Mike Gravel joins Libertarian Party

[Galileo Galilei]

Mike Gravel joins Libertarian Party


I just got off the phone with Libertarian Party Executive Director Shane Cory and he confirms the following information: Former US Senator and Alaska House Speaker Mike Gravel has joined the Libertarian Party. Cory says he’ll provide more in a media release to be expected over the next few hours.


Gravel is currently one of the Democratic contenders for president. Wikipedia provides a bit of Gravel’s colorful background:


As Senator, Gravel became nationally known for his forceful but unsuccessful attempts to end the draft during the Vietnam War and for having put the Pentagon Papers into the public record in 1971 despite risk to himself. He conducted an unusual campaign for the Democratic nomination for Vice President of the United States in 1972, and then played a crucial role in getting Congressional approval for the Trans-Alaska pipeline in 1973. He was re-elected to the Senate in 1974, but gradually alienated most of his Alaskan constituencies and his bid for a third term was defeated in a Democratic primary election in 1980.


Third Party Watch covered Gravel’s endorsement of Green Party candidate Jesse Johnson here and Gravel’s libertarian streak here.


This should provide some refreshing news to those insisting that the right-left balance in the Libertarian Party is slightly out of whack. Gravel joins former Republican Rep. Bob Barr as a recent congressional addition to the Libertarian Party fold. Both Barr and current Rep. Ron Paul are “Life Members” of the LP.


READ COMMENTS:


http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/03/25/mike-gravel-joins-libertarian-party/

[Aratus]

Wow!

[Aratus]

they counterbalance ....geographically!

[Aratus]

if by september Ron Paul and his loyal supporters who soon may be the national
convention delegates get their way with the GOP party platform, mcCain can only
forgive him a tad or somewhat only if Ron Paul sits back and does not run or
jog anywhere much between september and november of 2008!!! (methinks)

LETS RUN BARR AND GRAVEL OR GRAVEL AND BARR! [if we can!] IT ALMOST DOESN'T
MATTER WHO HEADS THE TICKET! WHAT DOES MATTER IS THE BIGGER PICTURE!!!

[Cowlesy]

not even close to gonzo..give me a break.

[Cowlesy]

Mike Gravel joins Libertarian Party


Good for him.

[Aratus]

Cowsley,


i think we have a way to skew ALL narrowcasting data!
this could be a triumph of old fashioned politics! lets try to
field a team that tosses away all political science data!

[Cowlesy]

Cowsley, even with Ralph Nader in the running as is,
Gravel and Barr flipping a coin REALLY causes
either mcCain or Hillary Clinton to be upset! if
i went sorta off my usual stride as i contemplate
the potential 269 vs. 269 split in the electoral
college! i am in a poly-sci point of bliss! the way
the libertarian party staggers a future ticket could
skew all ANCIENT narrowcasting data! i am in bliss!
we can bring the two major parties to their knees
by how either the Constitution Party or the Libertarians
field a ticket! we KNOW that Nader will draw 0.5 percent
of the democrats AWAY from the democrat! so ...if... we....field
a ticket predestined to draw moderates and conservatives from mccain...

more ether less mesculin

[Aratus]

gravel will always be known for reading 4000 pages of the turgid enjargonated
pentagon papers into the public record in the 1970s! he is NOW not a democrat!

[Aratus]

"red" verses "blue" almost triggered a classic split of 269 verses 269 in 2000 and 2004!




mike gravel and bob barr hold the answer to the 2008 election! we can toss things totally
into the electoral college if neither party secures an advantage! this fall could see a contest
so down the wire as to make the race between obama and clinton to be almost conclusive!

[Aratus]

Bump!

[LibertyOfOne]

No Bob Barr please or Gravel for that matter.

[OptionsTrader]

he is NOW not a democrat!

That is just silly.

Ron Paul belongs to the Libertarian party, and he is a Republican. There is nothing wrong with being a member of multiple parties.

[The One]

Gravel should make a youtube video to announce he's now in the Libertarian party, but instead of making an announcement, he should just stare into the camera for an eternity and then throw a rock in a pond.

[0zzy]

This is why I don't like party politics. Gravel and Dandero = libertarian party? psh

[Cowlesy]

I just can't get around the fact that Gravel was proud he welched on $65k of credit card debt a few years ago.

Regardless of how much you hate banks or think credit cards are evil, I think using them is taking a loan from someone else no matter who it is, and you should pay it back.

I know I would never loan the guy lunch money.

[Caulfield]

http://www.lp.org/media/article_573.shtml

[OptionsTrader]

I did love it when he called out Hillary:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8XwNCbSTQE

[OptionsTrader]

My comment on:
http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/03/19/gravel-the-libertarian-gravel-the-libertarian/

Gravel does not fit into what I would call the libertarian mold and I consider Paul much more closely aligned with more than 95% of the content in the LP issues page:
http://www.lp.org/issues/issues.shtml

That said, if Ron Paul was not running (and I will be voting for him as I am a delegate for him from my precinct) I would definitely vote for Gravel over the lying sacks of socialist manure that are Hillary, Obama, and McCain.

[Highland]

I bet Dennis Kuchinich is next!! Welcome all....

[revolutionary8]

Give Peace a Chance
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0S2zkh6ZOGE

I would vote Mike Gravel over Bob Barr in a WTC collapse minute.

Good for Mike. Hopefully he will help identify and then kick out all the infiltratraitors of the Libertarian party.

[OptionsTrader]

I bet Dennis Kuchinich is next!! Welcome all....

If Dennis came around on his socialist views and embraced a more libertarian domestic policy, he would be much more appealing as a candidate. At least he is currently half right, unlike most neocons that are 100% wrong ... Dennis only has half as far to go as most neocons...

[familydog]

Gravel a Libertarian? Did he renounce all his big government views?

[angelatc]

Gravel should make a youtube video to announce he's now in the Libertarian party, but instead of making an announcement, he should just stare into the camera for an eternity and then throw a rock in a pond.

Maybe he could mix it up a little....stare at the rock and toss the camera into the pond.

I like Gravel well enough, but his political stances are hardly libertarian. I mean, look what happened to the GOP when the disgruntled Democrats came over.

But I hardly think that Gravel has any evil intention. He's apparently a pretty honest guy.

[Allen72289]

I sure hope Gravel doesn't bring socialism into the Libertarian party. :eek:

Lolz.

[OptionsTrader]

ANYONE can join the party for $25.

Norman Thomas could be resurrected from the dead and join the LP for 25 bucks, but it isn't going to change a damn thing about the party's platform.

[0zzy]

Give Peace a Chance
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0S2zkh6ZOGE

I would vote Mike Gravel over Bob Barr in a WTC collapse minute.

Good for Mike. Hopefully he will help identify and then kick out all the infiltratraitors of the Libertarian party.

For which reasons? Socialized healthcare? Direct democracy? Foreign aid to all the countries of the world?

what is everyones phobia of Barr. I've heard him speak, he seems like a great guy. Excellent on civil liberties, anti-war, and I assume small government and federalism.

[Mach]

And I thought he was just kissing up in this video the whole time......... the Ron Paul people here seem to give him a "thumbs up!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-6yNLLXsg4

.
.
.

[OptionsTrader]

The bottom line is that the man is very far from perfect, but he is at least better than the 3 dirt bags that are "top tier." Granted, it doesn't take much to be better than them. He would at least end this bloody war unlike the dirt bags. I'm not saying I'd vote for him, I wouldn't, but I do respect him. He has earned respect instead of attacks in my opinion.

[angelatc]

The bottom line is that the man is very far from perfect, but he is at least better than the 3 dirt bags that are "top tier." Granted, it doesn't take much to be better than them. He would at least end this bloody war unlike the dirt bags. I'm not saying I'd vote for him, I wouldn't, but I do respect him. He has earned respect instead of attacks in my opinion.

Yes, me too. I just wandered over to the official site to see if there was any news there, and saw that some of them were wondering if they could join our march!

I told them to wear their Gravel gear, and come!

[GigiBowman]

Did anyone ever go to the glassbooth website? You fill in little boxes and they tell you the presidential candidate that best represents you beliefs.

I did it ....and Mike Gavel came in first??? Ron Paul second. I still don't know why. I think this thing was geared towards democrats.

Anyway, try it and see what you get http://glassbooth.org/

[OptionsTrader]

edit nm,.

[OptionsTrader]

Ron Paul 97%
Mike Gravel
Barack Obama

I weighted the war at 15 and taxes 5, and other issues 1 each that I care about.

I agree with the order, considering the derth of decent candidates.

[angelatc]

Did anyone ever go to the glassbooth website? You fill in little boxes and they tell you the presidential candidate that best represents you beliefs.

I did it ....and Mike Gavel came in first??? Ron Paul second. I still don't know why. I think this thing was geared towards democrats.

Anyway, try it and see what you get http://glassbooth.org/

I got Ron Paul 74% and Mike Gravel 69%. I also got a big red statement that says Ron Paul has withdrawn from the race! Grrrrr....

[amy31416]

I got 91% Ron Paul, 76% Gravel and 67% Obama. I didn't get the big red statement that Paul had withdrawn though.

[GigiBowman]

what big red statement?

[OptionsTrader]

I got 91% Ron Paul, 76% Gravel and 67% Obama. I didn't get the big red statement that Paul had withdrawn though.

Hey Amy, take this quiz if you have not already:

http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html

[OptionsTrader]

what big red statement?

see post 34.

[amy31416]

Hey Amy, take this quiz if you have not already:

http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html

Damn. I'm 100% Libertarian...and here I thought I was Indy. ;)

With all respect, the questions are a bit slanted toward libertarianism, but it's an interesting quiz to give to a non-Paul, non-libertarian person.

[GigiBowman]

Well optionstrader, I did your quiz...and apparently I'm a Libertarian :O

[angelatc]

what big red statement?

My results indicated that I disagreed with Ron Paul on Social Security. I clicked on the "Find Out More" link near that topic and the page that I went to has "This candidate is no longer in the race," at the top.

I emailed them, and got a response back ASAP. They're fixing it now.

And it also showed the same message when I clicked Obama. :)

[brandon]

I got Paul, Gravel, Obama in that order.

The test is terrible though. One question was...

"Do you support or oppose unrestricted free trade"
I answered strongly support. Apparently the test reads my answer as if I strongly support NAFTA. It told me gravel has a different opinion then me because he is against NAFTA

Also, according to the test Obama is extremely opposed to gay marriage. Is this true?

[OptionsTrader]

Damn. I'm 100% Libertarian...and here I thought I was Indy. ;)

With all respect, the questions are a bit slanted toward libertarianism, but it's an interesting quiz to give to a non-Paul, non-libertarian person.

It also helps teach people that there is another dimension (libertarian to statist) than the single dimension of left versus right. I like to intentionally answer like I think Bush governs while showing the quiz to Republicans and get 100% statist. They usually go, "what's statist mean?" And a discussion ensues.

[revolutionary8]

I sure hope Gravel doesn't bring socialism into the Libertarian party. :eek:

Lolz.
I thought Libertarians were socialists? I thought they believed in free trade and Amnesty and all that hogwash and abortion and so on?
What makes Libertarians so different from socialists?

- I am a Republican who can't stand fakes. :D
I will take a true Libertarian or Paleo-Liberal like Gravel or Kucinich over a Patriot Act voting Neo-Con wanna be like Bob Barr any day of the week.
I welcome Gravel in to the Libertarian Party. They need straight talkers like him.

[brandon]

How does free trade, abortion, or amnesty have anything to do with socialism?

[revolutionary8]

How does free trade, abortion, or amnesty have anything to do with socialism?
NAFTA, Planned Parenthood, Open Borders?
Isn't that all part of the Democratic/Socialist Platform?

[Caulfield]

I thought Libertarians were socialists? I thought they believed in free trade and Amnesty and all that hogwash and abortion and so on?
What makes Libertarians so different from socialists?

- I am a Republican who can't stand fakes. :D
I will take a true Libertarian or Paleo-Liberal like Gravel or Kucinich over a Patriot Act voting Neo-Con wanna be like Bob Barr any day of the week.
I welcome Gravel in to the Libertarian Party. They need straight talkers like him.

This makes no sense whatsoever.

How does supporting free trade equate into socialism? And the Libertarian Party rejected the "open borders" stance back in 2006. They simply believe that if you want to come to this country, you should have to prove you're not a criminal, prove you're not infectious, and don't take any welfare (by abolishing social programs altogether in the U.S.). Also, on abortion, the LP position is neutral.

Gravel is not a true Libertarian by any stretch. Does he have Libertarian-inclinations? Certainly, and that qualifies him in some people's eyes. But his big-government, nationalized health care and anti-corporation views don't jive with the LP platform.

[revolutionary8]

This makes no sense whatsoever.

How does supporting free trade equate into socialism? :cool: They simply believe that if you want to come to this country, you should have to prove you're not a criminal, prove you're not infectious, and don't take any welfare (by abolishing social programs altogether in the U.S.). Also, on abortion, the LP position is neutral.

Gravel is not a true Libertarian by any stretch. Does he have Libertarian-inclinations? Certainly, and that qualifies him in some people's eyes. But his big-government, nationalized health care and anti-corporation views don't jive with the LP platform.
Free Trade is NAFTA, CAFTA?
or is it not?
"back in 2006"


They simply believe that if you want to come to this country, you should have to prove you're not a criminal, prove you're not infectious, and don't take any welfare (by abolishing social programs altogether in the U.S.). Also, on abortion, the LP position is neutral.
What is different in the way we "welcome" immigrants today?
I guess I just don't see the differences.

[Caulfield]

Free Trade is NAFTA, CAFTA?

Free trade is unregulated and unrestricted exchanges between American companies to foreign markets, and I would support any initiative that helped expand that. I've never understood this delusional paranoia about trade agreements. Do I think they are necessary for free trade? No, but since the government isn't willing to knock down trade barriers, they're the best we've got.


What is different in the way we "welcome" immigrants today?
I guess I just don't see the differences.

For starters, we could make it easier for people to legally immigrate by streamlining the process. Additionally, what is the problem if people legally immigrate here and aren't receiving any tax-payer funded handouts?

[revolutionary8]

you wrote:

Gravel is not a true Libertarian by any stretch. Does he have Libertarian-inclinations? Certainly, and that qualifies him in some people's eyes. But his big-government, nationalized health care and anti-corporation views don't jive with the LP platform.
If Bob Barr is a "true Libertarian" then I don't know what is. Ron Paul isn't even a "true Libertarian".

I am so sick of these labels, let's hear what these people have to say!
Listen to this-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vH9SbwSQCk4

[revolutionary8]

Free trade is unregulated and unrestricted exchanges between American companies to foreign markets, and I would support any initiative that helped expand that. I've never understood this delusional paranoia about trade agreements. Do I think they are necessary for free trade? No, but since the government isn't willing to knock down trade barriers, they're the best we've got.



For starters, we could make it easier for people to legally immigrate by streamlining the process. Additionally, what is the problem if people legally immigrate here and aren't receiving any tax-payer funded handouts?
How would we "streamline" the process and who would be in charge of the "streamlining"?

There is no problem with people who immigrate here legally. I am not sure why you even asked.

[Caulfield]

you wrote:

If Bob Barr is a "true Libertarian" then I don't know what is. Ron Paul isn't even a "true Libertarian".

I am so sick of these labels, let's hear what these people have to say!
Listen to this-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vH9SbwSQCk4

Oh, I agree that the litmus test that some Libertarians try to apply to people is rather absurd, but this is not to say that there are some unequivocally un-Libertarian positions that Gravel takes, that others like Barr do not.

Gravel is more than welcome in the LP, but that's not to say that he's very in-step with the core philosophy of the party or its platform. For instance, how much control does Gravel think the government should have over the economy or corporations? Or, how strictly does he interpret the Constitution?

He's not perfect, and every libertarian thinks he is, but that's still no excuse to overlook the issues he needs to seriously work on.

[OptionsTrader]

NAFTA isn't free trade. It is part of a managed trade system.

The term free trade has been bastardized as badly as Patriot (Act), conservative, security, defense, and Republican.

[AFM]

Don't forget "liberal"

[revolutionary8]

NAFTA isn't free trade. It is part of a managed trade system.

The term free trade has been bastardized as badly as Patriot (Act), conservative, security, defense, and Republican.
Yessssir.
That is why Republicans like Ron Paul are not in favor of unrestricted free trade, as there is no such thing.

[majinkoola]

Free trade is unregulated and unrestricted exchanges between American companies to foreign markets, and I would support any initiative that helped expand that. I've never understood this delusional paranoia about trade agreements. Do I think they are necessary for free trade? No, but since the government isn't willing to knock down trade barriers, they're the best we've got.



For starters, we could make it easier for people to legally immigrate by streamlining the process. Additionally, what is the problem if people legally immigrate here and aren't receiving any tax-payer funded handouts?

I don't know how we got into this discussion of free trade, but free trade does not have the definition you described. We can't control the exchanges between American companies and foreign markets, the foreign markets determine that. Of course everyone wants American companies selling stuff to other countries, except for vital military secrets or something, because that brings money into the economy. The debate is about foreign companies coming into American markets. For instance, while China has huge tariffs for American goods coming into their markets, they have subsidies for their industries which export, while America has low tariffs on imports and no subsidies on exporting. The worry here is that since America is so tied down in regulation and high taxation, that companies will flood to China since the workers are cheaper and they can flood American markets. Effectively getting rid of American jobs. I don't think it'd be that big an issue if we had the economy that RP is talking about, because companies would flood jobs into this country if the regulation and taxation were taken away.

Regarding the immigration deal, the only people's opinions I take seriously are those who have lived in the American Southwest and have dealt with the consequences. Others just can't understand the extent of the problem. This is coming from someone who grew up in Arizona and had many friends who were illegal immigrants.

[Aratus]

"red" verses "blue" almost triggered a classic split of 269 verses 269 in 2000 and 2004!




mike gravel and bob barr hold the answer to the 2008 election! we can toss things totally
into the electoral college if neither party secures an advantage! this fall could see a contest
so down the wire as to make the race between obama and clinton to be almost conclusive!


:Di said this on page one of this thread, way back on february 25th! even if the Libertarians think Gravel is
an old coot of a liberal and have someone else as their veep, most likely mr. root or mr. kubby, it still goes!

[werdd]

Gravel is not a libertarian.

[Tim111977]

Gravel is not a libertarian.

hes not even close, either. Its like he just looked to see that they were agaisnt the war and said "hey thats the party for me"