Sunday, October 10, 2010
The Fed's Bad Year
In a press release last week, the Federal Reserve announced the delay of the new $100 bill after they discovered an error in the printing process.
While it isn't going to slow them down for long, it's just another item on a list of things that have gone wrong for the Federal Reserve over the past year.
Two years ago, most Americans knew little - to absolutely nothing - about the Federal Reserve, and that's the way the Fed liked it. However, times have changed.
And it's all because of you.
When we embarked on the challenge to Audit the Fed, no one, least of all the folks at the Federal Reserve, could have predicted how far it would go.
For over 30 years, Congressman Paul has attempted to open up the Federal Reserve and shed sunlight on its books. Never before had his bill made it out of committee, let alone received a roll call vote in both houses of Congress.
Even though the final audit included in the Dodd/Frank bill was more of a fig leaf to cover up Fed-loving congressmen than a real gain for liberty or transparency, it shows just how frightened the Fed and its enablers are becoming of a citizen outrage.
Thanks to your efforts, the Federal Reserve is now a household name and most people now recognize its actions as a cause of the recession rather than a solution, and its actions are frequently scrutinized in the media. No longer can the Federal Reserve go about its daily business without people asking questions.
Because of you, 80% of Americans are now in favor of a full audit of the Federal Reserve.
It wasn't easy for the Fed to water down the audit. It took everything they had, including hiring a powerful and well connected ex-Enron lobbyist and circulating letters signed by so-called “renowned economists” who made it sound as if we would bring on the apocalypse itself if the Fed were subjected to an audit.
Even the Obama administration was forced to come out in opposition to the audit to help the Fed save face.
Due to the immense pressure from grassroots activists, Ben Bernanke was reconfirmed with the lowest vote of any Fed Chairman.
Together, we were able to put senators and representatives on the record as being either for or against transparency at our nation's central bank.
With your continued support, Campaign for Liberty will put federal candidates on the record for sound money and auditing the Federal Reserve with our Federal Candidate Survey Program.
You can see how your candidates answered the Federal Candidate Survey by visiting your state page on our website.
If the candidates in your area haven't yet filled out our survey, call their campaign today and ask them to return Campaign for Liberty's Federal Candidate Survey.
The liberty movement looked the Federal Reserve in the eye, and for a change, we made it blink.We've given the Federal Reserve a rough time over the past year. Let's keep up the pressure!
In Liberty,
John Tate
President
Unlike the Federal Reserve and its broken printing presses, we can't magically print money out of thin air. Your contribution of just $10 will go a long way toward helping us keep pushing for sound money and transparency at the Fed.
War Consumes Our Most Precious Resource
BURNET, Texas - The greatest cost of the endless and needless wars the United States is engaged in can’t be measure in dollars and cents but in the expenditure of our most precious resource, the lives of our young people, said potential Libertarian presidential candidate R. Lee Wrights.
“The greatest cost of war is the toll it is taking on our most precious resources, our young people,” said Wrights. “Every time a young American soldier, sailor, airman or marine is killed, another dream dies, another possibility dies, another prospect dies. Every time a young American is killed, another hope dies.”
One such precious resource was 24-year-old Robert J. Miller. The Special Forces soldier was recently awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor, the highest U.S. military decoration, for his action in Afghanistan in saving the lives of 22 American and Afghan soldiers.
“Staff Sgt. Miller gave his life for his fellow man, the greatest sacrifice any person can make,” Wrights said. “He should be honored, as should every American killed defending themselves or their comrades.”
“But the greatest honor we can bestow on these young people is to stop asking them to sacrifice themselves in endless and needless wars,” he said. “If we truly want to support the troops we should bring them home - now.”
“Most Americans are untouched by the war, other than having to endure invasions of their civil liberties when they try to get on an airplane,” Wrights said. “During the Vietnam war, the anti-war movement was galvanized by the images of death and destruction on their television screens. Sadly, today Americans are either numb or indifferent to very similar images coming out of Iraq and Afghanistan.”
Defense Secretary Robert Gates has even acknowledged that this is not a shared cost. He told a group of students at Duke University recently that less than 20 percent of Americans know someone who has been in the military and that number is declining. Gates said that despite the “fond sentiments for men and women in uniform, for most Americans the wars remain an abstraction.”
Wrights said that America’s wars are now being fought by a professional military, the standing army that our nation’s founders feared and warned against. In his Duke lecture, Gates said that United States couldn’t sustain such “complex and protracted missions” like Iraq and Afghanistan without the dedication of “seasoned professional who choose to serve and keep on serving.”
The defense secretary also said that whatever mistakes were made in these conflicts were the result of failures and “miscalculations” at the top, not by the troops in the field. “It has taken every ounce of our troops’ skill, initiative and commitment to battle a cunning and adaptive enemy at the front while overcoming bureaucratic lassitude and sometimes worse at the rear,” Gates said.
“This is stunning,” Wrights said. “What the secretary is saying in effect is that these young people who choose to serve their country have more honor and integrity to do the right thing than the leaders who send them to fight and die. I am appalled at such callousness.”
Gates said that the wars are putting extraordinary stress on military members and their families, causing anxiety, increased domestic strife and a growing number of suicides. He said that the divorce rate among Army enlisted personnel has nearly doubled since the wars began.
“Yet neither the secretary nor President Obama offer any solutions to these problems,” Wrights said. “They piously praise the dedication and sacrifice made by America’s young men and women in uniform, yet they continue to promote policies that will cause them and their families to suffer and sacrifice even more.”
“Our military deserves better. Our military deserves a Commander-in-Chief who will honor and respect their devotion to duty by calling on them to fight and die only to defend America when we have been directly attacked,” Wrights said.
Wrights, a military veteran himself, is considering seeking the presidential nomination because he believes the Libertarian message in 2012 should be a loud, clear and unequivocal call to stop all war. He has pledged that 10 percent of all donations to his campaign will be spent for ballot access so that the stop all war message can be heard in all 50 states.
R. Lee Wrights is a writer and political activist living in Texas. He is the co-founder and editor of the free speech online magazine Liberty For All. Contact Lee at rleewrights@gmail.com.
Friday, October 01, 2010
Economic Attack on China
Biting the hand the buys our debt. How stupid can our overlords possibly be? This is another economic war we can not win. Fast track to the bottom of the toilet bowl....
Kick The TARP Lovers Out!
Libertarians challenge 89 TARP-supporting incumbents in Congress
WASHINGTON - This November, Libertarian Party candidates are challenging 89 incumbent members of Congress who voted for the TARP bailouts in 2008. View the list here.
The list includes 27 Republicans and 62 Democrats.
LP Chair Mark Hinkle commented, "Few acts of Congress have evoked as much fear, ire, disgust, and disapproval from Americans as the 2008 TARP banker bailouts, passed with bipartisan support in Congress, and signed into law by Republican President George W. Bush."
Hinkle continued, "Bailer-in-chief John McCain, who famously suspended his 2008 losing Republican presidential campaign to rush back to Washington DC to vote for TARP, tops our list. He'll face Libertarian Party co-founder David Nolan in November."
[Note and correction: An earlier emailed version of this release incorrectly stated the number of Libertarians at 97.]
According to Congressional Quarterly, twelve of these TARP incumbents are in close re-election battles (classified in the "tossup" or "leans" category). The Libertarian Party hopes to help kick them out of office. "They tried to justify TARP by claiming our economy was going off a cliff. Let's push their teetering careers off a cliff," said LP Executive Director Wes Benedict.
The twelve most vulnerable TARP incumbents in races with Libertarians:
Harry Mitchell (D-AZ, District 5)
Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ, District 8)
Barbara Boxer (D-CA, Senator)
Dan Lungren (R-CA, District 3)
Kendrick Meek (D-FL, incumbent Rep. running for Senate)
Bill Foster (D-IL, District 14)
Brad Ellsworth (D-IN, incumbent Rep. running for Senate)
Joe Donnelly (D-IN, District 2)
Roy Blunt (R-MO, incumbent Rep. running for Senate)
Ike Skelton (D-MO, District 4)
Joe Sestak (D-PA, incumbent Rep. running for Senate)
Chet Edwards (D-TX, District 17)
CQ Senate ratings
CQ House ratings
Benedict continued, "The Tea Party revolt is one potentially positive reaction to TARP. But any Tea Partier who votes for a TARP-supporting Republican is a plain old hypocrite, just as bad as the incumbent he or she is pushing back into office. Every Tea Partier should take a pledge to vote against ALL incumbents who voted for TARP, period.
"Liberals should also vote against TARP incumbents. Hundreds of billions for Wall Street bankers and their stockholders and bondholders is not what Democrats are supposed to stand for. Any liberal-leaning voter who votes for a TARP-supporting Democrat, when a Libertarian alternative is available, sends a callous message to the middle class and poor: Thanks for your taxes! Get another job if you can find one -- we want even more of your money to pass up to the Wall Street fat cats!
"Fortunately, these voters have a better option: Libertarian candidates who would have proudly voted against TARP, and who will consistently vote against other foolish, unconstitutional, taxpayer-abusing measures.
"After the TARP bailouts passed, Republicans repeatedly tried to defend their support, sometimes saying that they hadn't done a good enough job explaining it to the American people. Now the recent pandering Republican 'Pledge to America' says 'End TARP once and for all.' Which is it, Republicans? Was it a bad sales pitch, or are you trying to pretend that you never supported it? I suspect that the Republicans don't know what to think. That's a problem with many ignorant and spineless members of Congress today.
"Some incumbents have tried to make the excuse that they voted for TARP because President Bush and Secretary Paulson scared them, or because drops in the stock market made them worry. Such worthless excuses are beneath the dignity of their office. Voters should not let TARP-supporters make excuses for themselves.
"Last year, William A. Niskanen of the Cato Institute wrote this article describing five instances in which the members of Congress caved in to executive-branch hysteria, leading to disastrous consequences. (TARP is #4 chronologically.) Each time, the members of Congress failed to uphold their crucial responsibility to view all executive requests with care and skepticism.
"If all it takes is for a president to shout 'The sky is falling!' to get Congress to pass whatever he wants, then we might as well make the president a king, and give him all the power.
"In addition to the huge transfer of wealth from taxpayers to bankers, TARP created tremendous moral hazard by sending this loud message to bankers: 'Your goal is to get big, because then you can claim you're too big to fail, and you can get Congressmen to force taxpayers to bail you out for whatever stupid or self-serving decisions you make.'
"It's hard to think of another government program that did more to reward stupidity and punish prudence.
"TARP is both a short-term and long-term failure. We would be better off today if Congress had done nothing."
The Libertarian Party has 21 candidates for U.S. Senate and 170 candidates for U.S. House in the upcoming November 2010 elections.
For more information, or to arrange an interview, call LP Executive Director Wes Benedict at 202-333-0008 ext. 222.
The LP is America's third-largest political party, founded in 1971. The Libertarian Party stands for free markets and civil liberties. You can find more information on the Libertarian Party at our website.
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Spider Webs For The Rich & Mighty
"Laws: We know what they are, and what they are worth! They are spider
webs for the rich and mighty, steel chains for the poor and weak,
fishing nets in the hands of the government." - Pierre-Joseph Proudhon
Sunday, September 26, 2010
No Wonder Our Country Is Going Broke
BURNETT, Texas - The war in Afghanistan may cost another 60 billion dollars and last ten more years, even if U.S. forces start leaving the country in 2011, potential Libertarian presidential candidate R. Lee Wrights said today.
A NATO training-mission document recently uncovered by the Associated Press estimated it would cost about 6 billion dollars a year to train Afghani military and police forces. Gen. David Petraeus, the new commander in Afghanistan, has said that a successful counter-insurgency operation could last another ten years.
“That means this war will cost at least another 60 billion dollars to finish a job we never should have started,” said R. Lee Wrights. “No wonder our country is going broke.”
Even with the training the NATO document acknowledges that Afghanistan will remain largely dependent on U.S. forces for security for years. The document also includes plans for large-scale infrastructure projects for “establishing enduring institutions” and “creating irreversible momentum” according to AP sources.
“The only ‘irreversible momentum’ we’re creating is the irreversible momentum driving America deeper and deeper into debt,” Wrights said. “And the only ‘enduring institutions’ we’re creating is the enduring institution of a welfare-warfare State that supports corrupt governments under the guise of fighting terrorism.”
Wrights said he’s troubled by comments Petraeus has made about the withdrawal of American troops, which is supposed to begin in July 2011.
“He seems to be hedging his bets,” Wrights said. After nine years of war, Petraeus said that it is just now that the United States has the organization and people in place to fight a counter-insurgency operation.
“The general is reputed to be an expert on this type of warfare and has said it can take years, even decades, to wage successfully,” Wrights says. “So if we are just getting started now, it could take ten more years to ‘finish the job.’ That’s unacceptable.”
Wrights is also troubled by the fact that the general refers to July 2011 as the date “when a process begins, the pace of which is determined by conditions on the ground.” Petraeus characterized the process as a “thinning out” of U.S. forces, rather than a “turning over” of security for their own country to Afghanistan’s citizens and authorities.
“We have already endured one war where the generals and politicians kept telling us they were seeing the ‘light at the end of the tunnel,’ but that light never got any closer,” Wrights said.
Petraeus recently spoke out against plans by a Florida minister to burn the Qur’an, saying that the action would put American troops in danger.
“What is a greater danger to American soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen is keeping them in a war we should not have started in the first place, helping prop up a corrupt government,” Wrights said. “If we truly want to keep our troops safe, we should bring them home now.”
Wrights is considering seeking the LP presidential nomination because he believes the Libertarian message in 2012 should be a loud, clear and unequivocal call to stop all war. He has pledged that 10 percent of all donations to his campaign will be spent for ballot access so that the stop all war message can be heard in all 50 states.
R. Lee Wrights is a writer and political activist living in Texas. He is the co-founder and editor of the free speech online magazine Liberty For All. Contact Lee at rleewrights@gmail.com.
Thursday, September 02, 2010
Close The Book Of War
[originally posted at Liberty For All]It’s time do more than just “turn the page” on America’s foreign wars. We should close the book and put it pack on the shelf, said potential Libertarian presidential candidate R. Lee Wrights in response to President Obama’s address to the nation Tuesday night.
“President Obama said he was announcing that ‘the American combat mission in Iraq’ has ended and that it was time to ‘turn the page’ on a ‘remarkable chapter in American history,” Wrights said. “It is time to do more than just turn the page. It is time to close the book of war, put it back on the shelf, and never refer to it again.”
“There is nothing remarkable about this chapter in American history,” Wrights said. “If the president really wanted to end the war he would simply tell the joint chiefs to draw up a plan to remove every last American solider, sailor, airman and marine from the region as quickly and safely as possible.”
“If the president really wanted to honor the sacrifices made by America’s men and women in uniform, he would not continue to put them in harm’s way unnecessarily,” Wrights said.
Wrights said that President Obama was elected on the expectation that he would end America’s interventionist foreign policy, but from the words he used in this address it appears he is going to continue this policy and use different language to obscure his intentions.
For example, Wrights noted that while the president said the combat mission is ending, he said our commitment to Iraq is not. The president also said a transitional force will remain to advise and assist Iraqi security forces, support Iraqi troops in targeted counter-terrorism missions and protect civilians. In fact, as the last “combat” troops leave Iraq, fifty thousand troops will remain behind.
“In other words, our soldiers and marines will still be going on patrol, getting shot at, and possibly getting killed, but the president won’t call it combat operations,” Wrights said. He noted that the infantry brigades still in Iraq have been renamed “advise and assist” brigades.
“It is shameful the way politicians will parse words in order to justify and obscure their actions; and, it is disgraceful that any president who refers to himself as the commander-in-chief would use such a tactic to disguise the service of the men and women he is supposed to command.”
“It is disturbing the way the president casually dismissed the fact that this war was fought for a lie,” Wrights said. The president said that what began as “a war to disarm a state became a fight against insurgency.”
“It is distressing that President Obama admitted that the war has cost us one trillion dollars, most of it borrowed for other nations, and contributed to our debt, yet he doesn’t miss a beat in calling for even more government spending,” Wrights said. “He shows absolutely no signs that he is going to change anything in American foreign policy when he said America ‘must use all elements of our power to secure our interests and stand by our allies.’”
Wrights is considering seeking the presidential nomination because he believes the Libertarian message in 2012 should be a loud and unequivocal call to stop all war. He has pledged that 10 percent of all donations to his campaign will be spent for ballot access so that the stop all war message can be heard in all 50 states.
R. Lee Wrights is a writer and political activist living in Texas. He is the co-founder and editor of the free speech online magazine Liberty For All. Contact Lee at rleewrights@gmail.com
Sunday, August 08, 2010
Monday, August 02, 2010
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Saturday, July 17, 2010
Friday, July 16, 2010
This American Government
Trade and commerce, if they were not made of india-rubber, would never manage to bounce over obstacles which legislators are continually putting in their way; and if one were to judge these men wholly by the effects of their actions and not partly by their intentions, they would deserve to be classed and punished with those mischievious persons who put obstructions on the railroads."
Henry David Thoreau
Thursday, July 08, 2010
The State Commands It
"the interests of the State and those of the individual differ fundamentally and are antagonistic. The State and the political and economic institutions it supports can exist only by fashioning the individual to their particular purpose; training him to respect "law and order;" teaching him obedience, submission and unquestioning faith in the wisdom and justice of government; above all, loyal service and complete self-sacrifice when the State commands it, as in war."
Emma Goldman
Saturday, July 03, 2010
Lee Wrights Explores 2012 Presidential Run
WRIGHTS FOR PRESIDENT 2012 EXPLORATORY COMMITTEE
For more information:
Thomas Hill
Phone: (704) 621-8621
E-mail: thomasbhill@msn.com
Wrights forms presidential exploratory committee
BURNET, Texas (July 4) – R. Lee Wrights, a former Libertarian Party national vice chair and the editor and co-founder of Liberty for All online magazine, announced today he is forming an exploratory committee to lay the groundwork for a possible bid to seek the Libertarian nomination for president in 2012.
“The Libertarian Party faces a critical test in 2012 and I want to make sure that we’re up to the challenge,” Wrights said. “The Libertarian message in 2012 must be loud and clear – Stop the Wars! Stop the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, stop the war on drugs and alternative lifestyles, stop the war on civil liberties.”
Wrights said that it’s time to stop supporting politicians, regardless of party, who don’t even come close to fulfilling their campaign promises.
“President Obama was elected on a platform of ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,” Wrights said. “Instead of supporting the troops by bringing them home, he has sent thousands more young men and women to die needlessly to prop up a corrupt government in Afghanistan.”
“Now he’s wavering on his promise to bring the troops home by July 2011,” Wrights said. “He calls the war in Afghanistan a ‘war of necessity.’ It is no such thing. It is unnecessary, irresponsible and a dishonor to the founding principles of our republic.”
The president has also reneged on his promise to reverse the trampling of civil liberties which began under the Bush Administration. “He’s done just the opposite,” Wrights said. “He’s expanded federal power to invade our privacy and curtail our rights. He might not call it the ‘war on terror,’ but President Obama still uses 9/11 as an excuse to justify voiding the Bill of Rights.”
Wrights said he is most appalled by the way the president turns every issue he faces into a war by labeling anyone who opposes him as an enemy.
“Not content with just warring with the Republicans in Congress, the president has turned the Gulf oil spill into a war on oil companies. He’s used the financial crisis, which was largely caused by government regulation, interference and incompetence, to continue waging war on banks and financial institutions,” Wrights said.
“Even after his major victory in ramming through a massive health care bill which imposes federal government bureaucrats into our most intimate and personal health care decisions, President Obama continues to wage war on insurance companies and health care providers,” Wrights said. “Now, he’s opened a new front in Arizona over that state’s attempt to deal with an illegal immigrant situation his administration has failed to address.”
“Where will it end?” Wrights asked. “Is anything or anyone safe from being labeled an ‘enemy of the state’ and incurring the wrath of the federal government’s war-making power?”
Wrights pledged that 10 percent of all donations to his campaign will be given to the LP for ballot access. “Whoever is the 2012 Libertarian nominee for president, we must take our message to all 50 states and our message must be clear and unequivocal – Stop the Wars,” Wrights says.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Monday, June 28, 2010
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Friday, June 04, 2010
Antiwar.com's Week In Review (June 4th)
- Antiwar.com Founder Eric Garris on Antiwar Radio
- Raimondo: An American among the nine
- Eight Turkish citizens slain, yet Turkey is the villain?
- Israel: Burden, not asset to U.S.?
- Ivan Eland: there is a silver lining
- Can Israeli spin machine overcome international fallout?
- Winslow T. Wheeler, director of the Straus Military Reform Project, questioned Secretary of Defense Robert Gates’ halfhearted fight against Pentagon waste and wondered why our always increasing Pentagon budget paradoxically results in the worst-equipped military in a generation.
- Flynt Leverett, former senior director for Middle East Affairs at the National Security Council, discussed WMD myths and Iran’s nuclear program with guest host Gareth Porter. "Iran is a critically important country … and at this point, given the relative decline in American standing and influence and the relative increase in Iranian standing and influence, [we’d] argue that the United States …can’t achieve its own objectives" without improving relations.
- Thomas Woods, co-editor of We Who Dared to Say No to War, reviewed the propaganda behind U.S. foreign policy and the slaughter of Iraqis. "If this government is run by liars and thieves and killers and I don’t trust a word they say on anything else, then I’m not giving them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to their monopoly on the use of military force. I’m just not going to do it ,and I don’t believe that that’s anti-American."
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Never Soft - Peddle The Truth
L. Neil Smith
"What Is A Reagan Libertarian" by R. Lee Wrights
“Don’t write so that you can be understood, write so that you can’t be misunderstood.”
- William Howard Taft
The first time someone asked me, “What is a Reagan Libertarian?”, was in an e-mail from a person new to the Libertarian Party. I was contacted in my capacity as one of the At-large Representatives to the Libertarian National Committee. That particular question was one of several that this constituent asked for clarification. When I got to the question of what is a Reagan Libertarian, I felt it was a no-brainer and simply answered, “There is no such thing.”
I explained that Ronald Reagan had been a Democrat who, at some point, switched to the Republican Party where he eventually served two terms as President of the United States. I further explained that the term they probably meant, and I thought they were misquoting at the time, was the ever-popular “Reagan conservative,” which has been adopted by many disenfranchised Republicans who have become discouraged with the direction their party has taken in the years following the Reagan administrations.
Imagine my amazement when this constituent replied to me that it was I who was mistaken. He explained that there was, in fact, at least one prominent Libertarian out there calling himself a Reagan Libertarian. That person turned out to be former Libertarian Party vice-presidential nominee Wayne Allyn Root.
Of course, I still couldn’t believe it and thought surely this new member was mistaken somehow. But in the e-mail was a link to Mr. Root’s Facebook page where, sure enough, there it was as big as life. WAR, as Mr. Root likes to refer to himself, proudly calling himself a Reagan Libertarian. Frankly, I was offended that our most recent VP nominee would so brazenly and blatantly misrepresent the LP brand in such a manner. I also realized that now we had a problem on our hands.
After reading Mr. Root’s book, I saw the problem more clearly than before. You see, Ronald Reagan is WAR’s hero. He loves the man. So much so in fact, he named his youngest son after the former Republican president. He idolizes Mr. Reagan even though he admits that once he gained the White House, after making promises to the contrary, he grew government spending to greater proportions than ever before. Apparently to Mr. Root, this is just a small boo-boo that can be all too easily forgiven, if not forgotten.
That’s right, Mr. Root’s idol is a politician who said whatever he had to say in order to get elected, only to turn around and do what he said he would not do once he was elected. In other words, just another pandering politician who would tell voters whatever they wanted to hear to gain the White House. Not a very good example for any member of the “Party of Principle” that has been calling for less government and more freedom for almost four decades now. So one has to wonder, just what does Wayne Allyn Root mean when he calls himself a Reagan Libertarian?
Now Mr. Root is the only person I have ever known in all my many years in the LP who refers to himself in this manner. Therefore, we can only use his own words to answer the question, “What is a Reagan Libertarian?” So let’s examine how WAR defines himself. He does so in his most-recent book, The Conscience of a Libertarian: Empowering the Citizen Revolution with God, Guns, Gambling & Tax Cuts.
Mr. Root is very upfront about who he is and what he is politically in his book. In fact, in the very first paragraph of the book’s introduction entitled “Citizen Politician - Citizen Revolution” he writes, “Politically, I’m a combination of Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan, and Ron Paul - a Libertarian conservative, supercharged, and on steroids!” (Emphasis is his, not mine.) There you have it in a nutshell, in Wayne Allyn Root’s own words. Let’s take a close look at what he is saying.
The first half of his self-description reads, “Politically, I’m a combination of Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan, and Ron Paul…” Do the math with me here. Senator Goldwater was a Republican. President Reagan was a Democrat turned Republican. Dr. Paul is a Republican turned Libertarian turned Republican. All three men were/are elected Republicans. Mr. Root claims to be a combination of all three men. So, Republican + Republican + Republican can only equal Republican! There is no other way for the “combination” to add up.
Mr. Root seems to try to clarify himself in the second half of his self-description by claiming the title “Libertarian conservative,” but that doesn’t jive with the first half of his statement. The inference is that all three men were/are also Libertarian conservatives, yet we know for a fact that they were/are all Republicans. Seems misleading to me, but that is just my opinion, of course. Honestly, the majority of Libertarians I know just call themselves Libertarians. We see no need for qualifiers. In fact, since being Libertarian covers such a wide political spectrum, many of us believe using qualifiers to describe Libertarians can be misleading.
WAR brings his self-description home with the big finale, “…supercharged and on steroids!” (Please remember, the emphasis is his not mine.) Well, I have seen what steroids can do to people. I had to take care of some of them in the military hospital where I worked years ago. I know what steroids do to the body and the mind when they have been abused. Not a pretty sight, believe me. Steroids will definitely “supercharge” you, but they can also destroy you if you are not careful. Sadly, they can also cause you to destroy those around you. In fact, the danger you pose to others when using steroids is perhaps the most damaging part of this whole equation. I’m afraid by being too reckless with his words Mr. Root has put all of us in the Libertarian Party in a position where we now must do damage control.
President Taft provided us with some sage advice when he wrote, “Don’t write so that you can be understood, write so that you can’t be misunderstood.” It is doubly important for Libertarians to heed this advice since we have spent the better part of forty years trying to distance ourselves from the two major political parties in the United States. We realize we must set ourselves apart from the status quo in order to be perceived as a viable alternative for voters who have become fed up with the shenanigans of the Democrats and Republicans. Unfortunately, whenever Mr. Root tells anyone he is a Reagan Libertarian, the first thing that comes to mind is - Republican. He sets us back decades, intentionally or unintentionally, with this one careless statement, because what it says to far too many of us is, “I am still a Republican.”
We Libertarians have enough trouble with Democrats and Republicans who constantly try to brand us as something we are not. Both parties go out of their way to smear us as being everything from anarchists to un-American zealots. The last thing we need right now is one of our own providing them with extra ammunition for the political war in which we find ourselves.
In just a couple of weeks, Libertarians from all across the country will gather in St. Louis for our national convention. There we will be asked to decide who will be our next chairman of the Libertarian National Committee, an office for which Wayne Allyn Root is currently running, along with four other men. As I see it, we are faced with a choice between four Libertarians and one “Reagan Libertarian.” For the good of my party I will be voting for a Libertarian. If you are a delegate to the Libertarian national convention, I hope you will too.
R. Lee Wrights is a writer and political activist living in Texas. He is the co-founder and editor of the free speech online magazine Liberty For All. Contact Lee at rleewrights@gmail.com.
Tuesday, May 04, 2010
Should His Conscience Be Your Guide? by Mary Ruwart
The original article was published at Liberty For All.
The Conscience of a Libertarian: Empowering the Citizen Revolution with God, Guns, Gambling, and Tax Cuts by Wayne Allyn Root. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2009.
This book might be more honestly titled “Conscience of a Conservative II” or even “Conscience of a Constitutionalist.” Chapter 2, “The Libertarian Model,” opens with Ronald Reagan’s quote “Libertarianism is the very heart and soul of conservatism.” The author then describes the history of the New York State Conservative Party which his parents supported; he tells us that he wants to reintroduce the principles espoused by Republican conservative Barry Goldwater. No mention is made of any libertarian economist or Libertarian Party (LP) member. The uninformed reader cannot help but come away with the impression that “libertarian” is another name for “conservative.”
On page 24, Mr. Root goes on to say “As a Libertarian, I believe that social and personal freedom issues are quite simply States’ Rights’ issues. … Voters should decide these issues on the state and local level.” Root’s position is that of a Constitutionalist, not a Libertarian. Libertarians believe that social and personal freedom issues are individual rights. However, since Mr. Root never refers to the non-aggression principle anywhere in his book, naïve readers are unlikely to learn of this distinction.
Liberals will almost certainly come away with the impression that they are unwelcome in the Libertarian Party. While the author criticizes both Democrats and Republicans, he has nothing but praise for conservatives and offensive comments, almost to the level of “hate speech,” for liberals.
Indeed, Root chokes on the popular slogan “Libertarians are fiscally conservative and socially liberal.” He insists on saying that libertarians are “socially tolerant” instead. Since Conscience was originally conceived as a campaign book, why would the author, the LP’s 2008 Libertarian VP nominee, insist on alienating liberals, who constitute almost half of the voting populace, especially when the LP has the solutions to poverty, pollution, and health care that they seek?
The answer to this question may lie in how the author apparently sees himself: as a conservative first, and Libertarian second. He usually styles himself as a “Libertarian conservative” (page 60), even though libertarianism is generally considered “beyond right and left.” Mr. Root apparently wants to redefine what it means to be a libertarian.
Indeed, Mr. Root can’t seem to get the words out when stating standard LP positions, like ending the Drug War. He tells us that we must “reposition” the war on drugs instead (page 225).
Similarly, although telling readers he wants smaller government, the author’s proposed solutions often do just the opposite. He wants to increase the number of Congressional representatives from 435 members to almost 3,000 (pages 201-203). Mr. Root also wants to pay this gargantuan Congress CEO-level salaries ($500,000-$1,000,000 per year) “so they do not feel desperate to sell out their constituents in order to support their families” (page 202). Will paying more to those who steal our liberties and our money really stop them—or encourage them?
Why not simply make it illegal for Congress to pass laws favoring one group over another, like taking from Peter to give to Paul? That would be the Libertarian solution, but our former VP candidate shows little awareness of it.
Mr. Root continues: “The people who make our laws are very important people. We should try to pay them enough to attract the best and brightest (page 202).” Since virtually every law Congress passes violates our individual rights—and will continue to do so unless we place some truly libertarian restrictions on them—do we really want them to do it smarter and better?
The author is undaunted by those who point out that the LP hasn’t yet elected anyone to major national office. Mr. Root counters that the LP has a great message, “but the missing ingredient up until now has been heart. I am Stella Root’s son. I am relentless. I have a bigger heart than a thousand candidates. More heart than all the others that came before me—combined… We have had plenty of intellect, plenty of brainpower, plenty of good ideas, but up until now, not enough heart” (page 347, emphasis in original).
Judging from my three decades of observation, I would say that the LP has heart far beyond what any single person can bring to it. The Natural Law Party, with better funding and more political connections than the LP, threw in the towel years ago. The Reform Party, with taxpayer money and a more mainstream message, has self-destructed. Recently, when National Chair Bill Redpath approached the Constitution and the Green Parties for ballot access help, he learned that both of these groups could barely keep their doors open.
Unlike the Greens, we receive no special interest funding. Unlike the Reform Party, we’ve never accepted matching funds. Unlike the Natural Law Party, we don’t have donors with deep pockets. Unlike the Constitution Party, we didn’t get Ron Paul’s endorsement. How is it that the LP, with the most radical message of all, is the only third party that is a recognized threat to the establishment, standing tall when other Parties are on their way to oblivion?
The dedication of thousands of LP members make up the Party’s heart, which beats more powerfully than that of any individual. Many of our seasoned activists forgo the high pay they could get in the private sector to volunteer their time to gather ballot access signatures, run full-time campaigns, staff our state and national organizations, or spread the good news of liberty through their writing. Others donate their hard-earned money to help support the national office or their state parties. Many of our members have given, not just for a single year or two like the author has, but for decades, in the face of seemingly insurmountable odds. The dedication and relentlessness of thousands of LP supporters have created the pulpit on which Mr. Root now stands; he abuses it when he belittles their contributions with grandiose and unsupported self-aggrandizement.
Mr. Root’s dismissal of his LP predecessors is apparent in statements like “I’m the only politician in history who wants to make my office less important” (page xxviii). Every LP presidential ticket has vowed to shrink the power of their offices, but the author appears oblivious. He also claims to be “… the first candidate to run for president who has the same worries of a typical U.S. voter and taxpayer” (page 99), a patently false statement given his LP predecessors. On page 64, the author claims that he and Barr “attracted a record number of new LP members,” when that honor belongs to two-time presidential nominee, Harry Browne.
Truth may not be that important to Root, though. On p. 249, he states “I understand that in the end, all that matters is winning. All the principles in the world gain you nothing, if you’re not in power to institute them. So winning really is everything…” We’ve heard this argument from the mouth of tyrants everywhere: the ends justify the means.
Is this the conscience of a libertarian?
Dr. Mary Ruwart currently serves as an At-large Representative of the Libertarian National Committee. You can contact Dr. Ruwart at mary@ruwart.com.