----- Original Message -----
From: David Macko
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2006 9:47 PM
Subject: Re: [lplibertarians] 25 Candidates For The LP In 2008
I have no trouble deciding what to think of Michael Badnarik. He is far and
away the
best choice for 2008.The manner in which he landed on his feet after being
nominated,
conducted a twenty hour a day, seven day a week campaign until the election
against
greater odds than any or our candidates in the last thirty years and was able
to outreach
to nonlibertarian patriot groups, including people brave enough not to have
driver's licenses
and pay income taxes as well as conduct outreach efforts such as the Ohio
Vote Recount
after the election, make him the only logical candidate for 2008 if he is
willing to devote
two more years of his life to the cause of liberty and does not become the
first Congressman
elected as a Libertarian.
As for your comments about the "public mind", to the extent it exists it is
totally under the
control of the establishment media at present and if we base our activities
on it we will
be enslaved.
Below I will intersperse comments on the other candidates, as to which would
be the best
running mates for Badnarik.
For life and liberty,
David Macko
----- Original Message -----
From: The Girondin
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 8:24 AM
Subject: [lplibertarians] 25 Candidates For The LP In 2008
Today, I offer an early assessment of 25 of the Libertarian Party's 2008
presidential prospects, in order of how likely I feel each is to be the
eventual nominee. My own feelings on each, and my punditry on their
candidacies, follows. (Among those omitted are ex-vice presidential candidates
Richard Campagna, Jo Jorgensen, and Art Olivier, who so far have neither
expressed interest in candidacy nor been mentioned much among LP activists as
prospects.)
Michael Badnarik: It is hard to know what to think of Badnarik. He is a
decent and sincere man, and performed well in 2004. He is a strong speaker and
bases his message on strict but reasonable constitutional arguments. Still,
though he was hardly the establishment candidate in 2004, he was the most
radical of the three major contenders for the nomination. His refusal to file
income tax returns and his opposition to driver's licenses relegates him to the
fringe in the public mind. While he is a more palatable "purist" candidate than
some in the past like Rick Tompkins and Irwin Schiff, I am reluctant to support
him for 2008.
Gary Nolan: I initially backed Nolan in 2004, despite my concerns about how
tied in he was to "Browne Inc." He ran a respectable, responsible, and
professional campaign, and would have represented us well if he had been the
nominee. I've talked with him before, and found him able to be both forceful
and respectful at the same time. It is very likely he will run again, and he is
definitely a top-tier candidate, but he needs to get away from the Old Guard
crowd.
**I supported Gary Nolan. He would make an excellent running mate for
Michael Badnarik. DM**
Aaron Russo: I was thrilled when Russo got in the race as an independent in
2004, and I was among those who urged him to seek the LP nomination. I covered
parts of his 1998 Nevada GOP gubernatorial bid in my real-life job, and I was
impressed. In 2004, I chatted with him a bit via e-mail, and I was still
impressed. But the candidate on paper (or on screen) is not the candidate in
person. At the 2004 convention he revealed himself to be boorish, bombastic,
sexist, and even a bit racist. Even if it was all in fun, it wasn't fun for
those in the way. He also likes to tout Nicholson, Midler, et al as possible
campaign trail draws -- but where were they when he actually ran? Though I
agree with Russo on many issues, I would oppose his candidacy in 2008. He would
embarrass the LP.
**Ditto, despite his somewhat odd sense of humor. **
Mary Ruwart: For years, I have hoped Dr. Ruwart would run. Unlike many
national LP figures, she is disarming and non-threatening, and she has a unique
and positive outlook on Libertarianism that is rare. Her vision is one of peace
and community, and she could probably win support from disaffected leftists as
well as the usual Libertarian crowd. Also, though it should not be a
consideration, it is: Gender can matter. The past two LP tickets have consisted
of two white males each, and the LP has never nominated a woman for president.
A female helming the ticket would be a draw. In college, I knew someone who
voted for Lenora Fulani, then the presidential candidate of the psycho-cultic
New Alliance Party, just to make a statement by voting for a black woman. Maybe
women turned off by Hillary would prefer President Mary?
**If elected, Mary Ruwart would be the best president of the United States
in over a century. She is very well-informed,
articulate and able to outreach.
However, since the Communist bitch Hell-ary Rod-D*MN Clinton will be the
Bolshevik (Democrat) candidate for president
and it appears more and more likely that CFR Condoleezza (I didn't know
that you could turn airplanes into bombs) Rice
will be the Trotskyite (Republican) candidate, it would be fatal for us to
also appear to be panderers, and therefore we
should not have a lady vice presidential candidate in 2008 although we have
several qualified ladies. Wait till 2012 if
we are still having elections then. DM**
Jim Gray: It would be wonderful to see Gray seek the presidency. He would
bring his credentials as a California Superior Court judge, and his strong
resume as a decorated veteran and a Peace Corps volunteer, to the campaign.
Folks like Walter Cronkite, Milton Friedman, and George Shultz have praised his
original ideas on drug policy reform. And he received more than 216,000 votes
as the LP's California US Senate candidate in 2004.
**An excellent running mate for Michael Badnarik. DM**
Barry Hess: An interesting contender. I spoke with Hess a few times during
his first run in 2000, and at the time, he seemed earnest but naïve. He had
many great plans for the LP, which he had apparently just joined, and genuinely
believed he could win the presidency. Since then, though, he has become a more
polished and realistic presence on the state-level LP scene. I do not think he
is really considering another presidential run just yet, though.
** Also very good. DM**
Karen Kwiatkowski: She would be a compelling anti-war candidate if she ran,
but it remains unclear where Kwiatkowski she stands on other Libertarian
issues. I think she will ultimately opt against running for national office.
**2012 for the reasons listed above for Dr. Ruwart. DM**
Mark Yannone: I honestly do not know much about Yannone, except that he is
making a bid for the US House in Arizona and that some backers want him to pull
a Badnarik and aim higher instead.
**I don't know much about him either. DM**
Ed Thompson: Thompson would be a fun and straight-talking candidate. I
interviewed him during his gubernatorial run, and I think anyone who expects a
"Billy Carter" or a "Roger Clinton" would be very disappointed -- he's smart
and competent. I doubt he will run, but his brother has been suggesting he
(Tommy) might make a longshot bid for the GOP nomination. Wouldn't it be
something if both Brothers Thompson sought the presidency in the same year? It
would certainly get press for the LP.
**Also an excellent running mate for MB DM**
Lance Brown: Brown, who will be 36 on Election Day 2008, announced his 2008
run back in 1994 while attending the University of Massachusetts. He ran a
fairly serious long-term online effort fo win support, but basically vanished
in 2004 to pursue his business career. He's back online now, and I will be
following his efforts with interest.
**? DM**
Richard Mack: Mack is one of the higher-profile Libertarian politicians
right now. The question facing him is the same as that facing other big LP
players -- run for president, or run for a lower-level office that might
actually be winnable?
** Also an ERM (Excellent Running Mate) for Badnarik. DM**
Bob Barr: An appalling idea. While he has been a strong advocate of privacy
protections and limiting the scope of the War on Terror since leaving Congress,
his record in that institution should not be forgotten. He authored the Defense
of Marriage Act and blocked any sort of drug policy reform for years. Despite
his talk of states' rights, Barr used his power as a representative of a
Georgia district to prevent the enactment of medical marijuana policies favored
by the electorate of the District of Columbia. I could go on and on. And
remember -- the LP helped to kick him out of Congress!
**Is there any chance to educate Barr about the drug issue? Sometimes,
people do see the light. DM**
L. Neil Smith: If I am The Girondin, "El Neil" is the Louis Antoine
Saint-Just of the LP, coldly excluding any non-"100%ers" from his view of what
the party should be. Smith is acerbic and confrontational, and certainly would
not sway undecided voters into the party. In fact, he would probably drive out
some longtime LP voters. Plus, the notion of nominating a science fiction
author would just underscore the "Libertarians are goofy" arguments of our
foes.
**He might pick up sci-fi fans. DM**
Clyde Cleveland: Cleveland ran a strange but somewhat successful fusion
campaign for Iowa governor as the LP/Natural Law Party candidate in 2002,
winning about 13,000 votes. He had planned to run for president in 2004 but
ultimately opted against it. The NLP no longer exists on a national level, and
I have never been clear just how connected Cleveland is to the Maharishi Mahesh
Yogi movement that created it. But if Cleveland sought the LP nomination in
2008, he'd be an interesting candidate. His stress on the nonviolent aspects of
Libertarian ideals could appeal to anti-war voters in a campaign likely to pit
pro-war Sen. Hillary Clinton against a pro-war Republican. He'd also pull in
some Greens.
Ron Paul: It's not gonna happen. Besides, isn't it better to have him in
Congress than out of office after another presidential run?
**Badnarik - Paul, a true dream ticket. But the very good doctor is almost
70 and is doing an excellent job in
Congress of serving as a measure of what the rest of them should be doing.
DM**
Michael Cloud: The LP establishment's ultimate insider. It would be like
the GOP running Karl Rove for president.
**He could raise a lot of money. DM**
Carla Howell: Would be like running Karl Rove's girlfriend. Okay, that's
not fair -- she had some solid success in Massachusetts. But her command of
Libertarian themes and ideas is limited at best.
**See comments on Dr. Ruwart and our other ladies. DM**
Neal Boortz: Potentially a future candidate, but I doubt he will give up
radio so soon. Boortz has a lot of listeners outside the LP and even the
libertarian movement, and he could end up being what Gene Burns was supposed to
be in 1984. However, his support for Bush Administration war policy has won him
some enemies within the movement.
**I would not support anyone who favors and defends the unconstitutional,
unnecessary counterproductive war based
on lies on Iraq or the likely one against Iran. One of Michael Badnarik's
greatest strengths was his position as the
leading peace candidate in 2004. We need to outreach for him to the hard
anti-war Left on that basis. DM **
Cindy Sheehan: I question her for the same reasons I question Kwiatkowski,
but more so. Kwiatkowski has been active in libertarian circles and clearly
understands our views. From what she has revealed, Sheehan seems to be fairly
leftist across the board. I'm not sure she's a libertarian.
**We should honor the Peace Mom for her courage and persistence, but other
than opposition to the war she has
not said or done anything to indicate that she is a libertarian. There is
also the pandering issue. See above comments
on our lady candidates. DM**
Harry Browne: It is highly unlikely Browne will run again, though before
the 2004 race, there were some rumors he would make a third bid then, which he
did not. Browne would be 75 by the time of the 2008 election, and he has been
ailing. I was sorry to hear that, as I have had the chance to talk with Browne
at length in the past, and he is intelligent and a gentleman. That said, I was
never a fan of "Browne Inc." -- the force within the LP that pushed him in to
the race in 2000, anointed him for 2004 long before that election, and that
crossed many lines of propriety between the LNC and a nomination campaign.
Browne himself seems to have been above most of this, but his staffers worked
too closely with the leadership of the LP. The LNC did not assist Browne's
efforts to win the nomination in 2004, despite the claims of some LNC critics
that they did so. In fact, several Browne supporters within the LNC at the time
have told me they were pleased by Don Gorman's entry into that race, as a
competitive nomination fight is good for the party. But there's just too much
bad history with Browne to support him again the future.
**An excellent running mate for Michael Badnarik. I don't believe the
stories about him. He is intelligent, articulate and
personable enough that if he wanted to con people he could choose a far
more lucrative target than the LP. DM**
David Hollist: He's sort of the Harold Stassen of the LP. Hollist gets a
bad rap -- he has an interesting idea. One single, very detailed, idea. But
it's not necessarily a Libertarian idea.
**I wouldn't question his Libertarian credentials. However, his inability
to explain his program to convention delegates would
make it unlikely for him to communicate effectively with the brainwashed
general population. DM**
Don Gorman: There was little indication Gorman planned to run in 2004, and
even less that he is mulling a 2008 run, though his name still gets mentioned.
He was a reluctant candidate back in 2000.
*Another ERM for MB DM**
Ken Krawchuk: A smart guy, but as he has said before, he is mostly
interested in building the party in Pennsylvania.
Jim Burns: Burns is best known for legally changing his name to "James
Libertarian Burns" and for campaigning with a Confederate battle flag. This is
his third run for the presidential nomination, and he's never been taken
seriously before. No reason to change that now.
Jeffrey Diket: Oh good Lord, no. John Birch Society member Diket is best
remembered for a rambling, bitter speech against abortion at the 2004 LP
convention. While there is, and should be, room within the LP for those on all
sides of the complex abortion debate, Diket's vicious and disrespectful
comments embarrassed the party as they were broadcast across the nation on
C-SPAN.
**Jeff Diket is a very brave and very good Libertarian. I don't regret
nominating him for president. However, in 2008,
we need to support Michael Badnarik from the start, unless we decide to
hold the national convention in 2007
and give him and all of our candidates a one year head start. I do not
intend to nominate Jeff again.
For life and liberty,
David Macko**
Beyond these 25, I would love to see Personal Choice Party founder Charles
Jay brought in to the LP fold...
**We need many more good people in the LP. Badnarik is more likely to
attract them than anyone else,
especially if we give him the dedicated, united support which he did not
receive completely in 2004. DM**
--
The Girondin
http://thegirondin.blogspot.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
