Skip to main content

An open apology to Chairman Jim Rash and the Libertarian Party of Delaware

Some insider baseball: last year, during the controversies dogging the national Libertarian Party following the nomination of Bob Barr for President and the continuing party infighting (that in part I reported here), I advocated that the Libertarian movement could only benefit from having State parties contemplate disaffiliation. I even argued that some State parties might choose instead to affiliate with the Boston Tea Party.

I don't disagree with my assessment of the national Libertarian Party, which I view more than ever as something of a lost cause, but I have come to realize that the BTP is not going to do anything either.

However, at that time I wrote a post on a BTP blog in which I said I had discussed with leaders of the Libertarian Party of Delaware the possibility of disaffiliating with national and going over to the BTP.

Here's the problem: I should have said that I met with some Libertarian leaders in Delaware or that I met with some leading Delaware libertarians, because I did not discuss this issue with State Party Chair Jim Rash or other elected officers.

It was wrong to write a sentence which could only be read as a semi-endorsement of my position by the elected party leaders, and I apologize for doing so. I suspect that having the State's most visible Libertarian blogger write something like that has made it more difficult for Jim and his team to organize within Delaware, and if that happened it was my fault.

You may be wondering why this comes up now.

If you blog, you'll get this next sentence: you write thousands and thousands of words and never try to look back. Last week is the distant past; last year could be your previous incarnation. Jim Rash had too much class and too much common sense to bring up the issue publicly, and only recently brought my attention to my actions when I wrote him unsolicited on a different topic, seeking his input. Which was earlier today.

I believe in trying to clean up my own messes, and less than a week before the LPD's annual convention, it's incumbent on me to acknowledge the fact that I did something wrong, so that the party and the movement can keep pushing forward.

Comments

classy. when you do wrong you need to "man up" as they say. If I were Jim, I would accept that apology.
Brian Shields said…
I never really thought much of the BTP nonsense. To be honest, it seemed like a step back in protest, but nothing more.

The BTP is old news, we should move forward.

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 — ...

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 ...

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...