The Libertarian Party continues to dig their own political grave.

I was a card carrying libertarian for years, untill sept. 11.They need to read up on Ayn Rands'take on defense.You can't have a free society if you've been defeated by barbarians. I'm to old to learn to speak "diaperhead".

I'd make a comment about the shit they've been smokin, but I remember the last time I made a reference to the Libertarian Party and dope.

Yes, and it was deserved (what happened to you, not your comment). ;-)

It's quite possible to be a Libertarian (and a libertarian) without any pharmacological aids, and to imply otherwise is brute and false ad hominem, plain and simple.

Perhaps it's all to the good.
The apparatchicks manning the LP
Politbureau have been terminally compromised
by Harry Browne's crooked conduct, and the sooner
they self-destruct the better it will be for
the cause of liberty.
It's also good for everyone to see first-hand how
many among those professing to be libertarians
are just dogmatic broken records not worth paying attention to.
Fortunately, there are enough sane libertarians around to make one feel content.

As a member of the Libertarian Party, I am both outraged and mystified over the Party's press release on Iraq. Where do I begin? Hussein has been stoking up the heat in the Middle East by making payments to families of suicide bombers, shunning UN inspectors from affirming that Iraq no longer is producing weapons of mass destruction, and brutally maintaining his grip over the country while starving its citizens.

I joined the LP in '96, after growing up in a liberal Democratic family, because I FINALLY came to the conclusion that liberty is the ultimate goal, with reason being its foundation, and that the LP was the party that best represented those beliefs. Yet I am simply stunned that the party's misconceptions on foreign policy lead to such foolish positions.

Curtis, I really hope you reconsider leaving the LP. The LP NEEDS libertarians like you because you think for yourself and do not follow the "party line." As difficult as it may be, this is PRECISELY the time when LP members need to make clear the party's foreign policy positions are hurting the party. Not because they're unpopular, but because they are wrong. We need to defend ourselves from those who want to kill us. And if it means that we need to attack first, then so be it.

The LP's position also hurts because not all Libertarians (small or large l) agree with it! And so when someone comes up to me and says, "hey, I heard Libertarians don't want to attack Iraq," you end up in an argument you'd rather not get into.

Sorry that this is so long (I didn't have enough time to make it shorter), but this just irritates the bejeezzus out of me. That's because stupid releases like this only lead to confusion and libertarians like Curtis to leave the party.

LPers need to remember that those of us who are willing to help them get statewide ballot status when there's not a good Republican to vote for will stop doing that if they offend us too much.

4 points:

(1) The Libertarian Party is an oxymoron.

(2) The LP concern about attacking
"sovereign nations" is as antilibertarian
as can be: state sovereignty is a
*statist* principle, *individual* sovereignty is a libertarian principle.

(3) Libertarians object to *initiation* of
force, but approve of *retaliation*. Attacking Saddam's thugs *is* retaliation - earned many times over by acts of violent aggression, long before 9/11. Whether a new immediate threat exists is beside the point. They had it coming anyway.

(4) The following "argument" (which I have
seen many times, from many sources,
in many situations) is just pure undiluted idiocy:

" Saddam Hussein is a ruthless dictator. True enough, but there are dozens of ruthless dictators [...] Is Bush going to send troops to topple them all?"

The answer is: nope - not all - too bad -
but far better *some* than *none*...

Though I consider myself a Republican, I campaigned with the LP in 1996, since I saw Dole as the Mondale sacrifical lamb up against Clinton, and I had about as much enthusiasm for Dole/Kemp as Mondale/Ferraro generated in Democrats.

So I've seen the LP up close at the grassroots level, and while we're talking about "fantasy ideology," I must say that while the LP is shut out of the game by ballot access and campaign fundraising laws (not to mention the statist, pro-Democrat biases of many journalists), their ideological rigidity ensures that they will remain a marginal force in U.S. politics.

LP'ers keep hoping for a breakthrough, and that the voting public will someday swing their way, but they're all too willing to sacrifice winning for ideological purity. The LP would rather be right than elected, so their candidates generally lack experience in governing, and don't have a chance at the national level, where they have to appeal to more than just libertarians in order to win. They'd have more success in a parliamentary system, I think, but woe for them, they have to compete in winner-take-all contests.

On the war, the LP came out of the box with the blame America crowd on September 11, and hasn't improved their message since. Open borders and free immigration doesn't look too good as a policy stance for the future, unless we can bring liberty and prosperity to the rest of the world. The LP could point out the progress of liberty in Afghanistan, thanks to U.S. support for overthrowing the Taliban, but they'd evidently rather that we hadn't interfered in Afghanistan's "sovereign affairs". The LP neglects to have a pro-liberty foreign policy, but instead has an isolationist one.

Vote libertarian if you want:

-Pay per view Super Bowls and World Series
-Streets full of sick or elderly beggars
-Shantytowns around American cities whenever times get hard down on the farm.
-No public access beaches
-No paid vacations
-No mortgage interest deduction on taxes
-Shortages of unskilled labor serving affluent areas, thanks to abandonment of public transportation
-No FDA or CDC to counteract quacks.
-No disaster relief funds. I once assisted in flood recovery in a city that sufferred a 500 year high water flood. Church volunteers and the feds were the only relief, as few had flood insurance so far away from the river.
-No protection from dishonest builders and shoddy construction other than expensive lawsuits--if you can catch the perps.

And out of respect, I didn't even mention child molestation and drug abuse.

1. I think the proposal was a stupid move. I say this as a LP member. The LP is better off creating unity by sticking to pure libertarian issues.
2. The LP never said anything against the war in Afghanistan. Statements were made in September by Harry Browne but he IS NOT A MEMBER OF THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY!