Michael Badnarik, 2004 Libertarian Candidate - Whats his story...?

[Diesle]

Ref: http://www.badnarik.org


In the last couple of election cycles I've voted Republican pretty much down the line. You know how Republicans used to sort of run on the ole 'we're all about smaller government.... and we're all about personal responsibility and liberties...' That appealed to me. For the most part, I guess I feel that that has worked in my favor. Tax rates have been largely flat-lined over the years, gun laws have been loosened at the state level for the most part and national defense is in the front seat. However, MY government has no business legislating morality. So abortion and sexual preference are and will continue to take a beating under Republican rule. And it looks like my personal liberties will be eroded in the name of national defense and we (U.S.) will continue to police the world. Plus I can look forward to big businesses running my government well into the future. Very disturbing.

I’m ready for a shakedown. I want a shakedown.

What are you gathering on Michael Badnarik? Any interesting facts or information. Obviously there isn’t a chance that the LP will win the presidential election in 2004 but it sure would be nice to see a little "how's your father" sent to Republicans in the form of votes lost to a Libertarian candidate. That might help remind some of them who their working for….



Diesle

 

[Jim March]

I've met him. He was one of the guest speakers at Counterattack2003 in Texas; I would rate both his public speaking and "sanity level" as being very high.

He teaches a class in "deep Constitutional law", and gave a mini-lecture on the subject at the conference. Very good stuff; quite "hardcore" in regards issues like freedom of travel and taxation, but also very well thought out and presented.

Basically, he can be counted on to "shift the debate" in interesting directions, while not coming across as a loon and actually getting some people to think. Which is about all you can ask of an LP Presidential contender.

I hope this doesn't come across as too negative, as that's not my intent.
I think highly of the guy.

 

[Cactus]

Great idea Diesle! If enough Republicans and conservatives vote for Badnarik, we could end up with Howard Dean as President.:banghead: What a great "message" that will send!

Wonderful!

 

[David Park]

Here's a web page with information about all the LP presidential candidates:
http://www.politics1.com/libt04.htm

It seems like a wide-open field. Currently, Badnarik and Gary Nolan seem to be the frontrunners, but Carla Howell hasn't announced if she's running yet.

 

[MicroBalrog]

If enough Republicans and conservatives vote for Badnarik, we could end up with Howard Dean as President

Still better than George "AWB" Bush and John "Patriot Act" Ashcroft.

 

[Diesle]

You know what Cactus, if Dean were elected as a reuslt of voter bleed, I think the message would be heard LOUD AND CLEAR! In fact, Im willing to sacrafice the next 4 years to send that message in no uncertain terms.



Diesle

 

[bjengs]

Amen, Diesle.

Republicans - the P. T. Barnum party ("there's a sucker born every minute")

 

[Waitone]

I can't stiffle this one.

Does this guy clean up real good? I mean, is he presentable, speak clearly with some sense of grammar? Is he interested in bringing voters over to his side or is he interested in beating them about the head and shoulders for being so stupid at to vote for other party members.

Reason I ask is the Libertarian party in my district twice fielded the same candidate who managed to alienate just about everyone he counted on to vote for him.

He dressed like a recent refugee from Oregon (I'm in the hot, humid south) and according to those who got close to him smelled like 3 day old boiled goat. His USP (unique sales proposition) was vote for him 'cause he was a gun totin', pagan, libertarian. He relished his role in sticking his thumb in the eye of the establishment, unfortunately, he made no headway in acquainting the great unwashed as to the benefits of the libertarian philosophy. He lost big time, twice, to a typical spinelessrepublican.

If Libertarians want to have an impact at the local level, they must learn the basics of human nature. No human likes his or her believe to be attacked or belittled.

 

[Cactus]

Originally posted byiesle
You know what Cactus, if Dean were elected as a reuslt of voter bleed, I think the message would be heard LOUD AND CLEAR! In fact, Im willing to sacrafice the next 4 years to send that message in no uncertain terms.

Maybe you can fill me in on what message all of the Ross Perot voters sent President George H.W. Bush in 1992. The only thing I got out of it was eight years of Bill Clinton; the AWB, ignoring terrorists, higher taxes, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, etc., etc.!

But I'm sure Howard Dean will be much better than Bill Clinton, right?

As a wise man once said: "Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it".

 

[Oracle]

The Republicans have been leaning seriously left lately. With their sponsorship and passage of the Patriot Act, vast increases in government spending, especially on programs they had vowed to abolish as few as six years earlier (the education spending bill), and with President Bush supporting gun control in the form of the AWB, the Republicans are alienating the Libertarians and others who are supportive of less government, with less intrusiveness, less restrictions on rights, and more responsibility. These same Libertarians and others who have been voting for Republicans for a while now see that the Republicans don't care about the issues they care about. So, they won't vote for Republicans.

It's all about voting for those who support the issues you support. Howard Dean and George W. Bush have voiced basically the exact same positions on gun control, why would you expect one to be any worse than the other? George W. Bush has virtually abandoned any idea of smaller, less intrusive, more responsible government, he's co-opted much of the left's agenda. I truly don't think a Democrat, especially one like Howard Dean, would be much worse.

 

[rock jock]

He teaches a class in "deep Constitutional law", and gave a mini-lecture on the subject at the conference. Very good stuff; quite "hardcore" in regards issues like freedom of travel and taxation, but also very well thought out and presented.

I have to disagree. I too saw him at Counterattack and found many of his views to be shortsighted. I later confronted him on several subjects and all I got were a lot of "uh's". He cut our conversation short and then said he would love to talk with me later, but made no effort to continue where we left off. Basically, I found that he gets attention by making provocative statements, but then cannot defend them. I think that in any debate which asked the hard questions, he would get chewed up.

 

[Diesle]

Maybe you can fill me in on what message all of the Ross Perot voters sent President George H.W. Bush...

You know what, you right. I vow to never vote my conscience again. Further more, I reserve upon myself from this day forward to never hope.... or dream.

Signed this day (my day of emancipation),

Diesle

 

[Lone_Gunman]

An ideology that cannot be implemented is the same as no ideology.

So goes the Libertarian Party.

 

[Zundfolge]

The only way Libertarians are ever going to win big is if they follow Ron Paul's lead and infiltrate the Republican party.

Like it or not this is a two party system ... Republicans or Democrats.

Third parties are only spoilers (we may be able to thank the Green party for Bushes ultra-thin victory).

"I am a Republican with a capital 'R,' and a libertarian with a small 'l.' I have a party membership as a Republican, not because they have any principles. But because that's the way I am the most useful and have the most influence. My philosophy is clearly libertarian."
--Milton Friedman

 

[Oracle]

Uh huh. Maybe it's just that a party's ideology takes longer to get implemented, and some of us are in for the long haul.

Regardless, many of us are not going to be voting Republican, and we're going to be doing whatever we can to get others to vote Libertarian as well. We're tired of voting for candidates that are supposed to stand for what we believe in, and then getting the shaft. If you guys want to continue voting for people who don't support your views, go right ahead. Republicans have brought about just as much gun control laws as Democrats have. I'm through with both of them.

 

[rock jock]

Oracle, I take you have never been a part of any organization comprised of more than, say, two or three people? If you had, you would realize that change only comes by working within the organization. Taking your marbles and playing elsewhere only serves to inflate your ego. It does nothing for changing hearts and minds, both of which, I might add, can in fact be swayed. Don't believe me? Look at the majority of states that now have a CCW system. Gun rights activists can make a difference in the Republican Party. Unless, of course, the changes you are looking for are the Libertarian Party platform planks - no taxes at all, no moral standards (errr, except for the standards of humanism, which are just fine), zero government regulation over anything, etc. If these are your goals, you're right, you're not going to find them in the Republican Party.

 

[MicroBalrog]

But I'm sure Howard Dean will be much better than Bill Clinton, right?

Right.

 

[Oracle]

Yes, Rock Jock, I've been a part of large organizations, and still am. One organization can get quite "political" at times, and there are problems that I have with it. But, I stay. Do you know why? Because they still do the things that I originally came to the organization for. Even though I might not like everything about them, I still like the vast majority of stuff that organization does.

I can't say that about the Republican party. They campaign on the promises of smaller government that has less involvement in people's lives, and then when they get in power, they expand both the size and power of government, make it far more intrusive, and completely ignore promises made just a few years before, promises that gave the party the kind of power they now have. The Republicans have now co-opted much of the left's agenda, the agenda that they should be working against. I'm simply not going to drink the Kool-Aid anymore.

I also do agree with the Libertarian party on nearly all of the planks of their platform. Government should not be involved in legislating morality, period (but tell that to the head of the Republican party in the State in which I live, who is the former head of the Christian Coalition). Government should not be taxing people's incomes, our government did quite well without taxing anyone's income for nearly 150 years, and that would force it to reduce it's size. I believe in some government regulation, but only as it applies to protecting people's rights and their ability to exercise those rights, government regulations that create victimless crimes only exist to give the government undue control over the people governed.

Also, need I say anything more about the abysmal gun rights record the Republican party has? Can you say Assault Weapons Ban? Find where in their platform that the Republican Party supports the absolute right to keep and bear arms. I can easily show you that in the Libertarian Party platform.

So, I'm going to continue to vote Libertarian, and continue to work to convince others to do the same. I may vote for a Republican on occasion, but only if a Libertarian isn't available to vote for in that position, and only if the Republican is one of the ever-shrinking minority whose record shows that he or she is truly dedicated to reducing the size, power, and intrusiveness of government.

 

[seeker_two]

Unless the GOP has changed the rules, Bush still has to win the Republican primary before he can run for reelection...

That would be the place to show our displeasure...

And a great opportunity for Libertarians (registered as Republicans) to have the greatest effect...

Bush has lost my primary vote...

Will a more capable candidate court it?...

 

[Jim March]

Getting back to Badnarik: yes, he "cleans up well". He dressed quite professionally, typical business haircut, etc. I think the only thing funky he had going on was an American flag tie and given the venue, that's no big deal.

I personally agreed with most of the points he talks about, and he seemed to present them fairly well. Didn't debate him privately though.

-----------

I'm also of the opinion that we have to infiltrate the GOP. A *golden* opportunity in that direction is coming up in California with the recall vote. It's going to be a free-for-all, with the winner picking up as little as 15% of the popular vote . Maybe *less*. IF a very, VERY good GOPer jumps in, such as McClintock or Ray Haynes, I hope to GOD the LP will see the value of kicking in behind them and not running their own candidate.

In that fashion, the "pro-freedom vote" would have the greatest possible effect and hence would be seen as a viable voting block that can be catered to. THAT is how we'll win.

 

[sctman800]

I have been a member of the Libertarian party for many years, and yes there are some things I don't agree with, but I will stay. This is the only party that REALLY wants to reduce the size of government, which would automatically make it less intrusive. Altho I am from Illinois, the congressman I admire most is the former Libertarian, Ron Paul, God bless Texas for reelecting him. The FIRST thing I look at when voting in any election is their stand on gun control, and I don't remember ever finding any Republican better than the Libertarian canidate. Jim.

 

[Jim March]

There are many Republicans "as good on guns" as most Libertarians, and even a few Dems. But these guys are MORE valuable than the LP candidates because they actually got into office!.

Ray Haynes and McClintock are as good on guns as anybody could hope.

 

[Oracle]

Jim, it would be nice to elect someone that agreed with my principles, but the Republicans that actually do so are getting fewer and fewer. Republicans instituted the AWB after being elected into office by gun owners opposed to it, and the current President Bush saying that he would sign it again if it reached his desk isn't politics, it's a slap in the face to all the gun owners in this country.

The Republicans in this country have been moving farther and farther to the left, not just on guns, but on everything. If that's what you mean by "able to be elected into office" I'm sorry, I'd rather not have it. I don't think that Libertarians of any stripe will be able to get the Republican party to do anything unless they take a major chunk of their votes away from them for an election or two. Unless that happens, the Republicans will just go on talking a good game but enacting the opposite agenda when they actually get into office, like they're doing now.

 

[Jim March]

I agree completely with your statements regarding the current GOP.

But it's 100% irrelevent.

You vote your concience in the final vote, but you register for the party you want to change by voting in the primaries.

 

[Cactus]

Originally posted by Oracle:
Republicans instituted the AWB after being elected into office by gun owners opposed to it...

The AWB was passed and signed into law in 1994 by Bill Clinton and a Democrat controlled House and Senate.

If your going to accuse a party of selling us out, at least get your facts straight!

And I couldn't care less that President Bush said he would re-sign the AWB bill. It was a cheap political line to appeal to the vast political middle knowing that Congress will never reauthorize it. I am much more concerned about actions than words or intentions.