Libertarian Convention Media Streaming In

Here’s the media wrap-up from day one. The Washington Times took the headline-o-the-day with their front page article, “Marijuana project parties with Barr.”

The Libertarian National Convention kicked off yesterday with a tea-and-cookies reception hosted by the Marijuana Policy Project featuring none other than Mr. Barr, the party’s leading candidate for its presidential nomination.

Stacy McCain covered the rumors and floating conspiracies at the American Spectator with his article, “Fear and Loathing in Denver.”

The accusation that Barr and others are attempting to “hijack” the party is one of the many intrigues surrounding the Libertarian convention that began here Thursday. With 14 declared presidential candidates and more than 1,000 delegates—none of them officially pledged to any candidate—there is plenty of opportunity for suspicion.

While McCain covered in-house conspiracies, the New York Times took that ball and ran with it in their report covering a possible run by Tucker Carlson.

“Tucker Carlson for president?” That’s the headline at the personal blog for Brendan Nyhan, a former Spinsanity editor who is now a graduate student in political science at Duke. Nyhan says that Carlson, the former “Crossfire” host and former writer for The Weekly Standard, among other magazines, may seek the nomination of the Libertarian Party, according to a rumor making the rounds among delegates to the Libertarian convention, which is being held in Denver this weekend.

Last but not least, Reason’s Weigel jumped in to take a shot at the truthers present at the convention.

Libertarians for Justice, a group that’s urging all LP candidates to pledge to open a new 9/11 investigation, rented a spacious room for hours of 9/11 Truth events, including a screening of Improbable Collapse, a “scientific investigation” of the attacks. At 8:00 p.m. they invited presidential candidates who’d signed the pledge to take questions from an audience of around 60 people.

Barr, Root and Phillies did not attend as they had probably predicted Weigel’s conclusion:

I’m no purge junkie, but LP candidates have no business indulging the Truth crowd like this.

49 Responses to “Libertarian Convention Media Streaming In”

  1. Eric Dondero Says:

    In many respects what happens at the LP Convention is not that important. If the Radicals take over the Party, so be it. Just means a boomlett for John McCain for President, for scores of libertarian Republicans and libertarian-leaning conservatives who would have otherwise supported Barr and the LP, will immediately switch their allegiance to McCain.

    A number of Libertarians are already pushing McCain, over even Barr; People like Jim Fryar. Patrick Jubert, Ryan Christiano, Republicans for Marijuana Legalization Chair Don Murphy, Bryan Delaney, et.al. Their ranks could be reinforced on Sunday evening if viewers see on C-SPAN the LP choosing to go the Radical obscurity keep the Party small route.

  2. Eric Dondero Says:

    The Libertarian Party lost a great deal of support in 2004 immediately after the convention, when Radical Anarchist Michael Badnarik won the nomination over minor-celebrity real world Libertarians Gary Nolan and Aaron Russo. The shift to Bush was immediate.

    Libertarians for Bush formed by Beth Soloe, and Honorary Chaired by 1972 LP Presidential Candidate Dr. John Hospers, made a major impact on the election. At one point, when Neal Boortz linked to the site, 28,000 hits resulted in one single day.

    No doubt, we’ll see pretty much the same if Barr or Root lose the nomination to the crazies in the Party. And it will happen almost immediately.

  3. CT Says:

    If someone who claimed to be libertarian voted for big-government Bush for any reason, then their self-identification as an libertarian means nothing. They might as well consider themselves a part of the herd that votes for “the lesser evil.” Their voice was lost in the wilderness and signified nothing.

  4. Bill Woolsey Says:

    Badnarik wasn’t a radical anarchist.

    He is a Constitutionalist libertarian who has adopted
    various “Patriot” theories. Because I consider those
    theories to be nuts, I didn’t support him for President.
    However, it never even crossed my mind to support
    Bush.

    Similarly, I strongly support Barr. I would never
    support McCain.

    I hate to be paranoid, but I sometimes wonder if
    Rittberg/Dondero’s support for Barr and Root isn’t
    aimed at turning libertarians away from them.

    If a “radical” like Ruwart wins the nomination,
    the LP will be ignored. She is unlikely to be
    much of a threat to McCain.

    So, from the point of view of a “proud Republican,”
    getting her nominated and keeping Barr, especially
    away from the nomination, is a good strategic
    move.

    I know that every time Rittberg/Dondero says that
    he supports Barr (or Root,) I reassess my support
    for Barr. (Well, not really… but it makes me wonder
    a bit.)

    Of course, Rittberg/Dondero was consistently anti-McCain
    during the primaries. He supported Guiliani.

    Still, notice that now he is trying to get all of the “angry”
    Barr and Root supporters to come over to McCain.

    Was that the source of his “support” all along?

    Anyway, I will never support McCain because of his neocon
    foreign policy.

  5. John Lowell Says:

    Only in the Libertarian Party could there be such a structure as the Marijuana Policy Project. With “substance” of this kind, how will we manage when party philosophers turn to less meaty questions like war and peace?

  6. johncjackson Says:

    Libertarians didn’t vote for Bush. Maybe they call themselves libertarians, with all due respect (especially to the war-mongering ancient Presidential candidate).

    I am a big tent radical-reformer. But draw the line somewhere. McCain and Bush were never remotely “’libertarian” or logical choices for actual libertarians. Might as well support Hillary.

  7. johncjackson Says:

    MPP is not a Libertarian structure, but I don’t really understand that comment. Marijuana legalization, especially medicinal, is a position that should be embraced.

  8. hf Says:

    Just a lurker here (and 20+ yr LP voter), but I intend to suck it up and support whoever gets nominated. Any of the following will get a vote and probably a good sized donation: Phillies, Ruwart, Kubby, Barr, Gravel, Root, Smith.

    Even an endorsement from Dondero is not enough to put me off.

  9. dodsworth Says:

    scores of libertarian Republicans and libertarian-leaning conservatives who would have otherwise supported Barr and the LP, will immediately switch their allegiance to McCain.

    Don’t be so sure that some of them won’t go for Obama especially if he picks Chuck Hagel (who is far superior to McCain on both domestic and foreign issues) as veep or McCain picks a statist like McCain, Crist, or Bloomberg. I intend to vote LP but a Hagel pick would be truly inspired if Obama is smart enough to do it.

  10. dodsworth Says:

    I meant to say “Lieberman, Crist, or Bloomberg.”

  11. Stefan Says:

    How can Eric speak on behalf of most libertarian Republicans? The fact is most libertarian Republicans are with the Ron Paul movement, not his so called “neolibertarian” pro-offense splinter group. The Ron Paul Libertarians are mostly split between Barr, Ruwart and Smith IMHO. If none of these get the nomination, a great many of them may vote for the fairly libertarian Chuck Baldwin of the CP and for libertarian Republican candidates locally (for congress).

    It is so funny, Eric has himself affirmed McCain has done nothing to reach out to libertarians and conservatives, yet now he is already calling for a “libertarians for McCain”. McCain is even more “anti-libertarian” as Bush: he has this huge eco-neoconservatism ideology and global superpower complex that will grow government even bigger in terms of expenses for “green energy” (rather expensive govt. risks/experiments) and the military, not to mention the continuing Iraq occupation. He is someone that will follow his own mind and act impulsively.

  12. Shawn Levasseur Says:

    I’d heard that Phillies was there. Wow. That’ll teach me to listen to people coming into the bar late at night with breaking gossip.

  13. Stefan Says:

    Libertarians for Justice simply calls for an investigation of 911 on issues and would probably expose the ineptness of many in the government. So it is as such legitimate to subscribe. On the other hand it is could also be good to stay away, as some of them (not all!) are associated with the so called 911 truther conspiracy groupies. Note that with this anyone who buys the conspiracy that the US was attacked because of its richness and freedom, is also quite kooky…

  14. DrGonzo Says:

    Note that with this anyone who buys the conspiracy that the US was attacked because of its richness and freedom, is also quite kooky…

    Agreed. And so are the people who believes government could have actually planned something like this and kept it quiet. Both live in the same fantasy world.

  15. Bill Woolsey Says:

    If you look at the Libertarian’s for Justice website,
    it is pretty clear that they are promoting the
    “Truther” line.

    I think the website has changed since I glanced at
    it when this story first broke.

  16. jwpegler Says:

    [Just means a boomlett for John McCain for President…]

    Very poor analysis, as usual. There are a lot of people, myself included, who will never vote for McCain.

    If Barr doesn’t get the nomination, we still have other choices: A.) stay home on election day, B.) vote for Chuck Baldwin, or C.) hold our nose and register an anti-war vote by pulling the lever for Nader (which I did in 2004).

  17. Gene Trosper Says:

    I’m no “truther” and don’t support the truther movement, but I do believe that perhaps the government knew something beforehand and either blew off the information or decided to look the other way. It’s no conspiracy: it’s just the nature of big government.

  18. Michael Says:

    D.) Vote for Alan Keyes, Independent.

  19. Richard Says:

    I’ll be voting for most any of the Libertarians this fall, except Gravel, who is a socialist showing up in the Libertarian Party. Alan Keyes can’t win because he won’t make it on enough ballots, the Constitution Party showed a facist head when their founder was allowed to rip apart Keyes, and Democrats and Republicans appear to have joined forces on the Dark Side.

  20. Kenny Says:

    I agree with Richard although I am not convinced about Root or Phillies.

  21. Jane Says:

    I noticed on C-Span web site that they have a video of Weigel/Reason Mag. scheduled for 8p eastern tonight.

  22. JT Says:

    Dondero: “Libertarians for Bush formed by Beth Soloe, and Honorary Chaired by 1972 LP Presidential Candidate Dr. John Hospers, made a major impact on the election. At one point, when Neal Boortz linked to the site, 28,000 hits resulted in one single day.”

    Yeah, and given what Bush has done since 2004, libertarians should be really proud of that, right?

  23. Michael Seebeck Says:

    Hey, Dunderhead, a guy charged the stage looking to get seated as a delegate. People were asking if it was you.

    And people were also asking if it was you who called in the fire alarm/bomb threat this morning.

    Jokes aside, those things really did happen this morning.

  24. Eric Dondero Says:

    Libertarians didn’t vote for Badnarik. Maybe they called themselves “libertarians” but in reality they were Anarchist infiltrators in the libertarian movement.

  25. Eric Dondero Says:

    Umm, JT, in fact many mainstream libertarians are proud of President Bush. A man who has won not one, but two wars, liberating over 60 million Iraqi and Afghani peoples. A man who has appointed more Libertarians to administrative posts than all other past Presidents combined. A man who seriously proposed a massive privatization of Social Security. A man who cut our taxes.

    Yes, on balance, I’d say Bush’s record is not that bad from a libertarian perspective.

  26. Eric Dondero Says:

    Stefan, I don’t want to have to support McCain, but what choice do I have? What choice would any mainstream libertarian have if the LP nominates Ruwart or Kubby?

    How could any mainstream libertarian support someone for President who thinks Kiddie porn is “okay” or pals around with the likes of David Bergland, the very worst Presidential candidate in the history of the Libertairan Party.

    Please Stefan, give me a reason to support Ruwart or Kubby as a mainstream libertarian?

    No, sorry. I’ll support the Vietnam Veteran guy, unless the LP nominates Barr or Root.

  27. darolew Says:

    Eric, Badnarik wasn’t an anarcho-capitalist. Also, considering that anarcho-capitalists make up about 1/4 of libertarians (by some estimates), it’s not entirely wise to alienate a significant part of the movement…

    Really, Eric, would you consider someone like Rothbard to be a false libertarian? Albert Jay Nock? Were they just anarchist infiltrators? How about Lew Rockwell and David Friedman? Them too?

  28. disinter Says:

    The Neocon rag “Reason” took a shot at the truthers? I’m shocked!

  29. disinter Says:

    I’m no purge junkie, but LP candidates have no business indulging the Truth crowd like this.

    Yes, heaven forbid the LP be interested in the truth. They should just obey what they are told and be good little citizens. Nothing to see here, move along.

  30. disinter Says:

    scores of libertarian Republicans and libertarian-leaning conservatives who would have otherwise supported Barr and the LP, will immediately switch their allegiance to McCain.

    Umm, no, Dumbdero, that is not how it works. Anyone that is willing to vote for McKook were not EVER going to vote Libertarian.

  31. disinter Says:

    I am a big tent radical-reformer. But draw the line somewhere.

    Strange, that is what the “purists”, that you so strongly disagree with, want to do. Can you say hypocrisy?

  32. disinter Says:

    McCain and Bush were never remotely “’libertarian” or logical choices for actual libertarians.

    Neither is Barr, Gravel or Phillies.

  33. disinter Says:

    Agreed. And so are the people who believes government could have actually planned something like this and kept it quiet. Both live in the same fantasy world.

    Yea, cuz conspiracies have NEVER happened.

  34. disinter Says:

    but I do believe that perhaps the government knew something beforehand and either blew off the information or decided to look the other way.

    Troofer! Troofer! Troofer! Kill the Troofer!

  35. TROOFERS/NAMBLA for MARY '08 Says:

    THERE’S ENOUGH ROOM IN THE MOTHERSHIP FOR ALL! WE WANT MARY! WE WANT MARY!

  36. Roscoe Says:

    Bergland, the worst? I traveled with Bergland to a number of newspaper and tv interviews. He gave reasoned, cogent answers and impressed the interviewers I saw. He had the misfortune to run in 1984 when it was Reagan in a landslide because most Americans were content. Had he run in 1992 or 2000 I don’t doubt he would have done as well as Marrou and Browne did.

  37. DrGonzo Says:

    Yea, cuz conspiracies have NEVER happened.

    Do you often just throw out random statements that never address the previous statement?

    Who said they have never happened. I said no matter how much evidence is presented against a 9/11 conspiracy, the Loose Change sheep will march in line claiming everyone else to be wrong.

  38. disinter Says:

    I said no matter how much evidence is presented against a 9/11 conspiracy, the Loose Change sheep will march in line claiming everyone else to be wrong.

    No, you said:

    “And so are the people who believes government could have actually planned something like this and kept it quiet. Both live in the same fantasy world.”

    Retard. Caucus.

  39. Catholic Trotskyist Says:

    Has Daniel Imperato endorsed the Fringe Alliance Strategy yet?

    And God said, “HEAR O ISRAEL, O MY PEOPLE, GLORY UNTO THE OBAMA REVOLUTION.” Obama will reach out to libertarians, and the Libertarian Party will either help the Obama Revolution or fall apart this year no matter what happens. Unless Barr/Gravel is nominated, or if you trogledytes harangue the party about the Fringe Alliance Strategy as God has ordered.

    I have developed a strategy based on an alliance between the Green, libertarian
    and constitution parties, the various socialist movements and centrist independents, Kucinich Democrats, Ron Paul Republicans, and other smaller groups such as fascists, feudalists, monarchists and syndicalists, to initiate the following goals.

    1. The electoral college is abolished.
    2. The presidential election uses a national Majority Runoff system. This will change us from a republic to a democracy.
    3. Congress is elected through proportional representation.

    Third parties should spend most of their energies pushing for these constitutional amendments, using graphic protests in public locations. Otherwise, the
    efforts of all of them are doomed to do nothing more than push the major parties slightly in one direction, and ruin the chances of the parties that their
    candidates are most closely aligned with, while gaining such small failing numbers for themselves. The people who visit this site are by definitions on
    the fringes of society. It is important for the fringe to get together. This strategy is gaining the support of many political scientists across the nation,
    and I will continue to post it several times a week here until it is adopted. Fortunately, we have the Obama Revolution to save our country for now.
    The revolution will be televised.
    Please pray for the pope and please pray for Barack Obama. Amen.

  40. jwpegler Says:

    [many mainstream libertarians are proud of President Bush. A man who has won not one, but two wars, liberating over 60 million Iraqi and Afghani peoples]

    The wars are not won. Osama bin Laden is still at large. Gas is $4 a gallon and will likely be upwards of $5 a gallon by election day. National debt doubled from $6 trillion to $12 trillion under Bush and this doesn’t even account for Bush’s massive new unfunded mandate to bribe the greedy geezer lobby with free prescription drugs.

    Anyone who is “proud” of this record needs to put the crack pipe down and join reality.

  41. JT Says:

    Dondero: “Yes, on balance, I’d say Bush’s record is not that bad from a libertarian perspective.”

    You’re right; that’s good stuff. Appointing certain people to administrative posts…wow! Cutting taxes while vastly increasing welfare spending…yes! Liberating millions of people into civil wars…awesome!

    No wonder so many libertarians in the blogosphere hate you. Fortunately, the important ones don’t know how you are and don’t care.

  42. End the Empire Says:

    “Anyone who is “proud” of this record needs to put the crack pipe down and join reality.”

    Amen

  43. Tom Bryant Says:

    The government says drinking arsenic is bad. I wonder if Disinter would put his money where his mouth is and stop being a good little boy who does what he is told? I guess he doesn’t care about finding out the truth.

    I bet if I directed him to a YouTube video, he’d drink arsenic!

    On the plus side, we’d clean up the gene pool a little bit.

  44. Rolf Lindgren Says:

    9/11 was privitized.

    Except the part where they blew up WTC 7 in broad daylight, blowing the entire plan.

  45. Thom Simmons Says:

    I will vote for whoever the Libertarian nomineee is, unless they follow a “911-was-an-inside-job” philosophy. These morons appeal to teenagers looking for titillating fantasy, not to reasonable people. And if that means I have to vote for McCain, I will. It’s time to show the wackos in the LIbertarian Party the door, and build a REAL, pragmatic political party that opposes dDmocratic hands in your wallet and Republican noses in your bedroom.

  46. Jim Duensing Says:

    I will only support an LP candidate who is tough enough on terror that he’s willing to leave no stone unturned tracking down Osama and whoever else may have helped him carry out the attacks on 9/11.

    I cannot trust a candidate who is afraid of investigating the largest terrorist attack in American history until we are sure beyond a reasonable doubt that the terrorists have been brought to justice.

    Barr, why are you afraid of an investigation, if you have nothing to hide?

    Dondero, you never answered me from before. Are you an anti-Paul Republican or a pro-Barr Libertarian?

    In liberty, with eternal vigilance,

    Jim Duensing
    Chair Libertarian Party of Nevada
    http://www.libertariansforjustice.org/?q=blog/7

  47. Jim Duensing Says:

    Sorry. He or she :)

  48. disinter Says:

    Bravo Jim Duensing! Thank you, sir.

  49. Alex Peak Says:

    The Denver Post writes, “Since Republican Ron Paul ran as a Libertarian in 1988, the party has offered little-known ‘milquetoast’ candidates strong on theory but unable to excite voters, said Jeffrey Dimit, a delegate from Goose Creek, S.C.”

    Dear Denver Post, Harry Browne was more ideologically libertarian than Ron Paul and got more votes in 1996 than Ron Paul got in 1988. Moreover, Ron Paul is much more libertarian than certain LP candidates for the nomination this year.

    Newsweek says that Barr became a Libertarian in ‘96. No, it was ‘06. It also talks of the LP as being some sort of spoiler for McCain. Blah.

    The idea that we only take votes away from Republicans is absurd. The Wall Street Journal correctly notes that “Libertarians respond that their message of an immediate end to the Iraq war, legalization of drugs, and opposition to the Bush administration’s undermining of civil liberties appeals as much to Democrats as their advocacy of free-market economics appeals to Republicans.” Polling data from Browne and from Badnarik confirm that we are just as attractive to Democrats as we are to Republicans.

    Cheers,
    Alex Peak

Leave a Reply