Drudge: The Libertarians planning to take over New Hampshire

[NACBA]

Nirvana for a libertarian in New Hampshire is a gay married couple guarding a stash of marijuana with an AK47.
“I could live with that,” said Ian Freeman, a leading light the Free State Project and one of the pathfinders in a mass migration of like-minded people to the New England state.

He left Florida and moved to New Hampshire to push the libertarian agenda in a state whose motto is “Live free or die” - one of more than 1,600 to have done so.
They are the first tranche of 16,000 people who have pledged to up sticks and make the state a “beacon of liberty”.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/11241203/The-Libertarians-planning-to-take-over-New-Hampshire.html

[parocks]

Boston's northern suburbs is the barrier.

[thoughtomator]

I'm revolted that the abomination of "gay marriage" is getting attached to anything libertarian. There is nothing even slightly libertarian about it!

[twomp]

Why are they so worried? I thought the libertarians got only 1% in the last election and haven't been able to accomplish anything in the last 50 years? All of a sudden they are going to take over a state? It's never been done in the past 50 years so that means it is impossible right? The libertarians will never accomplish anything remember?

[Matt Collins]

The people from Mass who have moved to NH have far and away negated any FSP gains sadly (the mass exodus from California is doing the same thing to the western states too).

But the thing is that it doesn't matter how many FSP'ers move into NH if they don't bother to vote in liberty-oriented elected officials.

[69360]

Yep, massholes outnumber freestaters in NH probably at least 10 to 1 if not more. So it's kinda pointless. But whatever floats their boat, I have nothing against freestaters.

[alucard13mm]

What is the highest office Libertarians ever elected that had an [L] next to their name and what is the current highest?

[sparebulb]

I understand the reasons why NH was chosen over WY for the FSP. But the Masshole situation makes the FSP an unlikely dream. Although, I keep hearing Ian and Mark from FTL talking about their accomplishments, which I don't deny. But they seem quite modest.

For me, WY would have worked better.

[Zippyjuan]

I'm revolted that the abomination of "gay marriage" is getting attached to anything libertarian. There is nothing even slightly libertarian about it!

Doesn't Liberty mean allowing (and tolerating) people doing what they want to without others saying they can't?

[twomp]

The people from Mass who have moved to NH have far and away negated any FSP gains sadly (the mass exodus from California is doing the same thing to the western states too).

But the thing is that it doesn't matter how many FSP'ers move into NH if they don't bother to vote in liberty-oriented elected officials.

I keep hearing this "mass exodus" theory but can you show me some numbers of what you are talking about? Or is this one of those Matt Collins generated facts?


Everybody goes ballistic now and then. It’s natural to indulge in a little hyperbole when you’re frustrated and need to let off some steam.

But some stories get exaggerated so often that people start to believe them. And that’s dangerous — because they can get in the way of a more nuanced understanding that is necessary to identify and correct real problems.

A prime example: The notion that California’s companies, workers and jobs are fleeing in droves to other states to escape taxes and regulations.
It’s an appealing notion for anyone who’s had a run-in with the state bureaucracy, paid through the nose for endless permits or had to contend with the state’s truly Kafkaesque HR laws. We love to imagine ourselves giving the Golden State a one-fingered salute as we ride into the sunrise toward a place that welcomes our business. So we want to believe the California exodus story.
One problem. It’s not true.

As a Feb. 1 report by the Sacramento Business Journal demonstrated, there’s no evidence that companies, people or jobs are leaving in significant numbers.
Over the long term, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, California is about average among states in job growth. And while the state suffered disproportionately during the Great Recession and still has high unemployment levels, the latest figures show it is again adding jobs at both rates and numbers above the national average.


http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/print-edition/2013/02/08/the-california-job-exodus-myth.html?page=all

[georgiaboy]

hmm. If the Mass folks aren't small gov't oriented, why are they moving out of Mass to NH?

Surely they're not trying to avoid the taxachussetts?

[rhelwig]

It wasn't that long ago that there were 4 (L)ibertarians in the state house (elected as Libertarians).

I got elected to local office (so-called non-partisan) pretty easily and there's a bunch of Free State project participants elected to local offices. But since the system is rigged so that third parties won't win (they changed the rules after the LP did so well, making things even harder) most FSP types run as Republicans or Democrats. I counted over 20 personal friends who are libertarian that won their elections to the state house this last time around, and some have said there's as many as 25% liberty friendly reps now.

As far as I'm concerned, the Free State Project is the only thing that is really making any significant progress for liberty anywhere in the world.

[sparebulb]

hmm. If the Mass folks aren't small gov't oriented, why are they moving out of Mass to NH?

Domino Theory.

[satchelmcqueen]

I'm revolted that the abomination of "gay marriage" is getting attached to anything libertarian. There is nothing even slightly libertarian about it!

how about freedom of choice as long as u dont hurt someone else?

[Christian Liberty]

how about freedom of choice as long as u dont hurt someone else?

Nobody, not even most conservatives, is saying that gay marriage should be "illegal", the real issue is whether government LICENSING of gay marriage is libertarian. I'd argue no.

[Carlybee]

Nobody, not even most conservatives, is saying that gay marriage should be "illegal", the real issue is whether government LICENSING of gay marriage is libertarian. I'd argue no.

Neither is licensing of any marriage

[Christian Liberty]

Neither is licensing of any marriage

I agree.

I have reservations about "gay marriage" being legally recongized for a few reasons:

1. It actually is a government endorsement of immorality (by contrast, legalizing something is NOT an endorsement of that thing. Government recognition of gay marriage as marriage IS an endorsement. Getting the government out of marriage means the government will not take sides, which is what I want.)

2. Its a "positive right" not a real, negative right.

3. I'm not as big on this as your average conservative, but the homosexualist lobby is not going to content itself with government recognized gay marriage. They want to give themselves other "positive rights", enslaving cultural conservatives who don't approve of their behavior if necessary. Are there exceptions? Sure. But those people don't understand what they are realy advocating for. If they did, they'd support getting government out of marriage, not "gay marriage" recognized by the government.

That said, I agree with getting the government out of marriage, but not with "gay marriage" as is currently being advocated for. I agree with the view expressed here:
http://libertarianchristians.com/2010/07/05/gay-rights-marriage-and-government-intervention/#sthash.gjeW7MGw.dpbs

[scottditzen]

I agree.

I have reservations about "gay marriage" being legally recongized for a few reasons:

1. It actually is a government endorsement of immorality (by contrast, legalizing something is NOT an endorsement of that thing. Government recognition of gay marriage as marriage IS an endorsement. Getting the government out of marriage means the government will not take sides, which is what I want.)

2. Its a "positive right" not a real, negative right.

3. I'm not as big on this as your average conservative, but the homosexualist lobby is not going to content itself with government recognized gay marriage. They want to give themselves other "positive rights", enslaving cultural conservatives who don't approve of their behavior if necessary. Are there exceptions? Sure. But those people don't understand what they are realy advocating for. If they did, they'd support getting government out of marriage, not "gay marriage" recognized by the government.

That said, I agree with getting the government out of marriage, but not with "gay marriage" as is currently being advocated for. I agree with the view expressed here:
http://libertarianchristians.com/2010/07/05/gay-rights-marriage-and-government-intervention/#sthash.gjeW7MGw.dpbs

Thanks for posting.

At the state level, Christian libertarians should not support further government intrusion into marriage in general. This is unacceptable power given to the government. For example, I do not think it right for state governments to pass marriage amendments that either legalize or make illegal the practice of “gay marriage.”

The main complaint I have is a pragmatic one; that is the state government is already so tied into marriage. And by anyone's estimation that is not likely to change any time soon. I personally don't know a single gay person (or any person) who is pushing a gay agenda. But the majority of people I do know want gay couples to have the same privileges as straight.

Otherwise I'm with you. When I first heard the libertarian views of "getting the govt out of marriage" I thought it sounded crazy. A knee jerk reaction based on conditioning. But it's truly the right position. Now I find the government role to be intrusive, overbearing and offensive.

[HOLLYWOOD]

Good... first action for NH: Deport Carpetbaggers Scott Brown & Mitt Romney back to Assachusetts lol :D

[The Free Hornet]

I'm revolted that the abomination of "gay marriage" is getting attached to anything libertarian. There is nothing even slightly libertarian about it!

Why are you still flogging this issue... TWO YEARS LATER? (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?378767-Gay-marriage-ban-backers-get-unexpected-support&p=4461220&viewfull=1#post4461220) It's played out.

[Matt Collins]

I keep hearing this "mass exodus" theory but can you show me some numbers of what you are talking about? Or is this one of those Matt Collins generated facts?




http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/print-edition/2013/02/08/the-california-job-exodus-myth.html?page=all


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/15/upshot/the-california-exodus.html?_r=0

http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304444604577340531861056966

http://www.aei.org/publication/the-california-exodus-to-texas-is-reflected-in-market-based-one-way-u-haul-truck-rental-prices/