The GOP has started its regular raping of the libertarian wing of the party by making gestures about small government and then immediately reverting to big party/big government politics as usual.
After promising to cut $100 billion from the budget, the supposedly uber-conservative Rep. Ryan Paul came in with cuts still short almost $40 billion. The House then set about arguing exceptions to those minimal cuts.
At the same time, the Patriot Act Channel (Fox News), set about an assault of Ron Paul's win of the CPAC straw poll. Evidencing the idea that an electoral victory is only a victory when the governing elites believe it is, Fox News set about minimizing the win, highlighted in this clip of Orwellian spin: watch video here (to be fair, I suspect might just have been poor journalism- either way Fox is either manipulating deliberately, or so shoddy in its reporting that it is inadvertently manipulating).
It is clear than that Ron Paul is highly unlikely to earn the 2012 nomination. Likeminded believers of the idea that the Constitution, not bankers, party chiefs, and special interests; guide our country, should also prepare to be disappointed.
The GOP will happily take the support, but does not intend on making any sort of substantive changes.
What's a sensible libertarian to do? To do when the party is led by the idea that nation building by subsidizing dictators is necessary? That high speed rail spending for the benefit of unions and contractors is an investment? That molesting elderly women at airport checkpoints makes us safer? That arresting people for marijuana is a national priority?
Third party runs for the presidency, the axiom goes, never succeed. Well, at one time it was said the presidency would never be won by a black American, a Catholic American, or even an American west of the Mississippi.
It can be done.
And never has the time been more appropriate. The fractious political environment today is not just a result of idiot extremists on both sides, who foment distrust for political gain. It is mostly because of an underlying, yet not completely formed idea, that the existing two party structure has gamed the system against most people. There is something sinister amiss when Goldman Sachs gets a bailout, Greece gets a bailout, McDonald's gets exceptions to a health bill, the rich get a tax break, and the unemployment rate is (allegedly) at 9%.
There is a peculiar union going on where a true silent majority, outside the realm of special interest groups and loud, influential political minorities (for example, the banking lobby, the agro-industry lobby, the federal employees lobby), is starting to coalesce into an unrepresented group.
This group is presently without leadership and presents an opportunity.
The timing then is perfect for a third party run in 2012 and I submit that a Ron Paul / Dennis Kucinich ticket could not only make a dent in results, it might very well win the whole thing.
These two potential candidates have very little in common, besides what is most important in a statesman: integrity and intelligence.
There is some common ground though and in that area rests a potential platform. I propose the following five agreed points, to be pursued if elected:
1- fix the monetary system. Gradually, because a successful run requires moving from the theoretical (End the Fed!) to the practical, abolish the Federal Reserve and ensure our currency is sound and the insidious, regressive, hidden tax of inflation is put in check. Such a move will (eventually) reassure markets and prevent the boom and bust cycle which brings about the painful recession we are very much not emerging from at the moment.
2- respect the Constitution- all of it- by reversing the trend of ignoring the 4th Amendment. The president, as executive, could immediately turn around the attack on civil liberties that the nation's endured for the past decade. Get rid of the invasive searches, the overly zealous policing, and the fear induced and perpetuating security state we all presently live under. Bring back the idea that liberty trumps security.
3- move to abolish most federal drug laws.
4- remove federal interference in drinking laws. Get rid of the federal laws which tie highway funding to a state mandating a 21 and over drinking law. Let states decide if a 20 year old coming home from Iraq can order a beer or not.
5- cut the defense and intelligence budget 25% over ten years. If done incrementally, we will minimize job loss and can move to a national security posture which is more sensible. Bring troops home from not just Iraq and Afghanistan, but Japan and Germany too (or send them a bill). Libertarians and liberals might disagree about spending money on domestic programs, but every libertarian will agree that given the choice on spending money overseas or in the US, at least domestic spending keeps the money local.
There are technicalities to be worked out here. Chiefly, how would the presence of one candidate on the vice presidential ticket assure their aims would be honored (might not the Paul/Kucinich team win, and then Paul shirk Kucinich's goals?), but I think the decency of both men makes this the least of several concerns.
There needs to be negotiation on issues like abortion, the estate tax, and foreign aid, which I am not certain the Paul/Kucinich union could ever agree on completely.
Some political concessions by both sides will need to be made. Some issues might need to be avoided.
But the sea change that would come about from such an option though, from the opportunity to vote for someone other than whom the political machine spits out, to select someone who can really win, and really will care about the health of the nation and the electorate-- that has value.
I would give anything to have that opportunity.
In fact, I would even be willing to vote for Kucinich/Paul in 2012.
Sensible libertarian views on nearly everything- except foreign affairs.