Skip to main content

Update: Freedom Slate '08 collects money for the opponents of EIGHT Libertarian candidates

It was wrong when Bob Barr, as a sitting member of the Libertarian National Committee, headed a PAC that donated thousands of dollars to Republican candidates who had active Libertarian opponents.

And if you unknowingly donate to Freedom Slate '08, you will be doing the same thing.

Eight of the Republican candidates who will receive money from donations to Freedom Slate '08 have ballot-qualified Libertarian opponents.

Here are the Libertarians you will be sending money to the GOP to oppose:

Lorenzo Gaztanaga, 2nd Congressional District, Maryland
Thibeaux Lincecum, 4th Congressional District, Maryland
Darlene Nicholas, 5th Congressional District, Maryland
Ronald Owens-Bey, 7th Congressional District, Maryland
Jim Duensing, 1st Congressional District, Nevada
Sean Patrick Moore, 2nd Congressional District, Nevada
Joseph P. Silvestri, 3rd Congressional District, Nevada
Edward Choate, 3rd Congressional District, Tennessee


[These names compiled from the list of ballot-qualified candidates reported in DC Political Report.]

About many of these candidates I know nothing, other than that they are fellow Libertarians who have taken the time and trouble to file for election.

There is also the following:

The Libertarian Party of Maryland supports and endorses the four candidates mentioned above.

Jim Deusning, whom Freedom Slate '08 would have you oppose, is the State Chair of the Libertarian Party of Nevada.

One of these individuals--Thibeaux Lincecum, 4th Congressional District, Maryland--has an amazing website. On it, in the usual issues section, Lincecum not only shows his positions on the issues, but lists those of his opponents. It is worth checking out the segments on the Drug War, Same-sex Marriage, Gambling, Immigration, and the Deficit to see which candidate--Lincecum or Republican Peter James (who is supported by Freedom Slate '08)--appears more Libertarian to you. I think the answer is pretty obvious, but, hey, what do I know? According to anonymous in the last post I am a moron for investigating the issue, and according to disinter (who plans to send Libertarian opponents $1,000 in the best Bob Barr fashion), I am a neo-Libertarian apologist. I think that means I get to replace Keanu Reeves in The Matrix IV, but I am not quite sure.

I am sure of this: No matter what you feel about Bob Barr and Wayne Allyn Root at the top of our ticket, there is no justification for crapping on eight down-ticket Libertarians in Maryland, Nevada, and Tennessee the same way Barr crapped on Allen Buckley in Georgia.

If you want to donate money to support Allen Buckley, Michael Benoit, Dan Druck, and David Casey--the Libertarian Party candidates who stand to benefit from Freedom Slate '08--I suggest you do it individually through their own sites.

That way, these Libertarian candidates will actually receive all the money you donate, and you will be able to support them without sending money to the GOP opponents of other Libertarians.

Comments

Eric Dondero said…
It is wrong to donate money to Jim Duensing. He's a 9/11 Holocaust Denier, who believes that Al Qaeda wasn't really behind the September 11 attacks but rather Bush, Cheyny and Haliburton did it, with help from those "dirty Jews."

It's downright shameful that this man serves in any capacity within the Libertarian Party.
Unknown said…
If Dondero says it, it must be false.

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 — ...

Libertarian National Committee Deathwatch Part 1

As the LNC continues to lurch towards collapse, with the latest news of mass layoffs at HQ, I've decided to begin tracking those things leading the national party to irrelevance, even as state and local parties gain power. As news, rumors and rhetoric break out, I shall chronicle them in this ongoing series at Delaware Libertarian. Organizations approaching failure have a number of characteristics. One of the most striking is renunciation of their purpose and effort to reinvent themselves as a "me-too" provider of services in the marketplace. In this, the LNC has been on a collision course with destiny for a while now. Recently, for example, it hired Republican Party web site developer TerraEclipse to redesign the LNC web site . Terra created a web site very similar to those of the clients it brags most about -- far-right Republican conservatives like Tom McClintock and BJ Lawson. A quick look at the web site they built for the LNC is instructive. The tagline on the ...

Soda tax debate reveals fundamental progressive assertions about your lack of individual rights and the "responsiblities" of the State

I thought it would be at least amusing to use the Delawareliberal comments as sub-headings regarding each category of what is wrong with the proposed tax on sodas and juice drinks. But there are so many different little strands of each comment that it would be impossible to pull them all out. So, instead, I'm going to let you read them in more or less the order they appeared, and note the assumptions. pandora: I’m perfectly okay with taxing sodas and juice drinks. Mainly because they’re total crap, and one of the main reasons our country’s children are overweight. They are also dirt cheap. Assumptions here: (1) Because "I" am perfectly okay with a new tax it should be imposed on everybody; (2) it is the government's responsibility to keep children from being obese; (3) the cheapness of the product to be taxed justifies charging people more for it. John Manifold: Soda fattens your kids [and you and your husband], shortens their lives, costs more than water [a...