My Michigan Primary Endorsements

July 29, 2016 by

I am a very active Libertarian. So when the general elections comes along, I will be voting for Libertarians. However, we are in primary season until August 2nd. So I am taking a break from my endless push for Libertarian Party candidates to chime in on Tuesday’s primary.

First of all, I will address why there are no Libertarians in the primary. By state law only parties who reach a specific threshold for their top-of-ticket candidate are included in the primary system. We have not yet reached that threshold. So all of our candidates are nominated, at no cost to taxpayers, in Conventions and primaries.

I live in Detroit’s Second State Representative District. In this solidly Democratic district Bettie Cook-Scott stands out as best qualified. She has served in the state house before and has a demonstrable record of being an advocate for the residents of her district. One distinction is that she is a retired police Sergeant, who was supportive of the late Ron Scott and his efforts in the Detroit Coalition Against Police Brutality. She correctly articulated the fact that all police should oppose police brutality, because it is their job to serve the public and prevent violence, not excuse it. She was a law-enforcement officer who chose her job because she cared about people, and that is also why she wishes to return to the Michigan House.

On the topic of police, there are good cops and bad cops. I just endorsed one of the good ones. When I was awaiting trial, as a result of the conduct of a bad cop, only a couple friends showed up in support. One of those was Republican State Representative candidate Matt Schonert. I have known Matthew over the years as principled advocate for individual liberty. We first met through the 2008 Ron Paul campaign, and he has continued doing Paul’s work of trying to steer the Republican Party in a libertarian direction, as a Campaign for Liberty delegate, and now as a candidate for the fourth State Representative District.

Also, through Campaign for Liberty I have come to know an incumbent State Representative from the Forty Fourth District. He is Jim Runestad. Representative Runestad has consistently supported legislation that is designed to make Michigan’s government more transparent, and more respectful of individual rights, and more respectful of individual privacy. Before being elected to the Michigan House, Jim Runestad was on the Oakland County Commission. While there, he introduced the “Liberty Preservation Resolution,” which stated that Oakland County would not be complicit in indefinite detentions as defined in the 2012 NDAA.

Another incumbent State Representative from Oakland County is Martin Howrylak. Representative Howrylak is the type of conservative who truly believes in smaller, less invasive government. He has frequently introduced and supported legislation that shows he is willing to walk the walk. His principled support for liberty earned him the support of Oakland County Libertarians when he successfully ran for the Troy City Council in a non-partisan election. Opponents attempted to use this against him by claiming that Libertarians supported him because he was into drugs (A serious distortion of the Libertarian Platform). The attacks backfired since Howrylak’s personal commitment to conservative family values was beyond reproach; he is as clean as they come. Over the years I have found Howrylak to be a person who never compromises on matters of ethics decency, and honesty. If re-elected he will serve his constituents in the Forty First District with integrity.

During my visits to Lansing on behalf of Brass Roots and Our America Initiative, I have become acquainted with another outstanding State Representative, Triston Cole of Michigan’s One Hundred Fifth District. Cole is a principled supporter of the right of citizens to own and carry firearms. He is a sportsman who believes in protecting the environment with out infringing on private property rights. He believes in fixing roads without raising taxes, and he knows that entrepreneurs, not government, creates jobs. If re-elected I am sure he will be an asset to his district.

The Fifth State House District is a Democratic stronghold.  One of the candidates in the Democratic Primary is the host of the talk show, Stand Up Now. She is Cynthia Johnson.  Through her show, she has raised public awareness of the need for electoral reform in Detroit, a cause that I made the centerpiece of my City Clerk run in 2013.  She has also brought attention to police brutality problems in Detroit and has organized walks to draw attention to the lack of adequate public lighting in Detroit neighborhoods.  I am sure she could shine some light on Lansing politics as well.

At this point my fellow Libertarians might be feeling a bit worried about me. Won’t saying these nice things about candidates in other parties hurt their Libertarian opponents in November? Not to worry…

… their are none. There will be 69 Libertarians on the ballot in Michigan’s general election. None of them will be running against the above candidates.

Ramblings Of A Pro-Johnson Radical

May 26, 2016 by

I’ve been a Libertarian since the eighties. I am of the variety who believes ALL human interaction should be voluntary. Each election season, I have yelled at the TV while crumbling up proverbial newspapers and pelting the pundits who followed every move of “BOTH” candidates.

The World-wide web gave us a bit of a voice, but (in the average voters mind), the so-called MSM (ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, Fox, AP and UPI) remained the final word on which candidates were credible. Anyone could post stuff online, and everyone does. This paradigm of the establishment media as curators of truth is dissolving, but not gone.

Have I been alone in this frustration? Hardly. Until recently, this ideological shunning has been obvious to libertarians, and of no interest to people who were not minor party activists. For years the official political discourse had been about liberals, moderates, and extremists (meant in a scary-bad way).

Enter Ron Paul’s second Presidential run. Twenty years after being the Libertarian Parties nominee, he returned to Presidential Politics as a libertarian-Republican. While the  establishment did their best to marginalize him, they could no longer do so without being  called out.

Libertarians of all backgrounds were finding each other, and the Ron Paul campaign was the catalyst. Finally we were hearing the word “libertarian,” and people were using it correctly; but they were referring to the philosophy, not the party. Ron Paul supporters became the Campaign for Liberty, which has attempted to make the GOP more libertarian. I’ve been there, and can’t blame them for trying… but how’s that working out in this Presidential election cycle? Privately many C4L-Republicans have told me that in general elections, they vote Libertarian if no liberty-Republican made it through the primary.

So once again, I find myself throwing those proverbial crumbled newspaper balls at the TV and cursing at pundits who talk about “BOTH parties” or “THE candidates” and would go on on to talk as if only two parties existed. Sometimes they would ask if it might be time for a third party, as if none existed yet…

…but sometime between 2012 and 2016 change was underway. Those moments of hopelessness and frustration were punctuated by respectable recognition of the Libertarian Party by many of the mainstream broadcasters and publishers who had once shunned them.

The major parties continue to nominate hard-core statist candidates, but this time the idea of picking the lesser of two evils is no longer taken for granted. Mixed in with the idea that Americans need a third choice, there is an acknowledgement that the choice exists, and that choice is the Libertarian Party’s candidate. Most of the time they name that candidate, and when they do, it’s Governor Gary Johnson.

Something I have been working toward for about 30 years is finally happening. Conversations outside the echo chamber have included respect for the Libertarian alternative. This is beyond a token mention. There are interviews and analysis… even polling results indicate 10% of the voters being willing to support a Libertarian candidate. Most interviews with a Libertarian Presidential candidate are with Gary Johnson. He is also the candidate polling 10%. Of course there is one glaring omission to most of the hype, that Governor Johnson, himself, has to keep alerting people too: He has not been nominated.


After years of stagnation and shrinking membership, the Libertarian Party is respected by regular people outside the movement. When Johnson was nominated in 2012, many Libertarians were overly optimistic about the effect of nominating a two-term governor. The fact was that the Libertarian brand was no longer taken seriously; most people found us to be irrelevant. In spite of that Johnson earned us a record number of votes, and in my home state of Michigan he earned the highest number of statewide write-in votes in the states entire history.

The Johnson-Gray team never went away. Through the non-partisan issues oriented organization, “Our America Initiative” they had been providing a libertarian network whereby activists, working on libertarian legislation, could unite and lobby for it on an issue-by-issue basis. This way we were gradually showing relevance. Also, through Our America Initiative, Gary Johnson, Judge James P. Gray and others have taken the Commission on Presidential Debates to court. Even if the lawsuit fails, Libertarians are winning; we are on track to regaining our long-lost 50-state ballot access. I can hardly keep up with all the news reports and interviews that have focused on the Libertarian Party and the Johnson candidacy. I can hardly contain my excitement either (so I blog about it). Recent polls have Johnson at 10%, but if the libertarian nominee reached that 15% threshold, the commission could just close shop, thereby exposing themselves as a fraud to the general public. At this point we would be the proverbial naked man running down the street. Ignoring us would be like ignoring the 800 Lb gorilla in the room. We would have to be recognized by the people covering the election, and voters could begin to think of us as a viable choice; the death of the “wasted vote” argument is upon us.

For years we have looked for the magic bullet. Little did we know that round was already primed in 2012, and if the Libertarian delegates are willing, it will exit the muzzle this weekend. This is our moment, but only if we seize it!

But what about the message? Has it been watered down? In a way, but it’s a good thing.
Here’s the Real Politik. A while back my late friend, Pat Clawson found that more people would support him petitioning to run as an independent rather than the much less costly option of being nominated at a Libertarian convention; they just didn’t feel right about the about the Libertarian Party. He said we needed to do some market research. Well, it’s been done for us.

The sucess Gary Johnson has had reaching people outside the movement shows that he is doing something right. Perhaps those of us who thought the logical elegance of libertarianism would be universally recognized for its crystalline beauty were distracted from a blind-spot.

People have different learning styles. The fact that they don’t readily agree with what ever we say, doesn’t make them sheeple. They think differently, and need to be spoken to in a way that makes sense to them if we are to persuade them to agree with us. To people who love to debate (as I do), he comes across as indirect. His policy positions often don’t go far enough to satisfy libertarian activists. This does not make him the perfect candidate at a Libertarian Convention. In 2012 Johnson was quick to credit R. Lee Wrights with out-debating him.

However, Gary Johnson is the perfect candidate, and an excellent spokesperson, on the national stage. People connect with him emotionally. He doesn’t scare people, and his policy positions take us in the Libertarian direction.

At an event in 2013 I asked why he supported a “harm reduction” approach to hard drugs, like heroin, rather than just legalizing them outright. His response was that everything he does must be “reality based.” I didn’t get this right away because I thought in terms of physical reality, but there is also the world of political reality. If one wants to affect change, one needs to get people on one’s side.

Governor Johnson knows how to reach people where they are. In the current political context. The reality is that we live in a popular soft tyranny, not a state of nature. The reality is that we are not ruled over by a few statists with fancy hats. Millions of people put leaders in office, and most people are comfortable with what they do.

The way to move from a soft tyranny to a relatively free society, is to appeal to that libertarian part of them that would like to remove government aggression from some part of their lives. Let’s give people a taste of liberty and hopefully they will want more. Respect the moderate Libertarians because we need them to move forward. They are reasonable, but cautious, people. They will vote for us, and we can expand liberty by getting government out of the way, one reform at a time.

I have renewed optimism that we may finally reach critical mass, and we might even win the oval. I hope my optimism survives past this weekend.

Don’t you?

Transracial People Define Themselves

June 17, 2015 by

Define yourself, or be defined
-Cass Corridor sidewalk graffiti-

I am deeply disturbed by lack of sensitivity people have shown toward Rachel Dolezal. For those unfamiliar with her plight, Rachel Dolezal was a Spokane Washington NAACP President who considered herself to be “African-American” or “black.” Recently, it became apparent that her biological parents considered themselves to be “White,” and using reasoning derived from Public Enemy’sFear of a Black Planet” lyrics, “White man, white woman, white baby” journalists concluded that if she was born “white” she must still be “white.” Next came accusations that she was lying about her race, and that her “True race” was “white.”

The implication here is that a person can’t change his, her, or its demographic. Put another way, the paradigm at work here dictates that you’re personality must adapt to the body you were born with, and any attempt to modify your body to externalize one’s inner sense of identity is somehow phony or dishonest. Most people are comfortable in their own skin and don’t wish to change it, but that isn’t any reason to be so harsh on people who are not so fortunate.

To some extent, changing the way one looks, in ways that bypass heredity, is common and accepted. Genetics determines hair color, but people who feel they are more blond, brunet, or red head can chose to be that. Even then there is a bit of snobbishness. Ever see a blond rolling her eyes as another one passes and remark “She’s not a natural blond.” When I was first asked to fill out an application for my drivers permit I was confused, because it asked for eye color. Knowing that my eyes changed color (normally based on what I was wearing), I asked nearby people what color my eyes were. After receiving multiple answers I was tempted to write “rainbow” in on the form, but was later urged to call them “hazel” Since then I have seen people with purple and yellow eyes. There are contact lenses for that.

Switching other traits is much more controversial. This may be because they are groups that politicians like to pander to; the divide and conquer strategy of the establishment depends on a lack of mobility between demographic groups. In these united states of America collectivist politicians love the categories of “race” and sex.

Mobility between sexes has achieved an unprecedented level of acceptance. Lately there has been a lot of buzz about Decathlon gold medalist Bruce Jenner having sex reassignment surgery and changing her name to “Kaitlyn,” but Jenner walks a path that has been blazed and cleared by a variety of other individuals. One of those people was, the tennis player Richard Raskind. While he was successful as a man, he chose to become a woman. She went on to be the Tennis player Rene’e Richards. When Richards was first outed as being born a male, she faced criticism that was very similar in content to the rhetoric used against Rachel Dolezal now. Richards was accused of pretending to be a woman in order to get an advantage by playing against male rather than female athletes. They would say she lied about her sex. Athletic organizations banned Richards from playing her favorite game because the United States Tennis Association, established an unprecedented women-born-women policy.

Of course Richards laughed off the notion that men would be lining up for the emasculating surgery so they could play professional tennis against men. Of course transsexual and transgender people face different challenges then transracial people. [Side note: Gender is not the same thing as sex. “Masculine” and “feminine” are genders, “male” and “female” are sexes.]

One distinction is that there are structural, functional and chromosomal differences that delineate sexes (though many people are born as hermaphrodites with intermediate or combined sexual traits). Race, on the other hand is a social construct, or a look. The belief in distinct races is a myth largely promoted by the likes of eugenicists and slavery apologists, to serve their particular agendas. Modern humans don’t exist as distinct subspecies, like say wolves and coyotes. So it would seem that changing races is even easier than changing sexes. From a medical perspective this is certainly the case, but social acceptance has ironically proven more difficult.

While Richards scoffed at the idea that someone would have a sex-change simply to gain some advantage, it is possible that someone would, but so what? As a libertarian I believe in peoples right to do as they wish with their property, and the most valuable piece of physical property individuals can own is their own bodies. As a matter of enlightened self-interest, I would hope that anyone choosing to change ones physical identity to such a degree, would be doing so to be true to one’s self. However, that’s not up to me. There are other cases where people have “passed as” members of another race in order to gain an advantage. Examples include Carol Channing, and reputedly Dinah Shore. By “passing” they were able to perform in venues that were off limits to those who held onto the look that was then called “negro” or “colored.” While this is less ideal then people taking on a look that matches their sense of self, such pragmatic “passing” is still morally defensible. If it is to ones advantage to change one’s sex or race, then it seems to me the fault is in the society that makes these changes advantageous, not in the character of the person who is trying to better one’s self.

I don’t know Ms. Dolezal personally, but it is my distinct impression that she is transracial. That is to say, that she has chosen a racial identity that differs from the one that she was supposedly born with. If this is the case, then she can’t be said to have lied about her race. She simply changed her public identity to harmonize with her inner self. I have often been confused when looking at Federal forms that ask people to categorize themselves into narrow racial categories. This is probably more confusing to an educated person who knows that race is mythical then it is to a person who has been duped by racialist politicians. There it defines black as follows, “A person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa.” These forms also ask what one considers oneself, rather than what one is. By the aforementioned definition, any human could honestly answer “yes,” based on current paleontological and mitochondrial evidence, which shows modern humans to have a common ancestry in sub-Saharan Africa.

Dolezal’s parents showed an attitude similar to the attitudes people used to have toward members of the LGBT community.  They said, “We hope she gets the help she needs.”  The implication was that she was sick, and needed professional “help.”

There is one thing I have put on the back burner: She lied about her father. Lying is wrong and I don’t wish to defend it, but it is understandable. In an age of discrimination against transracial people, as is evidenced by the harsh rhetoric she has faced, she may have felt compelled to lie about her past. I suspect many transsexuals may hesitate to tell people they used to be a different sex, often as a matter of self-preservation. Perhaps unintentionally, Ms. Dolezal has opened the way for another wave of diversity acceptance. People who have been labeled “Oreos,” “wanabees,” and “wiggers” for instance, may soon be recognized as transracial. At least, that is, until we move past this categorical mentality altogether, and see people as individuals, and not members of politically defined categories.

The ACA: Washington’s Assault on American Labor

December 24, 2013 by
Medical Symbol

Medical Symbol

Obama’s so-called “Affordable Care Act” (BKA Obamacare) is devastating to many working class Americans.  Unfortunately, the unions we pay to represent us, are not speaking up about this since they have become tools of the Democratic Party.  The Democratic Party along with some Republican accomplices have betrayed labor, but labor would rather betray the rank and file then break the chains that keep them beholden to their political masters.

I am one of Obamacare’s victims.  This is my story.  If I am the only victim, then it’s no big deal…. but I have a feeling I have lots of company.  I have never read about this in the mainstream media, but this is the truth.

As a part-time college professor, I have been teaching at two institutions to earn a decent income.  I have been able to use that money to buy my own insurance.  Since the law passed my premiums have increased significantly with no significant new benefits.  But that is the least of my problems.

The ACA requires employers to buy health insurance for any employees who work three-fourths of full time or more.   So many employees are having their hours slashed by employers who don’t wish to face penalties for giving their employees too many (sic)  hours.  Most people would expect this to force employers to restrict their part-time employees to 29 hours per week, since most people think of 40 hours as full-time.  Such an intervention is bad enough, in principle, and a person struggling to make ends meet in the current depression may not be able to afford any loss in income.  Nonetheless, the reality is even more outrageous.

According to the ACA college faculty who teach over 11.5 hours per week are categorized as three-fourths full time.  No, that’s not a typo.  According to bureaucrats, the law says eleven and one half hours are three-fourths full time!  Since my regular course load involved two six hour classes (12 hours total) per week, my hours have been nearly cut in half at one of the places where I teach.  Fortunately, the union local at the other college refused to cave in and I still have all of my hours there.

If I can’t find additional work in the next couple weeks, I may be faced with bankruptcy. Meanwhile I have had to forgo Christmas shopping in preparation for this impending financial crisis.

The rank and file need to stand up and tell their unions to withhold endorsements from any candidates who supported the ACA or any part of it’s implementation.  Workers of the USA unite!  We have plenty to loose.

Carl Levin Recall Language Passes Clarity Review

July 8, 2012 by

[This is the text of a press release that went out on July 3rd.  In spite of the historical nature of the subject, no major publications have yet written about it.]

Nothing Personal: Representative Sander and Senator Carl Levin at the Clawson 4th of July Parade shortly after speaking with Libertarian Congressional candidate Jim Fulner, and Recall organizer Scotty Boman.

Nothing Personal: Representative Sander and Senator Carl Levin at the Clawson 4th of July Parade shortly after speaking with Libertarian Congressional candidate Jim Fulner, and Recall organizer Scotty Boman.

Detroit, MI – Activist are free to begin circulating petitions to recall Senator Carl Milton Levin starting this Independence Day; their petition language has been deemed clear in the manner described by Section 168.952 of Michigan Election law which states:

“(3) The board of county election commissioners, not less than 10 days or more than 20 days after submission to it of a petition for the recall of an officer, shall meet and shall determine whether each reason for the recall stated in the petition is of sufficient clarity to enable the officer whose recall is sought and the electors to identify the course of conduct that is the basis for the recall. Failure of the board of county election commissioners to comply with this subsection shall constitute a determination that each reason for the recall stated in the petition is of sufficient clarity to enable the officer whose recall is being sought and the electors to identify the course of conduct that is the basis for the recall.”

Notarized certified letters containing the most recent language were signed for on June 11th, and Wayne County Election Chairman Milton L. Mack acknowledged receiving the language on June 14th in a letter written to the petitions sponsor, Scott Avery Boman.  In the letter Mack wrote that, “…the Wayne County Election Commission will not accept petition language directed to a United State Senator.”  According to Boman, Director of Elections Delphine Oden told him (by phone on June 22nd) this meant they would not be holding a clarity review hearing.  Section 168.121 (United States senator; recall) reads: “Persons holding the office of United States senator are subject to recall by the qualified and registered electors of the state as provided in chapter 36 of this act.”

On May 1st the commission held a hearing to review the clarity of previous language and found the prior language to be unclear.  The new approved (by default) petition language reads,

He co-authored and introduced an amendment regarding detention provisions (Subtitle D Section 1031) to S.1867 (the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012). He voted in favor of the final version (H.R. 1540) which contained the detention provisions in section 1021.”

Sponsors cite Levin’s pivotal roll in provisions they describe as “de facto martial law,” as their reason to initiate the recall effort.  The recall will require 468,709 signatures.  Boman said, “Warren and I can’t do this on our own.  We can get this started with a build-it-and-they-will-come approach.  In 2008 1,810,234 people voted against Carl Levin.  We need to have about a quarter of these people sign the petition, and a much smaller portion to step up and be activists.”

Petitions can be downloaded from:

County officials also have standard recall petition forms that may be filled out by hand.  Co-sponsor Warren Raftshol said, “We are building an internet campaign via Facebook, and these petitions are legal and official.  I invite people to forward the link to Carl Levin’s Facebook page and tell him they object to NDAA detention.”

Boman said, “Independence Day is the perfect day to launch this effort.  The tyranny Levin has brought us with this law rivals the oppression imposed on the colonists by the British in 1776.”

My Choice for President (The Sequel)

June 22, 2012 by

June 22, 2012

In February, I endorsed libertarian-Republican Ron Paul.  My confidence that, if elected, he would be the best president in generations is unshaken.  Naturally, I voted for him in Michigan’s presidential primary.  Unfortunately, by Dr. Paul’s own admission, his nomination at the Republican Convention in Tampa is extremely unlikely.  In fact nothing short of Romney’s exit from the contest would make it possible.

I don’t wish to discourage Ron Paul delegates.  They have an unprecedented opportunity to give the Republican Party a more libertarian national platform, and they have the numbers to do it; delegates are committed to a candidate on the first ballot, but no such restraints apply to matters of policy.

So where do we go from here? There will be a number of choices on the ballot.  The typical approach for supporters of a Republican candidate is for those people to rally around their party’s nominee, but Ron Paul supporters are not motivated by a love of politics as usual.  Rather, they are motivated by a message of maximum liberty in the context of a constitutionally limited republic, and a desire to elect a president who feels as they do.

Gary Johnson and Scotty Boman

Gary Johnson and Scotty Boman at Libby Fest.

The good news is that they still have an opportunity to elect such a president! The Libertarian Party has nominated New Mexico’s former two-term Governor Gary Johnson as their presidential candidate.  Governor Johnson has been the most libertarian governor in United States history:

  • He vetoed 750  of the bills that were passed by the New Mexico legislature; more than all other governors combined.
  • He cut over 1,200 government jobs without firing anyone.
  • He got government out of the way thereby allowing for the private creation of 20,000 more jobs.
  • He left New Mexico with a budget surplus.
  • He cut taxes 14 times while never raising them.

…the list goes on.  Throughout the early Republican campaign for the nomination he repeatedly advocated libertarian solutions for national problems, and as a two-term governor he enters the race with stronger political credentials then any other Libertarian nominee, and he has more executive experience then Barack Obama and Mitt Romney combined.

Furthermore, a vote for Gary Johnson is a vote for the party of principal.  The Libertarian Party has been the choice for advocates of individual liberty and limited government for 40 years.  Many of it’s founders were Goldwater Republicans who were disgusted with Nixonian statism.  In 1988 Ron Paul was the Party’s nominee President.  At the 2012 convention, delegates nominated Judge Jim Gray as Gary Johnson’s running mate.  Judge Gray is an outspoken critic of the war on drugs.

For these reasons, I wholeheartedly endorse the Libertarian candidate, Governor Gary Johnson, as my choice for President of these United States.

Tea Party Welcomes Boman. Hoekstra Snubs Tea Party.

May 23, 2012 by


Shelby Township, MI – United States Senate candidate, Pete Hoekstra backed out of a candidate forum after

Boman Speaks as Hoekstra looks on in Grandville on May 14th.

Boman Speaks as Hoekstra looks on in Grandville on May 14th, at the Eternal Word Church.

learning he would have to face Libertarian hopeful Scotty Boman.  The forum was held by the Romeo Area Tea Party at the Palazzo Grande in Shelby Township and was moderated by WJR Radio Personality Frank Beckmann.

During introductory statements, Beckmann explained the absence of former Congressman Pete Hoekstra by saying that Hoekstra was uncomfortable with the format, and objected to the inclusion of Scotty Boman in the forum.  Boman commented that he expected Hoekstra to have a “…thicker skin than that.”  The following morning (May 22nd) Beckmann addressed the snub again during the first segment of his 9:00 AM to Noon radio program on WJR AM.  He specifically cited comments made by Boman at a forum held on May 14th as making Hoekstra uncomfortable.

At the May 14th forum in Grandville, Boman speculated on who he would vote for in the Republican Primary if he didn’t qualify to be in it saying, “We’re still a little short and if these are the only candidates I have to choose from, I’m going with Clark Durant…He’s a person that really sticks to principle. He’s a man who has professional talent to get things done.” This forum, at Eternal Word Church, was only attended by Pete Hoekstra, Gary Glenn, Randy Hekman, Clark Durant, and Scotty Boman. Peter Konetchy (who qualified for the Republican primary) did not attend.

On his May 22nd radio broadcast, Beckmann said Hoekstra viewed Boman and Durant as “a slate,” due to Boman’s favorable remarks about Durant.  When asked, Boman has clarified this as a comment about his Republican Primary preference and that he would be voting Libertarian in November.

In September of 2011 libertarian activist, Scotty Boman announced his effort to seek the Republican Party nomination for United States Senate, but fell short of the 15,000 signatures needed to file for the Republican Primary.  As a result, Boman’s name cannot appear on the Republican Party’s Primary ballot.

In 2008 Boman was on the general election ballot as a Libertarian.  He placed third in the election.  Libertarians nominate their State-wide candidates by a self-funded convention rather than a tax-payer funded primary. As a result, Libertarians can select their candidates at conventions, while also voting in major party primaries.

The Libertarian Party will hold it’s convention on June 2nd at:  Embassy Suites Livonia/Novi. 19525 Victor Parkway. Livonia, MI 48152

Another candidate, Erwin Haas, is also seeking that nomination.

Two people I Would Vote For… If I Could

March 27, 2012 by

As a liberty candidate, I provide people with an opportunity  to vote their conscience if they seek a candidate who is consistently for less government and more individual liberty in all areas.  In some cases this opportunity is afforded to voters in specific districts or municipalities.

Voters in Michigan’s 11th Congressional District and residents of Berrian County have such an opportunity. 

Ray Kirkus has been a devoted activist for the cause of liberty in a number of ways.  He is a skilled organizer who understands how the system should work, and is quick to point out where it fails.  He supports fully informed juries and a locally supported local government.  He holds steadfastly to the values that are needed at all levels of government to save our republic: a respect for individual rights, and a realistic recognition of the hazards of unrestrained government.


If elected, Kerry Bentivolio would be a Congressman ready to follow in the footsteps of Ron Paul and Justin Amash, by leading us toward a society where politicians follow the Constitution and serve the citizens.  He has consistently spoken out for free speech, the Bill of Rights, civil rights, and a rational economic policy.  He has worked closely with people in his community for that goal.  Residents in the 11th district would be wise to show up for the August primary to ensure his participation in the general election.

My Choice for President

February 27, 2012 by

I am a Republican candidate for United States Senate as well as a Precinct Delegate.  I have been a delegate at the last two Republican State conventions.  Prior to being a Republican candidate, I ran for a variety of public offices as a Libertarian. I first met Ron Paul in 1988 when he ran for President as a Libertarian.  I worked on his Republican campaign in 2008, and have been knocking on doors and phoning from home to get him elected in 2012.


Many people campaign on a platform of liberty, and many others get elected to public office.  Ron Paul not only speaks about liberty, he has manifested it through his service as a veteran, and his voting record in Congress; always standing on the side of right even when he must stand alone.  He is the only viable candidate who stands consistently for free markets, honest money, and a non-interventionist foreign policy in a constitutionally limited Republic.


I proudly accept responsibility for any of my political opinions, and am not acting as the spokesperson for any employer or organization I am involved with.

Union President Endorses Ron Paul!

February 11, 2012 by

Some people will be surprised to know that I am in two teacher unions. AFT and MEA. My union local at Wayne County Community College District is AFT-2000. They do excellent work representing the membership, and dues are not used for political action. So even though membership has been voluntary, I have been a member.

One downside is that they frequently endorse candidates that I can’t stand. So I was pleasantly surprised tonight when Wallace O. Peace, the president of my local (AFT-2000), endorsed Ron Paul for the Republican presidential nomination. He told all those attending the meeting that the primary wasn’t closed, and that we should vote for Ron Paul and stop Romney!