Category Archives: Libertarian Party of Oregon

I Unregister from the Libertarian Party

Due to the castrated response of the Libertarian National Committee to a situation in which members whose views are, in my opinion, completely antithetical to Libertarianism are being permitted to remain members, I have unregistered as a Libertarian Party member after 20 years, and now will remain unaffiliated unless another party comes along preaching the Jeffersonian-Rothbardian principles of inalienable Individual Rights and their accompanying economic principles.

Friedrich Hayek, Ludwig Mises, and Murray Rothbard all pointed out how the worst rise to the top in any bureaucracy, and that has clearly happened in the Libertarian Party. The puerile reasons given for continuing to include what are, in my opinion, anti-Libertarians in the party show that the worst have risen to the top in this organization, and at this point to continue as a member of the party is to enable its very opposite.

A parallel situation would occur if a group of Stalinists established themselves at the head of a state or county party committee and the party refused to throw them out. Obviously, to remain in the party in such a situation would be to promote and enable Stalinism.

And a similar situation arose in the dispute over which Libertarian Party of Oregon group was the legitimate one. The Hebdor/Wagner group was obviously the valid group and had been so determined several times by the Oregon Secretary of State, but the Burke group, which had forced the real LPO to waste vast sums of money and energy in legal disputes, was still invited and accepted at the LP’s national convention as an alternative and valid Libertarian group. The Burke group even supported President Trump in his election bid, instead of Governor Johnson, and basically bought their way into some kind of pseudo-legitimacy.

I suggest true libertarians either remain unaffiliated, or form a new party under a name like “The Liberal Party” (as the old Liberal Party in the British Parliament was the closest to the libertarian philosophy — however this would obviously cause confusion because modern Liberals in America have come to mean the antithesis of Classical Liberalism), or the Classical Liberal Party, or the Jeffersonian Party if they are Minarchists like Jefferson, or the Anarcho-Capitalist, or Capitalist, or Rothbardian Party if they are Rothbardians.

If the fascist elements are micturated out of the Party, I would gladly rejoin, since all the other political parties in America are far worse.

Disassociation is one of the few non-violent libertarian actions that one can take against tyranny, or mediocre, caponed bureaucrats.

—Paul Grad, enviro-vegan libertarian

Advertisements

Oregon Measures 94 to 100 2016 Election: My Recommendations

My recommendations, as a self-styled Libertarian, on Oregon’s 2016 Ballot Measures, are as follows:

Measure 94, which amends the Oregon Constitution, and removes the mandatory retirement age of 75 for judges, obviously deserves a “yes” vote. The idea that judges at 75 suddenly become incompetent to rule on cases is absurd. Indeed, jurisprudence is something that probably improves with age, as the judge is exposed to more and more cases. Moreover, there are already ways of removing any judge who suddenly goes “gaga”.

Measure 95 is a vile, heinous measure that would tie the financial health of government universities to the performance of the stock market. Here is another measure designed to give government backing to the price levels of stocks, i.e. private corporations. One can see the damage such cozenage has done to the Japanese economy, where the central bank has been buying stocks for years. Obviously, government entities buying stocks ties an entire nation’s economy to the fortunes of the stock market, and gives another “too big to fail” reason for the Federal Reserve to print more money to “bail out” the stock market, while it dilutes your purchasing power and makes you poorer. Indeed, the Federal Reserve is already preparing the public for such a massive theft by talking about the necessity of buying “securities” — ironically the most insecure investment there is besides buying a government lottery ticket. This measure is designed to defeat the “separation of government and private business”, which has already been defeated at the Federal level. Libertarians believe in separation of business and state, just as we must have separation of church and state, and separation of education and state. The failure to maintain such separations is a major reason for the steady decline of America as a civilization. Vote “no” on measure 95.

I oppose Measure 96, which would earmark 1.5% of lottery earnings for veterans services. While this may be a worthy use of the money, I oppose it for two reasons. Firstly, because I strongly oppose the lottery itself, which puts the State in the position of promoting vice, and destroying the financial well-being of its citizens. So any good-sounding reason for the lottery merely increases its attractiveness to the public. Secondly, the military and veterans affairs are provinces of the Federal Government, not of the State, and any aid to veterans should come out of the Veterans Administration and Federal Funds, not State funds. Any money the lottery players of Oregon save the Federal Government will quickly be absorbed by the next billion-dollar stealth plane the Pentagon builds. So vote No on 96.

Measure 97, the supposed tax on corporations in Oregon, has been well-exposed as another scheme to transfer monies from poor Oregon consumers to the wealthy, well-fed retirees of the Oregon State Pension boondoggle, PERS. Currently there are at least 1,195 PERS recipients receiving at least $100,000/yr as a pension. One receives $55,000/month, and four years ago I counted 12 that were receiving over $212,000/yr. Any funds looted from the public through increased costs for corporate services will surely go into these bloated, immoral pensions, which well illustrate the legalized theft possible under socialist governments like Oregon has had under Governors Kitzhaber and Brown. Vote “No” on 97, unless you believe in robbing the poor to maintain the cushy lifestyles of wealthy retired State bureaucrats.

(Note that in 2014, when I ran for Governor, I proposed a corporate income tax while eliminating the personal income tax. My tax would have begun at 1% for corporations with profits of $10-$100million, rising slowly from $100million to $1billion. Corporations making $1billion or more would have paid 8%, which is the current personal income tax rate on individuals making $30,000.)

Measure 98 is another ripoff you should definitely vote “No” on. It provides $800 per high school student to prevent and discourage drop-outs. The Government schools in Oregon are so lousy that many teens can’t wait to get out from under this royal wasting of the time of their youth. If the schools were really interesting, and had anything truly relevant to a youth’s life, there would be no “drop-out” problem. But children, who can’t vote, are the easiest group to exploit in our society, and the huge bureaucracies that make a fortune running the Oregon School system are not about to lose all that filthy lucre by having their victims drop out of it. Therefore they say let’s throw more money at the problem that their own existence has created. Government schools are a curse on children, and we should vote against any continuance or further financial aid to them.

Measure 99 is another one that indirectly promotes the State lottery and sends yet more private sector funds to the rotten government schools. It would give 4% of lottery funds to provide “outdoor schools” for 5th and 6th graders. (And one must wonder about the logic behind this measure since the weather for outdoor classes is most inclement during the Oregon school year.) Just like Measure 96, it encourages people to play the lottery for what seems like a good cause. I wonder how many children have been left parentless because the Oregon Lottery caused their parents to become financially destitute and commit suicide. The Lottery, besides being Immoral and outside the sphere of Jeffersonian Government, financially destroys the lives of countless people, whose tragic stories never become public. Let’s rid ourselves of this outrage known as the Oregon Lottery.

Measure 100 is an obvious “yes” vote if you consider yourself an “Enviro-Libertarian” as I do. While the measure is flawed, it is basically an anti-hunting measure, and I oppose hunting in all its forms as legalized animal torture.

So in summary here are my recommendations on Oregon State Measures: 94-Yes, 95-No, 96-No, 97-No, 98-No, 99-No, 100-Yes.

—Paul Grad, 2014 Libertarian Party of Oregon Nominee for Governor

Oregon Presidential Primary 2016: Write In Ron Paul

Given the mess in the Republican Presidential Primary, and the suspensions of the Cruz and Kasich campaigns, I am recommending writing in Ron Paul, since none of the listed candidates on the ballot fit the necessities of a fiscally-conservative and Constitutional President. Cruz came closest, but since he dropped out, and there were many flaws in his positions, and Trump is almost certain to get the nomination, one might as well make one’s vote count by writing in someone who is a fiscally-conservative Austrian School of Economics Libertarian like Ron Paul.

For one thing, voting write-in lets the winner, and the other mainstream politicians who lost, know that they don’t have your vote. Additionally, it lowers the percentage of the vote that the winner gets, making them look worse, if only minisculely. If enough people vote write-in, it can lop a few percentage points off the winner, making him look not so invincible. This is healthy for the body politic.

Since Dr. Paul is such an expert on Free-Market Capitalism, and has the correct economic views on almost every issue, and since America is primarily a capitalist country where almost everyone is obsessed, or at least heavily involved, with money or using money to get his daily needs, it makes great sense to put someone at the top of government who understands Economics. Dr. Paul is such an individual.

Therefore the choice is clear. Any Oregonian who really wants to turn government from a corrupt looting mechanism into its Jeffersonian Ideal should write in Ron Paul on the Republican, Libertarian, and Democratic Party ballots.

Vote Ron Paul for President on May 17, 2016!

— Paul Grad, Libertarian Gubernatorial Nominee 2014

 

Donald Trump and the Myth of Inciting to Riot

I noticed tonight that the political websites are full of talk of Donald Trump inciting violence, and his opponents in the Republican and Democratic political ranks seem to be universally jumping on the bandwagon, blaming him for the violence carried out by some of his supporters and the demonstrators themselves. In my previous blog post, I went into the reasons why disrupting his rallies is a property rights crime against both Trump and his rally attendee supporters.paul 19

As I said in my last post, I would not vote for Trump and would write-in Ron Paul first or vote for any decent Libertarian if the National Party ran one. (It looks like the Libertarian Party of Oregon will be choosing their own candidate independent of the National LP.) But the attacks on Trump tonight that seem to be pervading the political websites are based on the erroneous phenomenon of “inciting to riot”.

Inciting to riot implies that the people aggressing against property rights of others have had their wills taken over by another and are not responsible for their violent actions (and a physical assault is a property rights assault in Libertarian theory since your body is part of your property). “I was calm and collected, but so-and-so’s rhetoric was so overwhelming that I got carried away, and committed this murder or assault which I swear I would never ever normally commit, but something came over me and I was no longer in control of my actions. Blame Trump or whomever, Your Honor, don’t blame me.”

This is the universal cop-out of violent demonstrators. Of course they were responsible for their actions of violence. Of course they are the guilty ones and not the rabble-rouser who worked them up into a mouth-foaming frenzy of violence. The rabble-rouser, the demogogue who preaches hatred, may have a moral culpability for attempting to incite them to violence, but under America’s very liberal freedom of speech laws, he is not legally guilty. It is the person who carries out the violence who is the guilty party, and to believe in the validity of “inciting to riot” is to say that people who carry out acts of violence are not morally responsible for their crimes. This is an extremely dangerous idea, far more dangerous than the words of any demagogue.

That said, if a demagogue stood up, tried to work a crowd up enough to riot and carry out a pogrom against, say, Hispanics or Armenians by saying “Kill the Hispanics” or “Kill the Armenians”, both unfortunately completely legal under our liberal Freedom of Speech laws, and a mob descended on a string of Hispanic-owned or Armenian-owned stores, assaulting and murdering the occupants, and a Hispanic or Armenian in the area being attacked shot to death the speaker attempting to incite violence because he felt his life was threatened, and I was on a jury trying the shooter for murder, I would vote to acquit him, and perhaps even contribute to his legal defense. (Note however that it is illegal  and not protected speech in America for a rabble-rouser to say to a mob “Kill Jorge Perez” or “Kill Arpad Avakian”.)

The best weapon against any demagogue who attempts “inciting to riot” is to economically boycott him and anyone who supports him for life. If he or she is a politician, vote against them. “Send them to Coventry”, as they say in England, forever.

-Paul Grad, Libertarian Party of Oregon Gubernatorial Nominee 2014

The Libertarian Party of Oregon Should Nominate Ron Paul for President

When one looks at the horrendous field of candidates being shoved in the face of the American People to serve as their next President, one can only shake ones head and wonder how we came down from Jefferson to this.paul 19

Given the dismal choice, “a choice of cancer or polio” in the words of Sir Mick, and the news today that Donald Trump may go back on his pledge to support the eventual Republican nominee and run as an independent, and given the unique situation of the Libertarian Party of Oregon in relation to the national LP, it seems possible, and actually advisable, for the Libertarian Party of Oregon (LPO) to nominate Ron Paul as their nominee for President of the United States.

Now, there is a long and complex issue between the LPO and the national LP of which the reader might not be aware. In brief, a self-proclaimed rival group calling itself the Libertarian Party of Oregon, with a largely Republican agenda, sought twice to have itself legitimized as the LPO recognized by the Oregon Secretary of State (SOS). After two lengthy legal proceedings and in both cases, the courts ruled in favor of the true LPO, chaired by Wes Wagner, and ruled against the usurpers, led by Richard Burke. The Oregon SOS only recognized and currently recognizes the Wagner faction as the true LPO. The Wagner faction is far more democratic and egalitarian, requiring no dues, and sending ballots to every registered Libertarian in the State. The Burke faction wanted to require dues, and hold a State convention to select candidates.

However, despite the rulings of the Oregon Courts and the Oregon SOS, the national LP Judicial Committee recognized the Burke faction as an affiliate faction, and gave them access to the national convention on an equal footing with the Wagner faction. At the same time, the national LP executive branch continued to recognize the Wagner faction as the legitimate Oregon Party, making for a confusing situation. This is roughly my understanding of the spat between the Oregon LPO and the national LP.

And what this means is that the legitimate Wagner LPO will probably not be attending the national convention because they probably won’t be seated, or will be seated as equals with the Burke faction usurpers.

However, this also means that the LPO has the possibility to choose its own Presidential Nominee, independent of the national party, and would present a situation where a different candidate from the National nominee could be put forth.

Now, after today’s Trump statement that he might run as an Independent, we have the possibility of three major-party candidates running: the Democrat, a non-Trump Republican, and Trump. Given this three-way splitting of the vote, it might be possible for a well-known fourth candidate, with a very radical Libertarian free-market outlook and understanding, to break through and capture the Presidency. And given that the national LP might nominate again Governor Gary Johnson, who failed to ignite much fire in his two previous Presidential campaigns, or the unknown Dr. Mark Feldman, or one of the other unknowns, it seems to me there is a great opportunity for the Libertarian Party of Oregon to make history.

That would be done in a way similar to the Dixiecrat Southern segregationist parties, who ran their own candidates several times in the face of a national candidate who wasn’t racist enough for them.

I would suggest that members of the LPO, upon receiving their nominating ballots, should write in former Congressman and three-time Presidential Candidate Ron Paul for President.

Such an action would bring a ray of hope into a dismal field of candidates that will probably look like: Sanders-or-Clinton, Cruz-or-Rubio, Trump, and Johnson — four candidates splitting the national vote. Under such a fragmentation of the tally, it might be possible for a well-known outside maverick, with a national following that reached over 20% of the vote in several Western States, to gain national media attention by getting on the ballot in just one State, and nominated by a Libertarian Party that was so independent, it was even independent of its national organization (an example of States Rights).

Such an action would not only propel Ron Paul into the national spotlight as an instant candidate, roiling the muddy political waters, but would also propel the Libertarian Party of Oregon into national (and international) prominence as an independent state party, nominating its own candidate, and giving the finger to the national bureaucracy, in classical Libertarian mode.

I realize that many in the Libertarian Party would disagree with many of Ron Paul’s political positions. I do myself. But as far as understanding the economic underpinnings of Capitalism, and its relation to the Jeffersonian Rights adumbrated in the Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights, and as far as understanding Libertarianism, Ron Paul has no equal amongst any politician in America now serving, or serving in the last few decades.

Compared to the garbage being offered the American Public by the major parties, Ron Paul would make a great nominee for President, and a great Libertarian President. I urge all current LPO members to write him in on their nominating ballots, and I urge the Oregon public to register with the Libertarian Party of Oregon, so they can write in Ron Paul.

When it comes to choosing the next President, let Jefferson’s children have a choice, not an echo.

— Paul Grad, LPO Gubernatorial Nominee 2014

America’s Five Political Parties, and the Need of a Sixth

Watching the amazing and beautiful disintegration of America’s major political parties, and experiencing the ecstatic shadenfreude of seeing major politicians being rhetorically ripped apart and sinking in the polls, it struck this writer that America now has five, distinct, political parties, and that, over the last month, alignments have changed drastically in the American Political Colosseum.paul 19

The first thing to occur was the Republican Party handing the election back to the Democrats by having Trump deliver his xenophobic and racist remarks, in my opinion, on Mexicans. You can only imagine the Furore, and the tsunami of justified abuse he would have received if he had substituted for “Mexicans” the words “Blacks, Jews, Asians, Muslims, American Indians, paraplegics”, etc. The other Republican politician’s tepid, feckless criticisms on this Outrage will have cost the Party the Latino vote, I’d guess, as well as a major tranche of voters who share the general repugnance with racism in America, one of the few healthy signs in this society.

But for the Democrats, as in a chess game where two supposed masters continually leave their pieces en pris, no sooner has a week of sure-victory for them gone by, when Obama hands the election right back to the Republicans with his Iran “deal”. Only this dope deal went sour for the Democrats, even if it passes Congress. The Democrats have permanently lost the Jewish-American vote, which was the margin for victory for Obama in the last two elections, the Bible-belt Evangelical vote, and any Independents who like the Republican’s drum-rolling on the military, or who fear terrorism. Add to this the rise of the lovable Socialist, Senator Sanders, who is so bright he comes out for a “deal” guaranteeing nuclear proliferation. He seems to have forgotten the words and the work of that great Civil Rights Libertarian Socialist (yes, there are such creatures), Lord Bertrand Russell, who fought so valiantly to “ban the bomb”.

Indeed, it is now President Obama vs. Lord Russell, and I’ll take the Genius any day.

So, within a fortnight,  the Republicans throw the medicine ball of electoral victory to the Democrats, and the Democrats throw it right back.

That said, we can now commence to discern five major parties in America. These being:

The Democrats-Conventional. The tired old wing of the Democratic Party, as tired as the bags on Ms. Rodham’s face. Her conventional politics, her aversion to debate and be cross-examined, and now her support of the horrendous Iran “deal”, have killed her chances for any national consensus of support. An old hag hazbin.

The Sanders Socialists. A new wave of the tired Old Left laps its putrid waters against the bonnie, bonnie banks of the Love Canal of American Politics. Outside of a few enclaves of Leftism on the West Coast, some of the University towns, and New York, there’s probably very few Leftists left in America who would be moved to tears by hearing the Internationale, or who chirp “Hail Moscow” as they down their Coors. One reason I ran as a pro-Free Marketeer was that I felt that was the core philosophy of America, and had been for a couple of hundred years, and any politician or reformer who wanted to get anything done would have to genuinely share that philosophy, which I do. And, currently, the only Party extant that is truly for the Radical Free-Market is the Libertarian Party, so I ran as a Libertarian with environmental and animal welfare planks appended to the standard Libertarian positions on economic issues.

Additionally, I’d bet dollars to drachmas that the Green Parties, like the Pacific Greens, will probably endorse Sanders. He shares their Socialist views, and perhaps some of their environmental concerns.

Sanders and his socialists will never go anywhere, until their philosophy of looting those who save and invest becomes dominant in America, which it might do when hyperinflation finally hits. Until then, their State-coercion schemes will only make conditions worse, and be laughed at outside of Portland, Seattle, and the SF Bay. But he should do well in Oregon.

Moving from the Democrats to the Republicans, we can now discern two, or even three, distinct parties forming.

First the Trump slap-in-the-face Party. While I find his attacks on Mexicans so repugnant that I could never vote for, endorse, or praise this candidate, I can see why perhaps 20% of the country would like him. The Establishment of both parties are so cowardly and fawning in their sycophantic courting of the public that one feel nausea when they appear on the screen, and Trump’s attacks exploit that discomfiture. I think Ron Paul’s analysis of his character, and his opinion that he was “dangerous”, were fairly accurate.

America’s fourth political Party is the Republican-Conventional Party. This consists of that sorry sad-sack bunch of losers we saw at the Republican “debate” the other night, excluding Trump.

‘Twere obvious from the respectful way they addressed the Nation, that not one of them had ever committed a sin; a sterling group. They’re as irrelevant as Ms. Rodham, but one of them might win, heaven forfend!

The fifth Party in America are the Libertarians, who used to garner 1-2% consistently, but have now scored 8-10% in some States. Their philosophy is based on minimal (or no) government whose sole function is the defense of “personal property rights including your body”, and on the protection of the Individual against Rogue Government (the Bill of Rights), while forbidding aggression against anyone else’s Property Rights. Having run as a Libertarian, read widely on the Philosophy, and being familiar with its major tenents, I can enthusiastically endorse it as the correct Political Philosophy for all mankind, at all times on Earth.

However, on a pragmatic level, I feel the Libertarian’s do not exploit the validity of their Philosophy to its fullness. For example, they seem much more concerned with some minor gun restrictions, like background checks, than they do with major thefts of their wealthy, like the income tax, estate tax, and compulsory social security deductions. I’m the only campaigning Libertarian I ever heard bring up the topic of Jury Duty Slavery, or its violation of the 14th Amendment. And I was rather put off by their failing, in many cases, to understand that second-hand tobacco smoke is a serious assault on our Individual Property Right in our Persons, or than noise pollution from non-survival activities, like boom boxes, is a similar assault. Pitbulls running off-leash in public is a reckless endangerment issue, like drunk driving, but that also didn’t seem to be important to them. And there seemed a great lack of Environmental concerns among many, as Mankind destroys Life on Earth, although about 40% of the Party voting in the Oregon party primary wanted a ban on GMO-crops, which usually indicates a high level of Environmental awareness. But West Coast Libertarians probably differ from the National norm.

So those are the Five Current Political Parties: The Democrats-Main, the Democrats-Socialist, The Republicans-Main, The Trump Republicans or 3rd Party, and the Libertarians. And, outside of these delineations, are also a massive number of “Independents” who could flock to any of these parties.

In my next post, I will give my views on the necessity of a new, major political party in America, and what it’s general platform should be.

-Paul Grad, Vegan Libertarian, 2014 Libertarian Party of Oregon Nominee for Governor

Good on Nebraska: The Abolition of Government Murder

“I should not regret a fair and full trial of the entire abolition of capital punishment.” — President James Madisonpaul 19

Kudos on the Nebraska State Legislature for abolishing Capital Punishment in Nebraska, and overriding the veto of its necrophilic Governor! Unlike “Liberal” Oregon, “Conservative” Nebraska has taken a moral step and a Jeffersonian step towards a true Libertarian governance.

When I ran for Governor of Oregon, my number two proposal was the abolition of Capital Punishment, that vital cornerstone of Fascism, which permits the State to commit judicial murder, in violation of the Inalienable Right to Life contained in the Declaration of Independence. Nebraska has now come into line with that Declaration.

Thankfully, no more innocent people will be murdered by the State of Nebraska, thanks to those in the legislature who voted for abolition. They have performed a highly moral deed.

-Paul Grad, former Libertarian Party of Oregon Gubernatorial Nominee

Paul Grad for Oregon Governor: Observations on My 2014 Gubernatorial Campaign

paul 19Looking back on my run for the Oregon Governorship in 2014 as the nominee of the Libertarian Party of Oregon, I have several observations on the campaign which might be worthwhile sharing.

I ran because I’d long thought about running for office, but only for a top position. I wanted to radically change things, not begin a long career up the professional politician’s career-ladder. That’s why I made my proposals radical, and said just what I thought on the issues. There were several laws I felt were needed, and many abuses I felt were not being addressed or even talked about by anyone, so I determined to bring those to the public’s attention as part of my campaign.

I planned to run just a local campaign, and disseminate my views largely through posts on this website. I wrote about seventy pieces on a whole panoply of political problems, and hid nothing from the public as to what I was for and against, and what I would or wouldn’t do as Governor. Since people insist on political labels, and it is a way for them to conceive of a politician as a friend or enemy, I labelled myself an enviro-Libertarian Jeffersonian Minarchist, or an enviro-vegan Libertarian.

Since I was running as the Libertarian candidate, I confined myself almost exclusively to the general problems and solutions which Libertarians generally propose, like abolition of the personal income tax, or the legalization of gambling and prostitution, but I didn’t hide my views on hunting, logging, or slaughterhouses.

The first challenge was getting one’s statement in the voter’s pamphlet. This required 500 valid signatures, and the State gave you about 35 days to collect them and get them to Salem. You also had to submit your voter’s pamphlet Statement first and have it approved by the Secretary of State’s office before you could start gathering the signatures, and since nowhere on the Secretary of State’s website did they tell you the first date you could submit your Statement,  you didn’t even know beforehand how many days you’d have in which to gather the 500 signatures. The only way we found out was that the Libertarian nominee for Senator, Mike Montchalin, had the initiative to phone the Secretary of State’s office and ask. That’s how careless and inconsiderate the Oregon Secretary of State’s office, then under the auspices of the new Governor Brown, was to those of us running to improve and correct the State’s Government — they couldn’t even be bothered to publish such vital information to the candidates on their website as the first date you were eligible to submit your statement, after which you could start gathering signatures. (Approval seemed to take about half-a-day.)

I spent six days wandering around town, and hanging in front of the Librarium, gathering signatures. Probably 25% were filled out incorrectly, so the signatures were worthless. It was frustrating to talk to someone for five minutes, have them decide to sign, and then notice after they walked away, that they’d filled out something incorrectly.

I saw that I would spend a whole month, that I could expend just talking to people or shaking hands and introducing myself, in this futile attempt to get 350 words in the voter’s pamphlet, although this usually tends to double a candidate’s vote total. The Senatorial Candidate Mike Montchalin got just over twice the number of votes I got with his Statement and photo in the pamphlet, though this may have been due to his better campaigning, or voter repugnance at my views. However I did beat the total of the previous Libertarian candidate, Wes Wagner, who got 19k+ votes in 2010 with his statement in the pamphlet, while I got 21,903 without a statement, but that might well be just because of the growing popularity, though slight, of the Libertarian ideal in American politics. People are seeing that Government is not working, and is abusing them, and the natural American Libertarian streak, that inspired Jefferson and other Founders, is still amongst us.

So, after expending six days to collect about 85 signatures, of which probably 25% had errors which would have disqualified those signatures in the eyes of the Secretary of State, and for the reasons stated in the next paragraph, I suspended my signature gathering drive, and after that I just went up to people and introduced my candidacy and showed them my platform sheet. If I felt they were especially sympathetic or gungho Libertarian, then I’d show them the signature sheet, ask them to sign it, and explain that it was very unlikely I’d get the signatures in time. This liberated me to concentrate on the issues, and, not being a pragmatist, I was quite willing to spend a good deal of time explaining some of my views to one person.

I didn’t like collecting signatures for two other reasons. First, it seemed like this free printing of my Statement at the taxpayer expense was a clear violation of Libertarian Doctrine. Here we were preaching against government welfare, yet we were hypocritically taking a government freebie. That alone made me uncomfortable, and not want my statement in the pamphlet. Secondly, I didn’t like the feeling of having to ask people for something. One could have paid $3,000,  unlike the Democrat and Republican  who had their Parties and donors pay for them, so they didn’t have to tie up a whole month of their life, but that would have been collaborating with the Socialist State, and even enriching it through it’s extortion — talk about an uneven playing field in American Politics. But no Liberal Democrat politician has once called out the injustice of this rich man’s party’s hypocrisy. My Senatorial co-runner, Mr. Montchalin, did, by dint of persistent hard work in 100+ heat in Pendleton, manage to finally collect the 500 signatures, though I’d guess he spent over 20 days doing it. It was over 100 degrees in Cave Junction too almost that entire month, and the streets looked like the post-North Korean nuclear attack on the U.S. West Coast.

However, one thing I did like about the signature gathering process was the fact that I could go up to a stranger and engage them in political discussion without it seeming strange to them. I had the 20 or so key points of my platform printed in large type on a sheet of paper, and I would introduce myself and show them the sheet. This led to some very interesting political discussions.

One fellow I remember looked over my list and liked it until he got to my proposal to ban the supplying of meat, fish and poultry to State Prisoners, since the AMA has stated that a vegetarian diet is completely healthy, and this would save the taxpayer money. Prisoners could still buy certain kinds of meat through the mail, like jerky. He got quite hot under the collar about this proposal, but when I explained that the current situation violated the deepest religious values of both Hindu-American taxpayers and vegetarian/vegan taxpayers, who were forced at gunpoint to violate their most sacred religious and moral views, he saw the point, and ended up shaking hands and saying, “We should debate!”

Then there was the local owner of the Chinese restaurant in town. When I approached him, he spoke Chinese to me, as if he didn’t understand English (he does). He was with his two grandsons. I explained to them that I was running for Governor, and that I would abolish the income tax for small businessmen and abolish business license requirements. One rolled his eyes in surprise; evidently he’d never heard anything so radical before in milquetoast Oregon. Later on, when going to my car which was parked near his house, the owner saw me, smiled, and waved.

Additionally, there was the pleasure of converting someone over to your view by making them think of something they’d never thought of before. One Republican conservative/libertarian liked almost everything on my platform list except the abolition of the death penalty. I explained my plan for a more arduous imprisonment, but also the principle that the life energy of the murderer now should rightly become the property of the next of kin, so that a child whose parent had been murdered would be given the money that prisoner would earn working 6-12 hour days for life. He seemed to never have thought about this, and seemed to like the idea, and added “I see I will have to rethink my views on the Death Penalty”. Another gentleman, who had a booth set up with his wife, liked much of my platform, and liked my belief that marriage, being a religious institution, should be completely separate from our law and government, so that tax rates for single and married would be identical, and divorce would be handled through private religious and secular courts, saving the taxpayer the costs of operating government-run divorce courts and marriage-license offices.

As to my dealings with the Press: Though I sent an email to the local paper, which is a few blocks from my residence, I never once got a request for an interview, even though I was running for Governor. Shows how much the editor loves Libertarians, and his Care and Consideration in carrying out his duties as a member of the American Press. That Care and Consideration I did get from the major newspaper in Bend. They did an editorial staff interview of me over the phone. They would interview all candidates and then endorse one. ( It wasn’t me.) But at least they carried out their responsibility as part of the Press to ask me for my positions.

However, to its credit, the local newspaper did hold a Candidates Night. When I contacted the editor as to whether I could speak, he told me it was only for local candidates, as if the Governorship of the State wasn’t worth the public’s time, but he did say I could set up a table if I wanted. When I showed up at the hall, the editor told me that I could have three minutes to speak, along with fellow LPO Candidate, Mark Seligman.

Prior to our speaking, we had been listening to the questioning of the candidates for County Commissioner and Sheriff, and there had been absolute silence in the hall. But when I got up to speak along with Mr. Seligman, the editor got up and left, and in the back of the hall there were loud conversations going on between the two Sheriff candidates and other individuals, loud enough to the extent that it was very distracting to both the speaker and those trying to listen to us. I purposely raised my voice, and kept raising it as I pounded out the core principles of Jeffersonian Libertarianism and the Inalienable Rights of Man, as well as the Libertarian Non-Aggression Principle, which is its core axiom. Finally the Sheriff candidates looked towards the stage and ceased their banter, and I, and then Mr. Seligman, were able to deliver our talks in silence. So, while I was very disappointed that the editor didn’t even bother to interview me in his paper or explicitly invite me to the Candidates Evening, he did in part make up for it by offering me table space and three minutes to talk, which he could have not offered to do. So I give him a little credit for carrying out his almost-sacred Duty to the Public as part of the American Press.

One part of the Press that really did carry out it’s responsibility to the pubic was Don Merrill and radio station KBOO in Portland. Merrill has done a whole series of in-depth interviews with Oregon politicians and would-be politicians (as well as leading figures in jazz), and his interview with me was excellent. He was very well informed, stayed neutral during the interview, and edited out my faux pas nicely. That interview is available on the web.

As far as the Libertarian Party of Oregon was concerned, as illustrated by the thread discussions held on its Facebook webpage and their votes on potential state initiatives in the Libertarian primary, I felt that they were generally not Libertarian enough in hammering on economic issues. There seemed to be a great emphasis on a few issue, like drivers cards GMO-food labeling,  but not a lot on the basis market issues that Libertarians should be practically concerned with, like abolishing the personal income tax, or estate/inheritance tax, or farm subsidies. Very few commentators seemed to be worked up about these issues compared to topics like GMO crops, gun laws, top two primaries, and the militarization of the police. My top issues were the legalization of heroin for the terminally ill, the abolition of Capital Punishment, and the abolition of the personal income tax. Then abolishing estate tax and legalizing cannabis with a few exceptions.

One thing I did like about Oregon Libertarians was the large percentage of what I’d call enviro-Libertarians, at least if you went by the GMO-crop ban numbers. About 40% of them favored the ban, and about 60% bought the corporate line. There’s a lot of scepticism too about vaccines amongst Libertarians, while even Portland Liberals have voted again and again to ban flouridation of their water, which used to be an ultra-Right and Libertarian position in the 50s and early 60s. So there seems to be a crossover between Environmentalists and Libertarians in Oregon which I thought might make me an unusually welcome candidate, but shortly after I won the nomination, a Pacific Green candidate entered, and I imagine he ended up taking a sizable chunk of Green votes I might have attracted, even though he was a  phony in my view because he was pro-timber logging and pro-hunting, while my platform included the most radical environmental proposals: a live-logging moratorium, banning atrazine and neonicotinoid and other pesticides,  and outlawing hunting, etc.

I also liked the fact that Libertarians seemed generally to take a very sympathetic view of the child-refugees from Central America who were swarming into Texas and other border states due to the Fascistic War on Drugs. Republicans were calling for guns at the border to turn back these children, but the Libertarians clearly saw that this exodus was due to the anti-Libertarian controlled substance laws, which are a prescription for Communistic Totalitarianism, and that’s exactly what we’ve had in America since the days of the Fascist Hoovers (both Jedgar and Herbert), at least in the realm of drug laws. And remember the Democrats have not once stopped this disgusting tyranny when they have held power, showing that they are a morally bankrupt party, and no person should ever join or support them.

And I found it interesting that the anti-pesticide group of which I had attended numerous meetings, and whose proposals I was putting forth almost word for word, never once mentioned my candidacy on their website. Even though a Capitalist was putting forth every proposal they said was so emergently important to save the Earth, they weren’t going to publicize him. Maybe they’d rather have a socialist and Democrat destroying the Earth and spraying pesticides on kids like now former-Governor Kitzhaber than a pro-environmental Capitalist.

Additionally, I attended a sort of farm festival cum environmental information cum artisan’s wares at a large wooded butterfly sanctuary. I wanted to campaign, gather signatures, and felt my environmental views might find fertile fields at this gathering, but when I got there, one of the sponsors and his wife, both in the pesticide group I attended, wouldn’t let me gather signatures, even though this was supposed to be a fair dealing with environmental and farm issues and my platform included very radical environmental measures. The wife of the gentleman hysterically accused me of “forcing her to be a vegetarian” which cracked me up. These Liberal/Leftists (I’d guess they vote Democrat) butcher alpacas for profit, murdering these gentle creatures and grinding their corpses into sausage for filthy lucre, so they weren’t too jazzed about my animal welfare measures, like outlawing slaughterhouses — something I told the public I would not institute without a democratic majority behind it in the State. My purpose on certain issues was to bring them up for discussion, even if they hadn’t a ghost of a chance of passing.

So that shows you. The Left Enviros wouldn’t vote for a radical Capitalist even if he proposed exactly what they wanted, and the Libertarians in general didn’t even seem to know who Murray Rothbard was, or what his views were. And they generally seem engulfed in issues other than the free-market economic issues, which I think are the most important to the American Public, along with Bill of Rights and environmental issues.

And the problems with putrid politicians were well illustrated when I campaigned at our local 4th of July Lions Club Festival, held at the city park. When I arrived, i ran into Mark Seligman, the Libertarian Candidate for the State Legislature from our district. And seated next to Mr. Seligman was Mark Gatlin, who was running for County Commissioner. I chatted with Mr. Seligman on various issues, and at one point mentioned that my top issue was the legalization of heroin for the terminally ill. He told me I shouldn’t mention it because “it’s a vote loser”. The Principle, that no Citizen should have to die in excruciating pain, and has the inalienable Right to put whatever they want in their bodies, seemed to be completely forgotten by Mr. Seligman in the name of “pragmatism”, who remember was calling himself a Libertarian. Disgusted, I turned to Mr. Gatlin. “What do you think? Do you think heroin should be legal for the terminally ill?” His reply was “No.” “So you don’t think people have the right of self ownership?”, I asked. To which he replied, “There’s something else, oxycotin.” “But if someone doesn’t want to take oxycotin, or its not killing their pain, don’t you think they have the Right to take heroin?”. To which he replied, “Legalizing heroin is anarchy.” At that point, I couldn’t bear being around such a callous person, so I split. Then I ran into Mark Seligman again. “I’m telling you, man, legalizing heroin is a vote loser.” I turned to him, “You’re not a Libertarian, you’re a Democrat”, which I’d define as someone who won’t speak out on an injustice because it will lose him votes. (I still voted for him.)

Later, when I was leaving, I happened to pass Mr. Gatlin’s table again just as two teens were standing about 20 feet away, both smoking cigarettes. The smoke was drifting in our direction, and one of my campaign proposals would have criminilized assault by second-hand smoke within 100 feet of another person, with more severe penalties for smoking near a child or pregnant woman. I went up to Mr. Gatlin again. “Do you think that should be legal?” I queried. “What?” he asked. I pointed to the two youths, “That people can be exposed to tobacco-smoke in a public place?” “Yeh”, he replied. So you can see the hypocrisy of this Fascist — he’ll deny the dying pain relief in the name of preventing Anarchy, but he doesn’t mind people being able to poison other people and children in public. What a hypocrite!

After Seligman and Gatlin, I was pretty sick of politicos.

However, the number of interesting conversations I got into, the number of supportive and kind comments I got from people, and the joy of finding another human brain that saw things exactly as you saw them, and agreed with you 100% on an issue, made campaigning worthwhile. It was also gratifying to see someone’s thinking change before your eyes as you brought up an aspect of a political issue that they’d never ever thought about.

Finally, there was the subject of hits on this campaign blog, a subject which must be dear to any minor party candidate not included in the usual polls, which only list the two bipartisan candidates, but would never dare publicize a minor party candidate by including them in its surveys. Such candidates are relegated to the catagory of “other” in the poll results.

Of course, as soon as I set up my campaign blog and began posting, I was expecting a flood of hits daily — surely several hundred. The depressing reality was that, even though I was running for the Governorship of one of the United States, I was only garnering 5-15 hits a day with only three months to go before the election. The lack of interest was disconcerting.

One day, however, I awoke to find over 40 hits. I’d caught on! I’d finally lit that brushfire of Liberty mentioned by Samuel Adams! But no, it was due to the fact that a group, Women Against Registry, was soliciting my views on the sex registry, and had probably noticed my platform proposal to increase the sentence for first degree rape. I had a back and forth dialogue with some of their members, and they made me aware of the problems for people with minor sexual offenses like public urination or mooning that have kept them on sex registries for decades, as well as the problems for children as young as six to ten placed on sex registries. However, they weren’t very jazzed about my proposal for increased rape sentences. After our dialogues ceased, the blog hits declined again to their indifferent 5-15/day.

Contrast those 5-15 hits, to the roughly 1500 I got the day before the election, and the 2150 on the day of election. Political interest really hits a frenzy in those last three or four days before an election, and blog post hits are a good guide to the intensity of that frenzy.

I’m very glad I ran, and put my platform before the Oregon Voters. They finally had a choice and a voice on many issues that no politician ever mentions because they are trying to win, not trying to bring Justice and Right Action to politics.

The worm has eaten its way into the Fascistic apple.

-Paul Grad, enviro-vegan Libertarian,

Paul Grad for Oregon Governor: I Lose the Election

I lost my run for the Oregon Governorship. I received 21,523 votes, or 1.48% of the vote.paul 19

I’d like to thank all those Revolutionaries who had the moxie to vote for me. I think my platform and agenda were absolutely necessary for America at this moment in its development, or should we say degeneration? I doubt that we will get to the next election without a major environmental or financial upheaval.

I see nothing ahead but trouble, given the huge proportion of voters who voted for Democrats and Republicans. The public at large is still almost completely brainwashed into their Democrat-Republican football rivalries, while the world is burning around them. Without that change in political consciousness, nothing will change in America except that the deficits will get larger, further undermining the validity of the currency, and bringing the final crisis that much closer.

This was America’s last election before the storm.

-Paul Grad, former Libertarian Nominee for Oregon Governor

Paul Grad for Oregon Governor: Listing “Other” Votes in Election Returns

If elected Governor of Oregon, one of the electoral reforms I would seek would be the naming and listing of number of votes of any write-in candidate receiving five or more votes in the official election results. Currently, only the total number of “other” votes is recorded, not who received them or how many. I would also seek to require disclosure of the total number of people receiving less than five votes. If the five vote threshold proved cumbersome due to large numbers of write-in candidates, then the threshold could be raised as high as twelve, the number of members of a jury. paul 19

This measure is clearly in the Public Interest as part of the electorate’s Right to know the results of its democratic elections. Obviously, this is a transparency issue, but it has never been raised by the Democrats or Republicans, both of whom claim they are for that same transparency in government. But a Libertarian is the one who is finally getting around to proposing it.

Obviously, if one candidate on the ballot gets 10,000 votes, his rival gets 8,000, and “other” gets 500 votes, it is important for those who voted for an “other” candidate to know how many votes their candidate got. But no one complains about this violation of the Right to Know, which is why I’m bringing it up. Did Joe Writein, whom I voted for, get 499 of those 500 votes, or did 25 candidates get 20 votes each? It is important to know, and doubly important for those in minor parties, or who support Independent write-in candidates, for that is the only way they can gauge the efficacy of their campaigning. And for that reason, we can clearly see why the two wings of the major Fascist party don’t want the people to know those results. This lack of democracy doesn’t seem to bother the Democrats, who are always braying about their love of Democracy and the little guy. I wonder why they don’t bray about this affront to democratic elections?

No, let’s smash this Fascist curtain of obfuscation, and bring the election results into the light of day.

Let’s list complete election results to insure democratic elections.

Paul Grad, Libertarian Nominee for Oregon Governor