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 libertarian...

From the BTP site: "Whereas a majority of voters in the states of California, Arizona and Florida decided on November 4, 2008 that their state governments should not recognize marriages between two people of the same sex; and "Whereas, although in a free society 'marriage' would be of no concern to states (or government in any form), present conditions grant special privileges and immunities to those under formal marriage-contract, and "Whereas discrimination against ANY voluntary segment of society by government entities is both abhorrent and a violation of the Bill of Rights ... "Be it RESOLVED that the Boston Tea Party supports the rights of all people at home and abroad (including Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgendered (GLBT) people) to equal rights, privileges and immunities under the law and "Be it further RESOLVED that the Boston Tea Party calls for an immediate repeal of all state and federal laws attempting or intending to restrict or define...

In a response to a recent post on the American cross-border raid into Syria, commenter G Rex raises an important question about the Boston Tea Party's various positions on foreign policy. Right now there are two almost identical positions--one a part of the program and one a resolution: From the program (and lifted from Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty, actually): Foreign Policy: The Iraq War must end as quickly as possible with removal of all our soldiers from the region. We must initiate the return of our soldiers from around the world, including Korea, Japan, Europe and the entire Middle East. We must cease the war propaganda, threats of a blockade and plans for attacks on Iran, nor should we re-ignite the cold war with Russia over Georgia. We must be willing to talk to all countries and offer friendship and trade and travel to all who are willing. We must take off the table the threat of a nuclear first strike against all nations. From the resolutions: Whereas the United Sta...

The Boston Tea Party convention , which is winding up tonight, has elected Jason Gatties as National Chair, Douglas Gaking as Vice Chair, and Michelle Luetge as Secretary. Three of the four At-Large National Committee seats appear to have been decided for Thomas Knapp, Darryl Perry, and Neil K. Stephenson. For the fourth position a single vote currently separates Steve Trinward and me. Particularly with the election of Jason, Tom, and Darryl we have established a strong slate of officers (I honestly don't know the rest well enough to comment). Jason, Tom, and Darryl have in common that each of them has stepped forward this year to run for office--something more people need to do. Possibly even more significant is the adoption of a four-point program that is the same as the Campaign for Liberty: Foreign Policy: The Iraq War must end as quickly as possible with removal of all our soldiers from the region. We must initiate the return of our soldiers from around the world, including...

There's this about political parties: you don't have to agree with all the details of everything yours does to be proud of it. From a very personal perspective the Boston Tea Party condemnation of the $850 billion-dollar bail-out goes a little farther than i would, calling for an immediate liquidation of the Federal Reserve and repeal of legal tender laws. It's not that I don't want to go there eventually, but I'm more of an incrementalist, I think. But that's not the heart of the matter. The heart of the matter is that the BTP has put down in writing what the two wings of the Demopublicans haven't had the courage to say: the bail-out was simply wrong. Here are some of my favorite snippets: Whereas, the bailout will tack on an additional $112 billion to the current deficit over a period of five years because the legislation contains no provision to dramatically cut spending and tax levels, and... Whereas, the United States Senate voted in favor of the $...

I think this is why I've finally decided to join the Boston Tea Party and work through that organization as the national vehicle for Libertarian politics. Planetary Jim put this up at the BTP site , and because I can't figure out where I'd cut it, I'm going to steal the whole damn thing. I don't think [and this is addressed both to Waldo and my friends in the Delaware blogosphere] that I have ever read a piece of why my particular brand of Libertarianism is not conservative or Republican lite : I think libertarians must come out directly, staunchly, entirely, and frequently against racism, sexism, gay bashing, immigrant bashing, and all the other tawdry aspects of the so-called conservative movement. I think we have to stand up and say that if you are a racist, you are not a libertarian, if you are a sexist, you are not a libertarian, if you are against equal freedom for gays, the transgendered, the polyamorous, you are not a libertarian, if you discriminate agains...

... on CN8: He's also starting to point out in mailings and on the web [thanks, Shirley ] exactly what a special-interest whore his opponent is. Remember: Tyler Nixon is a fusion Republican/Libertarian candidate for the Delaware House in the 4th District, endorsed by both the Republican Liberty Caucus and the Boston Tea Party . Go Tyler!!!!!!! [...and, oh yeah, he blogs here. I got him and you didn't.]

The Boston Tea Party , which is advancing its case as the potential nationwide replacement for the essentially non-functional Libertarian National Committee as the central organizing group for individual liberty and smaller government, has turned its attention to Delaware. The BTP has now formally endorsed LPD Congressional candidate Mark Anthony Parks and LPD/GOP 4th District House candidate Tyler Nixon . For Tyler, this endorsement can be added to his earlier seal of approval from the Liberty Caucus . Given that I'd suspect only a few Libertarians and not many others have heard of the BTP (running Charles Jay and Thomas Knapp as their Presidential ticket), what significance does this have for our candidates? Primarily, it's another piece of national exposure, however modest. Libertarian candidates run not just to win (go, Tyler!), but also to make a point about the erosion of civil liberties and the continuing encroachment of government on our freedoms--both economic and s...

I've probably spent a lot more time thinking about this than it probably deserves. Or maybe not. I believe that the national Libertarian Party is day by day proving itself a hopelessly lost cause for those of us who believe that the cause of limited government, personal liberty, and individual freedom can be furthered at the ballot box. I have been talking for several weeks about something like a Libertarian Alliance of state parties organizing from the bottom up. But while I think it's a great idea, I keep wondering whether or not it's viable, whether or not anybody will do the necessary legwork to create it. At least for now, I'm thinking that the Boston Tea Party represents the best vehicle currently available. Yes, I know the BTP has a checkered organizational past, and that this could be merely another incarnation for dreamers who are not necessarily doers. The BTP has a simple platform: The Boston Tea Party supports reducing the size, scope and power of governm...