Article Image
IPFS News Link • Campaign for Liberty

The Campaign for "Liberty" - by Jim Davidson

• The Libertarian Enterprise
It looks like the people running Campaign for "Liberty" are no longer committed to non-intervention. They have endorsed through their Colorado branch a virulent war monger named Ken Buck. Their senate candidate in Connecticut, Peter Schiff, says he would bomb Iran given "credible evidence" that they are building a nuclear weapon. Their senate candidate in Kentucky, Rand Paul, was just endorsed by neo-conservative Sarah Palin, and says he wants to continue the war in Afghanistan.

Meanwhile, Ron Paul pretends his arm has been twisted by the Texas GOP to endorse all the incumbent Republicans in Texas. Including virulent war mongers and neo-conservatives like Lamar Smith who voted yes on war with Iraq, no on withdrawing troops from Iraq, yes on sanctions for Iran, yes on FISA. Ron Paul endorsed him. Kind of a kick in the pants to Stephen Schoppe, a liberty activist working to unseat Smith in the primary.

9 Comments in Response to

Comment by Tommie Taylor (20900)
Entered on:

I understand that the author of the article has been hurt by government and in all probability has been denied his Constitutional rights, so his view on continuing to fight for liberty is a bit skewed.  He's upset because the Libertarian party has not made as much headway in 39 years as he would like.  I'm Afro American and I know that my people had to wait  about 200 years for chattel slavery to end (Civil War and Emancipation Proclamation) and to wait another 100 years to come out of segregation and second-class citizenship (U. S. Civil Rights movement).  Freedom fighters must keep fighting for freedom no matter the number of years!

As for Campaign for Liberty, I began to mistrust John Tate several months ago because he was always sending money letters out.  I'll just send money directly to a candidate from now on.  I'm going to continue to support Ron Paul because I believe in End the Fed, the most important legislation presently in Congress.  I certainly think that he is head and shoulders above the other Tea Party candidates in his Congressional District and he has a 30 year record of standing on principal.  I don't have to support the other candidates.

Comment by Anonymous ()
Entered on:

FBI Cointelpro

How Government Agents Neutralize Liberty Activism

Comment by Rocky Frisco (15250)
Entered on:

They have lost my support. One of my non-negotiable principles is that I will never willingly support any effort that includes murdering children. Where are Ron Paul's principles in this? Are his principles negotiable? What a disappointment. I have come to the conclusion that Rand Paul is a snake.

Comment by Doug Schell (28242)
Entered on:

 No surprise.  I saw this coming when I saw how the $32 million given to Paul was squandered.  Paul is great on libertarian philosophy but stinks in his choises of who to run his campaign and Campaign for Liberty.  Proble is who else can we turn to?

Comment by Anonymous ()
Entered on:


A 501c4 cannot endorse a politician for elected office.  Opinion on this matter is irrelevant.

A 501c4 may educate its members on where candidates stand on the ISSUES.  It may RATE candidates based on their stand on the ISSUES and educate their membership about those ratings.

Comment by Benjamin Weir (28239)
Entered on:

501c3 can't endorse, but 501c4 can.

501(c)(4)s can provide candidate-related information to their members, endorse specific candidates, urge the election or defeat of a particular candidate, and encourage contributions to a candidate. 



And yes, the Campaign for Money did endorse a bunch of Neo-Cons. I fully see Rand Paul, Genocidal Schiff, and Ken Buck as Neo-Cons. The part I'm worried about is not that congress needs to declare war. The part I'm worried about is that we HAVE the war in the first place. When you are killing millions, technicalities aren't what we should be focusing on.

Comment by Brock Lorber (11655)
Entered on:

Wait, legality of actions is determined by tax status?


Comment by Anonymous ()
Entered on:

 The other thing is the article is just wrong.  The C4L did not endorse Ken Buck.  The C4L is a 501c4 and it is illegal for them to endorse any candidate.


Comment by Found Zero (11589)
Entered on:

Yeah that's the down side all right.  The up side is that they are being responsive and all is not lost.

This blood letting had a start and it will have a finish and we'll still have a movement.

I saw this whole thing coming. It has almost passed. Papa Oyate still loves you and he has never lied to except for that one time he opened up his mouth ;)