Libertarian Party

A Moment on the Libertarian Convention Floor With William Weld

The former Massachusetts governor is "good friends" with Mitt Romney, but reluctant to reach out to GOP pals until he knows his Libertarian campaign has traction.

|

From the floor of the Libertarian Party National Convention in Orlando, I managed to get a brief moment face to face with William Weld, the former Massachusetts governor who is likely presidential frontrunner Gary Johnson's personal choice to be his vice president. (I'll be posting more on how seriously Johnson takes needing Weld with him shortly. Pretty seriously, at any rate.) I was with Jeff Tucker of the Foundation for Economic Education, who was talking to Weld first. Below, his responses to Jeff's comments, first asking why he was doing this third party run.

William Weld Facebook

"I think this is a shot at cutting the size and role of government, which is my number one issue. It's the reason I've been a Republican as opposed to a Democrat. It's the reason I've turned Libertarian vs. Republican," Weld says.

"Spending restraint is something of a relic of the past among Republicans," Weld continued. "And what I really can't take is the movement conservative, social conservative anti-abortion and ant-gay, anti-lesbian…" Tucker brings up the drug war.

Weld talks about a legal emphasis on treatment vs. criminalization when it comes to drugs, treating the issue as a "public health emergency rather than a crime." (That's reformist, to be sure, but still annoying for those libertarians who want to see the government more or less ignore private drug use.)

Tucker asked if Trump was what made Weld bolt the GOP. "That moment came for me before Trump," Weld says. "I don't consider Gary and I as anti-Clinton or anti-Trump. It's based on the premise that we don't agree with either party.

"I used to be an enthusiastic Republican. I worked for [New York Republican senator] Jack Javits when lions still strode the earth, when Republicans were good guys and we were the free traders, we were as socially progressive as we wanted to be. Even when I worked for Reagan [in his Justice Department in the mid-'80s] half of us were self-described libertarians, including me.

"The other half were self-described social conservatives. That would be the anti-abortion crowd, they were also anti-gay by the way and overtly so. It you are not with the anti-abortion brigade in today's Republican Party in Washington you're nobody and that's very unattractive."

The decision to link up with Johnson was easy, Weld says, since "I've known Gary since his first election as governor. His first term was my second and we saw a lot of each other at Republican governors' meetings and we hit it off. In 1991 when I hit office I used executive orders on gay and lesbian issues and people were scandalized. No other governor or senator would touch those issues with a 10-foot pole. My chief of staff and head of the tax department were gay partners. People couldn't get over it. They didn't know what to make of it. After I got 71 percent (in his re-election bid) the national Party had to cut me slack and leave me alone."

I saw Weld last night debate three people who were not, suffice it to say, nearly as experienced in politics as he is. What was that like?

"I got to say what I wanted to say last night, " he says. "In substance it was fine. Obviously my voice was not as elevated as some of others, in terms of volume. But I was satisfied."

"It was a little unusual," he admits.

I ask him if Mitt Romney, a fellow Massachusetts Republican governor, was a friend.

"Mitt Romney is a friend, but I'm not about to call him on this thing," Weld says. "It's premature. I want money in the kitty, to make sure no more third party people are coming. I want a clear shot at 15 percent or over and have the credibility [for outsiders to think] 'these guys should be in the debates.'"

"Mitt is a close friend," Weld admits. "But there has been no direct communication [about Weld's Libertarian run]. There won't be for at least a month. It will take that long to know whether we are getting any nibble on the financial end."

Advertisement

NEXT: Meet the Libertarian Party's VP Candidates

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I don’t consider Gary and I as anti-Clinton or anti-Trump.

    Could I vote for someone who says “consider Gary and I” instead of “consider Gary and me”?

    Of course not.

    1. “Gary and myself” would probably be better. You wouldn’t say, “I consider me as ….”

      1. Yes, as much as “myself” is improperly used, this time it was appropriate.

    2. I too.

    3. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.
      ?????? http://www.realcash44.com

    4. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.
      http://www.realcash44.com

  2. The fact that Weld worked for and idolizes a left-wing big-government troglodyte like Senator Jacob Javitz (“Jack Javitz”) proves Weld is a left-wing statist.

    Javitz was a part of a now-extinct branch of the GOP (along with Pennsylvania’s Gov. Ray Shafer, who increased state spending so much he almost bankrupted Pennsylvania by leaving office in 1970) that believed that the Democrats were too timid in expanding the government, and that the government should be made much, much bigger, and that government spending was too low. Senator Javitz was to the left of New York liberal Republican governor Nelson Rockefeller, who quadrupled state spending, and ran to the left of his Democratic rivals, like Averell Harriman, whom he unseated. How could quadrupling state spending be too little spending? But to Javitz, Rockefeller was too conservative.

    Javitz was the guy who blocked attempts in Congress to overturning Richard Nixon’s racial quotas in government contracts, which both the labor unions and the Chamber of Commerce opposed back then in a less politically correct age with few Social Justice Warriors.

    1. The only thing I can think of this is that both Johnson & Weld must’ve gotten an idea from a crib sheet on libertarians that we’re like Republicans but not “conservative”. Oh, OK, so Javits fit that mold, so if I tell them how much I liked Javits, that should sell with them, right? And since the “conservatives” were anti-gay, I’ll tell them how pro-gay I was.

      I’m thinking about what “gay and lesbian issues” were in 1991 that could’ve been addressed by a governor’s executive orders, and it doesn’t appeal. So he had gays working for him in prominent positions; that’s like opposing the Nazis by hiring lots of Jews.

  3. If you want your Johnson held, vote for Weld

    Mind-meld with Weld

    Get in there and vote for Weld, I don’t care what you smelled

    1. Liberty will be Weld to your Johnson!

      1. If you get Welded you get gelded.

          1. If you like Johnson, you’re gonna love the Weld-anschauung!

        1. Enough with the cuck puns

  4. In addition to Bill Weld admiring the big-spending New York Senator Jack Javitz, one of the most liberal members of the Senate (the insufferably arrogant Javits eventually lost reelection after he was forced to run solely on the “Liberal” party line after the Republicans got sick of his left-wing stances), Bill Weld is more of a Social Justice Warrior than a true libertarian.

    Weld was an outspoken supporter as governor of race-based affirmative action at state colleges and in state contracts. He ran to the left of his 1990 Democratic rival for governor, on political correctness issues (John Silber, a university president, opposed campus speech codes and political correctness), and Weld’s appointees to the state judiciary included people who had supported draconian campus speech codes.

    In polls during Weld’s governorship, Massachusetts voters opposed race-based affirmative action, but Weld supported it anyway, saying he was “swinging away” in support of it. Even Democratic State Senate President Bulger had misgivings about some of these race-based affirmative action programs (Bulger later canceled one after becoming president of the University of Massachusetts) but not Weld, who was to the left of state Democrats on some Social Justice Warrior issues.

    To Weld, poltically-correct social engineering is fine as long as it is inflicted in the name of “righting” past “wrongs” (i.e., wrongs found in history books, like past racism).

    1. Campus speech codes were not a thing in 1990. But Silber was a traditionalist who had David Brudnoy’s favor apparently because they liked each other’s scholarship & belief in academic rigor.

      1. Were speech codes not a thing in 1990?

  5. I’m getting onboard with the transgender movement, but I want to take it a step further: hypergendering. I’ve always envisioned myself as a much more masculine man, but putting on muscle is like dressing in drag: I’m just hiding my inner wimp rather than fully realizing my outer machismo. To that end, I wish to further enmasculate myself with hormone treatments: regular doses of testosterone and HGH. Additionally, I will need follicle transplants to grow proper facial hair, and reconstructive surgery to give me the cheekbones and firm jaw indicative of manliness. Fortunately I am already blessed with a baritone voice, unlike many of my pipsqueek “brothers” afflicted by this identity disorder. With recognition and support from the medical community, I one day hope to mansition.

    1. Why stop there. Get an extra penis.

        1. – the British children.

    2. Get on board with the transnumber movement too while you’re at it.

  6. I won’t vote for anyone with this guy on the ticket.

    1. I mean not only is he a Republican, he’s a shitty east coast republican, aka democrat.

    2. Libertarian VPs are chosen separate from Presidential candidates. There is no ticket.

      1. I get that now, I’m just saying I won’t vote for anyone with this guy on the ticket. So if he gets the VP nomination, no matter who’s the prez candidate, I won’t vote for them.

        1. Then there’s the pragmatic side, which says even Weld is better than Trump or Hillary. I mean, if it came down to Stalin or Hitler in the main event, would Mussolini be less awful?

          1. Mussolini was much less awful.

  7. An anagram for Weld is lewd.

      1. His full name is William Floyd Weld, and the letters in his name can be rearranged to spell “Madly Wild Lowlife.”

  8. Here we go. Penalty shootout.

    1. Is there anything more cosmo than soccer, besides cocktails?

      1. Tennis at Roland Garros.

        1. And there’s this Monaco GP tomorrow.

      2. I can’t think of anything.

    2. I haven’t been this uninterested in the final since the last time two years ago these two teams I am completely uninterested in played it.

  9. Weld talks about a legal emphasis on treatment vs. criminalization when it comes to drugs, treating the issue as a “public health emergency

    jesus christ, is it 1985?

    And there are people lecturing me that the Libertarian party is the choice of “principles”. what a fucking joke.

    I don’t consider Gary and I as anti-Clinton or anti-Trump.

    Which is the only thing anyone actually wants you to be.

    1. Did the Libertarian Party nominate Weld?

      1. A party is just an agglomeration of interest groups.

        If those groups pick johnson/weld as their standard-bearers, then they’re not doing much other than shopping a “me-too” option.

        One which at best makes some general nods towards libertarianism…. but doesn’t do fuck-all as far as showing the mainstream parties how they should make more effort to win the libertarian-vote.

        By acting more like mainstream candidates (*and calling drug use a “public health emergency” is just that), they’re just saying to the main-parties, “we have to be like you to even appeal to our minority-constituency”

  10. Images from the San Diego “anti-Trump” protests

    (i like to think of them as the “Pro look-at-me!!”-protests in any case)

    Awwwwww!?

    Eeewwwwww

    1. Is that the girl next to the guy holding a sign calling for the release of el Chapo?

    2. Its like no one knows how to do a proper swastika anymore

      1. Buddhists for Trump.

        1. The first is backwards, and the second has a mutant-double-leg at the bottom

    3. LOL

      Not Graphic Design Majors

      Note that their signs use light colors for the “I am not a”, and very bold and dark colors for the “Criminal, Rapist, Illegal”.

    4. Also – going back to the first pic

      How stupid is putting hashtags on a fucking handheld poster?

      1. As stupid as showing up to a protest with a sign in the first place?

    5. You should have titled all of these links “Heavyweights Against Trump.”

  11. If John McAfee or Austin Petersen had political experience similar to Johnson (Governor or Senator) and/or picked a running mate with some name ID and political experience (Tom Coburn, JC Watts, etc.) then Johnson would already be toast.

    1. John McAfee is an embarrassment around the water cooler, the gym, the dinner table, and everywhere else people talk about politics..

      Why anyone would nominate him in an attempt to appeal to disaffected Republicans is a mystery–and representing libertarian ideas to swing voters is pretty much all I want or care about in a Libertarian Presidential candidate.

    2. John McAfee is an embarrassment around the water cooler, the gym, the dinner table, and everywhere else people talk about politics..

      Why anyone would nominate him in an attempt to appeal to disaffected Republicans is a mystery–and representing libertarian ideas to swing voters is pretty much all I want or care about in a Libertarian Presidential candidate.

    3. Coburn is even less libertarian than Weld. He called for executing doctors who performed abortions…

  12. Another photo set

    This is supposed to be the Iraqi-army “Battle For Fallujah”

    Count the number of pictures in which the Iraqi army is “sitting down”. It doesn’t give you the impression of a disciplined force led by aggressive Non-Commissioned officers.

    1. Maybe it was their lunch break.

    2. There are maybe 1,000 ISIS fighters in the city, while the Iraqi govt and its allies have about 20,000 attacking with air support and artillery.

      They have no excuse for losing.

  13. Weld opposed Ron Paul. nuf said.

    1. There’s bad blood between the Johnson camp and Pauls. The Jewish candidate Feldman who strangely endorses Johnson took a shot at Ron and Rand being Republicans referencing Ron’s ‘Republican-lite’ comments from today.

  14. William Weld is already generating coverage of libertarians by the MSM.

    “Old Republican Bill Weld Faces Skeptics as a New Libertarian”

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/ol…..1464468693

    That’s what Weld brings to the table: credibility and serious coverage by the MSM.

    Front page of the WSJ, and he hasn’t even been nominated yet.

    Other than Johnson, Weld, and that weirdo with the story about Belize, I don’t know or care who the other candidates are, and no one else knows who they are or cares who they either–and that’s a problem.

    1. This. How many people are gonna read that story and say – hmm LP is right on this issue and learn something.

      Well OK – maybe not WSJ readers who are gonna say – how much to buy the ballot access and stick the LP in gitmo.

      But maybe a rag other than WSJ covers him at some point.

  15. Weekend Derp Round-up

    1. Michelle Malkin wrote a column called “Enough with Hollywood’s Pendulous Boobery”.

    2. Sanders supporter recalls her horrifying experience of having to speak with Southerners.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CoAmll3ViQA

    3. A flesh-eating disease is spreading in Syria, mainly in ISIS areas because of all the corpses left unburied.

    1. I just want to know why she has a ladder in her room

      1. Also, she was calling Republicans to get them to vote for Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primary? Who gave her these phone numbers? Seems like some sly dog at the Bernie HQ played a prank on her that she completely missed out on.

        Young lady, if you call up Trump supporters asking them to vote for Bernie in an election they’re not even eligible for, don’t be surprised if you hear some strong words against your point of view. But also recognize, having the desire to build a border wall doesn’t mean those people think everyone but white Americans are ‘animals’. I know your professors tell you otherwise, but there is actually room for differences of opinion without needing to build straw men in this country.

        I would have loved to see her call a Bernie or Hillary supporter and tell them to vote for Donald Trump. I’m sure all those people would have been very polite, not said any mean things, and never brought up Hitler.

        Speaking of prejudice, I’ll bet more than anything else she was shocked by deep Southern accents. No need to listen to those rednecks in your protected college campus echo-chamber safe space, right sweetheart? How can they even allow those people the right to vote? They’re like animals!

        Good grief it’s scary what this generation is going to do when they’re in power. You thought the boomers were bad.

    2. You precious little cupcake…go to your safe space.

    3. …but I like pendulous booberies.

      1. I’d expect as much from a lolly-gagging blubberputt like you!

        /Mr. Burns

    4. I’ve never gotten emotional over politics before

      Liar.

  16. How can we score big making a play for disaffected Republicans this election if we stiff-arm William Weld for not being a real libertarian?

    1. Even if you make a play for disenchanted Republicans, what makes anyone think they stay around for more than one election cycle? They are angry about Trump – not libertarians. Why would they be committed to a libertarian movement over the long haul?

      How did Ron Paul gain traction in the GOP, even if temporarily? In my view, because people follow personalities and the policies are mostly filled in as ad hoc rationalizations of that choice. Johnson and Weld want to attract angry voters. They want to be a protest vote, yet claim (probably falsely) to have hope of winning. I worry about Weld being little more than interested in blocking Trump for the GOP.

      Maybe gaining votes and costing an election will cause the GOP to drift libertarian or pander to that group. More likely it will be dismissed as anti-Trump sentiment and the establishment will just shrug it off.

      McAfee is, as he says, the best way to put the libertarian party on the map. Because people follow personalities.

      1. “Even if you make a play for disenchanted Republicans, what makes anyone think they stay around for more than one election cycle?”

        Well, for one thing, our ideas and our name brand will be taken more seriously. When you represent less than 1% of the vote, you’re a joke.

        When you represent more than the margin of victory, you’re the swing vote–and the candidates better placate the swing vote if they want to win.

      2. McAfee is, as he says, the best way to put the libertarian party on the map. Because people follow personalities.

        mcafee is right about building the LP ‘skyscraper’ from the bottom-up not the top-down. But doesn’t get the irony of a top-down guy saying that centralized art-production will motivate people to go out into their neighborhoods and do grass-roots stuff.

        Bottom-up can work well – but only because it becomes independent of any candidate name – so the candidate has to follow the grassroots (or get out in front and pretend they’re leading it).

    2. Are we making a play for disaffected Republicans as in getting their votes, or making a play for disaffected Republicans as in attempting to convince them of the benefits of liberty?

      IMHO, the votes are meaningless. Trump has simply presented us an opportunity to actually talk before an interested audience for a change.

      What’s the goal? It’s certainly not to win the election. The only way to change the world is from the bottom up.

      1. “IMHO, the votes are meaningless.”

        Did you ever read the part in Free to Choose when Friedman shows how FDR co-opted the platform of the American communist party point by point?

        That’s the best we can hope for–that our platform will be co-opted by one of the two major parties.

        Candidates are like NFL play callers–they don’t stop calling a play that works until it stops working. When it stops working is when some third party dominates the swing voters. That’s the only way libertarian ideas will ever get mainstream traction from elected politicians–at least, so long as we have single member districts.

        You’re trying to score a touchdown by making a basket. There is no basket. We’re playing football. Stop dribbling the football.

        1. Two footnotes:

          1) Notice, the libertarian successes we’ve seen, say gay marriage and marijuana legalization, have come by way of the courts or popular referendums–not elected politicians.

          There’s a reason for that.

          2) Another example of what I’m talking about, Ross Perot didn’t just peter out into nothing. He had two issues: anti-NAFTA and fiscal conservatism.

          Post-Perot, the Gingrich Congress started cutting the budget like we’d never seen before. That was because those Perot voters cost Bush the Presidency by taking almost 20% of the vote.

          Libertarians will be taken seriously by elected politicians when we can take down a President for crossing us.

          1. Libertarians will be taken seriously by elected politicians when we can take down a President for crossing us.

            Which ain’t gonna happen until there are a lot more libertarians.

            1. The other day, I calculated some 30 million Americans who don’t own a gun but oppose universal background checks.

              There are more of us out there than people realize. It won’t really matter to elected politicians until they show up at the ballot box and are the difference between winning and losing.

        2. Politicians do what voters want them to do. As two smart people once said, politics is a lagging indicator.

          You change a nation by changing the minds of the people. Grass roots. Bottom up.

          The parties will change when voters tell them to. There will NEVER be a libertarian president until a plurality of Americans are libertarian.

          1. “The parties will change when voters tell them to. There will NEVER be a libertarian president until a plurality of Americans are libertarian.”

            Votes are the way voters communicate with politicians.

            Yes, politicians are always the last to get on board, and that’s probably because it takes them a few election cycles before they understand why the winners are winning and why the losers are losing.

            Until you translate that plurality into votes, the politicians will never hear you. If they can’t see you at the ballot box, then you’re a tree falling in the forest with no one there to hear it.

            I agree that real, lasting change comes from changing people’s minds, but there has to be a way to make elected politicians feel the change. When the LP scores 10% nationally, it’s a different ball game.

          2. That’s exactly right re the methodology. But:

            a)Libertarians have got to become comfortable talking to neighbors again. Not haranguing them about politics but simply re-establishing connections to neighbors so that neither of them are watching the centrally-planned info system (TV)

            b)Libertarians have to connect on the basis of some local issue. Not generic ‘libertarian’. And not some bullshit about foreign policy or the Fed. And that issue will be different everywhere.

            ‘Social conservative’ won the GOP was churches do a great job of connecting. Ethnic identity politics and unions won the GOP because recent immigrants lived together and unions worked together. Libertarians have to figure how to do stuff with others if politics is gonna become libertarian.

    3. “score big”

      if winning a higher percentage requires selling libertarianism as something like a “Democrat/GOP ice-cream swirl” of policies, then what have you “won” exactly?

      1. “f winning a higher percentage requires selling libertarianism as something like a “Democrat/GOP ice-cream swirl” of policies, then what have you “won” exactly?”

        Credibility from the media and future voters and serious consideration for how libertarian ideas resonate with swing voters in future elections.

        Like I said in another thread, a political party is a group of people who agree on a few principles and agree to sell them short for pragmatic reasons–mostly to consolidate support and win office.

        Until registered Libertarians are willing to behave like a political party, we don’t deserve to be taken seriously.

        1. Credibility from the media and future voters

          This depends on the actual net-effect tho, doesn’t it?

          I didn’t see the Green party grow in credibility after Nader’s campaign spoiled the 2000 election for Gore.

          I think if they break 5%, they get federal funding for the 2016 election. Which could be more-promising, since whomever wins this time around, i think it will be a one-term presidency no matter what.

          1. Was Nader ever the governor of Massachusetts?

            1. When I think “libertarian”, I think “Massachusetts governor”.

              Here’s an idea: why not pick an actual libertarian to be the nominee?

              I know, crazy talk…

              1. The right tool is the best tool for the job.

                I’m certainly not going to ignore the best option for libertarians just because the the best option isn’t necessarily a pure libertarian.

                Imagine you’re drowning in quicksand and William Weld throws you a rope. Are you gonna refuse to grab it because William Weld isn’t a real libertarian?

                We’ve got a great opportunity here in an election cycle when the two main parties are running an obnoxious, temper tantrum throwing child, on the one hand, and an outright crook on the other.

                I’d rather the libertarian movement stay mired in quicksand than grab William Weld’s rope simply isn’t a rational course of action. What’s the best course of action for the movement going forward? If it’s William Weld, then St. Ayn bless him.

                1. But I’m not drowning in quicksand. Since the LP isn’t likely to win anyway, why abandon principle and nominate soft authoritarians? There are already 2 authoritarians in the race, and the people
                  who want that are going to want a watered-down version of it.

                  I’m willing to vote for whoever the most pro-liberty candidate there is. I’m a bit surprised it may not be LP candidate.

                  1. Since the LP isn’t likely to win anyway, why abandon principle and nominate soft authoritarians? T

                    Yeah, this is probably the simplest version of the question i keep asking in all these threads.

                    I don’t get why the Libertarian party thinks that its going to “better promote libertarianism” by nominating candidates so squishy that *actual libertarians* don’t want to vote for them.

                  2. “But I’m not drowning in quicksand. Since the LP isn’t likely to win anyway”

                    If you don’t see the contradiction there, then it didn’t follow my analogy.

                    The LP not being likely to win (anything) is drowning in quicksand. They aren’t going anywhere.

                    If William Weld is the best guy that can help change that, then that’s who he is–regardless of whether he’s a pure libertarian in his soul of souls.

            2. Was Nader ever the governor of Massachusetts?

              That doesn’t really answer my question. You said that the goal is to get the party out of “joke” territory. Gain ‘credibility’, etc.

              I can see from a purely pragmatic POV that getting more than 5% of the vote – no matter how – could be a strategic move to prepare for a more-serious run in 2020.

              But as far as assuming that ‘beating the spread’ will result in a better public-image for the party or a wider attraction… well, I don’t see why that would necessarily be the case. If libertarians spoiled the election in Hillary’s favor, i doubt many #NeverTrumps are going to retain a warm-fuzzy in the future.

              1. I gave examples of it actually happening.

                Perot driving the Gingrich GOP to cost cutting–because of his big showing in the genera..

                The Progressives have essentially absorbed the Greens’ message–even if they watered it down.

                FDR adopted the Communist Party platform.

                That’s the way these things happen.

                If and when we see a more libertarian government, it will happen because someone important in one of the two major parties adopts our principles, runs on them, and wins. I was hoping that would happen with Rand Paul, but maybe the Republicans need lose more for being insufficiently libertarian. If we want to convince Republicans that they need to swerve libertarian in order to win, then making them lose for being insufficiently libertarian is a great way to achieve that.

                Another way would be to have a huge showing in the general election. This is the best chance we’ve ever had to do that. There’s a time for purity contests. And there’s a time for a big tent. Now’s the time for the big tent. The two major parties may not run two candidates this pathetic again in our lifetimes.

          2. Also, I’d argue that the Democrats effectively absorbed much of the Green Party’s issues in terms of environmentalism, global warming, Kyoto, Paris “agreement”, rising fuel efficiency standards, etc.

            The progressive Democrats aren’t as radical as the Greens, but that’s a result of mainstreaming.

            Bon Jovi is what Slayer sounds like when metal is mainstreamed. Progressive environmentalists are mainstreamed Greens.

            When libertarianism gets mainstreamed, marijuana is regulated by the government. And that’s better than it used to be, isn’t it? So, no, William Weld isn’t Slayer. But maybe that’s not entirely awful.

            1. Bon Jovi is what Slayer sounds like when metal is mainstreamed

              Holy shit are you trying to make me hate the Libertarian Party?

              1. You don’t like Slayer?

                The LP is Slayer in that analogy.

                When the Republicans go metal, they’ll be metal-lite.

                Maybe like BabyMetal . . .

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIKqgE4BwAY

                . . . which is a hell of a lot better than N-Synch.

                1. Its like you’re trying to make me vomit

  17. Build a Safe Space for only $20!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isE93Ad1eLQ

    “Comments are disabled for this video.”

    Of course they are.

  18. Pakistanis mourn assassin of secular politician who opposed blasphemy laws:

    http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/01/…..-protests/

    I predict a strong showing for the Pakistani team in the upcoming Shitheel Olympics.

  19. Define absurdity: a room full of white people talking about white privilege

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1uvfd9P39o

  20. Most of us want to have good income but don’t know how to do thaat on Internet there are a lot of methods to earn money at home, so I thought to share with you a genuine and guaranteed method for free to earn huge sum of money at home anyone of you interested should visit the site. More than sure that you will get best result.OI3..

    ===== http://www.CashPost7.com

  21. Most of us want to have good income but don’t know how to do thaat on Internet there are a lot of methods to earn money at home, so I thought to share with you a genuine and guaranteed method for free to earn huge sum of money at home anyone of you interested should visit the site. More than sure that you will get best result.OI3..

    ====== http://www.CashPost7.com

  22. I’ve just got my most successful month so far… I’ve been tracking my profits so far with this system and this month I made a record with
    visit this link……………….. http://www.social36.com

  23. Start working at home with GOOGLE!YAHOO. ABCNEWS AND MORE GLOBAL SITES.It’s by far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this 4 weeks past. I began this 7-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $97 per hour.

    I work through this link.——————— http://www.earnmore9.com

  24. Do you have a pay~pal account.. because if you do you can add an extra 650 week after week in your check just working on the internet 2 hours every day. go here to this site….

    Clik This Link inYour Browser…….
    ????????. http://www.MaxPost30.com

  25. Do you have a pay~pal account.. because if you do you can add an extra 650 week after week in your check just working on the internet 2 hours every day. go here to this site….

    Clik This Link inYour Browser…….
    ????????. http://www.MaxPost30.com

  26. Most of us want to have good income but don’t know how to do thaat on Internet there are a lot of methods to earn money at home, so I thought to share with you a genuine and guaranteed method for free to earn huge sum of money at home anyone of you interested should visit the site. More than sure that you will get best result.OI3..

    ====== http://WWW.ReportMax90.Com

  27. After finding out elsewhere that this miraculously reformed GOP politician is “former” DEA I no longer trust Brian to be a source of reliable information. At this stage, I hope Gary loses to McAfee.

  28. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.
    ?????? http://www.realcash44.com

  29. Most of us want to have good income but don’t know how to do thaat on Internet there are a lot of methods to earn money at home, so I thought to share with you a genuine and guaranteed method for free to earn huge sum of money at home anyone of you interested should visit the site. More than sure that you will get best result.OI3..

    ====== http://www.CashPost7.com

  30. My Buddy’s Mother Makes $96/hr on the laptop. She has been out of work for six months but last month her paycheck was $15480 just working on the laptop for a few hours.
    I work through this URL.
    Read more on this web site.—– http://www.earnmore9.com

  31. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.
    http://www.realcash44.com

  32. up to I looked at the check of $4791 , I did not believe …that…my neighbour could actualie earning money in there spare time on their laptop. . there friend brother has been doing this for less than 7 months and resently cleard the morgage on their mini mansion and purchased a great Bugatti Veyron . you could look here ……..

    Click This Link inYour Browser….

    ?????? http://www.Reportmax20.com

  33. Make 7500 bucks every month? Start doing online computer-based work through our website. I have been working from home for 4 years now and I love it. I don’t have a boss standing over my shoulder and I make my own hours. The tips below are very informative and anyone currently working from home or planning to in the future could use this website??

    ~~~~~~~~~ http://www.NetSelf70.com

  34. Make 7500 bucks every month? Start doing online computer-based work through our website. I have been working from home for 4 years now and I love it. I don’t have a boss standing over my shoulder and I make my own hours. The tips below are very informative and anyone currently working from home or planning to in the future could use this website??

    ~~~~~~~~~ http://www.NetSelf70.com

  35. 2″My friend just told me about this easiest method of freelancing. I’ve just tried it and now II am getting paid 15000usd monthly without spending too much time.You can also do this.

    >>>>> https://www.Cashpay60.tk

  36. This application is really good and very easy to use because you can never get an app which streams way of the latest and even the oldest videos. showbox

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.