Or how else would you interpret the fact that the LNC finally managed to vote for a resolution against US involvement in Afghanistan, but couldn't get the staff to publish it ? And while you're at it, please note that the leadership element of the Party of Principle refuses to follow its own rules about transparency and accountability. Here's a thought: everybody currently sitting on the LNC who has an ounce of personal integrity (yes, I'm talking about you, Mary Ruwart, Michael Jingozian, Jim Lark, Angela Keaton) needs simply to resign , depriving the organization of any remnants of respectability , while in the meantime.... ...the rest of us start thinking about a new strategy for the Libertarian movement [including ballot access], so that we're ready with an alternative when this house of cards comes crashing down.

So Ron Paul convened a press event to showcase third party candidates, including the Constitution Party's Chuck Baldwin, the Green Party's Cynthia McKinney, Independent Ralph Nader, and the Libertarian Party's Bob Barr.... Only Bob Barr decided not to show up, leading to the usual feeding frenzy among Libertarians of all persuasions, which earned the name snubgate among the blogs critical of the Barr/Root ticket. The most passionate among them began circulating a petition for Barr to be removed from the Libertarian ticket, and demanding that at least one LNC member stand up and offer a motion to remove Barr from the ticket.... For the high crime of insulting Ron Paul?? Then there were the competing motions at the LNC--that proposed by Aaron Starr which criticized Paul for not endorsing Barr and another to be offered by either Mary Ruwart or Rachel Hawkbridge to apologize to Dr No. You can follow the unfolding drama at either Last Free Voice or Independent Political Repo...

First, let me admit a dangerous truth: I have always liked the Articles of Confederation. Perhaps even better than the US Constitution. Those history textbooks that indoctrinate students to believe that the Articles were a failure because they denied the national government the power of taxation annoy the hell out of me. That having been said, I've always wondered why the Libertarian Party chose a hierarchical approach that far more resembled the Federal structure of a powerful State embodied in the Constitution than the loose alliance generated by the Articles. John P. Slevin, in a comment at Independent Political Report , captures this contradiction rather nicely: You have the right idea, wrong solution. Certainly support local candidates. Bust your butt doing so. That’s where it IS at. ALL govt money IS spent locally, THERE ARE 2 reasons the LP is stuck on the presidential elections process.] First, they are idiots. 2nd, it makes them money (and the “them” are the people who ...

The current venal and moronic conduct of the Libertarian National Committee and the Bob Barr campaign make it patently clear that this incarnation of the Libertarian Party is on the brink of disintegration at the national level. Ironically, there are more potential Libertarian voters out there than ever, and in states like North Carolina, Texas, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and--yes, even Delaware, the State parties are growing and earning both media attention and voter support. Isn't it time to take back national control of the Libertarian movement from a group composed primarily of self-serving parasites? How would this be done? As I pointed out in an email answer to George Donnelly, the Libertarian Party does not--indeed, cannot--have a lock on the term Libertarian . In multi-party European democracies, for example, there are often distinct parties in existence as Social Democrats, Liberal Democrats, Christian Democrats, and/or Progressive Democrats . A Libertarian Alliance [...

On Foreign Policy: For far too long and at the cost of American blood and treasure, our great military has been too willingly and quickly used for purposes other than national defense. Our fighting men and women deserve better and the integrity of our nation must be restored. Our National Defense policy must renew a commitment to non-intervention. We are not the world's police force and our long, yet recently tarnished, tradition of respecting the sovereignty of other nations is necessary, not from only a moral standpoint, but to regain the respect of the world as a principled and peaceful nation. The proper use of force is clear. If attacked, the aggressor will experience firsthand the skillful wrath of the American fighting man. However, invading or initiating force against another nation based upon perceived threats and speculative intelligence is simply un-American. We are better than the policy of pre-emptive warfare On Liberty: The United States was created for the purpose of...

It is unusual that I give kudos to Reason Magazine, with the exception that they got this right. There is a rise of the libertarian left going on. And it will impact and shape social policy in America. The actual mechanics of how that will play out are not known, but the process is underway and it is a productive force. Unlike the Rothbardian "anarchists" and ultra-right "minarchists" left libertarianism is predominantly a movement that see being libertarian as being fiscally conservative and socially liberal to ensure the maximum personal liberty and maximum economic liberty intertwined to serve a larger public good, the health of the overall society. Unlike radical libertarians they do not reject the state outright, rather in this view governments are "secured among men with a utilitarian purpose. That is they are defined in their duties by their foundation." In our case that is the constitution. The progenitor of this movement was none other than Thomas...

This from the Libertarian Alliance Blog out of Great Britain: "How Much is a Billion?" Upon finding out that the government under Gordon Brown was either spending or borrowing a Billion pounds per day, somebody (apparently in the US) helpfully tried to place the figure billion into perspective: The next time you hear a politician use the word ‘billion’ in a casual manner, think about whether you want the ‘politicians’ spending YOUR tax money. A billion is a difficult number to comprehend, but one advertising agency did a good job of putting that figure into some perspective in one of its releases. A. A billion seconds ago it was 1959. B. A billion minutes ago Jesus was alive. C. A billion hours ago our ancestors were living in the Old (middle paleolithic) Stone Age. D. A billion days ago no-one walked on the earth on two feet. (That’s 2,740,000 years approx - I think the writer is wrong but it’s a moot point still - David Davis) E. A billion dollars ago was only 8 hours and...

Did you fill out that consent for organ donation on the back of your driver's license? I did. Did you include permission in your will for your organs to be harvested? Eventually I will get around to it. However, if Great Britain's new PM Gordon Brown has his way, our cousins won't have to worry about such niceties. Brown wants to give National Health Service physicians the power to harvest organs from the dead without the necessity of consent. The Libertarian Alliance gives you two ways to look at this. The first, is the organization's restrained, official policy statement: The Libertarian Alliance believes that no organ or bodily part should be taken from any person for any purpose without the explicit prior consent of that person, or, if dead, without the explicit consent of the next of kin. But frankly what I like better is the personal reaction of LA Director Sean Gabb: When the law allows organs to be harvested from the bodies of the dead without the explicit p...