Michael Bolton says LP platform is fine!
…No, not the singer you're thinking of. Do you all recognize this guy? He sang along to these lyrics in the movie Office Space.
*...continues after rolling up his car window in fear of being spotted as a whigger*
Well alright, to be honest it’s a picture of Sean Haugh, Executive Director of LPNC and apparently he thinks it’s kosher to imitate the infamous David Herman who played Michael Bolton in Office Space. He’s PO’ed at the idea of people wanting to alter the LP platform, as he clearly vents his frustration here and here, ummm…I mean here.
I’ll just quote a snippet:
An excuse…, for what again? No Michael, I mean Sean, it’s an observation. And nobody in this camp ever suggested that cleaning up the platform, which IS needed, is some silver bullet. That’s ONE of the things that needs to be done. The rest of your article talking about the need for hard work when campaigning under the LP banner, is obvious in and of itself. Here’s what else needs to be done, credited to the newly engaged Mr. Tim West. Also, the content on Carl Milsted’s site here is invaluable. Matt Welch from Reason chimed in a while back with this also, courtesy of Christopher Monnier. So you're right, there is hard work to be done. And I truly believe changing the platform is a part of that.
“I've got my pistol pon cock / Ready to lick shots non-stop / Until I see your monkey-ass drop / And let your homies know who done it / Cause when it comes to this gangsta shit you muthafuckas know who run it”
*...continues after rolling up his car window in fear of being spotted as a whigger*
“I've got this killer up inside of me / I can't talk to my mother, so I talk to my diary”
Well alright, to be honest it’s a picture of Sean Haugh, Executive Director of LPNC and apparently he thinks it’s kosher to imitate the infamous David Herman who played Michael Bolton in Office Space. He’s PO’ed at the idea of people wanting to alter the LP platform, as he clearly vents his frustration here and here, ummm…I mean here.
I’ll just quote a snippet:
“There's a lot of whining going on these days about how the Libertarian Party Platform is somehow holding back or hurting our candidates. This is utter hogwash. It is an excuse made by people who want some easier way to win elections other than actually earning the respect of the voters, or by eggheads who will never understand how to win one.” [my emphasis added]
An excuse…, for what again? No Michael, I mean Sean, it’s an observation. And nobody in this camp ever suggested that cleaning up the platform, which IS needed, is some silver bullet. That’s ONE of the things that needs to be done. The rest of your article talking about the need for hard work when campaigning under the LP banner, is obvious in and of itself. Here’s what else needs to be done, credited to the newly engaged Mr. Tim West. Also, the content on Carl Milsted’s site here is invaluable. Matt Welch from Reason chimed in a while back with this also, courtesy of Christopher Monnier. So you're right, there is hard work to be done. And I truly believe changing the platform is a part of that.
posted by Rob D. at
11:14 PM
8 Comments:
Well, despite his resemblance to Michael Bolton, I think he makes some good points. I agree that the biggest factors influencing who wins an election are non-political--how good the person looks, how confident they seem, how good their voice sounds, how involved they are in the community.
And an excellent candidate could probably find a way to play off charges of being an unrealistic idealist, but it's really hard to find excellent candidates, especially among the people drawn to libertarianism. Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan, Barack Obama, Rudy Guiliani...these people are excellent candidates. They just seem like competent leaders. They're great at speaking and just look the part.
But imagine if the LP gets blessed with such a candidate. Then imagine that the opposing candidate looks as deep as the LP website and suddenly has a basket full of ready-made attacks against our ideal candidate.
So let's take the bullets out of the gun before we put our best face forward. 'Cause either our opponents are going to use them against us or we're going to shoot ourselves in the foot.
By
Christopher Monnier, at 10:00 PM, June 14, 2005
Actually I look more like John Denver. I've grown my hair out since that photo was taken but don't have the curls to rival Michael Bolton.
Wow, what a cogent criticism. Thanks for playing, try again.
By
Anonymous, at 1:33 PM, June 15, 2005
I had a teacher in high school who looked like John Denver. Sean, were you formerly known as Fred Yulga?
By
Christopher Monnier, at 4:57 PM, June 15, 2005
"Wow, what a cogent criticism. Thanks for playing, try again."
For playing eh? Everything is a game/debate with you anarchists. I don't need to rip your pitiful article into shreds. I only need to point to the types of candidates that you would back, vs. the Jim Grey's & Ben Brandon's who aren't wackos and ran on a moderate Libertarian platform. And these are the candidates National has put out front and center on the "What's New" part of LP.org! I find that hilarious.
Why were so many people excited about Jim Grey's candidacy? Because he had the background, the credibility, and he WASN'T an anarchist! I can't remember which radio show they were on, but Badnarik and Jim Grey were side by side doing a little radio interview together. Their answers and approach to the questions were quite different. Jim Grey advocated sunset laws, etc. while Badnarik talked about basically pulling the rug out from underneath the government.
Badnarik = another Harry Browne = what we don't need more of.
By
Rob D., at 5:18 PM, June 15, 2005
Christopher, I deny all knowledge of Fred Yulga. We are everywhere.
Now you see Rob, this is why you are a bigoted idiot. You obviously know nothing about me. You don't know, for example, that I strongly supported Jim Gray and helped bring him to NC when he was thinking about running for President. You don't know how I have helped our own Ben Brandons in NC get elected. You just make up a bunch of lies and then say they belong to me. Of course you don't need logic and reason to counter anyone's arguments when you have pre-packaged thought substitute of bigoted assumptions.
This is a rhetorical question, because the answer is already obvious: how much have you done to get good people elected? How much effort have you put into organizing your local party?
I once served your region as your rep on the LNC, so I paid very close attention to all the activism in Florida, and yet I never even heard your name before you started attacking me on your blog. I just find it hilarious that people who have no record of doing anything have so much to say to the people who have been doing the hard work of politics for years, and ironic that their main criticisms center around doing something. Don't worry, I am laughing at you, not with you. I call people like you "silver platter libertarians," people who want their Liberty delivered to them just the way the you like it without lifting a finger to get it themselves.
Thanks for playing, try again.
By
Anonymous, at 10:30 AM, June 16, 2005
I just moved here 6 months ago you putz, maybe that's why you haven't heard of me. I went to a couple of local LP meetings when I lived in NJ, but they were the types of hard core anarcho's such as yourself I was trying to stay away from.
You don't know how many people I've personally spoken to in my lifetime about libertarianism or the LP, so I don't know where you get off saying all that crapola. I've experienced it first hand when speaking to people...they love the ideas, UNTIL you start mentioning the more radical positions the LP seems to support.
I'm trying to change the image of the LP for the better Sean, and you're in the anarchist camp. You're just as bad as the Democrats and Republicans in my eyes.
Now tell me, what possible point could you be making by telling me you worked under the Jim Grey and Ben Brandon campaigns when they are moderate LP'ers themselves? If you support those people, you support a more moderate platform no? Why would you write that article then? Maybe you can clear this up for me.
And BTW, why do you feel the need to say "Thanks for playing, try again" after each post? Do you think that makes your dribble anymore credible? You're declaring YOURSELF a winner of apparently some game. If I may quote an appropriate line from the movie "Dumb and Dumber", "You are one, pathetic loser".
By
Rob D., at 12:00 AM, June 17, 2005
Rob, I have no longer have any hope of explaining anything to you, but I will respond for the benefit of anyone else reading.
My reference to Grey and Brandon was in direct response to your accusation, "I only need to point to the types of candidates that you would back, vs. the Jim Grey's & Ben Brandon's who aren't wackos and ran on a moderate Libertarian platform." Or maybe you forgot what you just said. There's medication for that, y'know.
You keep calling me an anarchist. Not that I mind so much, but I'm not one and I don't see where you got that idea except from your own prejudice. It certainly didn't come from anything I said.
Now here's some classic small minded thinking, since I love Grey and Brandon I must want a moderate platform. The truth is that while I don't want to water down the platform, I would like to see it be more inviting to self-described moderates. (I said as much in the original article.) Another truth is that I love all my Libertarian candidates and consider anyone who wants more Liberty rather than less to be my friend and ally. Unless of course they begin the relationship with a stupid bigoted hate filled screed like you did with me.
Let's go back to that for a moment. Not only is making fun of someone's appearance as a first line of argument about the surest sign of being a hate-filled moron, but in this case it shows just how astoundingly hypocritical you are. That headshot was professionally made by my local newspaper, and that's what you chose to attack. I would think that if you truly beleived the LP should be presentable, you'd recognize the attempt.
You say about your friends, "they love the ideas, UNTIL you start mentioning the more radical positions the LP seems to support." Well, why the hell would you do that?? I tell people if you want more Liberty rather than less, then you belong in the Libertarian Party. If they discover a plank that gives them pause, I tell them it's not a litmus test issue and introduce them to someone already in the party who agrees with them. Apparently you're the only one who is trying to shove this down people's throats here.
Actually, I cahnged my mind. Please don't play again. Just give up.
By
genushaha, at 8:19 PM, June 17, 2005
"Rob, I have no longer have any hope of explaining anything to you, but I will respond for the benefit of anyone else reading."
There's nothing else to explain. You got called out on your contradictions and you're trying to justify it somehow now.
"My reference to Grey and Brandon was in direct response to your accusation, Or maybe you forgot what you just said. There's medication for that, y'know."
No, I didn’t forget what I said Sean. I did ASSUME something by saying, "I only need to point to the types of candidates that you would back, vs. the Jim Grey's & Ben Brandon's who aren't wackos and ran on a moderate Libertarian platform." The fact that you told me you supported their campaigns, doesnt change anything though. Call me wrong for assuming that (for good reasons) in the first place, but now we have an even bigger problem for you to rectify Sean. Follow this reasoning everyone...
1. Sean said he backed candidates such as Grey and Brandon, WHO ARE MODERATE LP'ers.
2. You write an article titled "The Platform is not a Problem" and call those trying to clean up the unrealistic/extreme parts of the platform, "whiners".
3. Conclusion: So are you calling Jim Grey and Ben Brandon whiners too Sean? Because I certainly believe they wouldn’t have the knee-jerk reaction you had writing that article, if they were confronted by people wanting to make the platform truly representative of its constituency.
“You keep calling me an anarchist. Not that I mind so much, but I'm not one and I don't see where you got that idea except from your own prejudice. It certainly didn't come from anything I said.”
I know you don’t mind Sean, because I’m sure you find positive associations with that term when you say it. I don’t. You want to know where I got that idea, aside from your own article? Here’s where I got that idea from Sean…, from your own comment on Tim West’s blog.
“I used to be an anarchist, but I don’t think I could call myself one anymore since I am so busy trying to get people elected and change public policy. We would have to eliminate scarcity to truly consider it. I label my utopian view Star Trek Socialism. But politics doesn’t allow me much room for utopian philosophical discourse. In my article I devote a paragraph to my rules for incrementalism, not much different really from yours or Carl’s.”
You admit you used to be an anarchist. Well, now that you’re reformed I suppose, why and how more importantly did you make that switch? What changes of opinion have you had? I personally doubt that you have, partially because of your demeaning article/tone to reformers. You state above that you’re not one anymore, or as you say “I don’t think I could call myself one anymore since I am so busy trying to get people elected and change public policy.” So is this the only reason? You talk about incrementalism, and I’m all for that. But incrementalism to what ends is the question.
“The truth is that while I don't want to water down the platform, I would like to see it be more inviting to self-described moderates. (I said as much in the original article.)”
Taking out the extreme parts of the platform isn’t “watering down” anything. It’s getting done what needs to be done, so opponents can’t use our own platform to beat the hell out of our candidates. All this fear of the LP falling into a slippery slope should it take more moderate stances is bullcrap. My definition of what a libertarian is, is different from yours. Accept it and move on.
“Another truth is that I love all my Libertarian candidates and consider anyone who wants more Liberty rather than less to be my friend and ally. Unless of course they begin the relationship with a stupid bigoted hate filled screed like you did with me. Let's go back to that for a moment. Not only is making fun of someone's appearance as a first line of argument about the surest sign of being a hate-filled moron, but in this case it shows just how astoundingly hypocritical you are. That headshot was professionally made by my local newspaper, and that's what you chose to attack. I would think that if you truly beleived the LP should be presentable, you'd recognize the attempt.”
This is what it all boils down to. You thought I was attacking you personally, but nothing could be farther from the truth. All I did was say that you looked like the guy from Office Space, nothing more. That’s what immediately popped into my head when I went over to Libertyforall.net and saw your article/picture. I never said anything bad about your appearance, so stop making it out to be a personal attack. Honestly, as a new blogger, all I was doing was trying to be a little creative and entertain whatever readers might come this way.
“You say about your friends, "they love the ideas, UNTIL you start mentioning the more radical positions the LP seems to support." Well, why the hell would you do that?? I tell people if you want more Liberty rather than less, then you belong in the Libertarian Party. If they discover a plank that gives them pause, I tell them it's not a litmus test issue and introduce them to someone already in the party who agrees with them. Apparently you're the only one who is trying to shove this down people's throats here.”
I’m honest about all of what the Libertarian Party stands for and what its platform says, should someone ask me. Why wouldn’t I be? It should be clear why I want to root out what I see as the bad parts of the platform. I don’t believe in them, and I don’t feel I should have to defend them. You’re on the money when you say, “I tell people if you want more Liberty rather than less, then you belong in the Libertarian Party.” The definition of what it means to be a libertarian, and/or a member of the party, should be more broad and open as in your example. This is all I and others want to see…an inclusion of all lovers of liberty, and a less condescending tone taken when confronted with those who challenge existing libertarian dogma.
“Actually, I cahnged my mind. Please don't play again. Just give up.”
Sorry no can do.
By
Rob D., at 10:02 AM, June 18, 2005
Post a Comment
<< Home