I can't help but admit that I'm a little disappointed about the way the Libertarian Convention turned out (see here for balloting results and the individual candidates reactions). Whatever it's faults, if there's one thing that the LP comes through on, it's that when it comes time for the convention, the party generally rallies about the candidate who is a long-time member of the party and holds consistent political positions. Bob Barr (the LP's Presidential Candidate) and Wayne Allyn Root (the LP's Vice Presidential Candidate) were, until very recently, proud Republicans. And until very recently, both espoused some positions that were deeply at odds with the Libertarian philosophy (Bob Barr was a fervent supporter of the War on Drugs and opponent of gay marriage while Wayne Allyn Root was an enthusiastic supporter of the Iraq War). Both have changed their positions to some extent.

The big winner today, oddly enough, was the Democratic Party. Republicans already had an uphill climb to win the Presidential General Election, and today that climb just got a bit steeper. Bob Barr and Wayne Allyn Root will almost assuredly draw far more votes from McCain than from Obama. I suppose it you're someone who really has it in for Republicans, that's not such a bad thing. But if you're someone who was hoping the Democratic Party would grow a backbone and actually stand for something, a Libertarian Party bearing a diluted anti-war & pro-civil liberties message certainly isn't going to help any.

Last night, former Independent Governor of Minnesota Jesse Ventura was on Larry King Live to discuss the War in Iraq, the 2008 Presidential Election, and what he really thinks of the Democratic and Republican Parties and our two-party system:

PART ONE:

PART TWO:

PART THREE:

PART FOUR:

PART FIVE:

PART SIX:

Ventura made a few mistatements throughout the course of the interview, not the least of which is that Dick Cheney is Vice President and not Secretary of Defense. Still, it’s kind of amusing to listen to an Independent go off on the Democratic and Republican parties and give an insider’s take on what Democrats and Republicans do to keep third party and Independent candidates off the ballot.

Also, the final segment has two Democratic Party hacks and two Republican Party hacks telling Ventura how much they admire his independence before reverting into their assigned role of sputtering out talking points on behalf of their preferred Democratic/Republican presidential candidate.

NOTE: Cross-posted at The Moderate Voice.

This morning, Former Senator Mike Gravel, who was pursuing the Democratic nomination for president, sent the following email to his supporters:

Dear friend,

I wanted to update you on my latest plans before news gets out. Today, I am announcing my plan to join the Libertarian Party, because the Democratic Party no longer represents my vision for our great country. I wanted my supporters to get this news first, because you have been the ones who have kept my campaign alive since I first declared my candidacy on April 17, 2006.

The fact is, the Democratic Party today is no longer the party of FDR. It is a party that continues to sustain war, the military-industrial complex and imperialism — all of which I find anathema to my views.

By and large, I have been repeatedly marginalized in both national debates and in media exposure by the Democratic leadership, which works in tandem with the corporate interests that control what we read and hear in the media.

I look forward to advancing my presidential candidacy within the Libertarian Party, which is considerably closer to my values, my foreign policy views and my domestic views.

Please take a moment to make your most generous donation to my presidential campaign today. $10, $20, $50 — whatever you feel you can afford.

I want to thank you all for your continued support.

Gratefully yours,
Mike

As an Independent with libertarian-liberal leanings, there’s something about a Democratic politician leaving his former party for the Libertarian Party that gives me a warm and toasty feeling deep inside.

Gravel has been far more outspoken against the Iraq War than any other the other Democratic candidates (with the possible exception of Dennis Kucinich) and has expressed libertarian leanings with regards to the War on Drugs and taxation (he has vowed to end the war on drugs as well as get rid of the IRS).

Still, the Libertarian Party might not be the best match for the former Senator from Alaska. For one thing, his embrace of FDR is not likely to be encouraging to the libertarian faithful, most of whom believe FDR did more to enlarge the size and scope of the federal government than any other president. Furthermore, his support for universal health care is also not likely to be popular among libertarians, who feel that the federal government has no Constitutional authority to involve itself in the business of medicine.

Yet, if the Libertarian Party leadership is unhappy with prospect of being associated with Gravel, it certainly isn’t showing it.

Shane Cory, Libertarian Party Executive Director had this to say of Gravels switching of parties:

We’re honored to have a former member of the United States Senate join our ranks…Senator Gravel has a sincere dedication to empowering the American people and eliminating the corrupting influence of the two major parties. His switch from the Democratic Party, as well as former Congressman Barr’s abandonment of the GOP, shows that the Libertarian Party is truly a big tent organization moving firmly in the direction of Liberty.

Even more interesting was the reaction of former Republican Congressman Bob Barr (of Clinton impeachment fame or infamy) who left the Republican Party for the Libertarian Party back in 2004:

It is a distinct honor to have another former member of Congress within the Libertarian Party…Just as Senator Gravel believes Democrats have lost touch with the American public, I too concluded Republicans had lost their core principles, and could no longer associate myself with the GOP. While coming from opposite sides of the aisle, Senator Gravel and I definitely agree on the fundamental need for systemic change in our political system, and that the only way we have of effecting that change is by supporting and working in the Libertarian Party, which is the only political party in America that consistently works in word and deed to maximize individual liberty and minimize government power.

President Bush’s embrace of bigger government conservatism has caused a number of Republicans to leave the GOP in favor of the Libertarian Party. One wonders if the prospect of a Barrack Obama presidency or particularly a Hillary Clinton presidency as well as a Democratic Congress that doesn’t have the stomach to end the Iraq War will cause more libertarian-minded Democrats to leave their party in favor of the Libertarian Party.

Other internet sites that discuss this story:

San Diego Union-Tribune’s Newsblog
New York Time’s The Caucus
Washington Post’s The Trail
Baltimore Sun’s The Swamp
CNN’s Political Ticker

According to the National Priorities Project, the War in Iraq has now cost American taxpayers $500 billion. That stands in stark contrast to the $100 billion to $200 billion pricetag estimated by President Bush's chief economic advisor in September 2002 or the $50 billion to 60$ billion estimate offered by the White House Office of Management and Budget Director in December 2002.

The National Priorities Project explains how it calculates the cost of the war:

The Cost of Iraq War calculator was set to reach $456 billion September 30, 2007, the end of fiscal year 2007. As of October 1, 2007, it is ticking at the same rate, though Congress has not yet appropriated money for fiscal year 2008. The Cost of Iraq War calculator is occasionally reset based on new information and new allocations of funding and will be re-set depending on the decisions made by Congress.

The numbers include military and non-military spending, such as reconstruction. Spending only includes incremental costs, additional funds that are expended due to the war. For example, soldiers' regular pay is not included, but combat pay is included. Potential future costs, such as future medical care for soldiers and veterans wounded in the war, are not included. It is also not clear whether the current funding will cover all military wear and tear. It also does not account for the Iraq War being deficit-financed and that taxpayers will need to make additional interest payments on the national debt due to those deficits.

The media (and others) sometimes cite a figure that is in excess of our estimate. However, the number cited by the media may include not just the Iraq War, but the Afghanistan War and for enhanced security abroad. Our figure is only covering the cost of the Iraq War as it relates to the U.S. federal budget (and does not include costs to others or other countries or any economic impact costs to Americans).

This number is based on an analysis of the legislation in which Congress has allocated money for war so far and research by the Congressional Research Service (latest report) which has access to Department of Defense financial reports.

To get a better grasp on exactly how much this war is costing American taxpayers, consider this: at the current rate of spending, the war in Iraq is costing approximately:

$100 billion per year

$8.4 billion per month

$275 million per day

$11.5 million per hour