Other than the fact that this very minute Murkowski is fighting for the GOP nomination and the national GOP is sending legal support to help her do so, I suppose nothing at all.

The Libertarians need to take a different tact. If we were to take the resources we piss away every year and focus our efforts on one state or a small set of elections, well, then we might actually get to govern a little bit and show how we are different. Look what Ron Paul has been able to do about getting the Fed better known and the popularity he has a result. Of course, he’s a Republican, but the parts of his message that have resonate longer are those that are currently relevant, particularly in younger people who are really freaked out right now. Talk to a recent college grad, you’ll find out just how bad it is. Programs that used to see 80% or better job offer/placement for grads are seeing more like 10% now. It’s devastating, and this delayed start is something that’s very hard to ever make up. To make matters worse, they are graduating with obscene amounts of debt which puts them even farther behind the starting line. They can surely be lured away from Obama in large numbers.

I also think that the Republicans are far weaker now than they look. I interpret the electorate as being sick to death of both parties. In the Republican party, we have to be able to pick off some of the socially liberal ones. The Tea Party is best understood as a fundamentalist Christian political movement, and you know that they and the LiBeckitarian types (you know the Libertarians who want to fight the drug war and Iraq) have scared away many intelligent, socially modern Republicans – who are also very freaked out by the economy. I think the same is true of moderate Democrats – you know, the ones who weren’t Marxists in college?

Think about it, in many ways Libertarian policies allow for a common ground for both parties to meet on. We should sell the shit out of that, and we should also say that in a Libertarian society, Progressives could form collectivist communities and Christian fundamentalists could build theirs. I wouldn’t want to live in either, but they would have much greater resources at their disposal to fashion a world that they want to live in, but they just couldn’t enforce it with the power of the state. Sounds like a fair deal to me? But do you ever hear that kind of positioning from Libertarians?

No, instead we are stuck explaining the gold standard, or arguing for legalizing drugs. It’s Communications 101 to control an agenda – and you can’t do that without a strong organization supporting a candidate. So, most Libertarians candidates are doomed from the start. This is why we show much higher support for our positions than for the party, it’s because nobody thinks we can win because we come off as amateurs. It’s why I don’t help – every time I try to stick my nose in, I rapidly become nauseous.

My point is that there are lots of ways to get elected, but the fundamental question for Libertarians is always resources.

Yeah, sounds about right. Everyone else has abandoned their platforms in favor of bigger government, why shouldn’t the Libertarians?

He’s right. Lately I’ve not thought much about the libertarian party.

But if they do this, I’ll know for sure they’re political whores for sale to the highest bidder, no questions asked, no principles stand in the way of whoring for money and fame.

Actually the fact that they’re looking at selling the party name for some cash and press explains who and what they are.

New slogans:
Alaska Libertarian party; when the normal political whores are just too expensive.
Alaska Libertarian party; we’ll do anything you want for a price… Anything.
Alaska Libertarian party; we only have principles if they don’t cost us anything.
Alaska Libertarian Party; Libertarian is optional; we’re just looking for a party.

As for finding thousands of ballots in a trunk.. If you think it can’t happen, see: AL Franken.

Rod Blago, former gov of Illinois, is facing yet again charges he tried to sell a US Senate seat…

Murkowski seems to be planning on handing over a wad of cash to the Alaskan Libertarian Party in order for their current nominee to step down in her favor…

How is this different? If the ALP’s current candidate benefits financially from this transaction isn’t that a clear case of corruption? Buying a seat with cash? And isn’t it even worse than Rod Blagovich’s case since no actual transaction happened in his situation?