The AP knows as soon as papers are filed with the election bureau. Pete Jackson called me right after they were filed on Friday. Maybe we need to be faster with our press releases...

Why is the AG candidate a Green who advocates universal health care? What am I missing?

Is that why they made her PA state chair of the Green Party?

So in under 2 years she has recanted #2, 4(b) and 5? What evidence is there that she has recanted any of these positions?

http://www.geocities.com/mjr91/RogersforAG.html



Wow. How about if the candidate is advocating something that not only violates the pledge but also the party's statement of principles?


By that rationale I suppose we can safely run Adolf Hitler for dog-catcher. Sonny Landham for Governor should be fine, since he would not have any power to make war against the so-called "camel dung shovelers", right?


Given the current trend against civil liberties, why shouldn't the LP run candidates who advocate taking that policy to its logical conclusion of a police state not unlike mainland China, since that seems like "the only way to go"?


YES. You can not say for sure that the AG will never have anything to do with nationalizing the health care industry or setting a "living wage". What are the principles that underlie this person's political philosophy and what are their un-libertarian ramifications for the law? Finally, how is running a decidedly non-libertarian candidate going to advance the cause of liberty in Pennsylvania? You who approved this have muddled the definition of 'libertarian' in PA.


What plans do these secret candidates (not listed with the other candidates on this website) for sex education in the schools? Perhaps they are in favor of propagandizing against abortion? I'm just speculating but it would interesting to find out.

Libertarians need to fight to end public schools, instead of just vying to decide which orthodoxies to brainwash our kids with, using funds extorted from hard-working citizens.



I would never support anyone who violates the LP pledge and thinks they have a right to extort the fruits of my mind from me at the barrel of a gun. The Libertarian Party is about liberty from government, not more convenient enslavement.

The positions of Marakay Rogers have evolved since the posting of the information for her 2006 Green Party campaign. Information from that website should not be taken as current positions on any issues. She had already left the Green Party and was preparing an independent campaign prior to becoming affilated with the LP, although formal resignation of her GP positions did not occur until shortly before joining the LP.

She had been discussing issues with LPPA members for some time, going back to at least 2004. It was apparent even then that many of her stances, particularly those regarding individual rights, were more in line with libertarian thinking than along GP lines. While she may not have approached libertarianism from the same direction as some (not everyone likes Ayn Rand), it is good that she has arrived and is on board with us.

Prior to gaining the LPPA nomination for Attorney General, Marakay was interviewed in depth by the LPPA Board of Directors. Also separate discussions were held and endorsements were obtained from a former LPPA Chair and former statewide LPPA nominees. Let me be clear that we have a "Libertarian" Libertarian Party candidate for Attorney General. Additionally, Marakay has recently joined the LPPA Board of Directors as the representative from York County, and we welcome her service in that capacity.

Mik Robertson

I was a Democrat at one time.

I guess that means that I am forever and always: never to be a legitimate libertarian, never to be a legitimate libertarian activist, never worthy of communicating any libertarian ideas, never to be a legitimate libertarian candidate.  Personal growth and evolution of beliefs and perspectives are impossible for a former democrat as myself. Even if my beliefs inexplicably shift toward libertarianism, they won't transform instantaneously, so I remain impure, outcast and worthy of scorn.

I'm glad we cleared that up.

Mark

PS -- BTW, who in the LP is so officially "purist" enough to be worthy of accepting a resignation from the LP by a low-life, heretic, socialist like me? 

Here is apparently her website for this year's campaign: http://www.rogersforattorneygeneral.com/ . Some interesting tidbits:


by "risks" she apparently means the risk of accidental discharge of the weapon.

and

http://www.rogersforattorneygeneral.com/mission.html


She claims the endorsements of not only the LP but also the Green and Reform Parties. Frankly I find it surprising that a person can be both Green and Libertarian. The "social justice" program of the Greens requires extorting taxes from people and is therefore decidedly anti-libertarian.

Anyway, as you can see, the website contains little that a Libertarian could take issue with.

I am skeptical though since I'm not finding anything about her recanting her "social justice" platform of just 2 years ago.

You're over-reacting.


No one said that. If beliefs change there should be evidence of it.


I have nothing against you, sir. And I did not suggest you should leave the LP or that I was "worthy" of accepting your resignation, whatever that means.

Political parties must have boundaries, otherwise they cease to be political parties and become something else. Minor differences are one thing, but to have someone who advocates blatantly and radically anti-libertarian policies running for prominent state-wide office is a terrible mistake. Government-run health care is light-years away from what is libertarian and people who advocate are our opponents in the political realm.