Of course, it is great news that the Wall Street Journal covered the alternative candidates on the eve of the NY State Governor’s Race debate. I applaud the Journal and Erica Orden for recognizing that New Yorkers are capable of processing information beyond the dumbed-down drivel that comes from most of the political class mainstream media. Apparently Orden and WSJ understand why the voters are running screaming from the incumbent parties that got us into this mess. That’s a big step toward a real dialog on the issues. I only wish there was enough space to address some of the actual issues that separate the alternative candidates from the incumbent parties and from each other.
So let’s do that here.
The dumbed down version of the political spectrum would have us divide the candidates along a left-right, liberal-conservative line. The left side of that line includes Green, Working Families, Democrat and Freedom Party Candidates. The right side includes Conservative, Taxpayer and Republican Parties. The left is usually associated with more social freedom but less economic freedom. The right is usually associated with more economic freedom and less personal freedom. The problem is that today’s incumbent Republicans and Democrats both support more war, more welfare ( corporate and personal) and more limits on personal freedom via laws like REAL ID, the PATRIOT ACT. In short the incumbent parties are both for more big government when that big government works for them and against those other people.
I left out the Independence, Libertarian and Anti-prohibition parties.
I have to put the Anti-prohibition Party on the left because they support legalizing marijuana, prostitution and gambling – great ideas in support of more social freedom, but they support extraordinary taxes on those activities – a bad idea that reduces economic freedom and funds more and more bigger government. Much as I applaud the APP’s refreshing positions on victimless crimes , unfortunately, the APP is for the most part, a single issue party without any history or much to say about dozens of other important issues. It’s also interesting that Kristin Davis the APP’s candidate for Governor also opposes the Ground Zero Mosque. It’s hard to understand how Davis can see the issue of victimless crimes so clearly and completely miss the point on issues of economic and religious freedom.
The Independence Party sits squarely in the middle exhibiting no actual discernable principles of any kind.
But what about the Libertarians? Libertarians are a diverse crowd but for the most part they are fiscal conservatives who support lower taxes, lower government spending, less regulation and generally more economic freedom. But the Libertarians don’t really fit in on the right because we also support more personal freedom and typically left positions. We support Civil Rights and we oppose war , corporate welfare, the PATRIOT Act and REAL ID Act, and laws against victimless crimes such as the Drug War.
So how do we vote for a future for New York with religious and social freedom, a sane policy for victimless crimes and an economic climate conducive to job and income growth?
You reject the Democrats and Republicans immediately because they are the ones who got us into this mess. Hoping it will be different this time is really deluded.
Thinking people will reject the Left if they ever hope to retire or if they have children or even a basic sense of fairness. The Left has nice dreams but no way to pay for them. Putting your economic future in the hands of corrupt politicians is truly irrational. We should have learned that lesson in the last 100 years or so.
So what remains is the obvious choice. You can choose to vote for personal freedom and economic freedom. You can choose to vote against war, against the drug-war, against corporate welfare and against intolerance based on religion, race and gender-identify. At the same time you can vote for a healthy economy where free people benefit from their own hard work and where there are jobs for those willing to work and honest business is something we admire again. You could vote Libertarian.
Perhaps the biggest beneficiary of Carl Paladino’s missteps in the governor’s race will be Warren Redlich, Albany attorney, Guilderland Town Board member and, oh yeah, the Libertarian candidate for governor.
Redlich, 44, said the GOP nominee’s remarks on gays sent a surge of traffic to his website and even brought in some donations — as much as $500 a day. (It might not sound like much, but when your campaign finance disclosure reports show a balance of $1,948, every little bit counts).
“Every time Carl Paladino opens his mouth, my campaign gets stronger,” Redlich said.
With Paladino running on the ballot lines of the other right-of-center minor parties –Conservative and Taxpayer Party — Redlich said he stands as the reasonable alternative for conservatives who don’t want to vote for Paladino and wouldn’t vote for Democrat Andrew Cuomo.
“I’m only one to the right of Cuomo who’s not crazy like Carl,” said Redlich, whose campaign released a mock video Wednesday of him arguing with a fake Fred Dicker over the contents of his intestines.
Redlich has no illusions of winning the election. “Beating Cuomo is a long shot,” he deadpans.
But after Liberterian candidates have garnered less than 15,000 votes in the last two governor elections, Redlich said he senses an opportunity this year for the minor parties. He and four others have a place in the only scheduled debate on Monday at Hofstra University. And they have the major party candidates caught in an ugly campaign he thinks will turn off voters.
“It’s a great year to be the Libertarian candidate,” he said.
Message from Tom Vendittelli: Libertarian Candidate for Congress from New York 13th Congressional District
This November, the theme seems to be “throw the bums out.” Americans are angry, and with good reason. Most people don’t agree with trillion-dollar bailouts for multi-national banks, endlessly expanding wars, and the alarming rate we are losing our liberties at home. Though many recent badly made policy decisions can be rightfully be blamed on Democrats, Republicans are far from innocent in the current, frightening state of affairs.
President Bush, along with a Republican Congress, did much to increase the size of government, add to the national debt, and erode our civil liberties. President Obama promised to reverse the tide, yet he and the Democratic Congress have picked up right where Bush and the Republicans left off. Now Republicans are positioning themselves as the party of strictly limited Constitutional government. Not so. The Republicans are the ones that gave us the PATRIOT act, two trillion-dollar wars, a half-trillion dollar expansion of government health care, and the 2008 banker bailout.
Indeed, both establishment parties have a strong record of disregarding the rules and laws established by our founders and embodied in our Constitution. If one carefully traces the course of political events, especially of the last 10 years, it is obvious that among both Democratic and Republican parties, there exists a state of open contempt towards the Constitution and rule of law.
This campaign is about one thing more than any other. The American people need the option to stand up and say “No” to the events that seem inevitable to befall this country. No question, the Democrats have done much damage to our Republic since taking control of Congress and the Presidency. Democrats betrayed those who voted them into power by disregarding nearly all of their campaign promises in pursuit of an agenda that strongly benefits banks, large corporations, the insurance industry, unions, and government workers, all at the expense of the American people. They deserve to be voted out of out office, no question. However, do not be fooled by this strategic Republican about-face. If one believes the rhetoric, one is to believe that Republicans have suddenly learned the virtues of a Constitutionally limited government, and are poised to restore us to the principles of Thomas Jefferson’s America. Again, not so.
If one examines the Republican voting record when they controlled Congress, it is obvious that they will abandon all of their campaign promises at the precise moment they are voted in, the same as the Democrats did. The growth of government will continue unabated, and our Constitution and civil liberties will be further eroded. Everything in the Republican voting record indicates that they care little about the Constitution and limited government, favoring instead unlimited powers for what can only be deemed an “elitist ruling class.” Unlimited government power, unfortunately, has broad bi-partisan support.
This campaign is about standing up and saying “No!” to the entrenched special interests on both sides of the aisle, and “Yes!”, to the Constitution. This campaign is about offering to thousands of my fellow citizens in the 13th Congressional district, the choice of a candidate who really believes in the Constitution and strictly limited government.If the message of Constitutionally limited government, sound money, and a sensible foreign policy is ever to reach the ears of those who pull the strings in Washington, it starts at home by rejecting the status quo. I am doing my part by being that choice for liberty. It is up to my fellow citizens to do their part by sending a loud and clear message on November 2nd, by pulling the lever for Libertarians, the real liberty candidates.
I am running for U.S. Senate against Gillibrand to restore true peace and freedom to new York and the rest of America. That certainly begins, first and foremost, with opposing the war making and empire building foreign intervention machine. I propose to fight ceaselessly to bring all the troops home NOW. This mean full withdrawal, not “redeployments” of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, all the “contractors” and shutting down the empire of bases in those countries, or turning the keys over to the sovereign people of those countries. Give these native people back their sovereignty and self determination, instead of making them a perpetual co-opted puppet state of the US empire.
This candidate, and as I remember, millions more were protesting on the streets in major cities around the world on 2/15/2003 in opposition to the coming Iraq war. What happened to all those people? There is a shortsightedness here that transcends the partisan opposition to Bush, and now Obama. Bluntly, it appears most of the public has been willing to drop the subject as a pressing concern so long as no one related to them, or who lives around the block is dying over it. Most disappointing of all have been the Obama supporters whose opposition to war, occupation, torture etc. appears to have been “Bush deep”—as soon as the President changed, their protests went silent.
We have to acknowledge this is a long war both on the propaganda side and the military side, by design. The mess that has been made in Iraq and Afghanistan was deliberate, not a “government blunders again” scenario. The interventionists have used every trick from emotional rhetoric, lies about WMDs, to false flag operations to stoke the public into a mood that sustains war. The Empire and its corporate profiteers want our conflicts to be perpetual along the lines of the Korean model, with no actual withdrawals. The ‘mess’ gives them pretext to require our ongoing intervention in each area.
The corporate-military industrial complex was upset that their momentum for never ending war was derailed in the ’70’s by opposition to Vietnam, the ending of the draft, and scandals that exposed its machinations (Pentagon papers, the Church committee hearings, etc). It took them a generation, but they have finally got their perpetual war machine rolling again. The anti-war movement must be prepared to fight the long war to reverse the concrete political infrastructure that has been resurrected to perpetually justify intervention, not just win a pretty argument over the issue in the abstract.
In short, this Libertarian candidate stands for ending government meddling abroad, as well as in the market, and in our personal lives. I will work ceaselessly to end the Federal Reserve, the IRS, and the insane war on drugs. I pledge to fight globalism, aka the New World Order, and all movements institutions that would further Big Brother on an international scale. I will fight to reverse the Patriot Act in its entirety, as well as the National ID (in whatever disguised new form it takes). I will vote to repeal heath care reform and restore true choice in medical care.
I fully support the state sovereignty and nullification movements, as well as the efforts to expand our Second Amendment freedoms, including the right to keep and bear arms embodied in “right to carry” laws, that should be extended this state. I join Warren Redlich, the LP candidate for Governor, in pledging to work to get Albany and Washington to ‘Stop Wasting Money” at the expense of the taxpayers or our country’s fiscal health. Let’s all get to work, to bring freedom back to New York.
According to Libertarian Attorney General candidate Carl Person, Andrew Cuomo , as HUD Secretary helped to create the mortgage fraud and predictably has done nothing to stop banks from using false affadavits. Person says “Andrew Cuomo has a duty as NYS Attorney General to start lawsuits to stop Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, GMAC, Countrywide, Wells Fargo and other lenders from using the New York courts to foreclose mortgages on homeowners in NYS.”
Person explained that “these banks and lending institutions have been filing false affidavits in New York foreclosure actions for several years and have been illegally obtaining judgments of foreclosure and illegally selling the homes of many tens of thousands of homeowner victims.” Presently, there are approximately 80,000 foreclosure cases in the New York courts, with more being filed every day.
“Cuomo is trying not to get involved”, said Person, “because he helped to create the mortgage fraud when he was Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).” Person also stated that “Cuomo should have recused himself and let someone else in his Office of New York State Attorney General be assigned the responsibility for ensuring that mortgage foreclosure fraud is stopped in NYS.”
Person went on to say that the banks, servicing companies, and other participants in the illegal activities should be penalized by not being able to use the New York courts to commence or pursue any foreclosure actions in New York State as to any residential mortgages, and that the banks should not be able to assign the residential mortgages to anyone else for the purpose of starting foreclosure proceedings in New York State.
What needs to be done, according to Person, “is to require the banks to enter into modification agreements with residential homeowners decreasing the monthly payment to the current low mortgage rate of 4.5% or so and decreasing the principal amount of the loan to 90% of the present value of the property.” As to each property for which this takes place, the bank would then be able to enforce the modified mortgage in the New York courts.
“Everyone can see that Cuomo is unable to serve honestly as New York State Attorney General, and this should disqualify him from becoming Governor of New York State,” according to Person.
Cuomo’s running mate for NYS Attorney General hasn’t done anything in Albany to stop the fraud, and can be expected to do nothing except benefit the banks.
Person said “If elected, I would commence the needed lawsuits to stop this devastating fraud on the NYS courts and homeowners.”
Arguments in the case of Randy Credico et al v. New York State Board of Elections, will be heard on October 19 at 3:00 pm in United States District Court, Eastern New York Division, Courtroom 10A S, Chief Judge Raymond Dearie presiding.
Credico was nominated by the Libertarian Party and the Anti-Prohibition Party for the U.S. Senate (6-year term). Together with the other statewide candidates of those bodies, he collected approximately 34,000 signatures on Libertarian Party ballot access petitions and approximately 27,000 signatures on Anti-Prohibition Party ballot access petitions, more than twice the number required by New York State law.
Under New York State Law the Libertarian Party and the Anti-Prohibition Party are Independent Nominating Bodies. Recognized Parties are those that received at least 50,000 votes for their candidate for Governor in the previous election.
New York State Election Law 7-104(4)(e) limits a candidate who receives nominations from two or more Independent Nominating Bodies to one ballot position. Recognized party candidates’ names appear once for each party that has nominated them. The name of Credico’s opponent, Charles Schumer, will appear under the Democrat Party, Independence Party and Working Families Party.
Credico’s attorney, Gary Donoyan will argue that 7-104(4)(e) violates the plaintiff’s First and Fourteenth Amendment rights while subsidizing the recognized parties’ exercise of those same rights. In addition Donoyan will argue that the requested relief creates no additional burden on state election officials and in fact reduces their burden by making the ballot easier to design.
What’s going to be different on November 3?
It’s anybody’s guess. But if you believe the polls most likely Andrew Cuomo will be the next Governor. Depending on the poll he is burying Paladino by a margin of between 15 to 24 %. That means taxes are going up. State spending is not going down. Sheldon Silver will still be running New York. New York will remain among the highest taxed states with the worst environment for business and with the most dysfunctional State government.
You could still vote for Paladino hoping he will somehow pull it out. Then you will have a Governor who supports eminent domain, gives money to Hillary Clinton, who thinks the First and Fourteenth Amendments are only for the majority and who won’t be able to gets his tax cuts past Sheldon Silver. Given a choice between Cuomo and Paladino I’ll take the hemlock.
Fortunately that isn’t the choice facing voters this November. There seven candidates on the ballot. There are several single issue candidates with no national presence or history. Votes for those candidates could send an important message if you happen to feel for example, rent control or legalizing pot is the most important issue.
But you can also vote for candidates from parties with a major national presence and decades of history, well developed principles and reasonably well understood positions on the whole range of issues facing New Yorkers and all Americans.
Of course I am talking about the Libertarian Party and the Green Party. Let’s say you are pro-war, anti-free speech, anti-private property and pro-corporate welfare. Then you could choose either Cuomo or Paladino. You would probably make the choice between the two based on social issues such as marriage equality – oops sorry neither is a real supporter of marriage equality. What about ending the drug-war – whoops that would be two thumbs down. Are either of these guys really going to change anything? If you really believe in personal freedom, those of you on the left usually call it civil liberties – Andrew and Carl aren’t really good options.
Or you could wake up on November 3rd knowing that there would be two choices on the ballot for the next four years that represented real personal freedom and civil liberties but between the two offer a real choice on economic issues. That means you removed the biggest obstacle for candidates with new and different ideas and fresh perspectives on how to solve the problems caused by the failed Democrat and Republican ideas. That means the Democrats and Republicans will actually have to answer questions about why taxes are so high, why business is so bad, why the government decides who can get married and what you can eat and smoke.
But that won’t happen if voters make their choice out of fear and short term thinking. It will only happen if at least 50,000 New Yorkers (for each party) vote their hopes to leave behind a New York buried in corruption and owned by the welfare/warfare state and instead look forward to a future where New Yorkers can make informed decisions from among a real variety of ideas and choices.