|
What other sites say about Mike Ross running for president as a Libertarian.
http://www.wyolp.org/candidacies.html
Presidential Candidates
Michael Badnarik http://www.Badnarik.org badnarik@badnarik.org
http://hboswell.felisonca.com/mt/archives/2004_04.html Libertarian Party - so many candidates, you'd think they were Democrats: Michael Badnarik (Texas), Jeffrey Diket,(Louisiana), David Hollist (California), Gary Nolan (Virginia), Ruben Perez (Texas), Mike Ross (Arizona), Aaron Russo (California). Badnarik is a gun-rights advocate; Diket is pro-gun, anti-abortion, anti-gay rights. Hollist bases his candidacy on something called contract insurance, that would somehow replace taxes. Nolan, a former radio host, seems to have the most classic LP platform. Perez opposes foreign workers and the Patriot Act. Ross is running to protest the Libertarian Party itself, apparently. Russo is a Hollywood producer who wants to legalize marijuana for medical purposes and restore the freedoms we've lost since 9/11.
http://www.sciforums.com/archive/index.php/t-33028
Gary Nolan ( http://www.garynolan.com ) - Seems to be frontrunner right now due to the fact that he's a nationally syndicated radio host. Has worked at small government think tanks, appeared on FNC, CNN, MSNBC, and rightly attacks Republicans as the big-spending hypocrites they are. Generic LP basically - small government, anti-WoD, anti-Patriot Act, anti-interventionalist. Wish his site had more info. Mike Ross ( http://elect_mike_president.tripod.com ) - Looking to capitalize on the angry anti-Browne faction. Atheist, and teeters on the brink of being an Anarcho-Capitalist. Typical libertarian stances with an A-C bent, he's less about smaller government than ending it altogether. Aaron Russo ( http://www.russoforpresident.com ) - Famous, rich Hollywood producer. Has some interesting interviews on his site. Somewhat more of a left-libertarian, but his views on most issues (guns, taxes, etc) would still be acceptable to most LPs. Very anti-war, wants immediate withdrawal from Iraq, teeters on the brink of leftist vitriol on Bush/Cheney and big business. Wants to make medical Marijuana the center of his campaign.
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=33028 Mike Ross - Looking to capitalize on the angry anti-Browne faction. Atheist, and teeters on the brink of being an Anarcho-Capitalist. Typical libertarian stances with an A-C bent, he's less about smaller government than ending it altogether.
http://gseacademic.harvard.edu/~theappian/articles/spring04/wrestlingwiththeduopoly0404.htm PROFILES
Published Monday, April 19, 2004 Q: When it comes to education, what do you think Kerry and Bush are thinking in their heart of hearts A: How to get elected. Its another Presidential election year, the pundits are pundificating, and Ive been giving them my ear. Specifically, I have asked a group of campaigners, candidates, policymakers, and current Fellows at the Kennedy School of Government to tell me what they personally believe should be the aim of K-12 education, and to weigh in on how the major parties succeed or fail in tackling the issue. The above exchange is paraphrased from an interview I conducted with Jesse Ventura, former Reform Party Governor of Minnesota and now Fellow at the Kennedy Schools Institute of Politics. In this installment of a series I have put together on the upcoming election, I will focus on the libertarian perspective both on education itself and the governments role, if any, in shaping it. I had the pleasure of bouncing these ideas off of Michael Badnarik, a computer consultant and Libertarian candidate from Texas, and Jesse The Body himself. Mr. Ventura emphasizes the small l in his description; as far as hes concerned, Libertarian Party members are a bunch of anarchists who dont see any role for government. But both of these men hold that education has been wasteful and, in some cases, even counterproductive under a bloated governments influence. When asked about the purpose of education, Mr. Badnarik stated that school should enable people to provide for themselves and participate in the countrys government. As we will see, to Badnarik, this means distributing governance among the people, rather than swelling a class of professional governors. He does not even have faith that the government can run schools at all, or that schooling should be compulsory; education should really be up to parents, he believes. Venturas philosophy on education spoke more to intellectual development. He said that school was a way for students to learn the basic essentials so that they can go out in the world function, and be literate, and knowledgeable in society. Heres some more detail from the interviews: DM (to Badnarik): Do you believe that [education] should affect, primarily, their voting, or their ability to act in the grassroots sense? MB: It should give them the ability to do their own thinking, and not to take the governments word for everything. DM: Uh-huh. So it sounds like critical thinking skills, mainly. MB: Yes, absolutely critical thinking skills; right now, the Department of Education is in control of our schools, and the one thing that people cannot do is think critically. [Ed. note: the Federal government has much less control over a given school than does the local school board, but Badnarik thinks that the Feds have too much control at that.] Pressed further, Badnarik established a direct link between quality of education and quality of government. DM: Do you think the lack of critical [thinking] skills is what has narrowed the options in government narrowed the range of candidates, and that kind of thing? MB: Well, it certainly has perpetuated the idea of voting for the lesser of two evils. Now let us look at how Ventura conceives of education. An independent character if there ever was one, the former governor stressed education as a means to achieve personal advancement and happiness, rather than as a medium specifically for keeping government honest. However, he was quick to point out the political problem of education: vested interests do subvert it, and engaged citizens need to keep those interests in check. Ventura indicts the unions as the eight hundred pound gorilla that politicians face coming into office. In addition to the locals being spineless and allowing the unions to have their way, candidates dare not offend the gorilla too badly, or they will not get far in their career. DM: Do you see, perhaps, the [Democrats] being, in fact, slightly more friendly to education, in general? JV: I dont think that theyre any more friendly to education in general; I think theyre more friendly to the education union. Theyre friendly to whoever provides them their campaign finances. Here we find an important distinction between these analysts perspectives. Badnarik holds that most of what the Federal government does is unconstitutional that the myriad powers it has to tax citizens, regulate business, and create subdepartments goes above and beyond the call of our Framers precious document. He sees this behavior as way to bludgeon the masses into submission. But if Badnarik hints at an ominous Big-Brother type government with a direct interest in dumbing down its populace, Ventura paints a less sensational, but perhaps more pathetic, picture: waffling elected officials who bend easily to vocal (but not very critically-thinking!) special interests. For Ventura, if there is a link between bad government and bad education, it is a function of bureaucracy and incompetence more than it is a function of totalitarian groupthink. JV: If educating the children was the number one priority, which it should be, well, then, why would one care if they got their education via home school, private school, or public school?. I allocated a hundred and fifty million dollars, in Minnesota, specifically for lowering class sizes not a dollar got there. The local school boards used it in their collective bargaining agreements to pay off the teachers salaries and benefits. Ventura has little patience for those who will not do what makes economic sense. He would be much happier if schools taught children, at a young age, what makes economic sense. Then, perhaps, citizens would make more intelligent choices. The leader echoes a sentiment that has being floating around in popular literature of late, notably in Rich Dad, Poor Dad by Robert Kiyosaki: hardly any information comes down the public school pipeline, or even the private one, about how money and business really work. When I asked about the purpose of education, Ventura said students need basic tools to negotiate our system just as they need theoretical exercises to stretch the brain. We get far too little education about practical things today. I wasnt taught a thing about balancing a checkbook. I wasnt taught a thing in high school about a loan. And there is great inertia in the bureaucracy that keeps this fact from changing. Ventura hastened to report that Minnesota had adopted a plan during his governorship, which the Usual Suspects would ultimately scrap, for students to do major projects using real-world skills like the ones above. Three young boys presented their findings to the Governor at the state capitol. Their discovery about loans? Pay cash if you can. This was a rare example, Ventura thought, of useful information going to the people who need it. Yet there is still disagreement over who should impart practical skills to children. Ayn Rand, a great inspiration to many libertarian thinkers, saw a very specific purpose to education. The only purpose of education, she wrote in her book The New Left: The Anti-Industrial Revolution, is to teach a student how to live his life by developing his mind and equipping him to deal with reality. The training he needs is theoretical, i.e., conceptual [emphasis added]. He has to be taught to think, to understand, to integrate, to prove. He has to be taught the essentials of the knowledge discovered in the past and he has to be equipped to acquire further knowledge by his own effort. There is no mention in the above paragraph of creating engaged citizens or of imparting values. It is worth noting that neither Badnarik nor Ventura mentioned character education. Ventura, being socially liberal, would probably be content with a school culture that generally encouraged people to take responsibility for their actions. However, anyone will admit that self-serving bureaucracy has corrupted public schools to some extent, and to the extent it has, the schools are not setting a good example of responsibility. Both of my interviewees gave me the sense that, the less parents control their childrens education, the more of a farce it must be. For those who arent aware, we should step back and take a look at just how wide-ranging the Libertarian Party is in ideology never mind its fellow travelers. 2004 Presidential Candidate Mike Ross from Arizona is an avowed atheist and champion of just about every conceivable civil liberty, as well as being, perhaps, one of the anarchists of which Ventura speaks so dismissively. Well really I'm more of an Anarchist Libertarian then a Libertarian, Ross says on his site, elect_mike_president.tripod.com. My position is we should eliminate the government all together. If the Libertarian position is that taxes are stealing, then any government that uses taxes to fund its self should be eliminated. Ross stands in stark contrast to Jeff Diket, a "pro-life, anti-communist" candidate from Louisiana who proudly counts himself among the John Birchers and, on the question of gay rights, will "seek the support of advocates of family values instead of deviates" (www.politics1.com/libt04.htm). Most libertarians who run for office, small- and large-L alike, run as gadflies in an attempt to expand the debate. But the Libertarian Party is the third-largest party in the country, and plenty of its members already hold public office. If they wish to hold onto power, the mainstream parties simply cannot ignore the importance, to many citizens, of government non-interference in the economy, schooling, and private life. If nothing else, this philosophy is a crucial component of that swing vote that politicians have flip-flopped so hard to capture. God help us.
David Meadow, a student in the Specialized Program, is a staff writer for The Appian.
http://www.dandurand.uqam.ca/specialus/partistiers.html
Libertarian Party Convention nationale : 27 au 31 mai 2004 Atlanta, Gorgie Fond en 1971 comme alternative aux deux partis traditionnels, le Libertarian Party propose des solutions aux problmes politiques des tats-Unis : une conomie de march parfaitement libre la protection et l'largissement des liberts civiles et de la libert individuelle une politique internationale de non-intervention et de paix le libre-change Lors des lections prsidentielles de 2004, le candidat libertaire pour la prsidence Harry Browne et son colistier Art Olivier ont rcolt prs de 400 000 votes. Pour les lections de 2004, sept personnes tenteront de devenir candidat la prsidence pour leur parti, dont Michael Badnarik (Texas), Barry Nolan (Virginie), Mike Ross (Arizona) et Aaron Russo (Californie).
http://www.marscafe.com/vote2/vote2.html
Ticket Not Yet Designated (Libertarian Party)
- Michael Badnarik (Texas)
- Jeffrey Diket (Louisiana)
- David Hollist (California)
- Gary Nolan (Virginia)
- Ruben Perez (Texas)
- Mike Ross (Arizona)
- Aaron Russo (California)
http://www.uselections.com/pres.htm Libertarian Candidates Michael Badnarik (Texas) Jeffrey Diket (Louisiana) David Hollist (California) Gary Nolan (Virginia) Ruben Perez (Texas) Mike Ross (Arizona) Aaron Russo (California)
http://www.libertyforall.net/2004/may9/Interview.html The LFA Interview: President and Vice President
This is the second in a series of interviews with the announced candidates for various offices, to be selected at the Libertarian Party national convention in Atlanta, May 27-31, 2004. This time, we hear from candidates for the Libertarian nominations for President and Vice President. I used this site to determine who those candidates were. All candidates were asked the same questions. The responses are printed in full in the order received. The previous replies from Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates can be found here. In May, we'll interview candidates for offices on the Libertarian National Committee. ( If you are planning to run for one of these offices, please contact me as soon as possible at seanhaugh@mindspring.com. ) If you haven't registered for the convention yet, you can find out all about it at http://www.lpconvention.org/ .Hope to see you in Atlanta! Sean Haugh, Associate Editor *** MICHAEL BADNARIK, candidate for President LFA: How will your campaign make the Libertarian Party grow? Badnarik: My experience as a professional trainer and instructor gives me the ability to answer questions in a way that non-Libertarians can understand and relate to. A very high percentage of the people I talk to end up registering as a Libertarian, and many become Libertarian activists. One unique aspect of my campaign is my class on the Constitution that has converted hard core socialists into Libertarian members in only eight hours. To make that information available to people who are unable to attend my class, I wrote a book entitled "It's Good to be King!" that recently received a very favorable review from Congressman Ron Paul. I have dedicated my life, my fortune, and my sacred honor to the cause of Liberty. LFA: What is your top single issue, and how will you present your position to the voters? Badnarik: If the United States if going to survive, we have to eliminate the Federal Reserve System and the Internal Revenue Service. I explain that the thirteen colonies were printing money so fast that hyperinflation had all but destroyed the economy. The Constitution was written to replace the Articles of Confederation and grant Congress the authority to COIN money. The Federal Reserve has been inflating our economy ever since 1933, creating the very same economic problems that prompted the founding fathers to come together in Philadelphia in the first place. Without a stable, non-inflationary currency, the national debt will continue to grow, and the banking system will continue to steal our wealth until the United States is no better off than third world countries. LFA: Besides your signature issue, what is the one issue you care most passionately about? Badnarik: The First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion...". It does not say the people are allowed to go to church. No one is required to fill out a government form in order to gain permission to exercise their freedom of religion. At least, not yet. The Second Amendment works the same way. It does not grant me the right to keep and bear arms. It prohibits the government from infringing upon my right to protect my life and property. Thomas Jefferson said that "the most important reason for the people to keep and bear arms is to protect themselves against tyranny in government." This cannot be dramatized more effectively than to point out that the Declaration of Independence was written shortly after British soldiers attempted to enforce "gun control" on the colonies during the battles of Lexington and Concord. Texas became a nation shortly after the Mexican Army demanded the return of a cannon, and Texans at Gonzales raised a flag taunting them to "COME AND TAKE IT". History records that governments always take guns away from their citizens before subjecting them to horrible and unbelievable persecution and death. (I urge you to watch INNOCENTS BETRAYED which is a compelling video from www.jpfo.org) When Americans give up their guns, there will be no way to enforce Constitutional limits on a government run amok. For that reason I will NEVER give up my guns to any state or federal agent, period. LFA: Given the current reality in Iraq and Afghanistan, when you succeed President Bush, what will you do about US involvement in those nations' affairs? Badnarik: The current environment of terrorism has been precipitated by several decades of foreign intervention with the governments and economies of other countries. The Constitution does not authorize Congress to send troops thousands of miles from home in order to "make the world safe for democracy", no matter how honorable that notion may sound to some. Unless Congress formally declares war as they are responsible for doing, my priority as President would be to bring our troops home from all 135 foreign countries where they are currently stationed. Naturally I would instruct my military leaders to do so as quickly as possible without further endangering the men and women whom we have chosen to place in harm's way. LFA: What is your stand on immigration? Badnarik: This is a two-part question. The United States became the most powerful nation in the world during the late 1800s and early 1900s when millions of European immigrants came to this country in search of the "American dream". They came here to work hard, spend money, and make a better life for themselves and their families. There are millions who would like to do that today, however, because many of them immediately become a drain on our overburdened welfare system, Americans are forced to pay for their housing, medical, and their children's educational costs. That is the source of resentment against many illegal immigrants. The solution is to eliminate our bloated welfare system completely, for all nationalities. Then we can lower the immigration standards to simply documenting who is entering the country, and where they plan to live and work. Anyone who comes here to work hard and consume products and services is helping the American economy at the same time they are helping themselves. LFA: What will you have to accomplish to say you ran a successful campaign? Badnarik: The purpose of my campaign has always been to help spread the Libertarian message to members of the public who do not yet know our philosophy. I have always held that my campaign will be successful as long as I do my very best to accomplish this goal. When I stand at the podium in Atlanta, Georgia, I will be able to address the delegates with pride, announcing to them with all honesty that I have dedicated my life, my fortune, and my sacred honor to the cause of Liberty. *** MIKE ROSS, candidate for President LFA: How will your campaign make the Libertarian Party grow? Ross: im a low key person. other candidates are better at doing this them me LFA: What is your top single issue, and how will you present your position to the voters? Ross: get rid of as much government as possible! get rid of all the unconstitutional laws that have been passed over the last 100 years including legalizing all drugs, get rid of ALL laws regulating guns. get rid of all police state nanny laws regulate sex, porn and gambling and other things. personally i am an anarchist and would like to get rid of government all together. LFA: Besides your signature issue, what is the one issue you care most passionately about? Ross: even if your not a libertarian and you just think that the government should be run by the rules specified in the constitution then government is clearly out of control. im not a lawyer but lawyers and legal experts i have talked to say that between 50% to 95% of the state and federal laws on the books are unconstitutional. we need to get rid of these laws. probably the worst problem is the stupid drug laws. the drug laws have turned america into a police state and cause elected officials to pass many unconstitutional laws which flush the bill of rights down the toilet. LFA: Given the current reality in Iraq and Afghanistan, when you succeed President Bush, what will you do about US involvement in those nations' affairs? Ross: i will get out of iraq and get out of afghanistan. and get out of all the other 100 or so countries where the us military is involved. all of this government involvement is unconstitutional. when did congress declare war on iraq? when did congress declare war on afghanistan? it didnt!
LFA: What is your stand on immigration? Ross: get rid of the INS. rip down all the stupid fences on the borders and make our borders free and open to both trade and immigration. LFA: What will you have to accomplish to say you ran a successful campaign?
Ross: im a low key person. the other candidates can do a much better job getting pr and publicity for the libertarian party. but when it comes to getting rid of government i can do just as good as job as the other guys. and as i said i am an anarchist and think we should get rid of government all together. *** GARY NOLAN, candidate for President LFA: How will your campaign make the Libertarian Party grow? Nolan: My campaign is already helping the Libertarian Party grow. Over the past two months, I've done over 130 radio and TV, including the first national TV appearance this year for any LP presidential candidate - Dolans Unscripted on CNN-FN, The Big Story with John Gibson on Fox News Channel, as well as several nationally-syndicated shows at my old network: Ellen Ratner, Alan Nathan, Joe Farah, and Bob Barr (twice), plus Neal Boortz, Ken Hamblin, Michael Medved, and Fox News Live with Alan Colmes. In addition to giving out my campaign website, www.garynolan.com, I also regularly give out the LP's website and encourage people to get involved. I'm also starting to pick up pick up endorsements from radio hosts, including Trapper John (a liberal Democrat) in Indianapolis, and Mancow Muller, host of the biggest talk show in Chicago. Mancow announced on the air that "[Nolan] is the man I'm voting for." People who listen to political radio shows tend to be strongly influenced by the opinion of the host, so these endorsements will have a big impact on their listeners. While my competitors are mostly speaking to other Libertarians at some state conventions, I'm speaking at more state conventions, plus organizing and speaking at town meetings all over the country, plus speaking at major outreach events like the NORML's national convention, College Convention 2004 (right after Sen. Kerry and just before Sen. Lieberman), two Junior Statesmen of America conventions, a major national conference sponsored by the Arab-American Institute that most of the major Presidential candidates also spoke at, major hemp rallies on both coasts, events sponsored by the Lebanese Chamber of Commerce and California Civil Rights Alliance, and scores of college campuses. As the campaign progresses, we'll be expanding our outreach to include Internet advertising direct mail radio ads TV ads whatever works best to reach each target audience. I want to get people to more than cast a single vote for Gary Nolan - I want them to get involved in the battle for liberty long-term by joining the LP. LFA: What is your top single issue, and how will you present your position to the voters? Nolan: I believe that the massive increases in federal spending under a Republican administration and Congress, coupled with unprecedented losses of civil liberties virtually unopposed by Democrats, have created an ideal political environment for a Presidential campaign built around restoring small, constitutionally-limited government across the board. I believe I am the candidate who can best take advantage of this incredible opportunity. I've built a successful career as a nationally-syndicated talk-radio host on my communication skills - my ability to relate to listeners and present libertarian ideas in ways that are interesting and entertaining. I believe I can reach even more people as the Libertarian nominee for President. As a small businessman in Cleveland, Ohio, I was initially attracted to the Republican Party. However, over time, I became increasingly frustrated with their bloated budgets and continuing failure to cut spending, finally resigning in 1999 to join the LP. There are millions of small government conservatives and libertarians who voted for President Bush but have become as frustrated with the Republicans as I was five years ago. I know how to reach them and bring them into the LP. There are millions of liberals and moderates who are as concerned about the USA Patriot Act and war in Iraq as we are. My decade of communication experience is enabling me to reach them as well. LFA: Besides your signature issue, what is the one issue you care most passionately about? Nolan: The question we should be asking: what issues do the voters care most passionately about?
For too long, we've limited ourselves to talking about the features of liberty, the countless activities of government we oppose. It's time we focus on the benefits of liberty, and present a positive vision of how life would be better with our policies in place. If that's the kind of positive campaign you want to see, a Libertarian campaign that won't be ignored, then join with me and help me make it happen. LFA: Given the current reality in Iraq and Afghanistan, when you succeed President Bush, what will you do about US involvement in those nations' affairs? Nolan: In Afghanistan, we need to limit our involvement to tracking down Osama Bin Laden and the other perpetrators of the September 11, 2001 attacks, while otherwise leaving them free to pursue their own destiny. The Bush administration seems to be succeeding in its drive to get the Iraqi people to stop fighting each other and unite into a single nation. Unfortunately, they're uniting against us. One of the many unintended consequences of this unnecessary war. I'm sure members of the administration are surprised by the current level of armed resistance, although those of us who opposed this war certainly aren't. They seem to be perpetually surprised that the Iraqi people, glad as they are to be rid of Saddam, don't want to be ruled by us, even if "only for a little while" and "for their own good." The people of Iraq are like people everywhere - they want to control their own destiny. It's time we let them do so. We need to return sovereignty to the people of Iraq as rapidly as possible and not allow ourselves to be drug into a protracted guerilla war. And we need to look to Iraqis to take the lead in restoring order, even if the resulting government in some areas is anti-American. We cannot impose order and stability at the point of a gun - the people of Iraq will have to achieve order and stability themselves. If I were sitting in the Oval Office, I guarantee that our troops would be on their way home and the Iraqi people would be in charge of their own destiny. But as long as it's Bush or any of his Democratic rivals sitting there, I predict we will continue pouring lives and money into Iraq with no end in sight. What an incredible waste. Looking forward, we must refrain from intervening in the quarrels of other nations and from making enemies of oppressed people who would otherwise look to America as a beacon of hope and freedom. We must stop providing aid and support to authoritarian regimes and dictators around the globe. We must remember that our own government helped arm and train the military of Iraqi dictator, Saddam Hussein - the same military that our troops later faced in brutal combat. We must not allow something similar to happen again. It's time to bring our troops home from the more than 140 countries in which they are stationed. It is especially ludicrous for America to be subsidizing the defense of wealthy nations like Germany and Japan, as well as providing 60% of the world's foreign aid. Friendship, non-intervention, and trade with all nations is a time-honored prescription for an America that is at peace with the world. It was the policy recommended by America's Founding Fathers - one that I would restore as President. LFA: What is your stand on immigration? Nolan: To enhance border security, we should remove immigration quotas and let honest, peaceful individuals enter our country legally. This would shut down human-smuggling networks, and make it harder for would-be terrorists to cross the border. LFA: What will you have to accomplish to say you ran a successful campaign? Nolan: At a minimum, I'm committed to running the most successful outreach campaign ever for the Libertarian Party - creating a positive first impression for millions of Americans, and helping elect more Libertarians as all levels by recruiting new Libertarian supporters and building local organizations. However, my ultimate goal is to generate enough support to get into the debates, demolish Bush and Kerry, and establish the LP as a major political force. And at that point, anything is possible. *** The following candidates were sent the questionnaire and a reminder notice and did not reply: President: Dave Hollist, Ruben Perez Vice President: Scott Jameson, Charles Jay
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=43935 LIBERTARIAN PARTY: Michael Badnarik (Texas) Jeffrey Diket (Louisiana)-----Artificial intelligence David Hollist (California) Gary Nolan (Virginia) Ruben Perez (Texas)-----Reptilian w/ very high and dark agenda Mike Ross (Arizona) Aaron Russo (California)-----Human w/ alien programming
http://www.politics1.com/libt04a.htm Mike Ross (Arizona) Mike Ross was an angry, protest candidate for the LP nomination. Who was he protesting against? Just about everyone and everything! Tops on the list was the Harry Browne faction that still dominates the party nationwide -- particularly the national leadership and staff. "In his several bids for President as a Libertarian it seems like [Browne's] main goal is to pocket money he takes from Libertarians which he tells will be used to make commericals which are never made. Most of this can be documented in articles in Liberty Magazine. I don't want your money," explained Ross. Perhaps no one told him Browne wasn't running again in 2004. Next on the Ross hate list was a Phoenix area insurance agency owner who "has been making up lies about me and telling people that I am a government snitch." Ross' website also attacks one LP activist as "a scum bag" ... refers to the current leadership of the Arizona LP as "idiots" ... calls a mayoral candidate "a Nazi" ... and people who believe in God ("I'm an atheist ... I don't give a rats ass what god you worship as long as you don't try to use the force of government to force it on someone else"). Ross -- on issues -- is part of the extremist "no compromise" wing of the party: "I'm more of an Anarchist Libertarian then a Libertarian. My position is we should eliminate the government all together." Why all the anger? The answer: Ross was on the state governing board of the old Arizona LP group was disaffiliated and disavowed by the national party when they recognized another group instead as the official affiliate (and a court later ratified the action). Ross previously ran as a write-in candidate for Arizona Governor in the 2002 primary against a candidate backed by the faction that won control of the state party.
|