Skip to main content

Oh, Shut Up Wayne

I've written several times about the debasement of the Libertarian National Committee and the transformation of the LP's national organization into a sclerotic neo-conservative echo chamber.

But we've now got ourselves a walking, talking self-parody of that extreme in the form of Wayne Root, and it's all in embarrassing clarity.

Wayne thinks that Obama loves bailouts because it allows him to dictate terms to American big business, who have just been forced by bailout mania to all come for their gummint cheese, which Mr. Obama has had the audacity of attaching conditions to.

I guess a REAL anti-socialist government would give them a bailout without conditions, or something like that.

On the front page of his web site, he has an interview with "Michael Savage," the fringe-right commentator who famously told a dissenting caller "Oh, so you're one of those sodomites. You should only get AIDS and die, you pig; how's that?"

Because we need that sort of media attention as Libertarians. It makes Bill Redpath's laughable bunny rabbit interview look desirable in comparison!

Root recently bragged that he'd helped decapitate the "anti-war Libertarians," which is sorta like bragging that he kicked out the small-government Libertarians, or the personal liberties Libertarians, or the individual rights Libertarians.

With each passing day, his interactions become increasingly Freeperish.

And as Libertarians, we're affiliated with this guy. He speaks not just as a self-described "Libertarian," but as our former VP nominee in the last election!

And let's face it -- if you're a pro-war, anti-gay, "states' rights," hate-Obama, love Michael Savage sort of voter, which party are you going to choose... the LP, whose platform stands against every single one of those positions and which has little chance of a victory -- or the GOP, which enshrines most of those values in its party platform and culture?

It's enough to make those few people who still care about what's left of the LP's national stature depressed.

Seriously, Wayne, money might be tight after closing up shop, but there's a surplus supply of angry blustering white guys screaming about "socialism" and "business" and "Obama."

The Libertarian Party doesn't need your shenanigans, nor do the Republicans. Go for a job better suited for your demeanor -- there's a recent opening I'm sure would fit just fine.

Comments

pandora said…
Wayne's picking some crazy adjectives! ;-)
Eric Dondero said…
Decapitating "anti-War" libertarians is more akin to kicking out the Fascist faction of the Libertarian Party.

You simply cannot call yourself a "libertarian" and at the same time support the likes of Saddam Hussein.

Good for Wayne! I knew there was a reason I liked the guy.
Tyler Nixon said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Tyler Nixon said…
"You simply cannot call yourself a "libertarian" and at the same time support the likes of Saddam Hussein."

What self-proclaimed libertarian of any stripe anywhere ever "supported" Saddam Hussein?
pandora said…
I think in Eric's world...

Anti-War = Supporting Saddam

(Welcome to my world, Tyler!)
Cork said…
Root recently bragged that he'd helped decapitate the "anti-war Libertarians,"I believe you, but could you provide some kind of link? IPR should publish this.

I want Root finished for good.

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 ...