Monday, January 23, 2006



Why on EARTH would I support Sue Jeffers? And are the Libertarians clueless?

I don't like her stance on indoor smoking. I never stepped FOOT into a bar ( unless with relatives at a younger age) - until the smoking ban went into effect. I will admit - I was in Iraq at that time. But when I had my 2 weeks off - yes I did actually decide to go to a bar. ( Viking Bar on Riverside Avenue )

It's pretty simple why I went to the announcement of her candidacy - to see who her supporters were. Were these the same Libertarians who had a meeting with Jesse Ventura and then blasted him for building light-rail? Yes - indeed they were. [ If light-rail could be run as a profitable business, the private sector,risking its own capital and not taxpayer dollars, would enter the market.] Unfortunately they forgot that our ROADS are not run by for-profit businesses.

The Minnesotan Libertarians are definetely extremists. They are against not just some taxes but ALL taxes. They want NO government - or at least only one that supports the Consitution. Unfortunately, they want our state and local governments to adhere to the same standards. This is where we disagree - I believe in a strong state and local government - and want a Federal government that has no debts. But I do not wish the eradication of government.

The big thing about Libertarians is their lack of understanding as to what the purpose of government is. They feel we should all "self-govern." That is if we have a dispute with anyone - it should be settled only between those two members. I specifically asked what their take on the environment is - they think individual owners should take on polluters. WOW - so when Xcel Energy owns a coal-burning plant that adds mercury to the atmosphere and ending up strewn throughout Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan - the individual owners must deal with this themselves. I can only IMAGINE the lawsuits in a "Utopian Libertarian Society."

The biggest surprise of the night for myself was meeting Jeremy MacKinney there. I guess he has been a Libertarian for quite a while - as he is in charge of several related Meetup groups. The meetup group I have been semi-involved with is one pertaining to Peak Oil. He believes it would be "nice" to have the free-market solve our problems - yet is cynical it will happen. Again, what is he to do? Blame the government for not preparing us or not allowing a "free-enough market.?" I think we give the oil industry free reign above and beyond necessity. And as a Libertarian - how can you complain about the government not doing something for you? He had no real answer apart from free-marketism.

Libertarians are just clueless with regards to what a government is. A government is where people can solve a mass amount of problems that individuals simple cannot do alone. If I find my property is polluted with a substance (i.e. mercury ) who do I take to court? Do I take every business that could have possibly influenced this to court within 50 miles of my home? Wouldn't that actually disempower many people to actually do something? But a government CAN do something - they can impose standards to reduce lethal and toxic emissions. They can require the recycling of harmful electronics - and impose taxes to non-renewable substances thereby improving sustainable investments.

Sue Jeffers said this in running for Minnestoa Governor: "I am running for governor because people are fed up with the two-party system and voters want an alternative choice that truly represents them. My neighbors, co-workers, friends, family and the public have been ignored. I will be their voice in this election."

The reasons she is running could have easily have came from ANY third party candidate. I am not excluding ANY political party in any election - though my social values lean me against the Republicans.

I will be honest in that I have supported the Libertarians since 1998 - 7 years of supporting their National organization. Part of my money went to the crazies in Minnesota who think our State government is too excessive. I think they have lost touch with reality - our state governs 100 times better than states like Mississippi,Texas, or Alabama. I no longer feel the Libertarians to be a viable alternative if their belief in State government is the same as Federal. And now that their membership dues are zilch - I could stay a member(but why?). And I will use my money to support better alternatives - like the Greens.

5 comments:

American Lung Association of Minnesota said...

Interesting post, Kevin. As this is (I believe) my first visit to your blog, how does a Peak Oil guy like yourself feel about alternative fuels E85 and biodiesel?

We at the American Lung Association of Minnesota are focused on cleaning the air -- inside workplaces (like Stub & Herb's) and outdoors.

Bob Moffitt, ALAMN communication director

American Lung Association of Minnesota said...

How soon we old guys forget -- I HAVE been on your blog before, commenting on youth tobacco rates declining -- the post with the TM crew on the Capitol steps.

mike said...

In light of the recent success of the Independence Party, which doesn't appear to be going anywhere with Peter Hutchinson off to a solid start it's really difficult for the liberrtarians to find there nich. While concearned smokers probably only make up 2% of the population this is the first chance since Ventura for the Libertarians to get a meaningful chuck of the vote. Still it won't get them major party status, it won't change Tim Pawlentys stance on the issue, and it slightly increases the chances of a DFL victory.

It does get her bar some free pub though. Maybe a few appearances of the vampire at her bar would help business.

http://minnnesotamiddle.blogspot.com/

Kevin Chavis said...

Mike commented: "it won't get them major party status"

This is something I found disturbing about these Libertarians. They want a Libertarian society - where individuals can do as they wish - but they want to keep their party "pure." This means they DO NOT want Major or Minor party status - because they are against being "forced" to have a primary. A primary would take away power from their endorsements and put it in the hands of so-called "Liberterian" primary voters.

So Libertarians want our government run by their pure candidates and decided through their autocratic screening process. And they will dismantle the government by their shear will.

We will never see them coming to power- the exception being Science Fiction novels. (they promoted a science fiction novel "The Probability Broach" by L.Neil Smith. What a joke!)

mike said...

It is my understanding a major party can wave the primary process. however between this would play out in the public and if the secratary of state wouldn't strip your major party status (even if only until the courts overturn the decision), it's sure as heck not something I would want to test.

I suppose the libertarians also don't like the idea of publicly funded campaigns so outside of the easy ballot access maybe major party status doesn't do anything for them.