Well said Rob...as usual. You and Starchild were most eloquent.
________________________________
From: lpsf-activists@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Rob Power
Sent: Sun 4/2/2006 1:10 PM
To: lpsf-activists@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [lpsf-activists] "Reform"
First of all, anyone who cares about the LP platform needs to go join
the official LP Platform Discussion (reformthelp.org is NOT the official
platform committee) and contribute your two cents at:
[http://lpconvention.org/platform/index.php?](http://lpconvention.org/platform/index.php?)
You know, I've been sending money to the Badnarik Congressional
campaign, but Allen's comments do scare me a bit. I understand Badnarik
is facing real pressure on the immigration issue in Texas, but I see his
tortured reasoning to split hairs on legal/illegal immigration as no
different than Kerry/Clinton/Dean/etc. splitting hairs on same sex
marriage vs civil unions or state bans on gay marriage versus a federal
amendment banning it. Such pressures to nuance the message are the
reality of being a "real" politician running a "real" campaign, so we
can't blame Badnarik or Allen too much for it. But we as the Party
membership also have to do our jobs to make sure the platform isn't
watered down just to ease campaigning. If Badnarik or his campaign
manager want to say in their campaign that they disagree with the Party
platform on immigration or any other issues, let them do it. They may
just gain support from outside the Party -- but they'll also likely lose
support from those of us who liked Badnarik's unapologetic defense of
the Platform in his 2004 campaign. (You may remember in San Jose that
when the candidates were asked what their campaign platforms were, Nolan
and Russo had printed copies they had developed, but Badnarik said he
was happy with the official Party platform and would just use that.)
Furthermore, I'm decidedly NOT one of the anarchists in the party, but I
still contend that nothing in the current platform calls for anarchy.
So, I don't think we need to "reform" the platform to remove supposedly
anarchist language from it. Aside from the anarchy issue, though, the
Libertarian Reform Caucus folks intend to also remove anything they
consider "embarrassing" from the party platform. I've seen posts
suggesting that we stop calling for the repeal of all drug laws as well
as the FDA, and instead leave the FDA in place and let government
regulate pot the way it regulates alcohol. I've also seen posts
suggesting that we take the language out of the conscription and
military plank that calls for the end of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", and
make clear that our sexual rights plank is not a call for gay marriage
or adoption (if we keep the plank at all). Needless to say, in my
capacity as chair of Outright, these last two issues alone are enough to
make me oppose the Libertarian Reform Caucus.
I also have a very serious problem with making our platform "comply"
with the Constitution. Neither of the major parties with which we are
trying to compete have made their platforms match the Constitution. On
the contrary, they call for amendments to the Constitution, such as bans
on abortion, flag-burning, and gay marriage proposed by the Republicans
or the repeal of the Second Amendment from the Democrats. So why can't
we call for Constitutional amendments to ban the government coining of
money, laws restricting immigration, drafting and/or mistreatment of
soldiers, income taxes, etc.? If the "reformers" really want us to
start acting like the bigger parties, then let's do it! The major
parties have nothing but contempt for the Constitution, and they have a
total lock on politics in this country, so why the heck do we think
hitching our cart to the "Originalist" horse would do us any good?
So I may not have a vote in Portland (LPMA is a mess, and we may not
even have a delegation -- Bob Sullentrup suggested that I could find
another state to claim me, so I may come begging at the CA delegation
tables). But regardless, I am going to attend and do whatever I can do
to stop the "reformers" from doing anything that backs away from our
uniquely pro-liberty stance on everything, since I think they would only
weaken the Party further.
Rob
Yahoo! Groups Links
SPONSORED LINKS
[U s government grant](http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=U+s+government+grant&w1=U+s+government+grant&w2=California&w3=Activist&w4=California+politics&c=4&s=81&.sig=FOd4qdqU12L0kWrsKhuYhQ) [California](http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=California&w1=U+s+government+grant&w2=California&w3=Activist&w4=California+politics&c=4&s=81&.sig=5g8CqXOcIKJM2EAreG5g9A) [Activist](http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Activist&w1=U+s+government+grant&w2=California&w3=Activist&w4=California+politics&c=4&s=81&.sig=XEaAErK74HG3MSPO5TzVNg)
[California politics](http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=California+politics&w1=U+s+government+grant&w2=California&w3=Activist&w4=California+politics&c=4&s=81&.sig=9hSbXY7OkkWB6WjvI2ajBg)