LP blog/ daily poll The LP HQ staff posted a blog entry about one of their typically inept 'daily poll' questions:

http://www.lp.org/yourturn/archives/000727.shtml

On Thursday, the LP used a suggestion for its "Daily Poll" on the LP Web site. The question stayed up over the weekend, and quickly became one of the most responded to questions in recent memory. I thought the results were quite interesting, given the large response, but also more importantly, how diametric the results were. I do not wish to add commentary to the results, but simply wish to post the results for those who many not have had a chance to see them.

   What type of LP presidential candidate do you want? (408 votes)

   A "purist" - 30 (7%)

   A long established Libertarian activist - 22 (5%)

   Someone who can communicate our basic message to voters outside our party - 356 (87%)

I'll quickly pass over the bizarre sentence '[T]he results were quite interesting, given ... how diametric the results were'

How 'diametric'? What? What does that even mean?

But moving on; the fundamental issue here is that either the staff member responsible for this is incompetent at creating polls or he actually beleives that the categories "purist" (undefined), "long established Libertarian activist", and "Someone who can communicate our basic message to voters outside our party " are mutually exclusive.

If it's the former (simple incompetence), the situation is bad enough but can be improved dramatically and quickly by having an active committee (composed of LNC members and other Party activists) to review publications before they can embarrass the Party with their middle-school quality. If it's the latter (the idea that 'activist' and 'communicator' are mutually exclusive categories), the situation is much more serious and needs a more fundamental approach. The national HQ staff should not in any way be advancing the notion that being an activist (or a "purist") means that a Party member is not a good communicator of the libertarian message.

I suspect there is some combination of incompetence and an acceptance of the - utterly mistaken, in my opinion - notion that activists and 'purists' make poor communicators. Combined with the past two incompetent/or/worse releases, this is yet more evidence that there are serious oversight problems with the national staff.

My answer to the question "What type of LP presidential candidate do you want?"?

Well naturally, I want a "purist" longtime activist who can effectively communicate our basic message to voters outside the Party.

Fortunately, there is one: Mary Ruwart.

--
Susan Hogarth
http://www.colliething.com/lnc
  ¶ 9:23 AM 2 Comments Links to this post

  Latest LP release on food rationing The latest LP press release deals with food 'rationing':

http://www.lp.org/media/article_579.shtml

Apparently a few importers (not government) are rationing sales of
rice to retail outlets. Although I am happy to hold the US government
accountable for most of the institutional ills in my life, if I can't
get my favorite basmati (and I'll bet I can; I will in fact probably
pick up some tonight), I'll be more likely to blame China or India's
government for now.

But the first words of this release are astounding:

"Food rationing has started for the first time in the United States..."

Someone needs a fact-checker. Or a course in American History.

http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1674.html

If you are planning to be in Denver for the LP convention, please vote
for me - Susan Hogarth - for an at-large seat on the Libertarian
National Committee (LNC):

http://www.colliething.com/lnc

One of my first acts will be to propose reinstitution of the
Advertising and Publications Review Committee. This committee can help
ensure that the staff members are not left without the benefit of
simple editing to avoid such embarrassing factual mistakes as the one
above. It will also be able to provide more substantive review to
avoid such a bizarre suggestion as that in the previous release from
HQ (http://www.lp.org/media/article_578.shtml) that the resources
freed up by making one part of government smaller should be funneled
to another part of government to *increase* its power.

The Libertarian message should be that more government - in any area -
is never the best answer for society. If you agree, and want to see
the LP consistently promote this message, vote for Susan Hogarth for
LNC. I will work to help my fellow National Committee members craft
and take responsibility for delivering the Libertarian Party's
message, rather than leaving it in the hands of unelected staff
members.

--
Susan Hogarth
http://www.colliething.com/lnc

  ¶ 9:41 AM 0 Comments Links to this post

  Bees swarming


I visited some friends near Reidsville, and we ran across a bee swarm in one part of the yard. The buzzing noise isn't bees; it's traffic - the bees were pretty high up in the tree. More swarm (and dog and chicken) pictures.

  ¶ 6:57 AM 1 Comments Links to this post

  Quote o The Day: liberal VS radical From http://mises.org/story/2911

The underlining I added.

The liberal believes that the State is essentially social and is all for improving it by political methods so that it may function accordingly to what he believes to be its original intention. Hence, he is interested in politics, takes them seriously, goes at them hopefully, and believes in them as an instrument of social welfare and progress. He is politically minded, with an incurable interest in reform, putting good men in office, independent administrations, and quite frequently in third-party movements. The liberal forces of the country, for instance, rallied quite conspicuously to Mr. Roosevelt in the good old days of the Progressive party. The liberal believes in the reality and power of political leadership; thus, again, he eagerly took Mr. Wilson on his hands at the last two elections.

The radical, on the other hand, believes that the State is fundamentally antisocial and is all for improving it off the face of the earth; not by blowing up officeholders ... but by the historical process of strengthening, consolidating and enlightening economic organization. The radical has no substantial interest in politics, and regards all projects of political reform as visionary. He sees, or thinks he sees, quite clearly that the routine of partisan politics is only a more or less elaborate and expensive byplay indulged in for the sake of diverting notice from the primary object of all politics and political government, namely, the economic exploitation of one class by another; and hence all candidates look about alike to him... AJ Nock   ¶ 11:59 PM 0 Comments Links to this post

  Results from the LPNC Presidential Straw Poll Ruwart 17
Phillies 3
Root 2
Kubby 1
Gravel 1
Barr 1  ¶ 12:40 PM 0 Comments Links to this post

  Libertarian Party Convention I'm having a wild time in Burlington. Yee-haa.

  ¶ 2:25 PM 0 Comments Links to this post

  Quote of the day This is a comment someone made on another blog in reference to some candidate or potential candidate (Obama? Bob Barr?) being 'better' than McCain:

Hell, saying you're better on Iraq than John McCain is like saying you're a better gymnast than Stephen Hawking. You can clear a bar like that even if you trip over it.   ¶ 7:11 AM 0 Comments Links to this post

  Why broadening the LP position will not necessarily broaden our voting base - and what that means to us

I posted this as a comment on another blog, and thought I'd pull it over here because it makes some sense. I was responding to someone's assertion that:

The LP should be principled as well as pragmatic and achieve a crucial breakthrough, at least 10% will put it on the map, while a 1-2% will still ensure its irrelevance.

I replied:

Sure, everyone can agree that 10% is much more significant than 2%, but the fact is that we do not control how people vote. The voters themselves do (setting aside counting shenanigans, which certainly happen).

I think there's a misunderstanding of third-party (or ideological party) politics going on behind the sentence I quoted. The Nolan Chart, as useful a tool as it is, has in some ways fostered this misunderstanding. People draw out this chart, and they say something like "Look, if only the LP chooses positions that fall within an area where 20% of people 'test', then the LP should be able to get those 20% of people to vote Libertarian."

This sort of analysis – favored by Carl Milsted, example here:
http://www.lpva.com/Archives/Editorial/Milsted/20060415.shtml

completely misses a vital fact of American politics – the monopoly two-party system. The D/R Party will make promises to those people and they will continue in large part to vote for whichever branch of it they feel most comfortable with because even if it doesn't promise (or deliver) what they want, it will deliver something of what they want, and it will do that by actually winning. The ones who choose Libertarian consistently (not for a 'protest vote') will be those people who have accepted that their vote is a statement more than an attempt to seize and hold power.

Our focus at this point, I beleive, can't be people who are willing to make a lot of compromises ideologically – or who have no strong ideological leanings – because those people, by and large have a party (the D/R) that gives them what they want – the satisfaction of being on a 'winning team'. Will they vote Libertarian occasionally? Sure, especially when they want to 'punish' a politician on their 'team'. But those aren't the steady sort of committed activists the LP needs so much. Most of them will return to their 'home party' for the next election.

We can – and should! – attract and hold strong ideologues – from the right and the left – and forge them into neither 'right' nor 'left', and certainly not 'center', but into Libertarians. These are folks who understand libertarianism and will be committed to a project with a timetable much longer than the next election cycle.

Tedious? Hard? Uphill battle? Sure. But immensely rewarding, and, I think, the only proven way to have a long-term influence on not just the next election but on American political thought. Let's not settle for a change in regimes, let's aim to change America's view of politics altogether.

This is how I see it, and I may certainly be wrong, but I think that history supports me on this.

  ¶ 3:29 PM 0 Comments Links to this post

  Gratuitous puppy pic

Toad!!

More pictures of Kate and Toad.

  ¶ 2:56 PM 0 Comments Links to this post

  BUYCOTT I'll need to bring some Absolut to this weekend's LPNC convention:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080408/us_nm/mexico_absolut_dc

MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - The distillers of Sweden's Absolut vodka have withdrawn an advertisement run in Mexico that angered many U.S. citizens by idealizing an early 19th century map showing chunks of the United States as Mexican.

Ooh, a trip to the state liquor store. That always makes me feel nostalgic for the USSR - it's like having a living museum of communism right down the road. How handy!

sigh.   ¶ 10:35 AM 0 Comments Links to this post

  My first double-yolked egg! One of my hens laid a giant egg last week, and sure enough, when I
boiled it up it was a double-yolker. First one! Cool!

That's gotta be rough on the hen, though. But totally cool. I think
it was the nutty welsummer who did the deed.

  ¶ 2:35 PM 0 Comments Links to this post

  Barr's website ... is up:

http://www.bobbarr2008.com

And, not surprisingly, looks like a near-relative of Ron Paul's. That web designer guy is doing well :)

Of most interest to me is the issues page, as it's been so hard to pin Barr down on issues until now:

http://www.bobbarr2008.com/issues/

Here's my take at first glance:

• Against "government spending" - for "Large and thoughtful cuts in spending". Hmm. That phrasing worries me - it sounds suspiciously like "cut the things we don't like" rather than "cut all government spending".
• For the national sales tax ("Fair Tax"). This will be a deal-breaker for many Libertarians (it is for me, for instance). I would hate to see the Party embrace any tax through its presidential candidate or platform.
  
• For privacy and less government intrusion, relying heavily on constitutionalist arguments (but also mentioning morality).
• Quote: Each American should be free to decide what is best for themselves and their family. Good. I decided I don't want a sales tax. Ha!
  
• Immigration: he quotes the LP Platform about the issue, but without explicitly embracing the LP's solution or transitional action. It's my personal belief that this platform plank is too restrictive and that Barr is painting himself (with vague and hard-to-pin-down wording, true) as a keep-them-out conservative.
• Quote: Our National Defense policy must renew a commitment to non-intervention. Nothing specific about getting American troops out of Iraq, Afghanistan, or any other place in the world.

My first impression is that Barr's presidential bid will be much like his AJC columns - carefully worded to avoid taking specific positions on specific issues, but liberally sprinkled with phrases designed to show (nonspecific) support for libertarian concepts. Disappointing, but pretty much what I expected.

--
Susan Hogarth
http://www.colliething.com/lnc   ¶ 4:00 PM 0 Comments Links to this post

  Barr on South America Barr's writings are very difficult to pin down. They tend to sound 'statesmanlike', but often fail to really say much of anything. As a (somewhat worrisome) example, here is a column published within the last few weeks in the AJC:

http://www.bobbarr.org/default.asp?pt=newsdescr&RI=931

Barr writes: South America remains an afterthought for government policy-makers and news show producers. Whether we like it or not, that may soon change, as well it should.

Then he spends several more paragraphs explaining why Americans should be concerned about events in South Am. he talks about oil. He talks about drugs. He talks about foreign aid.

Wait. Drugs? Oil? Foreign aid? This is the perfect place for Barr to call for an end to the horrid U.S. drug war, and for the U.S. to stop supporting American companies that choose to do business overseas, and to stop propping up dictators with foreign aid. In other words, a perfect chance for Barr to say something incontestably libertarian. Disapppointingly, he opts instead for saying not much of anything except that the U.S. (government) should "pay closer attention" to the region. Coming from an ex-CIA man, I find that phrase to be a bit creepy, frankly.

His last few paragraphs continue the non-substance, but with frightening hints of interventionism underlying the non-substance:

There may not be weapons of mass destruction lurking in the jungles of Venezuela, Colombia or Ecuador (there weren't in Iraq either, of course), but arms are flowing into the area. Venezuela, for example, is buying billions of dollars worth of Russian military equipment. Leftist guerrillas and narco-terrorists remain firmly entrenched in the region, and evidence that other terrorist groups are using the area for problematic purposes is mounting.

Even if the possible loss of a significant portion of our imported oil requirement does not wake the United States from the somnambulant manner in which it views Latin America, perhaps the growing security threat in that area will —- hopefully before a major crisis jars us awake.

Our oil? Whatever. But this sounds to me like an ever-so-soft beating of the war drums. If Barr wants the American 'awakening' to the area to be peaceful and non-interventionist (Libertarian, in other words), why doesn't he say so? The Libertarian position is that the U.S. government should be 'somnambulant' when it comes to other people's lives. The Libertarian criticism of the U.S. in South America shouldn't be that the government is paying too little attention to the region, but that it is paying too much attention (foreign aid, drug war, support for overseas operations of American companies).

Why does Barr use his column in AJC to avoid saying anything actually Libertarian, if he wants to be the Libertarian candidate for president?

--
Susan Hogarth
http://www.colliething.com/lnc   ¶ 2:36 PM 0 Comments Links to this post

  More questions for Barr Most questions about Barr's past positions revolve around his 'drug warrior' stance. Although he has made some medical-pot-might-not-be-so-bad noises, I've yet to hear from him a strong libertarian position on the drug war: End it! Now! Is he willing to say that? In print?

The same question for Iraq: I keep hearing that he is 'critical' of the war - but where has he written anything saying the U.S. should leave Iraq immediately? Ditto for Afghanistan. He openly called for interventionism in the form of "strengthening economic and political pressure on Iran" last fall:

http://www.bobbarr.org/default.asp?pt=newsdescr&RI=890

But I have real concerns about the immigration issue. Barr clearly wants a piece of the Ron Paul action, and much of that was (seemingly) anti-immigration. Barr's congressional record is very unlibertarian on immigration (as on most other issues), so Libs need to ask him specific questions about whether he still supports all these votes he made restricting immigration:

http://profiles.numbersusa.com/improfile.php3?DistSend=GA&VIPID=219

I wonder if many Libs are so happy that Barr is moving libertarian-ward that they are happy to call libertarian-leaning positions libertarian. But I am finding it difficult to pin down Barr's positions on much except privacy (he's for it) and torture (he's against it). I suppose that's one advantage of getting into the race so late; he hasn't had to have clearly written positions on issues important to Libertarians. Let's hope that changes soon, and that libertarians hold his feet to the fire rather than simply placing 'most improved' at the top of our ticket.

--
Susan Hogarth
http://www.colliething.com/lnc
  ¶ 2:14 PM 0 Comments Links to this post

  Bob Barr as a potential presidential candidate for the LP I welcome Bob Barr's embrace of (some aspects of) libertarianism and (some parts of) the LP's platform. But I'm definitely concerned about his open fundraising for Republicans. For the last quarter of 2007, here are the political disbursements of the Bob Barr Leadership PAC:

REPUBLICAN:
Paul Broun (R) 5,000
Bobby Jindal (R) 1,000
James Gilmore (R) 1,000
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R) 500
Barry Loudermilk (R) 500
Total Republican: 8,000

LIBERTARIAN:
LNC (L)  2,500
LPTN (L) 250
Shane Cory (L) 500 (for a tribal council race)
Total Libertarian: 3,250

OTHER/FOUNDATION:
Constitution Project ('bipartisan') 250
OK for Ballot Access Reform 1,000
Reason Foundation 1,000
Atlas Society 500 (Barr an Objectivist? who knew!!?:)
Total Other/Foundation: 2,750

I am not comfortable with furthering the image of the LP as a 'righter-than-right' wing of the RP (or even 'lefter-than-right' wing of the RP), and I am afraid a Barr candidacy would do exactly that.
  ¶ 10:25 AM 0 Comments Links to this post

  Munger roundup Some news pieces on our only announced Gube candidate - the firs one on a recent forum at UNCP

and this cutely-named piece from a Duke student on Munger himself.

I loved this line (about NC ballot access woes for third parties), which is pure Munger:

I am constantly worried George Bush is going to invade to try to restore democracy.

--
Susan Hogarth

  ¶ 4:22 PM 0 Comments Links to this post

  Restraining order http://www.onlinelawyersource.com/criminal_law/restraining_orders.html

Judges issue restraining orders when someone feels threatened that another person will cause them harm.... Restraining orders sometimes have the ability to eliminate further abuse from occurring. This is not always the case, though, and simply filing for a restraining order will sometimes anger the recipient even more and cause more threat.

Despite the scary last sentence, I'd like to get a restraining order against George Bush. Any lawyers out there who could help?
  ¶ 8:55 AM 0 Comments Links to this post

  Am I missing something here? Why not just leave these guys alone?

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/04/01/russia.cult/?iref=hpmostpop

MOSCOW, Russia (CNN) -- Fourteen more members of a doomsday cult in southern Russia left a cave Tuesday after waiting inside for the end of the world since November, authorities said....

On Friday, seven other members of the cult left the cave and moved into the home of the cult leader, Father Pyotr Kuznetsov, who has been living in the nearby village of Nikolskoye.

Police detained him before he could enter the cave with his followers. He made several trips with authorities to ask cult members to leave.

The partial exodus began after authorities gave into cult members' demands that Kuznetsov be released from a mental institution.

"Huge work has been done to persuade those people to come out," Eskin said.

Until Friday, 35 cult members had been holed up since Novembers in the cave, in a ravine in Russia's Penza region, around 400 miles southeast of Moscow. They threatened to commit mass suicide if authorities tried to intervene.

The cult calls itself the "True Russian Orthodox Church" and said it would ignite gasoline canisters if authorities tried to force them out.

The ordeal began when Kuznetsov told his followers to hide themselves to await the end of the world, which he predicted will take place next May.

The 14 remaining holed-up cult members have sufficient supplies to last until then, Eskin said.   ¶ 10:23 AM 0 Comments Links to this post

  Congressional race: Immigration as an issue I'm still wavering on a run for CD4 against David Price. I feel like I'm in that classic Jack Benny routine:

Mugger: "Look, bud! I said your money or your life!"

Benny: "I'm thinking it over!"

At the WakeLP County Convention, we had a Q&A session with me (possible Lib candidate) and BJ Lawson - one of two Republicans running for the privilege of getting squashed by Price in the general election. BJ was in his Libertarian-wooing mode, and doing that whole I'm-not-about-the-Party, I'm-about-the-man thing. A trifle disingenuous coming from a guy who wrote a long I-am-not-a-Libertarian I-am-a-true-Republican post on his blog. But mostly it was one of the boring-polite sort of sessions with huge swathes of agreement. He's really a likable fellow, and seems to be headed in what I would consider the right direction. I'd like to see him run for some more local office rather than Congress, actually. Leave the windmill (err, Price)-tilting to Libertarians for this session. But I guess it's too late for that.

One issue that stood out for me was immigration. I take the classic LP open-boarders position. BJ talked about a specialness of America that he wanted to see preserved. We weren't back-and-forthing, or I would have pointed out that the 'special' thing to me about America is that many Americans welcome immigrants, not that everyone speaks the same language or even has the same values. At any rate, I just had a look at his website, and there's an interesting piece on immigration on his blog. The piece is discussing Price's immigration stance, which Lawson seems to find too permissive and I find too restrictive. I wanted to deconstruct one paragraph in particular for my own thinking-out-loud value and as a launching point for discussion with NC Libertarians on the immigration issue.

Lawson:
While it is true that many folks here illegally are hard-working and productive contributors to society, it is also true that they are here, well, illegally.

Me:
This seems in some ways the weakest argument from a (radical) Libertarian perspective - shouldn't one break unjust laws? Shouldn't one at least judge the justice of a law, rather that simply hiding behind the philosophical shortcut of "It's illegal!" when it's something you don't like anyway but have no good arguments against? I wonder if BJ thinks all laws should be followed - always - just because they are, well, laws.

Lawson:
Furthermore, people here illegally are ripe for exploitation, and while the standard of living enjoyed by illegals here in this country may be better than in their home country, they are still vulnerable to abuse.

Me:
This one is really strange - to me it reads "We're going to deport you for your own good." How's that?!

Lawson:
The welfare state benefits we provide such as education, social services, and healthcare are bankrupting healthcare institutions.

Me:
Probably an overblown concern. But let's stipulate it for a sec. Let's get rid of those burdens, rather than throwing the baby of new Americans out with the bathwater of failed welfare institutions. Actually the rank bathwater gets kept, and only the baby gets tossed. Eww. Priority time!

Lawson:
Finally, our open borders don't distinguish those seeking the American dream from those with criminal intent. Heinous crimes committed by illegals risk rising backlash against all immigrants, and illustrate the threat that these criminals pose to our families and children.

Me:
This is truly bizarre, and makes absolutely no sense. Nothing short of mind-reading can distinguish between "those seeking the American dream" and "those with criminal intent" - regardless of where the criminal comes from. I could say the same about the coworkers in my building - but I don't demand that they be screened every morning or - worse - refused entry to the building because they might be criminals. This one also includes that we'll-deport-you-for-you-own-good touch with the suggestion that deportation/border control can protect immigrants from a "rising backlash". That backlash is, I beleive, precisely the product of peddling such anti-immigrant rhetoric.
  ¶ 9:45 AM 0 Comments Links to this post

  Pictures form a happily boring weekend

Not that that's a Bad Thing - it was a pleasantly dull weekend. The lying-around-in-bed-reading sort of weekend. The rainy sort of weekend. The bored-dog sort of weekend.

The tomato and eggplant (six varieties of eggplant!) seeds I started came up this weekend, so I'd run over and check them every few hours. It was fun to watch them pop out, one variety after another (still waiting on two, and on the peppers). 

Oh, and the oyster mushrooms had their first harvestable fruiting - we cooked them up on Sunday. Delicious.

I painted nails twice - once on a trip to the hardware and feed stores with Bill, and another at home after buying a new color. It's called 'com-pewter-ized', which I think is trying just a bit too much in the way of names :) but did suggest a good way to model the color (hence the pic).
  ¶ 6:18 AM 0 Comments Links to this post

  testing photo embed via email <a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/hogarth/2008march31/photo#5183720441713708434"><img src="http://lh5.google.com/hogarth/R_BGRvdGzZI/AAAAAAAAFXg/79wQrn0PZj0/s400/IMG_2632.JPG.jpg" /></a>
  ¶ 6:07 AM 0 Comments Links to this post

  Google's April Foolie and my lame foray into literary criticism http://www.google.com/virgle/index.html

An invitation.
Earth has issues, and it's time humanity got started on a Plan B. So, starting in 2014, Virgin founder Richard Branson and Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin will be leading hundreds of users on one of the grandest adventures in human history: Project Virgle, the first permanent human colony on Mars.

A timely one this year, as I'm right in the middle of reading Red Mars. It's good, but I have definitely mixed feelings about it. Many of KSR's short works have affected me the same way - good, but with a vague dis-ease, which I suspect comes from serious underlying philosophical differences. I have the same issue with Clarke and some of Asimov. It's like when I went through my infatuation with Wells' SF - gotta love the giant chickens, but a comet turning everyone into socialists? Puh-leeze. At least Red Mars is a bit more sophisticated than that, but I'll probably have to dig up some more Vinge to counteract its effects :)

Speaking of Wells/socialism/SF, I meant to mention my experience reading Doris Lessing's Canopus novels. Wow. Just. Wow. It was Wells all over again, though that could be considered damning with faint praise. I loved them! But! She's certainly past Boomfood and comets by a bit... well, not comets so much, actually. For Wells, socialism could only happen through a cosmic humanity-altering event. With Lessing, a cosmic humanity-altering event has knocked humans out of the socialist Eden they inhabit. I may be the only person to associate Canopus with In the Days of the Comet. Some literary critic I am! :-/
  ¶ 5:20 AM 0 Comments Links to this post

  Well, that didn't quite work out... The previous entry was a shot in the dark, trying to send a scrip via
email. Oops. I can't delete via email, so I'll have to edit it later.
But for now, here's the gist of my previous post:

I'd love to support the Libertarian Party of NM and win a chance at a
Harley, but I don't have $100 to spare. I'm betting there are others
in the same boat, so I'm proposing that 10 of us buy shares in a
chance to win the bike.

Details here!

http://www.pledgebank.com/LPNM-Harley

  ¶ 3:49 AM 0 Comments Links to this post

  Let's win a Harley for freedom - together! <script type="text/javascript"
src="http://www.pledgebank.com/LPNM-Harley/progress.js"></script>  ¶ 3:45 AM 0 Comments Links to this post