Whether Boortz gets the boot or not, we are still left with a highly dubious LNC.
Many boots have been worn out tryin' to kick some sense into the LNC bureaucrats. Regarding business relationships with spouses, they don't seem to learn from their mistakes. There is little there one can rally behind. They seem confused about what their core values really are. Passion is reserved for infighting. A committee is a committee, I guess.
I'm not so confused, when I hit a brick wall, I look for a different route, and I have found there are many.
People, like the Kubby's, who walk the talk, are my kind of leaders. I will rally behind that. I don't have to worry about whether they deserve my support or how they spent the money.
They are a rare breed.

I'm confused !

Hasn't the LP invited people to its conventions who strongly disagree with it on topics ?

I remember the excitement (nationaly or localy) on having Nadine Strasberg of the ACLU accept an invitation.
God only knows what socialist ideas she supports !

So what's the big deal (apart from making an anti-war protest to the LP) ?

What's that you say ? Boortz is a member of the LP ?

If that is the source of the anger or part of it, then why isn't that stated in the petition ?

Ohh, you don't want come clean as to all the goals of this movement . Now I understand.

Yep, I agree. If you want to send all "pro-war" members in the LP a message then this is definitely the way to do it.

Can we work on those "pro-lifers" next ?

Neal Boortz has made support of the war a defining issue. He supports Bush on the basis of it.

Nadine Strasberg probably holds all kinds of crazy socialist ideas. But Strasberg didn't define those views as the most important political considerations of the day.

Also, I don't believe that Nadine (Strossen, right?) advertises herself as a Libertarian -- nor does the Libertarian Party advertise her as such, nor do the media or the public identify her as such.

The point being, that she was invited as an outsider guest with whom we share common points of agreement -- NOT as "one of us". Neal is seen by most as "one of us" -- a characterization which he embraces (despite declaring that most of us are his enemies as well), and which as far as I know, the LP also embraces.

That being the case, and with him being a public personality and an invited speaker, he carries a burden of representation. If Nadine Strossen went around saying, "I'm a Libertarian, and as a Libertarian I believe we need a 75% income tax," then people would rightly be concerned about giving her the official spotlight as a Libertarian, or publicly encouraging the connection between her and the party. Even with her being big on civil liberties, and against the drug war, etc.

Good points, Lance.

It really annoys me the way Boortz basically says things like, "I'm a Libertarian. I'm a member of the Libertarian Party. The Republicans spend too much. With this in mind, I, as a Libertarian, support George W. Bush because the war is so important to me."

Any libertarian who disagrees with us on this fundamental issue to the point of supporting the current administration has no place in the LP spotlight. Would we have let a "Libertarian" speak in the 1990s, who was planning to support Bill Clinton because of universal healthcare?

I may be way out on a limb on this,but has anybody considered Boortz may be a plant/provacateur/undercover operative from the GOP to cause division within the LP?

I was giving serious consideration to becoming a member of and learning more about what the libertarian party had to offer (based on NB's information he provides on his show), but after visiting this web site and seeing what the group apparently is all about, my conscience won't let me. Several of these comments quotes taken from his show notes were completely out of context, and the ones that were accurate reflect personal opinion of people's outlooks of certain policies and not necessarily reflective of entire political groups way of thinking. This is common sense, which according to many of the anti-NB people on this page is not considered. This may be an area where the libertarian group can really appeal to those of us that are disillusioned with both current parties: That is use common sense in determining direction. I won't pick apart all the nonsense that mentioned about why NB shouldn't speak, just one. His comments about the Muslim religion are dead on balls accurate. Anyone that doesn't agree is in denial, lives under a rock, or is trying to be politically correct and not offend any group. If, after 9/11, the world does not see the philosophies of the groups that practice this so called religion, and how dangerous they are, I pity you. Just food for thought for this group that can't seem to decide on what they really stand for.

Perhaps it hasn't occurred to any of you folks, but if we allow OBL and company to frighten us into a box, it's only a matter of time before he(or one of his successors) decides he wants the box.

OBLs' goals will restrict our freedom in the world, should he achieve them. Our freedom to participate in international commerce is vital to our economic freedom here at home. Our ability to conduct international commerce is dependent upon our ability to protect our commercial interests. OBL is a threat to our ability to protect our interests and those of our partners in commerce. (evidence: Malaysia, The Phillipines, Nigeria, etc.)

One of OBLs' complaints that I see referred to here often is that "infidels" are on Holy Soil. He omits, you forget, we were invited there by the Saudi Gov't, to help them defend themselves against Saddams' predations. Saddam's captired, and our bases are moving off Saudi Soil. That complaint has been discharged! But it demonstrates the need to protect ourselves, and our allies, and that that protection need not be permanent, as long as we present a united front against Saddam, OBL, et,al.

There is a new DEBATE BOORTZ petition http://www.petitiononline.com/debatelp/petition.html Now up to 83.

Of course the BOOT BOORTZ petition keeps going strong at 652 signatures. http://www.petitiononline.com/noboortz/petition.html

There's also a poll that gives a number of options, keep him, boot him, debate him, who cares, etc.
http://vote.sparklit.com/poll.spark/804051
However it's number of respondents remains under 200.

If you want to boot or debate him, however, you might answer to bounce up the numbers. He must have told his listeners to go to it and vote for him speaking since that's the most votes.

Carol in dc

If you are coming to the convention make sure you bring your BOORTZ IS A REPUBLICAN signs to flash all over the floor -- esp in CSPAN camera-eye view -- during his talk. One of many ideas for fun and games with the big fat fascist...

OOOH! Thing Boortz will report me to the FBI for TERRORISTIC THREATS???

Carol in dc

Don't forget there is a new DEBATE BOORTZ petition http://www.petitiononline.com/debatelp/petition.htm
Seeing him humiliated in debate by a hard core lib is still the best option.

Secede from Boortz and all fascists
http://www.secession.net

NEAL BOORTZ FOR PRESIDENT!

That's right...100% purity will insure that the LP is never taken seriously as a political party. Boortz speaks to 4 million of people a week and you idiots are doing your best to piss him off.

That's why LP candidates rarely get 2% of the vote in an election, let alone have 2% representation in any governing body except those in Leadville, CO.

You people keep pissing him off...we'd be glad to have Boortz in the Republican Liberty Caucus.

How does a homophobe, anti-semite like Carol Moore get such a voice within the LP? I seen her pictures and heard her voice -- it ain't either of those.

I've been a practicing Libertarian for many years, but only recently joined the party. I have always appreciated the fact that Libertarians, by and large, think before opening their mouths on any issue. Once open, however, they usually never close them in time to keep them from spouting off some whacko belief that turns the electorate that we want to vote for us completely off.

The bottom line is, if you listen to Neal carefully, he has put out his reasons for supporting the war in Iraq. I have listened to it any number of times, and while I don't agree with it, his explanation could make sense to people who agree with the evidence he uses. I happen to not personally belive that evidence, but then I don't get daily security briefings as does the President. Neal chooses to believe them; hence, his stance.

Neal Boortz is a Libertarian in almost every other way, and his voice promoting Libertarian causes is far better than this juvenile ranting about his stance on the war. Your efforts to boot him from the convention are childish and unworthy of Libertarians in general. This should remain a party of ideas, and a party of open and honest dialogue. Libertarians will never get more than miniscule electoral numers as long as they continue to ride the principled purity line. Politics is the art of the possible, and a party of 2% or 3% agreement on issues will never get their way. Compromise will always be needed, and shutting out those who support us in 95% of our issues is no way to gain political strength.

If you like the label of Losertarians, stay in your ideolgical hole.

I have a new button besides the old one of BOOT BOORTZ with Lady Liberty giving him the boot. The new one reads: Only NAZIs promote FBI Spying on Libertarians (in appropriate red and black).

But if you want general liberty, peace, etc buttons, as well as campaign 2004 buttons for Gary Nolan, go to the main page http://www.radicalbuttons.com (No other candidates are making artwork available to us entrepreneurs.)

If you support Gary and want to link to my more mainstream site where his buttons are on top, go to http://www.topicalbuttons.com

As for Boortz, at this point I think he has more than adequately alerted libertarians to his non-libertarian views so the only question is, will he have the nerve to mention them during his speech to a chorus of promised boos??

Also, the lead convention planner infers Boortz may not intend to take ANY questions from us MERE libertarians when she asked in a post for distribution: "I'm not sure what you hope to gain by being able to question (badger) Boortz there as to any and all of his anti-libertarian positions. He's got a show and website for just that sort of thing, and if he chooses not to answer, that's his right."

"...He must have told his listeners to go to it and vote for him speaking since that's the most votes. - Carol in dc"

Or, people can actually think for themselves and decided on their own to vote for Boortz... hmm, what an idea. Carol, sweetie, do you realize what your pathetic name calling (big fat fascist, etc.) makes you sound like?