to global warming is not considered. (Methane is a minor greenhouse gas.)
Commenting by HaloScan
