December 2009 Archives

I'd love to see Jim Ostrowski step forward and try like he did in 1994. A stalwart of the movement and no stranger to politics, Jim could splatter a serious piece of humble pie into the faces of the nut job lackeys of the donkeys and elephants. His broad range of knowledge, professional capacity as a lawyer and tireless pursuit of all thing libertarian could ignite theupstate freedom movement. Who knows how many in the big apple itself ?

Unfortunately, I don't see Jim doing this. I spent a long drive with Jim last March down to Poughkeepsie (and back) and I think it's safe to say he won't try it again. Without getting too personal into his life or means, it's sufficient to say that his focus on family and profession at this point in his life is more important than a quixotic run at the head guy job in New York. I spoke with Jim this weekend and he's not interested in running for office.

However, I am urging Warren Redlich to pick up his shield, mount his high horse and charge those windmills. Warren has all the credentials and qualifications that I've listed previously and he also holds public office as a town board member in Guilderland, NY. He's run for Congress twice in a hopelessly Democratic district like Albany. He's helped me multiple times during my campaigns on a pro bono basis. He's smart, funny and media savvy. While Warren does have ties to the Republican party as such, he's by no means a favorite son. If anything he's a bit of a pariah. He likes and understands freedom too much.

While I personally never seem to point to any hard electoral result in a campaign other than a footnote in Wikipedia, by virtue of the simple fact that I never make the ballot, I say it's still worth trying on occasion. I love being a candidate, fighting the battles and engaging with the public and media. The other day I had a couple at a local eatery insist that they voted for me despite the petition woes. They saw me on TV during a debate and thanked me profusely, asking when I'd try again. Since the attempt last Spring I've been mildly surprised at how often this happens. It's a sign that people are listening and want real change. Of course I demurred the other day and am doing so now in this post.

While the special election was an interesting side journey, since my experience in 2006, I've concluded that statewide office would be my only attempt again. Given my media contacts and experience I could make a decent case that running for Governor or US Senate would be effective for the message of liberty above anything else. My Guv pitch would be that I've been tossed off the ballot twice and am seeking to rectify that one final time by bringing to light the awful condition of ballot access in NY. If you and 49,999 individuals vote for me, maybe you can run next time, locally or whatever. Why waste your vote or money on Democrats or Republicans that will do nothing to stop the constant onslaught against liberty ? Because that's more practical ? Insane I say.

The recent special election in NY's 23rd Congressional District while seemingly a success of Doug Hoffman as a Conservative Party candidate, it simply wasn't the case. In NY a special election of this sort requires the county chairs to pick a candidate. Most likely the Dede Scozzafava appointment had the more disgruntled conservative faction in the NY GOP, scrambling for what they considered a better choice. It was effectively a primary after the disaster that was a certain diminutive Schenectady resident, in the 20th District special election last spring. By pumping national money into Republican enrolled Hoffman's Conservative campaign, they outflanked the weaker intra-Republican party opponent with another ballot line. Reader's might note that my own campaign in the 20th was not received well by Conservatives who bumped me off with a hand picked judge in Poughkeepsie in full cooperation with the Republicans, no doubt.

That being said, I am urging Libertarians in New York not to select a convenience candidate next year for governor. While our lot may very well be a Sisyphus like plodding towards a damned eternity of electoral nothingness (I prefer to keep this mantle to myself), we should not sell our souls to a luke warm promise of success in a statist universe. If our little cabal actually became that ballot qualified party it might only a matter of months before it is sucked into the Borg that is New York State politics. It's not to say that protections on a bylaw and legal level wouldn't hold up to a constant deluge of attempts to colonize a newly qualified party, but would the party simply become an appendage to the bigger apparatus which tends to reward it participants with pork and privilege. Is that not our opposite purpose ?

Note: This content's initial publication was intended for the Examiner gig, but became too long and complicated for adequate handling there. While I did publish it there and promise the rest here, Part II and maybe three will include the rest of such thoughts.

Participants in the Libertarian Party often engage in a self flagellation that I've always found puzzling. Aside from the completely inane and popular reformer vs. radical dysfunction, wanting success or disavowing traditional notions of it, is a particular twist that frequently surfaces. In my opinion, not enough thought is given to the particular plight of the American third party historically or it's subsequent, seemingly contradictory role. For Libertarians, I would submit that New York has many circumstances that don't apply in the rest of the country. One would hope that New York would be a fine place for the advocates of liberty to act politically. After all, Texas & California don't have a view of the actual Statue of Liberty, despite their larger Libertarian affiliates.

While this is fine parlor talk amongst conspirators in between elections, a subject fascinating in itself, it's discouraging to see it as the all consuming topic at times. Should we reject some principles to gain votes or just be who we are and not expect everyone to agree ? Likely neither will work and no one will be happy. Forsooth, new elections are always around the bend. In New York, Libertarians are bound by a provision of election law which provides for party status by obtaining fifty thousand votes in a gubernatorial election that takes place every four years. Combined with the notion of fusion, the ability to run on different party lines, 'successful' third parties typically endorse either a Republican or Democrat in order to guarantee their political survival by getting 50,000 votes for the same candidate on their line, a vote that might not have been cast for the more odiferous main party lines. Once ballot access is achieved, they are free to nominate candidates of their choosing and run them in all other elections. The problem is, they don't.

I'm wondering whether author and historian Thomas Woods is in fact too far into the woods despite being one of those city kids. He pens a curious piece today on LRC defending St. Paul and true Lew against another cadre of egghead liberty folk. In typical theory of the leisure class mode, Woods assumes that all mention of certain people directly correlates with the mindful followers of the aforementioned. He takes umbrage with a statement about the state of the movement with regards to a right/left drift made by professor Tyler Cowen at a recent CATO gig.

I know Tom gets out a lot to speak at certain events and does a lot of Break The Matrix interviews. He's commented on C-SPAN about his like for media attention and the subsequent lack thereof. He's not DiLorenzo jawing with Brian Lamb about Lincoln yet, but he's still a young man and those things may come. Like most intellectuals, they think they are the indispensable core of whatever school or faction of thinking that has suddenly powered the movement de jure. The cackling minions of Paul Krugman are still toasting themselves.

Joe six pack libertarian doesn't see the world the same way as Woods. Gadsen flags, guns and legal weed all appeal to folk who don't particularly want to see brothers and sisters in foreign lands. They had that done to them since WWII. Even Vietnam era thinking supplies a notion amongst old school believers that such a war would have been won if but permission was granted to 'win it'. So yeah, another undeclared action abroad for the purposes of good might win the emotions of the day when the stakes are for the whole enchilada (ie the Presidency). Ron Paul suddenly fit the bill of someone valiant enough to stand against the Rudy's of the world. As an attendee of the 25th Mises Institute affair, I can attest to the fact that the old men of the grand old institute turned in for sleep that night at the Grand Hyatt in NYC. Hardly the stuff of the Green Mountain boys in their quest for freedom.