Volume 19, No. 2                     January 24, 2014
View this email in your browser
The Liberator Online

for everyone who loves Liberty
Published by The Advocates for Self-Government
"I would highly recommend that you learn more
about the Advocates for Self-Government's views on liberty if you
would like to be reminded of what America is supposed to stand for."

— Robert Ringer, bestselling author of
Looking Out for #1 and Restoring the American Dream
WELCOME to the Liberator Online!

In This Issue

* Do You Prefer Cats, Dogs — Or Liberty?

* The Independents: Hot New Libertarian TV Show
* Obama on Marijuana: What Is He Waiting for?
* VIDEO: Funny Look at the Anniversary of Controversial Citizens United Decision
* Fifty Years of the Government "War on Poverty": Poverty Won
THEY SAID IT: The NSA conspiracy against Martin Luther King.... Rand Paul: I will continue fighting the NSA.... Walter Williams: the minimum wage versus the poor.... Jay Leno on the miracle of Obamacare and Obama's new "promise zones".... Conan O'Brien on paying (some) people not to work....

PERSUASION POWER POINT #363 by Michael Cloud
The Simple Secret of Persuasion

ASK DR. RUWART by Mary Ruwart
* How would a libertarian society deal with chemical spills like the one in West Virginia?

* Try These Phrases Instead of "The War on Drugs"

* Upcoming: Advocates communication workshops and speeches
* FREE OPH KITS for libertarian student groups!
* Join the Advocates on Twitter
* Join the Advocates on Facebook
* 2014 Freedom Cruises
Follow us....

President's Corner

by Sharon Harris

Do You Prefer Cats, Dogs — Or Liberty?

Dear friends, 

As president of the organization that publishes the world's first and most popular online political Quiz, I was naturally interested when TIME magazine posted an online political quiz this month in an article entitled "Your Personality Makes Your Politics."

"Can TIME Predict Your Politics?" the article's subhead asked. 

Alas, for me — and, I suspect, many other readers — the answer was a resounding NO. 

I took their quiz, and TIME's description of my political views was wildly out of synch with what I believe. Not even remotely close. And I found some of the questions downright bewildering. 

There are several reasons for this, which I'll discuss in a moment. 

But the main reason TIME got my position so very, very wrong is that my political view — libertarian — was not one of the possible answers. 

Yes, that's right. TIME's quiz attempts to shoehorn every taker's politics as some variant of liberal, conservative, or moderate.

TIME's quiz uses the simplistic, inaccurate, discriminatory, discredited left-versus-right view of politics — which leaves out libertarians entirely. 

And there's simply no excuse for that. 

Numerous recent surveys indicate that 15%-20% or more of Americans are more libertarian than either liberal or conservative. The 2012 Cato Institute book The Libertarian Vote: Swing Voters, Tea Parties, and the Fiscally Conservative, Socially Liberal Center explores these results at length, and concludes that 10 to 20 percent of Americans are fiscally conservative and socially liberal-libertarian. 

In August 2000 the Rasmussen polling firm gave the Advocates' World's Smallest Political Quiz to nearly 1,000 representative American voters. Our Quiz is a far more rigorous test of one's libertarian leanings than the looser definitions typically used by polling firms. Yet fully sixteen percent scored in the libertarian sector then — a figure roughly identical to Cato's estimate. 

And the numbers are growing fast. An August poll by FreedomWorks found that fully "78 percent of Republicans and GOP-leaning independents self-identify as fiscally conservative and socially moderate." Further: "Told that libertarians generally believe individuals should be free to do as they like as long as they don't hurt others and that the government should keep out of people's day-to-day lives, 58 percent of the full national sample said they agree."

Any attempt to identify American's political leanings that leaves out many of these millions of libertarians and libertarian-leaners is thus doomed to fail.

The inadequacies of the left-versus-right model of politics was the main reason David Nolan created his now-famous Nolan Chart back in 1971, the graphic foundation of the Advocates' World's Smallest Political Quiz

By showing that there was more to politics than just left versus right, our Quiz has opened millions of minds to a more inclusive, more insightful political map. 

This accuracy is one reason the Quiz rapidly became the world's most popular political quiz. It's been taken over 20 million times online. It's been recommended by numerous major high school and college textbooks and is used in classrooms across America. It's been translated into several languages and reprinted in newspapers and magazines with total circulations in the many millions. 

All of this is because it works. Because it provides honest, essential, enlightening insights into politics. Because it realizes that no discussion of modern American politics makes sense without including the distinctive libertarian view (and its mirror-opposite, statism). 

But back to the TIME quiz. 

I have a lot of respect for the researcher behind TIME's quiz. Jonathan Haidt is the author of the outstanding 2012 book The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion, which is carefully researched and rich in political insights. I recommend it. 

That book shows Haidt has a solid understanding of libertarianism and, more than that, an appreciation of what libertarians believe. And I'm a strong proponent of Haidt's goal of fostering more productive political discussions through a greater understanding of different viewpoints. 

TIME's quiz isn't a traditional political quiz. It tries to identify your politics based on a number of seemingly non-political questions that have been found to correlate with a person's political leanings. The first question, for instance is, "Do you prefer cats or dogs?"

This is an interesting line of research, but since libertarians apparently aren't included in this — and since the overriding value of libertarians is political liberty across the board, trumping cultural or lifestyle matters — I would think it would be hard to identify libertarians in such a way (though I could be wrong). Perhaps the quiz's lack of a libertarian score indicates this. 

A few of the questions also suffer from ambiguity in wording, something libertarians are especially sensitive to. Like "Respect for authority is something all children need to learn." What KIND of authority? Political? Family? School? Religion? Tell us more! For libertarians, the key political question is always: Is force being initiated? 

By the way, Haidt himself acknowledges the problems with the left-right line. In the introduction to his TIME quiz, he notes: "many people can't place themselves along the liberal-conservative dimension — such as libertarians, or people who find wisdom on both sides on different issues." The results, he says, is that the TIME quiz has "moderate predictive power." 

Given this, TIME's Quiz — like all efforts at political measurement based on the hopelessly inadequate left-versus-right model — is doomed to not work for millions of us — or to produce less than satisfying results overall. 

Back to the drawing board, TIME! Meanwhile, why not offer the World's Smallest Political Quiz to your readers — as the Washington Post, London Sunday Times, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Miami Herald and many other outstanding publications have done? 
Yours for Liberty,


Forward to Friend
“The triumph of the human spirit over evil and oppression.”
That’s how an Amazon reviewer describes A Dream of Daring, Gen LaGreca’s epic new novel.
In the South before the Civil War, a visionary planter’s radical ideas and breakthrough invention threaten the townspeople’s privileged way of life, based on slavery and power. Tensions mount when his device is stolen and a respected community patriarch is murdered.
Ingenious and original, A Dream of Daring unfolds a sweeping story of secrets, lies, and forbidden romance. It’s an irresistible page-turner, packed with suspense and surprising plot twists. The ideas and themes are directly relevant to today’s struggle for freedom.
This inspiring future libertarian classic is available in paperback and e-book at Amazon, here.

Intellectual Ammunition

by James W. Harris

The Independents: Hot New Libertarian TV Show

Are you watching "The Independents?" If not, you might want to check it out. 

The primetime libertarian-oriented program was launched last month on the FOX Business Network (FBN). 

The Independents is hosted by longtime libertarian Lisa Kennedy Montgomery with co-hosts Matt Welch of Reason magazine and Kmele Foster of America's Future Foundation.

The Independents appears Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday nights at 9 p.m. Eastern. The show features a roundtable discussion on the day's news, with a solidly-libertarian focus on the protection of economic and civil liberties. The Independents promises "a fresh, funny, and hip libertarian-leaning commentary on current events." Look for hard-hitting and entertaining discussions of subjects that the other TV talk shows like to ignore — such as ending the deranged drug war, halting murder by drones abroad, and replacing crony crapitalism with true economic liberty. 

You can learn more about The Independents, and see clips from past shows, at their website. There you can also learn which providers carry the channel in your viewing area.

By the way, if that FBN 9 p.m. Eastern timeslot sounds familiar, it should. It's probably already on your libertarian TV watch list. FBN's "Stossel," hosted by the great libertarian journalist John Stossel, airs during that hour on Thursdays.

Primetime libertarian TV commentary — every night of the week! Who could have imagined THAT just a few years ago? 

Yet another sign that we're winning. Check it out!

Obama on Marijuana: What Is He Waiting for?

The nation has been buzzing about President Obama's comments on marijuana 
in a profile in the January 27, New Yorker magazine. 

Said the president: 

"As has been well documented, I smoked pot as a kid, and I view it as a bad habit and a vice, not very different from the cigarettes that I smoked as a young person up through a big chunk of my adult life. I don't think it is more dangerous than alcohol… 

"[W]e should not be locking up kids or individual users for long stretches of jail time when some of the folks who are writing those laws have probably done the same thing. …

"Middle-class kids don't get locked up for smoking pot, and poor kids do. And African-American kids and Latino kids are more likely to be poor and less likely to have the resources and the support to avoid unduly harsh penalties. …

"[I]t's important for [the legalization of marijuana in Colorado and Washington] to go forward because it's important for society not to have a situation in which a large portion of people have at one time or another broken the law and only a select few get punished." 

Good stuff. So, asks Nick Gillespie of Reason magazine, what's Obama waiting for?

"About 750,000 people a year get arrested for pot, with more than eight in 10 being charged only with simple possession," Gillespie says. 

"Almost half of prisoners in federal prisoners are in for drug offenses and for most of its existence, the Obama administration has prosecuted medical marijuana dispensaries in California with far more energy than even George W. Bush did. 

"It's within the president's power — power that he is happy to exceed when it comes to waging wars overseas and in other circumstances — to start the reclassification of pot from a Schedule 1 drug, but he refuses to (a Schedule 1 drug is deemed to have a high potential for abuse, no known or accepted use as medicine). …

"Look, if Obama really thinks pot is no more dangerous than alcohol and that the war on pot systematically screws over blacks, why should there be any hesitation in liberalizing the federal policies over which he has control? And using the bully pulpit to push for broader legislative change at the federal and state level? 

"What is he waiting for: a third term? … 

"Time to start moving, Mr. President! Especially on an issue on which 58 percent of Americans agree." 

VIDEO: Funny Look at the Anniversary of Controversial Citizens United Decision

This week marks the fourth anniversary of one of the most controversial Supreme Court Decisions in recent history: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. 

At the time, the Citizens United decision was widely denounced. President Obama famously said it "reversed a century of law to open the floodgates — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections." 

But was it really so bad? Or was it possibly… a good thing? 

Take a look at "5 Things You Didn't Know About Citizens United," an enlightening and highly entertaining two-minute video by the Center for Competitive Politics
featuring the great pro-liberty comedian Remy. You might be surprised. 

The Citizens United decision overturned the blatantly unconstitutional parts of a law designed to prevent freedom of association among individuals wanting to speak out about politics. At its core, Citizens United was about free speech: whether the government could ban a nonprofit corporation from distributing a movie about a political candidate. Or even ban books, for that matter. 

The decision acknowledged the fundamental right of organizations to do what wealthy individuals and powerful media have always been free to do: spend money to support or criticize a candidate. Hey, free speech: isn't that one of those things that America is supposed to be all about?

Bonus video: To see some jaw-dropping examples of hysterical over-reaction to the Citizens United decision, watch the beginning of this short (3 minutes 15 seconds) video "3 Reasons Not to Sweat the Citizens United SCOTUS Ruling"
made at the time by ReasonTV, which also does a great job of putting this decision in perspective. 

Fifty Years of the Government "War on Poverty": Poverty Won

"Fifty years ago today, President Lyndon Johnson delivered his first State of the Union address, promising an 'unconditional war on poverty in America.' Looking at the wreckage since, it's not hard to conclude that poverty won."

So wrote the Cato Institute's Michael D. Tanner on that January 8 anniversary

"In 2012, the federal government spent $668 billion to fund 126 separate anti-poverty programs. State and local governments kicked in another $284 billion, bringing total anti-poverty spending to nearly $1 trillion. That amounts to $20,610 for every poor person in America, or $61,830 per poor family of three."

That's astounding. In 2012 U.S. governments spent more than enough money on poverty programs to — if simply handed out person to person — raise every person in America above the government's own definition of poverty. And spending on the major anti-poverty programs rose even higher in 2013. 

However, Tanner notes: "Yet today, 15 percent of Americans still live in poverty. That's scarcely better than the 19 percent living in poverty at the time of Johnson's speech. Nearly 22 percent of children live in poverty today. In 1964, it was 23 percent."

At the libertarian Independent Institute, Lawrence J. McQuillan has produced a startling chart

Using U.S. census data, the chart shows the poverty rate declining rapidly from 1950 — until the start of the "War on Poverty," when the progress begins to falter. 

"The poverty rate in the United States fell by half from 1950 to the start of the [1964] 'War on Poverty,'" writes McQuillan. "And it was on track to continue falling. But after the 'War on Poverty' programs kicked in, the poverty rate has been stuck in a narrow corridor.

"The lesson: Despite good intentions, statist redistribution programs to 'help the poor' lead to multigenerational dependency and shrinking opportunities and incentives for low-skill individuals to enter the workforce, increase their skills, and move up the income ladder."

Cato's Tanner suggests that, instead of subsidizing poverty, the government should embrace free-market, limited government policies that encourage better education, personal responsibility, economic growth, and job creation. 

Concludes Tanner: "Einstein is reported to have said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Throwing more and more money at more and more government programs doesn't work. In the War on Poverty, it is time to try a different approach." Like… liberty?
* * * * * * * *
Intellectual Ammunition is written by Liberator Online editor James W. Harris. His articles have appeared in numerous magazines and newspapers, and he has been a Finalist for the Mencken Awards, given by the Free Press Association for "Outstanding Journalism in Support of Liberty."

Like this issue? Forward it to a friend!

Forward to Friend

THE NSA CONSPIRACY AGAINST MARTIN LUTHER KING: "The FBI's intrusive surveillance of Martin Luther King Jr., constantly bugging his hotel rooms, was designed to smear him as a Communist and a philanderer to end his career as a civil rights leader, and, as is quite clear from the blackmail letters planted by the FBI, even drive him to suicide. But it wasn't until last year that we learned that the NSA's 'Minaret' program under the direction of President Johnson had spied on the communications of King, fellow civil rights leader Whitney Young, boxer Muhammad Ali, and journalists Tom Wicker of The New York Times and Art Buchwald of The Washington Post. … The NSA even spied on Idaho Democratic Senator Frank Church, who in 1975 had led the Senate investigation into the government's illegal counterintelligence program, and his Republican counterpart from Tennessee, Howard Baker, who could never figure out how he got caught in the NSA's dragnet." — journalist Robert Scheer, "No Place to Hide: We're All Suspects in Barack Obama's America," TruthDig, writing on Martin Luther King Day, January 20, 2014.   

RAND PAUL WILL CONTINUE NSA FIGHT: "While I am encouraged the President is addressing the NSA spying program because of pressure from Congress and the American people, I am disappointed in the details. The Fourth Amendment requires an individualized warrant based on probable cause before the government can search phone records and emails. President Obama's announced solution to the NSA spying controversy is the same unconstitutional program with a new configuration. I intend to continue the fight to restore Americans' rights through my Fourth Amendment Restoration Act and my legal challenge against the NSA. The American people should not expect the fox to guard the hen house." — Sen. Rand Paul's statement following President Obama announcement of tepid "reforms" of the National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance programs, Jan 17, 2014. 

THE MINIMUM WAGE VS. THE POOR: "There's little debate among academic economists about the effect of minimum wages. University of California, Irvine economist David Neumark has examined more than 100 major academic studies on the minimum wage. He reports that 85 percent of the studies 'find a negative employment effect on low-skilled workers.' A 1976 American Economic Association survey found that 90 percent of its members agreed that increasing the minimum wage raises unemployment among young and unskilled workers. A 1990 survey reported in the American Economic Review (1992) found that 80 percent of economists agreed with the statement that increases in the minimum wage cause unemployment among the youth and low-skilled. If you're searching for a consensus in a field of study, most of the time you can examine the field's introductory and intermediate college textbooks. Economics textbooks that mention the minimum wage say that it increases unemployment for the least skilled worker. The only significant debate about the minimum wage is the magnitude of its effect." — economist and syndicated columnist Walter Williams, "Politics and Minimum Wage," January 8, 2014. 

LENO ON THE OBAMACARE MIRACLE: "The White House announced that President Obama will visit Pope Francis in the near future. Pope Francis thinks Obamacare can be a success. Sure, he's the Pope. He has to believe in miracles." — Jay Leno, Jan. 16, 2014. 

LENO ON OBAMA PROMISE ZONES: "Yesterday President Obama laid out plans for creating what he called 'promise zones' all across the county — spots that will receive extra financial and economic attention from the government. Don't confuse those areas with the rest of the country. Those are 'broken promise' zones." — Jay Leno, Jan. 10, 2014. 

PAYING (SOME) PEOPLE NOT TO WORK: "A member of Congress said that unemployment benefits basically pay people to not work. He said the only people who should be paid for not working are members of Congress." — Conan O'Brien, Jan. 8, 2014.  
* * * * * * * * * *
"They Said It..." is compiled by Liberator Online editor James W. Harris.
Forward to Friend

Persuasion Power Point #363

by Michael Cloud

The Simple Secret of Persuasion

Ask one person to do what you want him to do. Then ask another. Then another.

Ask one man or one woman to take the World's Smallest Political Quiz. Then ask another. And another.

Ask one new libertarian to do something that's fun and advances freedom: to help with an Operation Politically Homeless Booth for just 3 hours this Saturday. Then ask another. Then another.

Ask one new libertarian to sign up for a free subscription to the Liberator Online. Then ask another.

Ask one new libertarian to donate $20 or $50 to help the Advocates supply student libertarian groups with OPH kits to bring the ideas of liberty to tens of thousands of college students about liberty. Then ask another.

Ask one young libertarian to buy a copy of a liberty book like The Law by Frederic Bastiat, or Healing Our World by Mary Ruwart, or Unlocking More Secrets of Libertarian Persuasion by Michael Cloud. Then ask another. And another.

* * *

Over 50% of sales presentations end WITHOUT THE SALES PERSON ASKING THE PROSPECT TO BUY.


No wonder most people aren't buying or donating or volunteering.

* * *

Want to up your results? Up your asking.

Ask more people more often to buy or give or help — and you WILL get more yeses.

Ask for what the libertarian movement wants and needs.

Ask one person to get involved with the Advocates. Then ask another. And another. One at a time.

Ask a person to do something libertarian that's simple, easy, and fun.

Ask a person to donate a specific amount to the Advocates — to continue and expand its work.

This is the simple secret of persuasion — and growing an unstoppable libertarian movement.

* * * * * * * *
Michael Cloud's latest book Unlocking More Secrets of Libertarian Persuasion is available exclusively from the Advocates, along with his acclaimed earlier book Secrets of Libertarian Persuasion.

In 2000, Michael was honored with the Thomas Paine Award as the Most Persuasive Libertarian Communicator in America.
Unlocking More Secrets of Libertarian Persuasion

Transform your libertarian outreach!

Click cover to see more and order.

Ask Dr. Ruwart

Dr. Mary Ruwart is a leading expert in libertarian communication. In this column she offers short answers to real questions about libertarianism. To submit questions to Dr. Ruwart, see end of column.

How would a libertarian society deal with chemical spills like the one in West Virginia?
QUESTION: How would a libertarian society avoid chemical spills like the one that happened in West Virginia recently? 
MY SHORT ANSWER:  The Wall Street Journal article you link to in your question about the West Virginia chemical spill suggests that regulations aren’t in place to cover the particular situation with Freedom Industries, Inc., and call for more. However, regulations can’t anticipate everything. That’s why restitution, rather than regulation, is better prevention. 
Today, corporations enjoy limited liability. Basically, corporations are a creation of government, which decrees that owners aren’t liable past the assets of a corporation for spills, pollution, and negligence. This wasn’t always so. Without the corporate veil to protect wrong-doers, companies and their managers would be more likely to be careful and to be insured. Insurance companies would probably have higher rates for firms that didn’t have state-of-the-art safety measures in place, just as your homeowners insurance goes up when you don’t have alarm systems for fire and security.
Companies would thus have a lot of financial incentive to protect the environment to lower insurance rates and protect themselves from personal liability. It would become good business to be good neighbors. 
In addition, if individuals still had property rights in rivers and other bodies of water, as they do in Britain, they’d probably be more vigilant about watching for polluting runoff.  The municipal water system in the West Virginia case is being criticized for not noticing the pollution sooner. Public utilities have less incentive than property owners to be vigilant as the utilities are often protected by the government’s sovereign immunity umbrella.  
LEARN MORE: Suggested further reading from Liberator Online editor James W. Harris on this topic:
The March 2003 issue of The Freeman magazine, published by the Foundation for Economic Education, examined the pros and cons of corporations. 
The “pro” argument is made in this article: “The Theory of the Corporation: Corporate Capitalism Is a Great Achievement” by Norman Barry. 
An opposing view is made in: “Is the Corporation a Free-Market Institution? The Success of the Corporate Form Comes with Some Drawbacks” by Frank van Dun. 
Also see “Limited Liability” by economist Michael S. Rozeff,, September 27, 2005. This short article examines the question on limited liability and argues that businesses and consumers would benefit without it. 

* * * * * * * * * *
Got questions?  Dr. Ruwart has answers! If you'd like answers to YOUR tough questions on libertarian issues, email Dr. Ruwart
Due to volume, Dr. Ruwart can't personally acknowledge all emails. But we'll run the best questions and answers in upcoming issues.

Dr. Ruwart's previous Liberator Online answers are archived in searchable form.
Dr. Ruwart's latest book Short Answers to the Tough Questions, Expanded Edition is available from the Advocates, as is her acclaimed classic Healing Our World.
Click cover to check out Dr. Ruwart's latest book!

One-Minute Liberty Tip 

by Sharon Harris

Try These Phrases Instead Of "The War on Drugs"

Economist Mark J. Perry, creator and editor of Carpe Diem — one of America's best and most popular economics blogs — recently used these substitute phrases for the War on Drugs: 

"The War on Otherwise Innocent and Peaceful Americans Using Arbitrarily Proscribed Intoxicants and Weeds."

"The War on Users of Politically Disfavored Intoxicants and Weeds." 

"The War on Peaceful Americans Who Voluntarily Choose To Use Intoxicants Not Currently Approved of by the Government, Who Will Put Users in Cages if Caught."

These substitutions are not just funny, they can awaken minds and make people consider the true nature of the War on Drugs. 

We've discussed other useful terms in previous columns. 

The constitutionalist writer William Norman Grigg once wrote that he was opposed to "the narcotics price support program (sometimes dishonestly called the 'War on Drugs')."

"Narcotics price support program" is a powerful phrase. With the right audience, at the right moment, you can have fun — and open some minds — by declaring that you "oppose the Federal Narcotics Price Support Program… sometimes misleadingly called the War on Drugs." 

It's a great way to drive home the fact that the War on Drugs creates a black market that drives up drug prices enormously and enriches the worst, most violent criminals. 

Another insight-inducing term: "politically incorrect drugs."
You might say something like: "Over a million people are arrested every year for doing nothing more than using politically incorrect drugs."
Or alternately: "A better term for the War on Drugs might be... the War Against Politically Incorrect Drugs."
The point, of course, is that there are some legal drugs that are approved of, and used by, many pro-Drug War political figures and opinion leaders — even though some of them are actually more dangerous than some illegal drugs. Obvious examples are alcohol and tobacco — as President Obama himself recently noted, quoted elsewhere in this issue. The fact that some intoxicants are legal, and some are not, is more a cultural or political prejudice than any kind of rational reasoning. And the "War Against Politically Incorrect Drugs" phrase gains further impact because most people — liberals and conservatives alike — hate the idea of being told to conform to some arbitrary social or political standard of "political correctness."

A favorite word choice of mine is "re-legalization" instead of the common "legalization" and "decriminalization." This word almost invariably provokes curiosity. "What do you mean: 'RE-legalization'?" And that in turn gives you the opportunity to tell the little-known, fascinating fact that drugs that are illegal today were perfectly legal in America well into the twentieth century — and that situation produced none of the horrors we associate with today's Drug War. 

"Re-legalization" may be especially useful as discussion of legalizing marijuana picks up steam in the months ahead. 

Have fun opening minds with these alternative words and phrases! 

PS: Mark Perry's column was inspired by Laurence Vance's excellent article "The Eighteenth Amendment and the War on Drugs" at the website of our friends at the Future of Freedom Foundation. Highly recommended!

* * * * * *
Sharon Harris is president of the Advocates for Self-Government.   
Forward to Friend

What's Happening with the Advocates



Advocates President Sharon Harris will be speaking at the following events:

March 8: Keynote speaker at the Libertarian Party of Georgia's state convention.

March 15: Speaker at the Libertarian Party of Tennessee's state convention.

March 29: Speaker at the Libertarian Party of Colorado's state convention.

March 30: Half-day Communication Workshop co-sponsored by LP-CO.

April 5: Banquet speaker at the Libertarian Party of Maryland's state convention. Liberator Online columnist and author Michael Cloud will also be speaking.

June 26-29: National Libertarian Party convention. The Advocates will have a booth, and Sharon will be speaking.

August 8-9: Featured speaker at the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)'s "Communicating Liberty" conference.

Attendees will learn how to dramatically increase their effectiveness at communicating the ideas of liberty. 

Email us now if you'd like us to send you further information on these events. 

Email Sharon to find out how you can have a communication event near you.

FREE OPH KITS FOR LIBERTARIAN STUDENT GROUPS: Thanks to the generosity of our supporters, we're giving our acclaimed OPH (Operation Political Homeless) outreach kits to libertarian student groups FREE — if they simply promise to use them a minimum of three times a year and send us photos documenting their OPH activity. OPH — praised as the best recruiting tool in the libertarian movement -- normally sells for $50.00.
If you're in a student libertarian group, click here for more information on getting your free OPH kit.

JOIN US ON TWITTER: Twitter is the first place to learn about breaking Advocates and liberty movement news, expert communications tips, and exclusive Advocates discounts and specials. (And don't worry — we won't bombard you with tweets. We're keeping it fun, fast, and useful.)
Go to the Advocates Twitter account and click the "follow" button below our picture. Thanks!

JOIN THE ADVOCATES ON FACEBOOK: The Advocates Facebook page offers you a chance to share your ideas on liberty, meet some great people and show your support for the Advocates for Self-Government and liberty. Join us and you'll receive regular Facebook updates on Advocates news, communication tips, and special offers for our Facebook friends.

2014 FREEDOM CRUISES: Advocates Board member and long-time libertarian leader Dr. Ken Bisson invites you to join him for a Freedom Cruise. Enjoy a wonderful trip on a luxury cruiser — at a bargain rate! Great food and fine company. Non-libertarians welcome! (These aren't Advocates events, but libertarians who have been on past cruises rave about them.) For photos and more details — or to sign up for free, no-pressure, no-commitment email updates — visit Freedom Cruises.
Copyright © 2014 The Advocates for Self-Government, All rights reserved.
unsubscribe from this list    update subscription preferences 

Copyright © 2014 The Advocates for Self-Government, All rights reserved.
unsubscribe from this list    update subscription preferences