Make sure you spell my name correctly when you tell people I said it.


--- In [email protected], "Eric Dondero Rittberg"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> All the more reason why you should run for LP nomination in 2008 
> Paul.  After all, you are most certainly NOT a celebrity.  
> 
> Though you might be soon, after your comments that "it's a shame 
> Reagan didn't die when he was shot."
> 
> 
> --- In [email protected], "Paul" <ptireland@> wrote:
> >
> > Running a celebrity is a bad idea because it gives us the 
> impression
> > of being a circus like the Reform Party.  We are not a circus, and 
> we
> > would never run people who advocate violation of libertarian 
> > principles, like Dennis Miller, Neal Boortz, Tom McClintock, etc.  
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In [email protected], "Eric Dondero Rittberg"
> > <ericdondero@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Excellent post.  Well thought out, and well-reasoned.  
> > > Congratulations.
> > > 
> > > I would respond that my preferred strategy is not in your list.  
> > > What I would preferably like to see for the overall libertarian 
> > > movement is the following (which by the way is the one strategy 
> that 
> > > I actually think can work):
> > > 
> > > The Libertarian Party nominates a celebrity candidate for 
> President; 
> > > John Stossell, Dennis Miller, Neal Boortz, Walter Williams, Tom 
> > > Mcclintock, Ron Paul, Leon Drolet, Tammy Bruce, Drew Carey, 
> et.al.
> > > 
> > > That candidate gets well over 1 million votes after running a 
> > > spectacularly successful campagin which garnered excellent media 
> > > attention.
> > > 
> > > The American public now thinks "libertarians are cool."  They're 
> the 
> > > hip ones in American politics.  
> > > 
> > > In the 2008 race Hillary gets clobbered by Mitt Romney, however, 
> the 
> > > Libertarian vote scared the pants off of the Republicans.  So 
> much 
> > > so, in fact, that Romney and the Republicans are forced to pay 
> > > attention to libertarian ideals.  After all there's Election 
> Year 
> > > 2010.  And the LP is coming on strong promising a top-notch 
> slate of 
> > > Congressional candidates for the mid-terms.  
> > > 
> > > The GOP, particularly the boys at RNC HQ, get more and more 
> > > frightened of the LP's potential impact, and advise GOP 
> candidates 
> > > nationwide to start ADOPTING LIBERTARIAN POSITION.  
> > > 
> > > Moreover, they go all over the country looking for libertarian-
> > > leaning GOP candidates to run in 2010, even managing to steal a 
> > > couple top-notch candidates away from the LP itself, by 
> promising 
> > > them all sorts of money and backing.  
> > > 
> > > It's a success.  In 2010 the Democrats get slaughtered.  The 
> > > libertarian-leaning GOPers win.  Once in Congress they start 
> > > instituting their proposals to cut back on government, and 
> President 
> > > Romney signs the bills.  
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In [email protected], "Eric S. Harris" 
> > > <eric_harris_76@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Compared to the Constitution Party, the LP has been more 
> > > successful at 
> > > > accomplishing some necessary steps, and some highly 
> preliminary 
> > > phases 
> > > > of other necessary steps.  I'm not sure that's saying much.
> > > > 
> > > > Losing the race for president with less than 1% of the vote I 
> > > would call 
> > > > a highly preliminary phase of a necessary step, at best.  
> Doing it 
> > > > chronically isn't a success, by any stretch, especially as the 
> > > trend 
> > > > line is not upward.  (I note that the LP website no longer 
> seems 
> > > to list 
> > > > the presidential candidates and their vote totals.  Or if the 
> list 
> > > is 
> > > > there, it's damned hard to find.  For some reason.)
> > > > 
> > > > Those things listed below are milestones and metrics of 
> progress, 
> > > but 
> > > > they aren't successes.  Successes would be things like 
> repealing 
> > > the 
> > > > federal drug laws, or stopping the Social Security boondoggle 
> > > (even if 
> > > > were "merely" replaced by a Chile-style mandatory IRA-/401(k)-
> like 
> > > > account of the sort that gives dogmatic Libertarians the 
> screaming 
> > > > meemies), or having no more of a military presence in other 
> > > countries 
> > > > than they have in ours (like "none").
> > > > 
> > > > Neither party has actually succeeded at reducing government 
> and 
> > > > increasing freedom.
> > > > 
> > > > The LP's pace is glacial, even at accomplishing these 
> intermediate 
> > > > goals.  And a celebrity candidate won't help quicken the pace, 
> I 
> > > > believe.  YMMV.
> > > > 
> > > > Here's an experiment to consider.
> > > > 
> > > > Rank these events in the order you expect them to occur:
> > > > o The Social Security administration pays more benefits than 
> it 
> > > receives 
> > > > in Social Security taxes.
> > > > o The LP gets rid of the "oath" membership requirement.
> > > > o The number of U.S. military personnel inside Iraq is less 
> than 
> > > the 
> > > > total number of U.S. military deaths in this Iraq war.
> > > > o The LP's members of at least one house of Congress number 
> more 
> > > than 
> > > > the difference between the Democrats and the Republicans; the 
> > > > Libertarian Caucus is the swing bloc in that house.
> > > > o Federal spending declines, one year to the next.
> > > > o The LP nominates a "celebrity" candidate for president, such 
> as 
> > > those 
> > > > in the quoted text below.
> > > > o The LP presidential candidate is elected.
> > > > 
> > > > If you draw up a list and yours is in a dramatically different 
> > > order 
> > > > from this, I'd be interested in the reasoning that lead to 
> that 
> > > > particular ordering.
> > > > 
> > > > If I don't find the reasoning convincing, perhaps a wager is 
> in 
> > > order.  
> > > > You may end up paying or being paid by my estate before the 
> list 
> > > is 
> > > > exhausted, as I'm over 50.  Even my maternal ancestors only 
> lived 
> > > into 
> > > > their 80s.   -Eric
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Eric Dondero Rittberg wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Intrguied by your comments on the Constitution Party.
> > > > >
> > > > > But fact is the Libertarian Party is and has been 10 times 
> more
> > > > > successful over the years, when you measure vote totals both 
> in
> > > > > Presidential races and local races, actual elected officials,
> > > > > membership, fundraising, and most especially ballot access.
> > > > >
> > > > > The LP, hapless as it is, has the CP beat in every category.
> > > > >
> > > > > There was a brief period a couple years ago, when the CP 
> pulled
> > > > > ahead of the LP in one single category; elected officials.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ron Jore in Montana switched from GOP to Constitution Party 
> for a
> > > > > few months.  But then something happened and he switched 
> back. 
> > > > > (Still quite curious about that whole affair; never got a 
> > > complete
> > > > > explanation???)
> > > > >
> > > > > For that period, I'd agree the CP WAS AHEAD of the LP, but 
> as of
> > > > > this moment as far as I know the CP has less than 10 elected
> > > > > officials nationwide highest office being some town 
> councilman in
> > > > > Iowa.
> > > > >
> > > > > While the LP has over 500, highest being a couple City 
> > > Councilman in
> > > > > Troy, MI (pop. 70,000), a Councilman in a Denver suburb, a 
> couple
> > > > > small town Mayors and a couple County Supervisors.
> > > > >
> > > > > Plus the ballot access situation shows a profound 
> difference.  In
> > > > > every election cycle in the past two decades the LP has made 
> it 
> > > on
> > > > > the ballot in either all 50 states of over 46 states.  The 
> CP in
> > > > > comparison is lucky to get over 30.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > No, if there's gonna be any viable third party movement in 
> the 
> > > US in
> > > > > 2008, it's going to be with the Libertarian Party.
> > > > >
> > > > > Let's hope the LP smartens up and nominates a Jesse Ventura, 
> > > fmr. NM
> > > > > Gov. Gary Johnson, John Stossell, Walter Williams, Charles 
> > > Murray or
> > > > > some other celebrity this time, and doesn't go with a Party 
> > > hack/No
> > > > > name Michael Badnarik type.
> > > > 
> > > > [snipped: old quoted quoted text]
> > > > 
> > > > -- 
> > > > Eric S. Harris
> > > > 
> > > > If this address ever fails, try visiting 
> http://www.returnpath.net
> > > >
> > >
> >
>








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/
 


Reply via email to