Skip to main content

Texas Libertarian Chair Pat Dixon on the hypocrisy of Democrats and Republicans

Dixon as quoted in the Dallas Morning News:

On Monday July 28 I received a call from the office of speaker Tom Craddick. It was an invitation to meet with chief of staff Terrell Smith to discuss issues of common interest. I am always happy to engage in respectful discourse whenever possible and happily accepted the invitation. Our executive director Wes Benedict accompanied me to the meeting at the speaker's office on Monday, August 4. The meeting could not have been more respectful and professional. We did discuss our honest differences of opinion and commitment to grow our party. We stated that while we have some common ground on economic issues, we feel that the Republican Party has departed from the principles of the free market and that we intend for our candidates to do their best to grow the Libertarian Party.

In response to this, my counterpart in the Democratic Party, state chair Boyd Richie, is now proclaiming that the speaker is using unethical tactics by using his office and staff to strong-arm Libertarians off the ballot. He claims the speaker is trying to manipulate the election through shady dealings.

I find this vapid rhetoric to be utter hyperbole.

Mr. Richie should understand that the Libertarian Party has met with Democrats and Republicans over the years, and we are more than happy to accept their invitations. Instead of bitter partisan attacks, our party wishes to sincerely discuss issues of concern to Texas voters. The volume of these invitations have increased now that we are larger and stronger. The Ron Paul campaign motivated many liberty-minded people to become active.

To suggest that these dealings are shady is easily refuted by their openness. The accusation that we are being strong-armed is dubious, since Mr. Richie was not in the room. I was in the room and I can tell you that the accusation is without basis. We were invited to participate and it was our decision to do so, so how were we strong-armed? The claim that it is unethical to use state-funded office and staff to discuss politics is so ridiculous that Mr. Richie should be embarrassed when voters read such inflated rhetoric. Every informed voter would not be surprised to find that politics are discussed in the state capitol by Democrats and Republicans alike. When these two parties engage in partisan bickering over creating gerrymandered voting districts to benefit their party, does that use tax-funded resources to undermine the electoral process?

Boyd Richie should understand that unlike his party, Libertarians remain committed to the principles of individual liberty and social tolerance. We do not have a presidential candidate that votes to allow the federal government to listen to your phone calls without a warrant. We don't have a candidate for U.S. Senate whose position on the Iraq war is incoherent. We do not have candidates for the State House promoting statewide smoking bans, illegal cheerleading, and casting votes for absent legislators.

It has become more clear that the Democratic Party does not offer any commitment to the principles of individual liberty and social tolerance that the voters expect. Even former Republicans like Kirk England can become their candidate. More voters looking for these principles realize they will only find that commitment in the Libertarian Party.

It is my hope that the voters will make their decision on these important issues and have choices on the ballot that represent their sincere interests, instead of partisan hyperbole. Let us also hope that, regardless of the outcome in November, respectful and constructive dialogue is welcome and common ground can be sought.


The longer this story stays alive, the more opportunities Texas voters have to take a look at Libertarian candidates.

Keep talking, guys.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Comment Rescue (?) and child-related gun violence in Delaware

In my post about the idiotic over-reaction to a New Jersey 10-year-old posing with his new squirrel rifle , Dana Garrett left me this response: One waits, apparently in vain, for you to post the annual rates of children who either shoot themselves or someone else with a gun. But then you Libertarians are notoriously ambivalent to and silent about data and facts and would rather talk abstract principles and fear monger (like the government will confiscate your guns). It doesn't require any degree of subtlety to see why you are data and fact adverse. The facts indicate we have a crisis with gun violence and accidents in the USA, and Libertarians offer nothing credible to address it. Lives, even the lives of children, get sacrificed to the fetishism of liberty. That's intellectual cowardice. OK, Dana, let's talk facts. According to the Children's Defense Fund , which is itself only querying the CDCP data base, fewer than 10 children/teens were killed per year in Delaw

With apologies to Hube: dopey WNJ comments of the week

(Well, Hube, at least I'm pulling out Facebook comments and not poaching on your preserve in the Letters.) You will all remember the case this week of the photo of the young man posing with the .22LR squirrel rifle that his Dad got him for his birthday with resulted in Family Services and the local police attempting to search his house.  The story itself is a travesty since neither the father nor the boy had done anything remotely illegal (and check out the picture for how careful the son is being not to have his finger inside the trigger guard when the photo was taken). But the incident is chiefly important for revealing in the Comments Section--within Delaware--the fact that many backers of "common sense gun laws" really do have the elimination of 2nd Amendment rights and eventual outright confiscation of all privately held firearms as their objective: Let's run that by again: Elliot Jacobson says, This instance is not a case of a father bonding with h

The Obligatory Libertarian Tax Day Post

The most disturbing factoid that I learned on Tax Day was that the average American must now spend a full twenty-four hours filling out tax forms. That's three work days. Or, think of it this way: if you had to put in two hours per night after dinner to finish your taxes, that's two weeks (with Sundays off). I saw a talking head economics professor on some Philly TV channel pontificating about how Americans procrastinate. He was laughing. The IRS guy they interviewed actually said, "Tick, tick, tick." You have to wonder if Governor Ruth Ann Minner and her cohorts put in twenty-four hours pondering whether or not to give Kraft Foods $708,000 of our State taxes while demanding that school districts return $8-10 million each?