Skip to main content

Libertarians in Kentucky forget how to breathe?

As Lee at A Secondhand Conjecture said in a post I quoted earlier, the Libertarian Party of Kentucky's 9-0 Executive Committee decision to dump genocidal, race-baiting Sonny Landham as their Senatorial candidate was good, but hardly outstanding:

Given the psychopathic nature of Landham’s views, I feel a little like I’m congratulating them for breathing.


Obviously, a few breathing lessons are in order, as Paulie Cannoli reports for Last Free Voice:

The Libertarian Party of Kentucky will reconsider its endorsement of Senate candidate Sonny Landham Wednesday evening, just days after initially disassociating their party from his bid. This news comes after the office of Kentucky’s secretary of state announced yesterday that Landham would need 5,000 new petition signatures to secure ballot access to run as an independent.

“We’re really stuck,” said Libertarian Party chair Ken Moellman. “We don’t necessarily want to kick him off the ballot.”


Granted, ballot access rules for third parties in Kentucky are grossly unfair--so what? They are everywhere.

Here's the situation made real simple for the 12 members of the LP Executive Committee in the Bluegrass State:

You screwed up by letting a real nutball on the ticket in the first place. The man is Lyndon Larouche mixed with David Duke.

The damage that one Sonny Landham can do will undo all the advances made by serious, thoughtful LP candidates in North Carolina, Georgia, Indiana, Texas, Michigan.... The list goes on.

It's time to take one for the team.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Exactly!

I got an email on Monday asking if I "Share the same views as the guy in Kentucky"

Having to convince people that I'm not a racist is not a productive way for me to spend my time campaigning.

What the LPKY needs to realize is, this is making things tough on the rest of us.

When the LP National basically went after Mary Ruwart, they didn't hold anything back and in my books, smeared her a bit in the process. Why are they taking a more laid back approach with a racist nut-job?
Eric Dondero said…
If the LP kicks Sonny off the ballot they will be risking severe ramifications for the Party for years to come.

Most signers for the LP petition "signed for Sonny." Kentuckians LOVE their Native American Hollywood Actor native son. The guy is enormously popular.

If the LP dumps him, Kentuckians will be real upset with the LP, and justifiably so.

Not too mention Sonny himself and all his supporters.

Imagine how his supporters feel, the guys who collected signatures just for Sonny at parades and festivals, to now find out that he won't be on the ballot.

And why should Sonny be punished for being a Rightwing Libertarian? This is a Leftwing Libertarian witch hunt at its worst. You say something a little politically incorrect, or something that doesn't jive with the Leftist line, and you get savagely attacked, called a racist and all sorts of other bad names.

KENTUCKY LIBERTARIAN PARTY PLEASE KEEP SONNY!!
Eric Dondero said…
Who are the racists here?

It's the Leftwingers who support affirmative action who are the racists.

HELLO! Sonny Landham is a NATIVE AMERICAN!! You can't get any more "minority" than that.

So what he doesn't want any Arabs coming to America and killing Americans as they did on 9/11 and have attempted to do numerous times since.

How is that racist?
Eric, do you even read what you're writing?

Sonny as a racist is arguable.

Sonny as a genocidal maniac in terms of foreign relations is not.

The LPKY blew it; they should never have associated with Sonny in the first place; so now they get to take the hit.
Anonymous said…
Gotta say Eric, I've never seen any libertarian in support of affirmative action.

What planet are you living on these days?

Sonny is a racist. Kentucky may be full of them, I don't know, but the majority of the voting public are not. So, Sonny running as a racist libertarian....bad for Kentucky, Bad for Bob Barr, Bad for candidates across the country, Bad for the Libertarian Party as a whole.
Anonymous said…
If the LP kicks Sonny off the ballot they will be risking severe ramifications for the Party for years to come.

That finishes it. "Dondero" Rittberg thinks that keeping Landham on the ballot is a good thing.

I cannot think of a better indicator that Landham needs to go, right now, today, "consequences" be damned.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...