I read that article at libertyunbound.com, and I have one important
question:
Though Bradford used the term "right wing" several times in the
article to describe Badnarik, did he provide any evidence anywhere in
the article of issues where Badnarik was "right wing" instead of
simply "libertarian"?
I get the feeling that, since Bradford was clearly a Russo supporter
(and hardly an unbiased journalist in that respect), he may consider
anything that isn't "left wing", such as Russo's support for
environmental regulations, to be "right wing" by definition.
I'm personally very proud to have a leader in the Party who is
willing to live by his principles. Saying an anti-income-tax
activist must file his tax returns until such time that the income
tax is repealed is, to me, like telling Rosa Parks (or any other
civil rights activist) that she must continue to sit in the back of
the bus until racial segregation laws are repealed.
Breaking laws, even stupid ones, is outside my own personal comfort
zone, so I don't do it. As anyone who has witnessed my sparring with
Starchild regarding "guerrilla politics", on issues such as bringing
amplified sound to a tax protest without the appropriate City permit
or crashing the LGBT Pride parade, my answer has been consistent --
"Not while I'm the one listed as the organizer". I've said
repeatedly that, if anyone wants to engage in civil disobedience,
they should leave my name out of it, but then go on their merry way
and not ask me to help out. (Same goes for things funded by an
organization like the LPSF where the majority votes to not break the
law.) Michael Badnarik appears to follow that principle in his daily
life as an activist -- not filing tax returns and regularly driving
without a license. But now that he's "our nominee", he's agreeing to
stop driving without a permit and arrange whatever payment plans are
necessary to settle up with the IRS.
Sounds not so "right wing" but rather quite "libertarian" to me.
Rob