Together
Forever Changing
Together
Forever Changing
An Article
Michael Badnarik:
Libertarian Candidate for President
I've been interviewing all of the candidates from the local Sheriff to the national candidates on my television show, The Norma Sherry Show. On August 6th, my guest was Michael Badnarik, the Libertarian candidate for president.
A soft-spoken, confident, man, Michael Badnarik, began his one-man
mission to become the Libertarian candidate for President last February. Since
then, he has traveled to 15 states, visiting towns and communities and in the
effort, he covered 25,000 miles with just a driver and his little Kia.
Supporters put him up in their homes, often fed him, donated some money so he
could continue his journey, and fulfill his vision for the Libertarian Party.
Regarding
same-sex marriage, he said, there should be no law that restricts two
individuals who love one another from marrying. Furthermore, we should not deny
same-sex couples all of the benefits that marriage ensures. He would also repeal
NAFTA and WTO. He said, “The managed trade that we see
today, where politically connected corporations and favored nations get special
deals, is anything but free.”
He
went on to express that, “Although free trade is a
blessing, managed bureaucratic trade is not. It is a dangerous misconception to
think of the World Trade Organization, the International Monetary Fund, and
other international quasi-governmental structures as free trade organizations.
They rely on thousands of pages of confusing regulations and corrupt agreements
between multinational corporations and oppressive governments. True free trade
— the kind that fosters peace — does not depend on such organizations and
rules, but is actually hindered by them. Managed trade — the kind that fosters
resentment and poverty — is all that these organizations have so far
delivered.”
I
asked
him what he thought about legalizing medical marijuana. His answer wasn’t in
the usual cautionary political correctness or no-answer we’ve become so
frustratingly familiar with -- no, once again, he spoke his mind and it was
clear the topic was one that angered him. “The decision to ingest, smoke, or
consume any drug should be up to the individual, under the advice of his or her
physician, when appropriate.” He went on to say, “On a fundamental level,
Libertarians believe that it is the unalienable and constitutional right of
individuals to medicate themselves and choose for themselves what to put into
their bodies, as long as they live up to the consequences of their actions. The
federal government has no proper say in the matter, and state governments
violate the rights of the people in their own attempts to enforce morality.”
Finally,
I asked him what he would have done if he had been our president after 911.
Immediately, he responded by stating that he would have sought the true enemy.
He would not have invaded
As
president, Mr. Badnarik plans to slash pharmaceutical prices by reducing, what
he refers to as, “excessive FDA regulation”. He feels the stringent
long-term testing of drugs before they become available to the populace is not
only financially costly, but costly in the lives that could have been saved had
the drug or drugs been available. According to Mr. Badnarik, “We could slash
pharmaceutical prices overnight by ending these regulations.” When I asked him
if removing these regulations and safeguards, would effectively make the
consumer or patient pharmaceutical guinea pigs? He rapid-fired, “no, it would
not.”
On
every topic, and I raised quite a few, Mr. Badnarik never stumbled, never voiced
a faux pas our present president is so infamous for, and he never stammered for
the lack of an answer, nor did he carefully couch his comments. He was candid
and direct. Clearly, he felt his points -- and the Libertarian beliefs -- are
the correct way to address issues. Absent from our dialogue was any fear that
his words might dissuade voters from voting for him. I have to admit, it made me
yearn for more representatives who speak so straightforward with such
decisiveness and clarity of thought and intent. I may not have always agreed
with his strategies or his beliefs, but I did find him most engaging, thought
provoking, and a stimulating conversationalist.
According
to Mr. Badnarik, the Libertarian Party is the largest third party we have;
larger than all the other third parties put together. Yet, they have to fight to
be on the ballot, to be included in the debates, to find funding, and to get
their word out in the mainstream press. In our search for the finest candidates
– true representative government – it would behoove us all to hear every
candidate’s point of view. Then, and only then, can we truly make a decision.
With any luck at all, that decision wouldn’t have to be based on the lesser of
two evils.