Dixiecrats v. Libertarian Party

Collectivist National Socialism

Wallace’s ‘Murrican Party platform carried 5 states and rewrote the GOP Bible

This just in:
A couple of months ago, the Arkansas state legislature, a.k.a. the Sahara of the Bozart, pulled some shenanigans and rapidly pushed through an “emergency bill” to make it nearly three times harder for us to get ballot access there. Why? Because Republicans are scared to compete with us.

Why else would so many Republican sockpuppets sign up as Reason Magazine commentators? Their mantra is the same fixed-pie mentality that is the foundation for communism. A vote for the LP is a vote “for” the same LIBERAL party that in 1930 added repeal of the 18th Amendment to its platform and helped the Dems win with it. That plank alone won the 1932 election plus five more.  Republican prohibitionists turned to Franklin Roosevelt’s enemies for help. The last thing the GOP wants is spoiler voters interested in individual rights costing them their political jobs, power, pelf and boodle.

Franklin Roosevelt’s enemies were German National Socialists. These were politicians of the very party Herbert Hoover had helped take over Germany by giving them a Moratorium on Brains in 1931. The moratorium excused Germany from paying war reparations to its victims and also from repaying loans taken from American suckers.  This so-called “standstill agreement” is right there in Atlas Shrugged, a book which, with the non-aggression principle, was written as nazis were tried and hanged in Nuremberg:

“The economic condition of the country was better the year before last than it was last year, and last year it was better than it is at present. It’s obvious that we would not be able to survive another year of the same progression. Therefore, our sole objective must now be to hold the line. To stand still in order to catch our stride. To achieve total stability. Freedom has been given a chance and has failed…. So we’ve got to stand still. We’ve got to stand still. We’ve got to make those bastards stand still!”

“The country” Wesley Mouch was referring to could easily have been Nazi Germany. In fact, we had come this close:

Republican National Socialism became ingrained after Dixiecrat spoiler votes nearly blocked Nixon’s election. George Wallace in effect rewrote the GOP platform just as Ralph Nader’s econazis rewrote the Democratic party platform after the y2k election. Today’s Republicans shout “liberal” in exactly the same tone as 1930s nationalsocialists shouted “liberal” and “Jew.” Some people have a hard time letting go of hillbilly superstitions.

Libertarian Saure Diethylamid

100 signatures sufficed for ballot access then and there

Another outside party turned up in 1970 opposed to aggression, conscription, prohibitionism, victimless crime laws and Comstock laws and in favor of relegalizing drugs. The obviously Libertarian Buffalo Party’s planks soon turned up in the platform of the Libertarian party. With fewer than 4000 votes the LP blocked Dixiecrat laws forcing women to reproduce against their will. The current wave of plant leaf decriminalization is the result of Libertarian Party spoiler votes over the course of 12 national election campaigns. It took 11 campaigns for the Prohibition Party to make beer a felony. Spoiler votes have finally become a mechanism for increasing freedom by throttling back coercion.


Visit my godless foreign blog…

Advertisements

The Bill Weld Gambit

No to Involuntary Labor!

Ensuring clinic access is guarding a fundamental right of the individual.

Would Bill Weld betray or help the Libertarian Party by running as a Republican?

The whole reason I volunteer, vote and donate to Libertarian parties is because I want the laws to change. This is about ideas, ethics, freedom… It is not about this or that particular politician. If my every libertarian spoiler vote is worth 10,000 looter votes when it comes to women’s reproductive rights, or 21 votes when it comes to repealing taxes and regulations, or a half-dozen votes in favor of relegalizing plant leaves, that leverage is fine by me. Nixon’s tinkering with the tax codes to subsidize looter parties and penalize honesty was met with whoops of joy from the presstitute corps. The move had attracted parasitical infiltrators to our ranks and literally pays all news outlets to enthusiastically depict the LP in much the way Der Sturmer reported on Judaism. It is no exaggeration to reiterate that the looter parties will do whatever it takes to rig the elections, infiltrate and defame the LP and generally play dirty pool to keep us from getting our candidates elected. After all, they are the ones that are for the initiation of force, fraud and violence.

But our candidates only need a few votes to win–where to win means to change bad laws. Because the Kleptocracy factions are nearly identical, their vote counts differ by very little. With a short platform purged of suicidal planks planted on us by infiltrators and saboteurs, all we need is about 3% of the vote to consistently cover the gap in roughly a third of the elections in These States. Bill Weld helped the LP earn national spoiler vote status by earning more votes than the difference between the Dem and GOP popular vote counts. When Gary Johnson opposed individual rights for women 4 years earlier he got only a third as many votes. The increase in our vote fraction attending the return to our original pro-choice platform should enable the LP to replace one of the looter parties in something like half a century. This is about the current age of the LP. Our looter adversaries are 170 and well into senility.

In order to not lose elections, paychecks and pelf, Republican partisans have to delete prohibition planks and find less repugnant candidates. Bill Weld is a less repugnant candidate. Unlike Randal Paul and Whatzisname Amash, Weld does not advocate sending men with guns to threaten doctors and  force women into involuntary labor. Weld is as pro-choice as the original Libertarian Party platform of 1972! If Weld runs for the nomination, he will end the Republican strategy of finding women-bulliers to impersonate token libertarians in an effort to bring back the Comstock laws banning ALL birth control.

This is exactly what we “unreconstructed” Libertarians want. Let’s us infiltrate them for some changes!

Simultaneous interpreting for Brazilian and American audiences.

Vote Repellent

Alabama and Louisiana both gave their electoral votes to George Wallace’s platform of de jure racial segregation and forcing women to reproduce in 1968. In the 2016 election both States went heavily for the party with the platform most resembling the Dixiecrats’ racial collectivism and planks urging the initiation of force against women and physicians.

Alabama gave the Republican Party a 15% overkill victory, and netted the Libertarian ticket 36% fewer votes than the reported national average. Libertarian votes there amounted to only one-seventh the amount needed to cover the gap between the two Kleptocracy parties. Alabama plainly needed seven times the libertarian voter turnout to qualify for message-sending, law-changing spoiler vote clout status in the rough-and-tumble earning of respect as a force to be reckoned with in George Wallace territory.

Louisiana voters handed antichoice prohibitionist Republicans an 11% lead over the other looters, and dismissed Libertarian candidates even more brutally than Independent American Party fans in Alabama. The LP ticket there got 42% fewer votes than we earned on average in These Sovereign States.  That’s less than an eighth the turnout needed for the law-changing spoiler vote status that forces Kleptocracy parties to drop cruel planks to keep from losing perks, paychecks and political power. 

Commies for McGovern!

Message: The Libertarian Party demands uninspected entry of strangers!

So where would you look to recruit false-flag infiltrators to make libertarians look like the kind of fools that have never read the Constitution, worked under oath or even bothered to learn the definition of government, rights or law?

Here is the text of a “resolution” sent to the National LP by persons claiming to represent what few libertarians voted for our unadulterated 2016 platform in those states:

WHEREAS, the Libertarian Party of Alabama believes that the only proper role of law is in the protection of the natural rights of individuals from the initiation of force or fraud;

WHEREAS, no individual has a natural right to prohibit consensual visitation to or consensual habitation on the private property of another individual;

WHEREAS, the Libertarian Party believes that eminent domain is a violation of private property rights;

WHEREAS, we affirm the right of individuals to set whatever standards they wish for entry onto their own private property but not that owned by others;

WHEREAS, we believe that all individuals have the same natural rights regardless of their citizenship;

WHEREAS, the Libertarian Party acknowledges that economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders:

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Libertarian Party of Alabama condemns and opposes efforts to build a governmental border wall.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Libertarian Party of Alabama supports open borders.

Maybe it’s not brazen sabotage at all. Perhaps open borders means what the US currently has: ports of entry at which travelers may produce visas and inoculation documents and be inspected by Americans against lists of persons known to be violent or dangerous–as in the LP Migration plank before it was gutted by Platform Committee personnel AFTER our record-setting capture of national spoiler-clout status. But what would be the point of that? Indeed, what was the point of damaging the plank to make voters perceive it as an enticement to uninspected entry? What better way is there to repel voters than setting us up as anarchists aiding and abetting reckless endangerment?

Would it not be more honest to say that they who presume to speak for those scarce LP voters want uninspected entry to not be a deportable offense? That would be easily understood as pressure to change federal law. Pitifully hopeless pressure, true enough, from states that were utterly lacking in libertarian spoiler votes even when our platform was mostly sensible–but clear enough to understand as a demand from Whitney Bilyeu, Thomas Knapp, Alex Merced and C.A. Harlos that any and everyone walk or climb right in. Even the locust-swarm of illiterates that recently attempted uninspected entry at the California stretch of the U.S. border at least had the courage to say what it is they figure the world owes them. 

For clear and accurate simultaneous interpreting of Latin American news, legislation, contracts or court cases, get in touch.

 

Why voting Libertarian works

Why would anyone bother to drum up votes for the Libertarian party?

Read' em and weep, looters!

Libertarian share of votes earned in national elections.

Why ask for libertarian votes? Simple. Every such vote benefits ME, not the Kleptocracy candidate, by getting rid of violent laws.  Every time Ram Johnston loses an election by 3% when the Libertarian Candidate got 2% of the vote, that–like a smack upside the head–is a learning experience. For a Texas State Legislator, the loss of pay comes to $43,000 (not counting bribes and kickbacks).  Women voters who want to keep birth control safe and legal need not help the Democrats make electricity scarce and unaffordable. The Libertarian Party platform of 1972 wrote the Roe v. Wade decision into law with fewer than 4000 votes nationwide. Comstock Law Republican and Prohibition Party organizers are painfully aware of this fact, though they struggle to evade it–but they change their platforms and laws in hopes of staying on the payroll. Your vote can count even more if it replaces a bad 19th-Century party with a good 20th-Century party that values freedom and individual rights.

Here is what a logistical substitution curve looks like. This is how the Whigs replaced the Federalists, and Red Republicans replaced the Whig Party.

Freedom replacing Left=Right coercive collectivism

The Libertarian vote share curve starts at 0 but never reaches 100% in a democracy.

Technically competent individuals who understand that electrical power generation drastically reduces the death rate are free to vote Libertarian. You need not help Republican-funded militarized police crowd prisons, shoot foreigners and confiscate property because mystical pseudoscience says to ban plant leaves. Conscientious voters change bad laws by keeping their integrity. Simple arithmetic makes voting for candidates that support the Libertarian Party Platform the most effective use of the franchise.  The only wasted vote is one that tells violent looters to keep trying to ban electricity, prohibit plants and repeal the Bill of Rights.

Energy enables eudaimonia

Interfering with energy increases the death rate

I am asking naturalized citizens to vote Libertarian and resident aliens to contribute to Libertarian campaigns.  The hardest part is helping voters understand that your vote should benefit YOU, not some force-initiating politician. I prove this with algebra showing 1.4% of the vote in 11 campaigns brought the 18th Amendment which caused the Great Depression. Earlier, 9% of the 1892 vote brought an income tax law, so if 9% has the law-changing clout of 51%, then each People’s Party vote counted for six Republican or Democrat votes in terms of its effectiveness in forcing at least one of the soft machine factions to change its platform. These are examples of spoiler vote leverage.

Solving the 1892 equation for x yields 6. This shows us that every populist vote had six times the law-changing power of a vote wasted on a machine politician. In the Prohibition case, 1.4% of the vote made beer a felony as if it were the same as 51%. So set 1.4x=51, x=36 means every such vote packed 36 times more law-changing clout. This is the mechanism whereby the entire Socialist platform of 1920 became law by 1980, even with the candidates all losing.

The libertarian party is simply reversing that process. Hitler, Stalin, Franco, Lenin, Mussolini, Ceaușescu and Pol Pot have demonstrated the legal and economic results of socialism via historical events not on record in 1913. That was the year American voters believed the Communist Manifesto income tax was a good idea.

Do you have a good idea that needs translation for a larger audience?

 

Libertarian Impersonator False Flag

Laura Ebke?

“Elected” Libertarians?

 

The Anti-Choice movement, coercive by definition, has since 1976 been attempting to infiltrate the Libertarian Party in a belated effort to defeat the Roe v. Wade decision which the Supreme Court copied from the 1972 Libertarian Party Overpopulation plank.

1972 LP plank: “We further support the repeal of all laws restricting voluntary birth control or voluntary termination of pregnancies during their first hundred days.”
Jan 22 1973, Roe v. Wade decision: “(a) For the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester, the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman’s attending physician. …”

In the intervening 11 campaigns Prohibitionist Republicans have tried to reinstate coathanger abortions and lost five times, mainly thanks to leftover Soviet anti-energy planks still in the Democratic platform. Since the Bush Asset Forfeiture Crash and Depression, a wave of prohibition repeal not seen since 1932 sweeps the nation, and God’s Own Prohibitionists have come up with a desperate Trojan Horse strategy: Inject an antichoice state legislator into the LP as a bolting, faithless defector bearing a package deal of gifts which includes guns pointed at Planned Parenthood physicians. Sound farfetched?

In 1992 a reasonably pro-rights Republican Senator, Arlen “Magic Bullet” Specter, was running for reelection. All of a sudden a coercive male zealot, John Perry, posing as a libertarian, got into the race thanks to dereliction on the part of the Pennsylvania Libertarian Party. The slip is particularly embarrassing since Philadelphia is the cradle of the Liberal Party. That party’s prohibition repeal plank was co-opted by the Democrats in 1932, a move that resulted in Democratic victories in five consecutive elections. Like The Atlantic magazine, the LP showed the male impostor the door. This is ordinary integrity–loyalty to one’s ethical principles.

The cross-dressing Libertarian impersonator elected by Republican votes is Sen. Laura Ebke of Nebraska’s 32nd district. The Greek gifts she bears are deregulation of bribe-dominated professions and partial clemency for persons branded felons by the Kleptocracy for associating with some plant leaves. Ebke’s cold deck is an offer to hand back a tiny portion of the individual rights previously sequestered by God’s Own Prohibitionists, in exchange for Libertarian acceptance of a planted impostor whom Nebraska Libertarians voted against. Here’s the Ram Johnston gunpoint coercion position, complete with misleading label:

Let me state unequivocally my personal positionI am Pro-Life. –Laura Ebke

The set-up has already brought panhandling spam from the LP in support of this Republican bait-and-switch trap. What remains to be seen is whether this particular sting, doubtless patterned after a John Grisham novel (Runaway Jury), will lure innocent Libertarian voters into betraying the individual rights won for women when Toni Nathan and John Hospers placed our platform before the voters and conquered individual rights for women.

One expects the Wall Street Journal to come shilling for Republican infiltrators. But this particular fake libertarian switcheroo has been convincing enough to take in LP fund-raisers and Reason Magazine. Their error, which the predators exploit, is to imagine that we need sitting politicians rather than libertarian spoiler votes in order to strike down bad laws. This red herring bait serves only to reinforce reliance on people, rather than the principles voters expect the party do defend with focussed integrity.

People of Nebraska, don’t fall for it. It’s a set-up! Swap your votes for leveraged Libertarian support in other districts if you can, but do not fall for this desperate false flag maneuver! The Republican/Prohibition Axis of Evil is gulling you to increase its lopsided control over your State by switching in a double for an additional 2%.

UPDATE: The antichoice fake libertarian lost the election to Tom Brands, but not before making libertarians look bad.

If you ever need translations of con games, loaded dice, shapes, misspots, cold decks, marked cards, long cons, rigged roulette wheels, shiners, false cuts, daubing, crimping, holdouts, peeking, palming, middle-card deals, stacking, waving, belly-strippers, pictures, luminous readers and other sharper and grifter hustles, drop me a line.

Political planks on legalization, 1932

Liberal Repeal party

Repeal party threatens to earn spoiler votes

In 1932, platform debates were aired nationwide and reported in newpapers everywhere. Here are the Democratic, Republican, Prohibition and Liberal Party planks on legalization of alcoholic beverages:

Prohibition party plank: [Invokes Almighty God and the Prince of Peace…] We unequivocally oppose the repeal or weakening of the Eighteenth Amendment or of the laws enacted thereunder, and insist upon the strengthening of those laws. …can and will coordinate all the powers of government, Federal, State and local, strictly to enforce, by adequate and unescapable punishment of all violators, this wise and beneficent law. (…) We indict and condemn the Republican and Democratic parties for the continued nullification of the Eighteenth Amendment and their present determination to repeal the amendment on the excuse that it cannot be enforced… (Johnson and Porter 1975 337-338)

Republican prohibition plank: We do not favor a submission limited to the issue of retention or repeal, for the American nation never in its history has gone backward, and in this case the progress which has been thus far made must be preserved, while the evils must be eliminated.
We therefore believe that the people should have an opportunity to pass upon a proposed amendment the provision of which, while retaining in the Federal Government power to preserve the gains already made in dealing with the evils inherent in the liquor traffic, shall allow the States to deal with the problem as their citizens may determine, but subject always to the power of the Federal Government to protect those States where prohibition may exist and safeguard our citizens everywhere from the return of the saloon and attendant abuses.
Such an amendment should be promptly submitted to the States by Congress, to be acted upon by State conventions called for that sole purpose in accordance with the provisions of Article V of the Constitution and adequately safeguarded so as to be truly representative. (Johnson and Porter 1975 348-349)

Liberal Party prohibition plank: We demand the immediate repeal of the Eighteenth Amendment. We demand that, without modification or compromise of any kind, the entire question of liquor control shall be returned to the States, where the use of beverages can be regulated by local option in each State, county, city, or otherwise, or prohibited, according to the wishes of the people therein. With this local option, or other control established, the sale of beverages, except that saloons are permanently abolished, should be freely permitted by law. (…)
To those who say that the system should be modified so as to permit the sale of wine and beer, we answer that you cannot modify anything that is essentially wrong. You have not thought the matter through. Besides, any modification of any kind would fail to correct the central evil. The bootlegger would still rule the situation, and the traffic in hard liquors, now so universally effective, would still make it necessary to preserve the whole system of futile enforcement, together with the violence and corruption which now disgrace it. Therefore, the Eighteenth Amendment must go out of the Constitution, root and branch. (The Liberal Party in America, 1931 pp 106-7)

Democratic prohibition repeal plank: We advocate the repeal of the Eighteenth Amendment. To effect such repeal we demand that Congress immediately propose a Constitutional Amendment to truly represent the conventions in the states to act solely on that proposal; we urge the enactment of such measures by the several States as will actually promote temperance, effectively prevent the return of the saloon, and bring the liquor traffic into the open under complete supervision and control by the states.
We demand that the Federal Government effectively exercise its power to enable the states to protect themselves against importation of intoxicating liquors in violation of their laws.
Pending repeal, we favor immediate modification of the Volstead Act; to legalize the manufacture and sale of beer and other beverages of such alcoholic content as is permissible under the Constitution and to provide therefrom a proper and needed revenue.
We condemn the improper and excessive use of money in political activities. (Johnson and Porter 1975 332)

Observe that the Republicans copied the Prohibition Party platform (in 1928) and the Democrats copied the 1931 Liberal Party wet plank (calling for repeal of the Prohibition amendment). In both cases, small parties casting less than 1.4% of the vote caused the major parties to adopt or reject important changes in the laws. This is the spoiler vote leverage effect.

Choosing a legal translator or court interpreter is also easier when you check their credentials to see what they offer.

Certified Portuguese Translators

A statistical breakdown of ATA-certified Portuguese translators. These are translators who have passed a relatively simple test by translating some 700 to 800 words in three passages selected out of a total of five. Three major errors or 20 minor errors suffice to fail a passage, and one has to pass two to pass the test. From 1981 until 2004, passing at least one of these tests was a requirement for voting in the association. People who have passed the tests are usually listed on the ATA website and hence are verifiable.

More and more entities are exercising responsible stewardship by checking translator qualifications. So, what is an ATA-certified Portuguese translator? Of the 987 persons claiming the ability to translate to or from Portuguese with professional competence, only about 16% have passed either of the two separate and distinct tests. Four out of five alleged Portuguese into English translators have never passed that specific test and only 14% of those claiming the ability to translate from English into Portuguese have demonstrated that ability by passing the other specific test. Most of the people who pass either test are native speakers of the target language, meaning that is their dominant language.

If someone says “I am an ATA-certified Portuguese translator,” that doesn’t tell you very much unless they mean they have passed the tests in both directions. Only one percent of all of ATA members claiming some competence as Portuguese translators have passed the certification tests in both directions. That works out to exactly 12 listed translators at the time of writing (2 more are unlisted). Although certification in one direction is better than no certification at all, only one in about 18 certified translators can reliably work in both directions for Portuguese. Here is a breakdown of the numbers:

ATA members who Claim E-P Claim P-E Claim Bidirectional
Claim direction ability 441 546 643 (estimated)
Certified f/direction(s) 86 75 12 (or 14)
Unverified 355 471 359
% unverified 80 86 36
% Certified 20 14 1

Most certified translators only assert that they are certified in one particular direction. The ATA, for reasons of internal politics, goes to great lengths to suggest that certification tests have nothing to do with interpreting ability. I have observed many interpreters, and every one of the certified translators who has passed the test in both directions has turned out to be capable of interpreting with professional competence in both directions (without necessarily liking the work). Somewhere in between 284 and 643 of these interpreters claim competence in both directions. The data tell us nothing about overlap, but the ratios of certified to uncertified (as translators) appear to be in the same ballpark for interpreters as for translators. As you might expect, most (but by no means all) of the better bidirectional interpreters in the ATA have passed at least one of the tests as near as I can ascertain.

Looking at the ATA as a whole, one is struck by the tiny number of people are certified into three different languages. When total membership stood at 8000, there were three such members. It is probably a safe bet that there are approximately half a dozen translators certified into three target languages today.