Tom,
I think you've missed a key point I've made in the post you linked and quite a few others.
There are many GOP astroturfed events and many which are true grassroots coalitions. I continue to give examples of each -- except on national television, where I spent my time last Tea Party trashing Gingrich, Huckabee and Keyes.
Considering that quite a few of the organizers, speakers and attendees were libertarian, constitutionalist, Alex Jones fans, Libertarian, Campaign for Liberty, Ron Paul supporters, Bob Barr supporters, at least one Mike Gravel supporter, etc. it seems unfair to paint them with the broad brush you just did.
Whether you supported him or not, you surely see the difference between a Ron Paul supporter and a Giuliani supporter.
Most of the Republican candidate speakers (good and bad) were "Ron Paul Republicans" for what that's worth.
Additionally, you damned well know that I've supported coalition activities which cross political boundaries (Free the Hops) as well as more left-leaning coalitions (like bringing Lew Rockwell to an anti-war rally or pushing medicinal marijuana).
As I wrote in the article, "Republican" wasn't a welcome word at that rally.
100% agreement with Tom.
There are, of course, those of us who have stated repeatedly that the Gordon course of action, as exercised since 2007 at a minimum, has delivered none of the promised dividends.
Brian,
Don't you ever join in coalitions with the left regarding gay rights issues? I thought you were a participant in SF Pride parades.
I see the Obama administration has left you cold and dry, as well.
On issue-related stuff, I'll work with anyone on our side of the line.
With regard to results, the last Tea Party (before this current batch) in my state led to the death of a very major GOP-proposed tax increase by a 2-1 margin. If you will recall, I was very active in that effort, too.
Jason,
Are you saying that we should oppose Senator DeMint and a majority in the Congress who are working on an Audit the Fed bill because we oppose each and every one of them on some issue or another?
One more point.
Aside from Knapp, I don't recall you guys providing any support or encouragement whenever I've worked with the left or taken swipes at the right.
Some examples include:
Repeated jabs at conservative hypocrisy.
Going after judge Roy Moore, mostly because of statements insinuating that it might be OK to exectute people for homosexual acts.
Pushing the Cory Maye story really hard in it's early days.
Helping push medicinal marijuana legislation in Alabama.
Helping push Loretta Nall to the top of the Internet charts and then to national television.
Bringing together a coalition effort to reunite a nursing baby with his undocumented mother. This issue also forced the resignation of a state cabinet official.
Bringing Lew Rockwell to an antiwar rally.
Trying to provide some positive media when Mike Gravel joined the LP.
Hitting the national news protesting the RNC Convention in 2004. This included one article where I was holding up a rainbow-colored sign which read "Compassionate conservatism is so gay." I couldn't buy my own drinks that night.
Taking heat from "conservative" libertarians for my support and work for Aaron Russo.
How come you folks want to chew my head off when I work with the right, but never even seem to notice when I do anything left-oriented?
Steve,
You seem to think that I oppose "coalitions" per se. I don't. I just oppose coalitions in which libertarians inevitably get used, discarded and screwed -- and I've never seen a coalition with "conservative Republicans" which came out any other way.
You're wasting your time and your talent, dude. It's your time and your talent to waste, but it's sad to see you doing it.
Also, you're easy to get a rise out of.
Tom,
With respect to coalitions, I think my point about the 2003 Alabama Tea Party is quite valid.
The coalition won, the tax was defeated, and nothing was effectively (there was one unsuccessful attempt) usurped.
The same holds true on the Marta Alonzo issue.
On rereading my comments, I'll retract and modify one statement: "On issue-related stuff, I'll work with anyone on our side of the line."
I won't work with racists, pedophiles, Nazis, and other extreme groups in any manner.
I should have said I'll work with most people, regardless of their political persuasion, on issues-based activities.
Does Gordon really think he's furthering libertarianism when he "brings" Rockwell to an anti-war rally? Considering Rockwell's alliance with "paleoconservatives" and his "social conservativism" Gordon may as well be taking Pat Buchanan to those rallies.
Gordon's behavior has never thrilled me and some of I found downright disgusting -- such as his role in turning the LP over to the crazies like Barr and Root. I don't trust him. He's one I stopped supporting the LP entirely.
Steve,
[Cough ... stomp ... cough ... clear throat]
"Also, you're easy to get a rise out of."
Tom, agreed. Steve, "...the difference between a Ron Paul supporter and a Giuliani supporter..." is the difference between a counterrevolutionary and a reactionary. Although I must admit Giulani has the most reasonable position on abortion. Unfortunately I believe in a big tent. But less coochy-coo in the sleeping bags with Republicans, ok?
My concern here is personified by my top pick for vp- Karen Kwiatkowski. She writes on Rockwell's blog and endorsed Ron Paul. We need to get the Ron Paul revolution to support declared libertarians/LP members, not Republicans. And them to work with progressives, not neocons & dixiecrat conservatives.
A few points:
Steve is absolutely correct on the point that he has done effective outreach to the left.
And Tom is not the only one who knows this; I have defended Steve on that ground many times, although I don't usually have as extensive a list of examples handy.
I think Tom has a good point in that we should make ourselves a distinctive presence at both right and left events.
Consider, for example, the message that "taxes fund the war machine". This is a message we can carry to both anti-tax and anti-war gatherings. Sure, some people at anti-war gatherings may not like that point because they are pro-tax, and some people at anti-tax gatherings may not like it because they are pro-war.
But what is the alternative? We can keep quiet on economic issues at peace events and never distinguish ourselves, and we can keep quiet at economic freedom events and never distinguish ourselves.
Someone who follows us around may eventually notice that we are at both types of events - assuming of course that we actually are (I certainly did not see the level of promotion for peace rallies or any other left leaning coalition/outreach from the LP as I did for the tea parties). But then, even in this rosy scenario, we will mostly end up with folks who are scratching their head as to why we are there at all.
On the other hand, if we agree on the main premise of the event yet clearly distinguish ourselves everywhere we go, and go everywhere, we make our challenge to the dominant view of how the world works much more unavoidable.
Regarding CLS point on Lew Rockwell above, there is a vast difference between Rockwell and Buchanan on economic issues, at a minimum; let's not lump them together.
CLS ad Steve Gordon are both two of the best libertarian activists; it's really too bad that there is such bad blood, it is very counterproductive to the many areas where we can still work together.
In other news, how about some debates between Wayne Root and Ernie Hancock? Hancock is willing. Or how about Loretta Nall? Couldn't get in touch.
Humor break brought to you by AaronStarr.com
paulie, or how about a supervised regulation boxing match between me & the President?
paulie, I think some bad blood is acceptable, even unavoidable, within the big tent. See my comment above re: me & S.G. & R.P. Agreed, significant "...difference between Rockwell and Buchanan...". Agreed: more LP participation in left oriented events. The recent outreach to the GLBTIQ community a good example.
I agree with you Tom.
Kissing much butt lately Paulie?
What about an apology from Steve Gordon about supporting a candidate who eulogized to the highest degree a former US Senator who was clearly RACIST even at the time of his death. YES I'M TALKING ABOUT BOB BARR!!!
Gee Steve is this how you throw away your friends who until as early as 2008 supported you in any endeavor you took part of. I'm still awaiting, you have my number but I shouldn't hold my breath about it.
Yes I do admit that Steve has done much outreach to the left on issues that concern libertarians and liberals alike.
Even so (you still get the GAS FACE!)
Chris Bennett
Chris,
I never kiss anyone's ass, not yours and not Steve's.
I told Steve from the start that I did not think Barr would be a breakthrough candidate, and I did not think that the conservatives who supported Barr for his record in congress would set aside their differences with libertarians who liked Barr for (at least supposedly) being a changed man.
I criticized the Barr campaign in many ways before and after the nomination. In case you have forgotten, much of that is still easily available.
Barr was one candidate, one year, just as Russo was another year, and Ron Paul, Badnarik, etc., and just as Ruwart and Kubby almost were.
I don't always agree with Steve, but the nastiness on all sides is counterproductive. For another example, the LNC is about to spend about $25,000 in travel costs to go to a meeting whose main focus will likely be a single $25 donation and how it was handled.
The nasty tone of the infighting is what really leaves a bad impression and drives people away, or keeps them from working with each other on future projects just because they disagreed on one campaign or strategy.
I call out all sides on that, and on other things - lack of activity, organization and follow through, lack of sunshine and transparency, etc.
I can work with almost everyone in the
party to some extent, and I can and do criticize anyone and everyone when I think they require it - although I'm trying to be more constructive about it.
Chris, if you piss on Helms' grave, will that make you feel better?
For the record, paulie has never kissed my ass.
He should, though.
He can if he wants to.
Ruwart could have nullified Barr's nomination by joining my independent ticket.
You can kiss mine. If I really like it, I'll let you know whether I'll reciprocate. But I'll warn you now, don't count on it.
Basically your right Tom. The GOP sees the rise of TEA parties as a potential threat to them down the road so they are taking steps right now to put people into TEA leadership posts that will always support the GOP candidate over the Libertarian or independant one. That way they control who runs for office. I expect nothing in the long run from the TEA's. The political system in this country is totally controlled by the Demopublicans and until and unless BOTH parties are removed from power AT THE SAME TIME nothing is going to change.
How can Libertarians expect to attract warmongers and statists to the LP if they say things these people disagree with?
Just think of all that has been accomplished in moving America in a more libertarian direction by reaching out to Democrats and Republicans. If libertarians keep this strategy up for another 30 years or so, we'll all be living in the most libertarian concentration camps in the history of the world.
Rocketman, agreed. Are you the same person who wrote favorably about the progressive libertarian alliance a couple of years ago? No, wait. That was ghostslider I think. Nevermind.
I like what Tom Blanton says here.
The truth is that 40 years of the Libertarian Party has illustrated that there is no future in electoral politics for freedom. And no freedom in electoral politics for the future.
Meanwhile, there is an entirely anti-state culture that is doing great without you political hacks. You won't like it if you demand intellectual property rights, but it exists, it is growing, and it has rapidly developing technology.
You guys are all full of it. I've known Steve for six or eight years and he's about as good as a person can be.
I remember staying at his house one night to keep him awake while he was doing everything possible to break the Marta Alonzo story to the media. I offered him coke and stimulants but he insisted on espresso and cigarettes. After a full day and night without sleep I fell asleep on his sofa. He stayed awake for another 24 hours pushing the story to anyone who would listen. He wasnt going to sleep until the media covered the story about a baby being forever taken from his mother just because she was from Guatemala and didn't have the right papers. When the AP finally broken the story, he stayed awake and hitting his keyboard until it started going national.
I missed the last LPA convention but Paulie can verify what I heard from most everybody there. Nobody in the LP has ever done a more fair job of chairing a very hot meeting than Steve did two weeks ago. I was on the other side of the issue from where I think Steve is but everyone I know that was there said Steve did great. Professional and fair with justice.
He told me last week that he may leave the LP and was really upset about it. I think you have just pushed one of the most promising Libertarians out the door. You make me embarrassed to call myself a Libertarian.
P.S. I consider myself a left Libertarian but he's better on the issues than I am some time.
Alabama Libertarian,
I'd be interested in where you think you read anything by me that contradicts your own description of Steve.
I've been working with him on and off for five years now and he may be the hardest-working activist I've ever seen. I suspect the reason he chooses to work with ME is that he knows when he calls me during a caffeine-fueled binge at 3 in the morning, I'm about as likely to be up as he is.
Do I believe he's wasting his effort when he tries to "coalition-build" with Republicans? You bet your sweet ass I do. That's a strategic disagreement, not a personal criticism -- and the parts that look like criticism are the kind of good-natured shots we've taken at each other since we've known each other.
AL,
Thanks for being there that night. It really helped.
TK,
It's always good-natured between us.
As I understood Tom's point, he was simply saying -- in an admittedly graphic manner -- that Libertarians shouldn't avoid talking about issues like Iraq or defense spending at events like the Tea Parties where we are working with conservatives.
I agree with that. When I communicate with people on the left, which is most of the non-libertarian folks I work with in San Francisco, I often bring up issues like coercive taxation and the right to keep and bear arms. It's important for people we work with in coalition to hear the half of the freedom spectrum toward which they are less sympathetic (whether it be civil liberties or economic freedom) argued for by people who take their side on issues that matter to them.
If they only ever hear the neglected side of the freedom spectrum defended by folks with whom they disagree on almost everything, they are much less likely to ever learn the value of those freedoms. One of our key tasks is to show leftists the value of economic freedom and the harmfulness of central planning, and right-wingers the value of civil liberties and the harmfulness of nationalism/militarism.
If libertarians don't engage in this vital education, who will? If we engage with them long enough for our single-issue coalition partners to see that we are not just left-wingers/right-wingers trying to infiltrate their events, but are principled and consistent and committed to their views in the areas where we agree, most of them will learn to respect the areas where we disagree. Those who don't will make themselves look unreasonable to their fellow travelers.
If on the other hand we hide our disagreements in order to "get along" with allies, we start to look to Democrats just like the Republicans we sometimes work with, and vice-versa. In the long run it will make us less effective and less respected.
I agree Steve Gordon is a hard-working activist who cares about liberty. After working with him to support Aaron Russo, it pained me to see him backing Bob Barr. I sincerely hope he does not intend to support Wayne Allyn Root. Steve, despite your personal work in reaching out to the left as well as to the right, our party's ability to maintain that balance and appeal to the left is in serious jeopardy, as is the party's commitment to libertarianism. Please don't help sink us by backing a guy like Root.
Starchild,
I don't think I could have said it better myself. I don't dismiss Steve's activism, I am a little wary of his purpose. But because Steve is willing to throw a few of his friends under the bus, (and I thought I was one of his friends) I'm really skeptical of working with him on future projects. Maybe in time, I'll turn around about how I feel about the situation.
Funny how Starchild just sad almost identically what I got called an ass kisser for saying, yet Chris agrees with him. What's up with that?
From talking to Steve, I don't get the impression that he is backing Root.
On the other hand, who else can we effectively back?
While there are a number of announced as well as prospective candidates who are better than Root on the fine points of libertarianism, and better at selling the LP to non-conservatives, none of them seem willing to promote themselves to outside media or even LP state meetings nearly as much as Root. If they ever start to, it may be too late.
The biggest faction in the LP is not necessarily radical or moderate, left or right leaning - it's people who value outreach, competence and success. Sometimes, as with Barr, they may fall for promises of breakthrough that can not be delivered. Right now, these folks are seeing a lot of mass media from Root, as well as concerted internal party work (we get lots of his press releases at IPR, he goes to state conventions, may be running for LNC chair, etc).
They are not seeing any such effort from our side (more radical and left-friendly). They may not reject us for being radical and left-friendly, but their votes will go to Root if he remains the one who does the most work. Yet we could win their votes if we had anyone who matched the shoe leather work Root is putting in.
"What's up with that" you ask, Paulie? Some people don't like you. Life's like that.
Who can we support? I support Angela Keaton and Tom Knapp. I don't know if Angela's campaign is for the long haul, but if she and Miche strip their way across Texas to raise money, I'm there, like a Dead Head.
I think Tom's campaign is for the long haul. He seems quite able to promote himself to outside media. I would encourage you to ask him to show up at more state LP events.
Some people don't like you.
I didn't say you had to like me.
I'm just pointing out that what Starchild said is basically exactly what I said.
How Chris wants to respond to that, if at all, is up to him. If he wants to agree with one person and call another person an ass kisser for saying the same thing, it's on him.
Who can we support? I support Angela Keaton and Tom Knapp.
I don't support Keaton for anything, and I don't think she intends to actually run. Last I heard, she was happy to be out of the party. And I'm happy for her.
I would support Tom, but so far he hasn't shown any interest in getting mass media and pressing the LP for internal support the way Root has. Last time he responded to me he said "I heard you the last 574 times" or something like that, but nothing has happened.
So one of two things needs to happen: either Tom starts campaigning hard the way Root is, or someone else whose ideas are more like Tom's should start doing so. Otherwise, we lose a lot of votes that are in play, and Root gets the nomination.
Yes, there is a lot of time left, but Root is already running hard, so later can be too late.
Hey, that's cool, as I've no plans to like you. "Let's get Mikey, he hates everything!"
I entirely support Keaton for stripping across Texas. Whether it raises money for a waste-of-time presidential campaign of for something useful, like Antiwar.com, it is entirely an idea that I support. lol
Pressing the LP for internal support. Would that be like the internal support Barr got in 2008, where the national headquarters team began issuing press releases disparaging another candidate for the nomination? lol
I think instead of pestering Tom Knapp you should run for president yourself, Paulie.
I think some people trust other people way too much but from experience I know who is willing to "throw me under the bus" and those who aren't so quick to do so. Thomas Knapp has never caused me to distrust him; Steve Gordon has.
Hey, that's cool, as I've no plans to like you.
No idea why, but since you feel that way, the feeling's now mutual.
I entirely support Keaton for stripping across Texas.
Good for you, although that has nothing to do with what I was talking about.
Pressing the LP for internal support. Would that be like the internal support Barr got in 2008, where the national headquarters team began issuing press releases disparaging another candidate for the nomination?
No.
More like what Root is doing now: going to state LP conventions and sending out lots of press releases about what he is thinking as well as about what he is doing in the realm of outreach.
Unless/until more hardcore LP members running against him for chair and/or president start doing that, we will not beat him for those positions. And if they start doing it too late in the game (I don't know when that will be, but it is possible that it already is, though not certain), they will not beat him either.
I think instead of pestering Tom Knapp you should run for president yourself, Paulie.
I'm not pestering Tom. He could do the things that need to be done, or at least try, but he is not the only one who can. I've made other suggestions on some people who might, tried to get a hold of them, and issued an open call.
I don't particularly care who does them, only that they be done - and hopefully soon.
On the other hand, there are many reasons why I don't run, starting with the fact that I was not born in the US. Of course, there are many other reasons, but they are again entirely beside the point.
Furthermore, the point is not even addressed to you. It is addressed to LP members, which you are not, and to those who believe the LP can and should be a libertarian party in more than name only. You've made it abundantly clear that you disagree.
That's fine; it's a position many people have, and you may even be correct. But in that case, you are not who I am talking to. I'm talking to those people who do agree with my premises about tactical details. You're inserting yourself into the conversation to point out once again that you disagree with the premises. Not that I have any right or desire to tell you that you can't, but nothing you are saying has anything to do with addressing what I am talking about.
Oh by the way, I'll say it first before you do: go fuck yourself.
I think some people trust other people way too much but from experience I know who is willing to "throw me under the bus" and those who aren't so quick to do so. Thomas Knapp has never caused me to distrust him; Steve Gordon has.
I'm not sure whether that is supposed to be a reply to me or not Chris, but I have never thrown you under the bus, so if you "don't like me" as Davidson claims, that's all on you. And to paraphrase what you told Steve, you have my number. Just in case you lost it, let me know and I'll call you myself.
I've always done my best to be a true friend to you. Not that you have to be friendly to me, but if you are not, it is not due to any conscious decision on my part; it's your call.
As for Davidson, up until now I thought we were friends, and was friendly to him. Oh well.
"Keep your friends close, but keep your enemies closer."
Plenty of backstabbers in this party/movement, so just beware of whom you all associate with because your best friends may be the ones to abandon you when they have no use for you...ain't that right Steve?
I didn't say we weren't friends, Paulie, I said that I have no plans to like you.
In my experience, you don't bathe often. You smell bad. You post really obscene things on blogs where you have the privilege to do so. You are unpleasant to individuals who are also my friends. I don't like many of the things you say and some of the things you do. So I don't like you.
I don't like many people. If I had ever met most people, I would very likely say that I don't like most people. I am not a respecter of persons. I don't care to ignore the stench just to be friendly.
You are welcome to tell me to go fuck myself, and do likewise, yes. Of course, it is a free blog and comments are open (presently) and unmoderated. So I'll say just what I please, whenever I do.
You are mistaken about me not being a member of the LP. I signed the non-aggression pledge. I'm not current with my dues, and I have no plans to become current. Though Wes Benedict is a major move in the right direction, there is still a lot of garbage at the national level of LP that restrains my generosity.
It is extremely clever of you to ignore my advice and tell me to shut the fuck up. You should try that with everyone. lol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x...h?
v=xKZR3Bcj4jw
I love my friends and they love me
We're just as close as we can be
And just because we really care
Whatever we get, we share!
I got it from Agnes
She got it from Jim
We all agree it must have been him
Louise who gave it to him
Now she got it from Harry
Who got it from Marie
And ev'rybody knows that Marie
Got it from me
Giles got it from Daphne
She got it from Joan
Who picked it up in County Cork
A-kissin' the Blarney Stone
Pierre gave it to Shiela
[ Find more Lyrics on www.mp3lyrics.org/QkiG ]
Who must have brought it there
He got it from Francois and Jacques
Aha, lucky Pierre!
Max got it from Edith
Who gets it ev'ry spring
She got it from her Daddy
Who just gives her ev'rything
She then gave it to Daniel
Whose spaniel has it now
Our dentist even got it
And we're still wondering how
But I got it from Agnes
Or maybe it was Sue
Or Millie or Billie or Gillie or Willie
It doesn't matter who
It might have been at the pub
or at the club, or in the loo
And if you will be my
friend, then I might ...
(Mind you, I said
"might" ...)
Give it to you!
- Tom Lehrer "I got it from Agnes"
because your best friends may be the ones to abandon you when they have no use for you...ain't that right Steve?
I don't know, Chris, maybe you can tell me? Were you one of my friends once and did I treat you as a friend?
As far as I know, yes.
Are we still friends? I notice on facebook we aren't, and that was not my doing. Last time I called you, you did not sound friendly. Was that just my imagination?
So who abandoned whom?
I won't dignify Davidson's bullshit with a response except to say, A) it's bullshit and B) consider the source.
But then some folks here know me personally so they know better than to believe him anyway.
Drop it Paulie, I was NOT originally talking about you was I?
The first comment I noticed from you was calling me an ass kisser.
I guess you don't want to be held to the same standard you want to hold Steve and other people to.
Just as long as that's clear now, it's dropped.
They know you personally? Or Biblically? lol
Commenting by HaloScan
