Loading summary
Transcript34 lines
- [00:00]
A
Foreign
- [00:04]
B
welcome to the Mountain State Liberty Cast. I'm your co host Taylor Richmond. I am not joined by our regular host Ty Ward this evening. We are happy to have a special guest with us today, Mr. Joe Early. Before we introduce him and get that conversation rolling, just a reminder that Mount State Liberty Cast is brought to you by the Libertarian Party of West Virginia, United States. You can find us@lpwv.org and on social medias both X and Facebook. This is a Value for Value podcast, so if you appreciate and enjoy what you hear on on this show, please make your way over to our website and make a donation and contribution to help further these efforts. It's a volunteer effort that we have here and we appreciate your support and keeping that going forward. As I mentioned, we're joined by Joseph Early. Joe is a former candidate for State Senate here in West Virginia, previously on the Republican ballot and within the past week or so, couple weeks now, Mr. Early has announced he has left the Republican Party and has since joined the Constitution Party here in the great state of West Virginia. And we have him on today President primarily to get to know him and understand that story and why he made that change, but also in a very similar story arc to myself, having left the Republican Party to find a new option for his political future and helping improve the great state of West Virginia. So Ms. Hurley, thanks for coming on this evening. And if you don't mind, just start by giving us a little bit of background on who you are, where you're from and what led you to run for the state Senate this past primary cycle.
- [01:59]
A
Well, hey, good evening Taylor, and I appreciate you having me on here and I guess a little place to start is about me. I am a native West Virginian. I grew up in the Eastern Canal county coal fields down in Fayette County, Eastern Kanal county, and life, like I said, lifelong West Virginia. But I left West Virginia in 1982 and went into the military and I honorably served in the armor branch of the United States army for 20 years and came back home, came back home in 2002 after, you know, multiple assignments while on active duty throughout the world. And so I've had a chance to see a lot of different cultures. So I guess we'll, we'll push back to that here in just a little bit. But as a comparison of our unique American culture that we're trying to preserve in comparison to other cultures across the world, across the globe. And so coming back home in 2002, transitioned careers fields from, like I said, armor to a more suitable civilian profession. I'm a cybersecurity engineer now. I'm a consultant for corporations and municipalities and other levels of government if they desire to, to strengthen their cyber security posture and their, their cyber resilience, to make sure they can continue to operate in the business aspect and protecting the taxpayers. So that's the fight that I'm in now. So lifelong servant. I like to consider myself a servant leader. You stated in your opening right there that I ran for Senate, State Senate. And that is true. However, I'd like to put a caveat to that. I am not a politician. I don't run with the political establishment. Anti political establishment, matter of fact. But being a lifelong Republican, as you said, you know, left the Republican Party, left the Republican party after the May 2026 primary here in the state of West Virginia. And I found after some, you know, some introspection and some reflection, I found that my conservative values and constitutional views do not sit with the West Virginia GOP at this point in time. And I had to find myself a new home and I landed by choice in the Constitution Party of West Virginia.
- [04:46]
B
So let me, let me ask you, you mentioned, or you made emphasis there on the West Virginia gop. Do you see a, a contrast or a stark enough contrast between the West Virginia GOP and the national GOP or maybe just kind of touching on why that point you made there.
- [05:08]
A
Well, to, to say as we as freedom individuals, freedom loving individuals and in the Republican Party as conservatives, I, I wanted to push that directly over to the West Virginia gop. But before I dive into that, I will say this is the national GOP is obviously a conservative political party. However, there are factions, as we can see in the Republican Party that's been around for, I'd say since the Tea Party came about about a decade ago. You know, the Tea Party was the first movement to align the Republican Party with more constitutional conservative values. And now we have the MAGA movement inside of the Republican Party and we can see that the, at the national level, especially in the Senate and the House right now, just with the Save America act, how we cannot get conservative principles aligned at a national level to protect our civic duty. Voting, I mean, to make sure that only citizens vote. And so now let's go over to the West Virginia gop. The reason I targeted the West Virginia gop, because I am a West Virginian, I'm registered in Harrison county as, or was registered in Harrison county as a Republican. But as I've witnessed, and this is one of the reasons why I ran for state Senate. We'll get into that in a little bit. But as, as the, the state GOP has become this welcoming big tent, I feel that their values have been diluted from what I would call constitutional conservative values that I used to believe the West Virginia GOP had aligned with. But now one of the reasons that I have left the party and came and went to the Constitution Party is because this big tent philosophy has diluted the party and, and made it more about quantity instead of quality. It's easy. You hear, you see it in the news, you hear it across the different media circles in West Virginia media that, oh, the West Virginia gop, you know, we're a red state. You know, we have high, these, these large numbers of people that are changing parties. But I've always said to my fellow conservatives that in the Republican Party is, there should be a litmus test for conservative values to make sure that when people do change parties that they espouse those values of the party that they're joining. It's similar to becoming a citizen of the United States. There's a process that goes through that, that legal immigrants, legal immigrants go through in order to become a citizen. And they, they, they have to go through that process because they assimilate to our values. They assimilate. Well, the Republican Party in here, in West Virginia, which I can only speak to that I'm, you know, don't keep a finger on the pulse at the national level, what's going on in different states. But here in West Virginia, there is really no, like, allegiance to the party values, you know, of conservative values. And, and granted, you know, we don't want to make. I don't want that statement to seem like, especially, you know, speaking to a libertarian and your libertarian audience and conservatives that, that are possibly frustrated as I was to, to make sure that I delineate. It's not allegiance to the party, it's allegiance to the constitutional values, the Constitution. And that's where I point my compass is to those values. And as long as I thought the Constitution or the Republican Party was adhering to that, then they aligned with my values. They don't align with my values anymore because they just welcome everybody in. And then what you find is what's going on in the state right now is constitutional conservatives, Freedom Caucus members are being challenged by. I'll just go ahead and call it Chamber of Commerce conservatives that don't necessarily bring constitutional values. Now, granted, I'm a capitalist, okay? And I'm all about the economy and bit bringing business in. You know, jobs, making sure we expand enough of West Virginia so that we are bringing in businesses. So yes, I am a capitalist, I'm a cap, A conservative capitalist. But at the same time I will not do that at the expense of the Constitution. The Constitution is not a sacrificial land for, for that. Because as you well know that I'll bring in an old Animal Farm saying here, you know that some of these, what I would call the Chamber of Commerce capitalists like to what I feel is go along the phrase, you know, we're all equal, but some are more equal than others.
- [10:51]
B
Yeah, well, I was chuckling there Joe, because I, I've, I've made that distinction among the Republicans running or in, in the House and, and Senate of late have cat who I consider capitalists, which are small business owners, you know, people who look to support small businesses and, and open the marketplace up under a free market capitalist scenario. And then you have these Chamber of Commerce or what I call, we call often corporatists, you know, mentality where the, from my, from my perspective and I feel like a lot of libertarians and a lot of, you know, free market capitalist perspective that the, the Chamber of Commerce is not to open, it's not there anymore to open up the marketplace. It's there to protect the big money donors and the bigger corporations and companies that are already in place in West Virginia or looking to come into West Virginia and making it easier for them. And on a previous episode Ty and I discussed and outlined some of those distinctions, especially as we saw in relation to Covid and the regulations and things that were put on the backs of small businesses, the mom and pop shops that the big corporations, the big donors to the Chamber of Commerce could. The big donors, the Chamber of Commerce could actually weather and withstand, but the small mom and pops couldn't and they went out of business. And that was fine by the Chamber of Commerce and their members and their elected representatives. But obviously for the small business people, the real capitalists here in the state, that's not who, what we necessarily believe in. So I was laughing because we share that opinion or at least a view of kind of where the Republican Party in the state and to some extent I'd say the larger GOP has gone. So I want to ask you, Joe, you mentioned the Freedom Caucus and we have some friends or allies, the Libertarian Party has some friends and allies within the Freedom Caucus, Delegate Anders and a few others there who really push the, a lot of libertarian leaning policies and agendas. So if, if you don't Mind me asking or, or pushing, why leave the Republican Party instead of staying in and, and aligning with the Freedom Caucus? Well, because I get asked that question too.
- [13:19]
A
You know, that's a really.
- [13:22]
B
Change the party from within is always the retort that we get is like oh well you agree so much with them, at least on the, on the surface, right? Or in principle, why not change the party within. So instead of joining the Freedom Caucus, why did you choose to leave and join the Constitution Party?
- [13:39]
A
Well, and that's a really good question because you know, that was part of my, you know, thought process and thinking about should I do this? Should I just stay in and fight from conservatives values? But what I found is, is that the, at this point in time the Republican Party has become more purplish than red. And you know, guys like Chris and Laura, Laura Kimball and you know, Chris Anders and, and George, you know, with the, with the Freedom Caucus and other members across the state, I just found it that I saw a meme the other day and this meme really brought it to heart is you know, if you, if it had to do with the Mafia and it was like, you know, why can't you just change it from within, joint stay with them and change it from within. Well, you know, that's, that's a, that's, that's why, that is why. The exact reason why that we have the problem in the GOP right now is because, because we have those conservatives that are not aligned with the Freedom Caucus, but there are conservatives. They align themselves with the corporate, as you said, your words, the corporate, I call them the Chamber of Commerce conservatives, but they align themselves because power is more important than principles. And that's why I said I just can't stay in this party, in the Republican Party here in West Virginia. And that does not mean that I will not support conservatives. I, I will support conservatives. If they are a true constitutional conservative, I will support them. And that's, I felt like that puts me in a better position because one thing as you well know, we are trying to grow the percentages that do not vote, that do not participate in that civic duty. So this is part of the reason also to parallel to that answer I just gave you about not aligning with the, or staying in the Republican Party, aligning with the Freedom Caucus. I do align with the Freedom Caucus, but I just cannot find enough in, in me says to say that the West Virginia GOP is not positioning themselves in a way to grab that 79% of people or a portion of that 79% of West Virginia Republicans to come out and vote because that's what we had. We had a 79% deficit of in this last primary that did not participate in the electoral process. And we wonder why did we end up with weak conservatives inside the Republican Party or just, I'll just call them, call them center lefts. Yeah, they're center left. They're not center right. They're not, they're not even close to being moderates. They align themselves with power instead of principles. And I just felt that it's necessary to align myself with a party, a political wing of, of of the Constitutional Party that does not pander and buy into that. And I think that the conserve the Constitutional Party, the Constitutional Party here in West Virginia is in a, a great position to get a portion of those 79% of Republican voters that the reason they do not participate in the electoral process is because of their, they are so frustrated. They do not see any reason to to participate because they cannot in their mind influence the outcome. But they can during the primary process. And that's what they, that's the message where the GOP fails here in, in this state. They fail by not getting the message out that the primaries matter. The primaries are the general election when we're in this type of position, that we are in the state.
- [18:05]
B
So I agree wholeheartedly. People ask me the question, you know, why I left the gop, why I chose Libertarian Party. And obviously there are some state issues that you're touching on and that one of the reasons why I'm running for Senate here in the 13th is I think the two main party, two major party options are two Democrats. I joke that you've got a pro life Democrat and a pro choice Democrat running and, and I'm the actually fiscally conservative, pro liberty candidate option in, in that race. But I know, I think some of the history was to, to get that super majority. I, I, you know, folks like Greg Thomas and others sold the soul of the GOP out to get that majority in place and now they're reaping some of the consequences of opening that tent up too big. And you know, I'm not going to, you know, go back into the big tent mentality of the gop, but I definitely what caused us or caused the GOP to get where it is here in the state. So you mentioned that. We talked about it. You're a member of the Constitution Party, Joe, if you don't mind, take a few minutes and explain to our listeners what is specifically the major platforms of the Constitution Party and where do they differ from the gop?
- [19:27]
A
Well, from a standpoint of party platforms, the, the Constitution Party hinges strictly on the Constitution. I mean that's, that's more of a given than anything else. So I would implore those who are interested, who may want be in that position or saying it becomes so frustrated to leave the GOP or, or want to consider, you know, going to a different party, whether it be the Constitution Party or the Libertarian Party so their voices can be heard. Is just look at from a standpoint of the Constitution Party's main framework is God, family and republic. Because without God, we, we are nothing. Without is the center mass is our north star from that perspective. And, and with that we have natural law, natural rights, and they are emboldened in the Constitution. The Republican Party I'm sure, uses a lot of that. You have constitutional conservatives in the Republican Party as well, but they are diluted and it becomes a factional fight. And we're seeing that go on in our own state Senate right now, and we're going to see it again in January. The posturing and positioning has already occurred or starting to occur now. But the core beliefs of the Constitutional Party first and foremost is, you know, Christian character, fundamental principles of American republicanism. You know, we are a constitutional republic. We are not a democracy. And a lot of people get that confused. Even in the Republican Party. I have heard people talk about the word democracy. You know, our nation, our Constitution, our forefathers, you know, understood western democracy. But that doesn't mean that we're a democracy as a nation. We are a constitutional republic. And that needs to be understood. That because of that, the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Its amendments, its provisions, everything that goes along with the Constitution to support natural law and the rights of man are, are uniquely associated with the Constitution Party and the Republican Party. Like I said, they don't require any longer. They may have at some point in time because I didn't become active. Like I said, I'm not a politician. So I did not become active in politics from someone who wanted to run for public office as a, as a, as a servant leader. And I put emphasis on servant leader because I think we, we miss these, these politicians. I think sometimes that we get in office today. They, they're not leaders. They're, they, they, they, they're, they're not, they are representatives of the people. And I think they tend to forget that is once they get in there, you know, they coined the word leader. Well, they're not leading anything there but we put them in the office and then that ends up happening. So I think the GOP doesn't necessarily align or the state gop, West Virginia GOP is not necessarily aligning with West Virginia values, West Virginia conservative values of freedom, you know, individual liberty, aligning with individual responsibility and you know, other things that are important to us, like the free market economy, things of that manner. And we still see the Republicans today, and I'll stop after I say this for a moment, is that we see even though that a lot of the GOP representatives will talk about, you know, the free market economy, but they'll still hand out corporate welfare in order to, say, attract businesses. And, and if we operate on true free market principles is the, if there's a need for that business to survive, then the business will survive based on that need. And I think that the, our, our people down in Charleston tend to forget that sometimes and they look at, that's why we have all these discussions going on now about taxation here in the states. You know, we wanted, they make the argument, well, we can, we can get rid of the personal income tax. Okay, we can do that, right? Let's look at personal property tax next. Let's get the counties involved in the personal property tax. But we just cannot get past ourselves as a state go. The GOP cannot get past themselves in order to truly engage in that honest discussion. Just because you have more tax revenue doesn't mean you need to spend more money. Doesn't need, mean you need to get out corporate welfare to attract businesses.
- [24:32]
B
We, we definitely agree on on that. And it's something that we really, you know, attack, for lack of a better phrase, the GOP in general, but specifically here in the state, you know, the whole idea of economic development, I'm air quoting that, but it's, it's central planning, it's government welfare and you know, oftentimes there are these gambles that the legislature and the executive make util taxpayer dollars that, yeah, you might, you might hit a home run here or there, but there's a lot of strikeouts along the way and, and West Virginians figuratively and literally pay the, pay the price for that. So. Definitely agree with you there. I think we could definitely have a very long conversation about representative, the representative nature of our, of our country and, and where religion comes into that and you know, theocracies and, and the role that can play. Put that aside. But you know, highlight both Ty and I are very open on this podcast about our faith, about being born again Christians. And that is a difficult The Libertarian Party because of a number of our platforms is difficult bridge for some to, you know, cross because we don't have a lot of the, you know, I'll say, for lack of a better phrase, standard Christian platforms like being entirely pro life or entirely opposed to gay marriage. Even though that's, I believe that as an individual, you know, we discuss on here that our, our stance is the government's role in that it should be different or not involved at all. You mentioned the, the support or the, the North Star being the Constitution for the Constitution Party. The pushback that I want to give or maybe just you know, ask for your take on because I won't mention his name yet. He hasn't come out and, and publicly endorsed me. But there's a, a person that you and I know very well is supporting me in my race against Mr. Oliverio, a very prominent or well known Republican in the Fairmont area. And after your announcement, he came, he called me and said, so why are you a Libertarian and why didn't you join the Constitution Party? And you know, I chuckled because I knew that, that when he, when he, I missed his call, that was going to be the question that he was going to pose to me. And I told him, well, first I think some of it was happenstance. When I switched, the Constitution Party was a lot less known. This was, you know, seven or eight years ago now. And you got in. The Constitution Party I think is gaining steam over the past, you know, four or five more prominence, but that was part of it. But also the pushback of the question I have for folks in the Constitution Party is, you know, because of the nature of our, our Constitution, how it's set up and the amendment process and everything else, you know, we look at things like the, the income tax, our, our talking point or our, you know, you know, quote is taxation is theft. But according to the, the federal Constitution, and I'm blanking now on which amendment it is, I try to suppress though that memory, but we have a, we have an income tax that is in the Constitution. So my question for folks in the Constitution Party, if that is, you know, a cornerstone of your, your platform, when a large part of this great country of ours puts in place an amendment that is, you know, against the, the Christian beliefs, maybe it's something to do with transgender youth sports or you know, gay marriage or whatever it is, what if that becomes a, a federal constitutional amendment? Does that, how does the Constitution Party react to something like that?
- [28:28]
A
Well, how, I mean, I'm sure there would be a A very adverse reaction to this because, you know, when you, when you just do it from a standpoint of natural law and, and, and, and the Constitution is an expression of that natural law of free people, of a free people. You know, one thing we don't want to do is we do not want government to come in and tell people how to live their lives, okay? But at the same time, we are not a democracy ruled by a 51%. Okay? You know, you know, you have. You just cannot let society drive. Cannot just. I guess you cannot let society drive the way you're. Your social constructs are, okay? So if a person. Look, I, I don't care if a person is gay, but I don't. They don't want me to tell them how to live. The converse is exactly the same way. I do not want them to tell me how to live. But if you look at it from a real sense, and I'm just going to. I guess I'm going to cut down to the, the root here. Our society is a. Has to thrive and grow, and the only way that it can thrive and grow is through heterosexual means, okay? And through procreation, which is as God has ordained procreation by making us a binary being. You're either male or you're female. You can't pretend you're something else. That is a mental disorder. Now, I know a lot of people are probably going to hear this and say, you know, early is wrong. You know, and look, I'm just saying that I'm giving my opinion. I'm not. You know, it's somewhat of an educated opinion. It's, you know, I'm not a psychologist, but I will tell you, it's very binary. It's very biblical. God made man, God made woman in order to procreate and, and have dominion over the earth, okay? And all the animals and beings of the earth, That's. That's the ordained portion. Now, again, government should not come in, which is the government is part of God's plan, but government should not come in and decide on how people live their lives. But at the same time, without the ability to pro. Without, without laws that. Or natural laws that stand behind procreation and, you know, making more Americans, making more people that, that are part of our country, that. That are here. You know, you can't get that through the LGBTQ community. Now, granted, you know, my wife and I had a discussion on this just the other day. Is, you know, there, there are members of the lgbtq, the Alphabet community, that may want to have A child. But transgender people cannot have a child. Transgender males cannot procreate. They can't do it. So how do you have it? Now, this is a very deep discussion. I'm, I'm probably digging a little bit too much into weeds. This is probably a one discussion all within itself. But, but if, if, if a gay couple, say gay men, if they want to have a child, the laws of our country, as they stand right now in certain states, will. Can allow that to happen. Okay, they can adopt a child as a gay couple. But we've seen the horror stories of that as well, where they've adopted these young boys and then sexually abuse them. So when you create the law, you also have to have guardrails for something like that, because it's not natural law. It's not natural. So I guess without digging too much more in the weeds is that gay couple can hire. Just like a. When I say hire, pay a person to be a female, to be a surrogate and carry that child genetically be one of those gay men's people child. I mean, that, that, that can happen. And you know, those, those laws are out there in different states that allow that to occur. So I guess going back to your main point is how do we reconcile when something with. That's where we have a biblical stance in the Constitution Party is how do we reconcile with laws that may pass, that may be anti God or anti biblical or anti natural law law? Well, that's some. That's why if we, as we continue to grow in the Constitution Party, we will have weight into that area and then that will be a delineation, as it is right now, that makes our party different than the Republican Party, different than the Democrat Party, different than the Libertarian Party. Okay? But those values are not up for negotiation. Those values are what they are. Those are part of our core values and core beliefs.
- [33:52]
B
And you know, I, I have said this to a number of folks. One thing that I appreciate about the Libertarian Party is that it allows me to live my life, my faith, and, and not. I've yet to run into a philosophical, political, philosophical dilemma in terms of how I live my life. Now if the government passes a law that I disagree with, you know, especially on a, a Christian, you know, moral basis, my response has always been, well, it's my responsibility as one, a Christian to, you know, lead those around me to Christ, to, To live a certain life and be, you know, better my community. As I see it, that direction I, being Libertarian, my. Or why I'm libertarian instead of Constitution is because I see state constitutions, the federal constitution as a possible weapon against insert population here, insert religious belief here. And we saw a lot of that right in, in the wake of COVID and the Biden administration and their use of government agencies like the SEC or sorry, the FCC and their interactions with the social media companies and shadow banning and all this kind of stuff. And you have a lot less of that when you have a lot less government. So that's my one pushback against the Constitution Party. You know, obviously, I think as it stands right now, depending on your, your, your stance on things like taxation, just going running through my little list in my head. Well, and a lot of it also comes down to Joe, obviously how the Supreme Court interprets some of the amendments to the Constitution. Obviously. I think I know a number of folks in the Constitutional Party may have disagreements with the high court on some of their rulings, even though they're utilizing the Constitution as their basis for that, while the Libertarian Party will have adhorrent disagreement with that. One of the reasons why I find a home in the Libertarian Party is that I don't have to justify it against, oh well, the Constitution says this. So therefore, you know, I, I now that is my cornerstone of my political philosophy. My political philosophy is don't hurt people, don't take their stuff, don't aggress upon people and don't let the government aggress upon them either. Gives me a lot of leeway into living as a Christian, you know, trying to better my community as a Christian and expand in that regard. Whereas I see Democrats, Republicans, almost every other party utilizing the, the government as a weapon to drive their goals, whether they be simply political, economic, or in some instances it can even be religious, depending on, you know, where you are in the country and you know, the elected officials therein. So it is an important distinction, I think, between the Libertarian Party and, and the Constitution Party. But I, I think obviously there are still a number of similarities and places of alignment in terms of general policy, of free market capitalism and allowing people to generally do as they please, so long as they're not impacting someone else directly. Right. Would that be a fair statement?
- [37:34]
A
Yeah, I believe that's a, that's a fair statement. But you said something there that kind of I want to key in on. And you talked about the Democrat Party, Republican Party and, and, and you know, right now the, the, the stance that lies, that I see that has taken a foothold in both parties is a hive mind. It's politics, politics over principles. And that's one of the things that drove me away from the West Virginia GOP and the GOP at large, because obviously, if you remember, one year member of both. But, you know, is that hive mind is that, you know, there are things that I disagree with that President Donald J. Trump has done. I, I disagree with them. But in the background, you know, I see it from a different, I see it from a perspective as a citizen and as a voter and someone who cares about our country and, you know, cares about the constitutional framework that we, that, that serves our country. But I'm not going to use that one disagreement to sit there and say that he is, he's as a single person, as the leader of the Republican Party across the nation, is that he is a bad person. You know, because when we, we all make decisions, some decisions have to go through a lot of different thought processes in order to get to that one final decision. But we can't have a hive mind to, to say that no matter what, we stand by the party. I want to be able to, excuse me. I want to be able to feel like if I disagree, that doesn't mean I'm not a, a conservative person, because we can't, you know, Donald Trump is a personality. And in three years, two years actually, he will no longer be our president. He will, because unless the law changes, he cannot run for a third term and we will have a new president. I, I would hope and will support a conservative candidate for that, for that office, as I would for Congress and for Senate. Conservative. That doesn't mean a party, a party person. Okay, but that's where we have to get politics out of the, out of this equation of, and, and get more back into principles. And, and also that has to do with this one phrase is we talk about society and we go back to the earlier conversation we had about, you know, different communities that are, that maybe one party may not completely stand behind when it comes down to a social issue. And that is a relative morality. We, you know, we, we can't keep going down this social justice road and because then it feels like our country is ran as a democracy where, you know, 51% tell the rest of us how to live, you know, and, and, and, you know, abolishing the electoral college is, cannot happen, cannot occur. You cannot stack the courts as the Democrat parties want to do. And we have to look at what causes our country to continue to thrive, procreate U.S. citizens. And, and I want to use this as a point to enter this is, I believe that we need a constitutional amendment that affects the Fourth and 14th Amendments. And this will solve a lot of our problems here in the United States when it comes down to illegal border crossings. Illegal immigration is. We need to change the word person to citizen and then define what a citizen is, because a citizen can be a person who's going through legal immigration. A citizen is someone who has the right to US Law. But right now, when we have an illegal immigrant comes in here because they are a person, they are protected by the Constitution and eat up our taxpayer monies through, whether it be the legal system to find out where they can stay here or not, we have the ACLU coming out here pushing, you know, all these things into court. And I really believe that we need to look at those two amendments and change the word persons to citizen and then make a definition of what a citizen is so that we can stop this fiscal drain against our economy and against the taxpayer that is killing, killing our citizens because it emboldens illegal crossings to come here. And we see it. And, and you being a Libertarian, me being a constitutional conservative, looking at it like, why are we sacrificing our youth? Why are our. Why is our youth being killed by illegal aliens, drunk drivers, people who cannot read our road signs, murderers and rapists and, and criminals that other countries have released into the United States. We can affect that by changing the Constitution and getting a constitutional amendment under the fourth and fourteenth Amendments from persons to citizen.
- [43:11]
B
Well, I'll say that that's a. And actually, that is one I've. I've noticed heard before or considered my initial thought, and I came up Ty and on our last episode, we're talking about the commentary that TJ Meadows had about the food divan. My concern always is when you allow the government to begin to define things such as what is harmful, then you allow them also by just the transitive property of doing that, that they then define how to respond to that. So I have to, I have to chew on that one, Joe. I think that's an interesting concept that I don't think has gotten a lot of, at least in my perspective, where I've, you know, what I listen to, which I try to be very diverse and haven't heard that approach to it. But, you know, the Libertarian Party does have branches or caucuses or wings of it that are very open borders and freedom of movement in terms of as long as you, up until you trespass or cause harm, which you outlined, a lot of harm being caused, up until you do that, you shouldn't be restricted. I'm more of a Milton Friedman approach to immigration where until we eliminate the Jurassic welfare state that we have which is fed by our again stolen taxpayer dollars, then there needs to be some policing of who is allowed in and able to draw on those resources. So, you know, there's, there's one of the divide in the Ritraan party on the best way to go about that obviously and some of those definitions, but definitely an interesting approach for sure. So I want to just also mention, you know, I think, or at least I don't say pushback but you know, going back to your comment about the, the two gay men adopting a child that's in the, the quote, unquote, as you said, horror stories that I've seen, you know, the libertarian retort to that would just be that, you know, given the drastic, you know, foster care issue that we have, the number of children that are out there that need a good loving home that we would be all in favor of, you know, increasing the penalties or the, the punishments to be levied on individuals who cause harm, especially to the, the youngest and most vulnerable among us. There's a pretty common meme that goes around libertarian circles that, you know, wood chippers are, are great for plants and pedophiles. So we, we would be completely for that and because there are Lord knows. And you've seen them, I've seen them plenty of heterosexual couples who have done ghastly things to children in their care.
- [46:07]
A
Absolutely.
- [46:09]
B
So I at least myself and you know, not speaking entirely for the party but as, as a libertarian myself and a candidate, you know, I would like to see pragmatic approaches. I. Anytime we allow the government to come in and completely, you know, just say outlaw something on, on the surface, there are a number of downstream consequences, ramifications that we don't think about because of a, sometimes a, a guttural or you know, religious or other type of response to it. Again, I have my beliefs on homosexuality. Ty's mentioned his on here and there are plenty of people within Libertarian Party who would disagree with us on that. But you know, that's why I, I generally say that and libertarian approach to a lot of these things is the Democrats, the Republicans, the Green Party, the Mountain Party, the Insert party, probably the Constitution Party, oftentimes will want to utilize the government to restrict actions in fear of an outcome that doesn't always come about in some of those situations. Our retort to the situation that you mentioned and a lot of these, and I'm even tying this into that, you know, the immigration issue is yeah, if you are driving down the road and you can't read the street signs and you cause an accident that takes, injures someone or does damage or whatever, then there should be very strict penalties on that and that is the mechanism to enforce and prevent that from happening. When we get into a mentality of oh well, this dangerous or this bad thing may happen and the ways to prevent it are to insert a new law, a new rule or new regulation, we've seen the slippery slope of where that generally gets us. That's the libertarian response, is there should be penalties and punishments for when and harm actually happens and not the well, what if or we saw this one bad scenario here happen and therefore we want to prevent it. So
- [48:13]
A
I can agree with that and that's going to give me an opportunity to refine my response and put some context to it. Because one thing I do not want to do is the listeners out there that hear this, I don't want them to come back and say, you know, I'm, I'm gay, I'm a gay basher, okay? Because I'm, I, I am not. It's just not my belief system. It's not, it's not what I believe in. But I do, I do agree that any harm done, whether it be through a member of a heterosexual family, and they are, as you said, some very ghastly and harmful things that have been done to children in, in what I would call the biblical family, the, the man, the woman and, and the child, the children of that family, whether it be a step parent or natural mother or father. And then the things that, that I brought up earlier where the, the two gay men that were not in, from this state that, you know, abuse their adopted children because we do have a foster problem here in the state of West Virginia, we're sending our, our West Virginia children out of state without the proper controls and checks and they could possibly become harmed as well. So I do want to give it a little bit of context that it was not a, an attack on gay men who can, who can provide possibly, you know, for a foster child or an adopted child, you know, a loving environment and would not proceed down to some sort of sexual abuse that, you know, can occur, whether you're in a homosexual relationship or a heterosexual relationship.
- [49:59]
B
And, and I appreciate it because I, I had forgotten about that situ, or that case, for lack of a better phrase. But you were actually referring to something that actually did happen and not just a hypothetical.
- [50:09]
A
Yeah, yeah, it wasn't hypothetical. That's great. So I want to give some context to it. And also too I want to say you mentioned there before I interjected on you a minute ago is yeah, we don't want to create cell work in cyber security and, and in the IT world, you know there's a common phrase out there is we don't want a business solution, okay. To be remedied unnecessarily. Okay. So what we don't want to do is we don't want to create a solution for a problem that doesn't exist. Okay. Because then it's just a solution looking for a home so you can, you can create a problem anywhere and, and then make it, make it and amplify it enough through media or whatever source and then make it look like it's a really, really a big issue. So you know, we want to make sure that we're not look, creating solutions that are just looking for a problem that doesn't exist. And but there's two other things I want to bring up. You talked about the, you know and I'm bringing us back around the family and problems that we have directly here in West Virginia. That's this remnants continued continued problems and remnants of the opioid crisis here in West Virginia as we have a drug problem in West Virginia and that drug problem from an illegal drug standpoint and also abuse of pharmaceuticals is we have a drug problem that's interrupted the family makeup and that's why we have such a huge foster child problem. We have grandparents now raising their, their grandchildren with grandparents raising their grandchildren because the parents are either incarcerated for non violent means mind you. And we'll get. That's probably another issue but but also too is from the law enforcement perspective I really think that this is something that probably needs to be addressed. Across the nation another real situation happened, occurred. Police officers shot a one year old child while a vehicle shot and killed a one year old child while a vehicle was moving because they were told to stop because the lady, the mother or the person accompanying the mother had had taken some Pampers. You know, you don't deal with non violence, with violence in these kind of cases. It put actually a young child in the grave. And I think that across the country we need to look at this qualified immunity sometimes because I think that that can be perceived as a license to intervene with, with lethal, lethal force when non lethal force would be the, the best solution. And all this kind of goes back to these drug problems. You know, we have to deal with these and you know you saw President Trump has recently by executive order has reduced marijuana from Schedule 1 down to Schedule 3 and to make it to where it's not not a federal. I may be saying this the wrong way, but I'm not a marijuana user so I don't track it this way but where marijuana is no longer is considered a felony. And then we also had a win for in within the Second Amendment where marijuana use because as a veteran we see marijuana use as medical marijuana as an alternative therapy. And we need to make sure that those persons that use medical marijuana or marijuana in general are not inhibited from their, their constitutional rights to whether it be freedom of speech, right to bear arms.
- [53:55]
B
Yeah, no, I, I agree wholeheartedly. I appreciate you bringing that up because obviously that's, those are two areas where I think we would would definitely agree especially on the qualified immunity aspect. You know we talked about on on this podcast before and I, I say it regularly. It's unfortunate how when you have and Delegate Hearst in the in the House is pushing for a number of these type of reforms in the state. And it's unfortunate because as soon as you try to reform or pass legislation or push changes in in the law that are very pro liberty are very, you know, if you take the time to sit and chew on it and mullet over, you realize that there are some real positives not just for the individuals but also just for the policing community. It builds more trust within them and so on. But as soon as you say oh we need to have qualified immunity for some more accountability, that's generally how it is often framed. You know, you hate police, you hate cops. You know, the back the blue folks come out in force, no pun intended to, to quiet you and, and shout you down. And that's an unfortunate thing that I see you talked about hive minds very similar to the teachers unions with the Democrats. You know, you try to have talk about education reform and, and needing to do certain things there. The 55 strong group comes out and that hive mind, you know, shouts you down, pushes you out of the room etc and I think we see that within the GOP oftentimes in terms of police reform as they're you know, intended of the back the blue group. So I appreciate your your sentiment there something that the libertarians definitely agree on and to also agree with you on the, the marijuana issue. And, and obviously we would go somewhat further probably than you would be comfortable with but in just in controlled substances in general. And again this may be where you and I will differ although again born again Christian, I you know, think that a lot of the use of those substances are are very bad for you health wise. The the ramifications on you know, your life, your familyhood, your livelihood, all those things are are in play. We've seen that you mentioned the veterans for example. Well, looking back over history it was the, the socially conservative Christian right who has pushed the, the predominantly the war on drugs and the, the incarcerations and the illegality of marijuana where you had friends like people like my good friend Ted who is a Marine and had an injury jumping out of a helicopter where he, he severely messed up his knee and you know, very high levels of pain. And the immediate response to that by the medical profession was to prescribe him oxycodone and Perco and you know, all Vicodins and all these highly. I just blaked on the word highly
- [57:12]
A
toxic chemical toxic cocktails.
- [57:14]
B
Yeah. Highly addictive medications that oftentimes and too often in West Virginia we've seen are much more of a slippery slope into harder drugs than marijuana is. And you know, he found a much safer relief much more maybe not as effective but a much safer relief in in medical marijuana. And before we were it was medical allowed in the state you know, at the time illegal marijuana. And he ran the you know, possibility of losing his right to bear arms at that point.
- [57:50]
A
That's right.
- [57:51]
B
And and that's and that's tying it back to my previous earlier about you know the folks utilize in a very strong religious sense especially Christian religious sense can then utilize laws and state and federal constitutions as a weapon. And that's where for me has been a barrier from joining a Constitution Party or a similar that adjacent type of parties in other states. So. But I appreciate you you bring that up because it is obviously something that I think you and I and the Libertarian Party and apparently the Constitution Party can align on. And I want to use that just to say something that I mentioned to your, your chair, Ms. Jackson in a phone call. I I think obviously there is areas where we align and candidates in in races where we're not not an actual competition that we can both support because of those major key policy issues that we agree on that for whatever it may be. Maybe it's the Democrats, but in West Virginia I think we can agree it's mostly the Republicans who are failing to deliver on where the Constitution Party and Libertarian Party can link arms and be a voice for. So one thing I'd like to end on before just giving you a few moments to to you know say any final piece is the the question that obviously Libertarians get Especially Libertarians like myself who are former Republicans. What's your response, Joe, to the, the, for lack of a better phrase, attack when and well, it's since you're not running, but let's. We know that Mr. Wilson is running for, for Senate on the Constitution Party where the attack is. Well, he's just going to draw, pull votes from, from Shelley Moore. And what if, what if you're, you're running causes the, the Republican to lose the seat and a Democrat gets in or, you know, maybe it's another Mountain Party or whatever, but obviously in the duopoly it's going to be the Democrat.
- [59:57]
A
Right.
- [59:58]
B
What's your, what's your response to that mentality or that attack on the Constitution Party as a spoiler in the Republican versus Democrat situation?
- [60:09]
A
I have seen that already. But that, that goes back to my earlier point, point where we started this whole conversation is why I left is there are a lot of frustrated Republicans out here that feels like the same way the Democrats have changed to Republican Party. I, I would ask any Democrat that's listening to this and any Republican that's listening to this broadcast to do a quick look on the inside and say, why did you leave your party? Well, I didn't leave my party. My party left me. My party does not. You know, and I, I put things on a, on a, sliding, on a scale. And since we don't have. I'll try to explain this graphically, but I, I am a, the first time I voted Republican and registered Republican, Ronald Reagan was running for his second term, okay? Because, you know, I joined the army in 1982 and when I joined the army or I'm sorry, his first, his first term because I was 18 years old when, already 18 years old when he ran for office. So I was registered Republican from a family of Democrats, okay, Kennedy Democrats, mind you. Okay? But if we put this on a, on just a, a linear, put it on a line and say with point that arrow up. And this is how I think right here. And I, I would put myself in the middle, okay? But what's happened over time is that line has moved to the left. Now this goes along with the Democrats, okay? If that line has moved to the left, my arrow now moves over to the moderate or center right. Well, the further that line moves to the left, my position now becomes like, you know, right extremists, like, like they're trying to classify the MAGA people right now. So my message to being a spoiler is the Constitution Party, a Libertarian Party. The members running are not Spoilers I would say to the Republican Party is you have not done a good job of maintaining your conservative principles and you focus more on growing the party and diluting party values than fully embracing the constitutional conservative values the Republican Party was built on and has existed on for quite some time. But lately here like and you have used the same words I've used is there's a duopoly and with that duopoly with the Democrats and the two parties, the Democrats and Republicans, the two party system is failing our constitutional republic, filling it miserably. And that's why we have more taxation as theft principles coming out of the Libertarian Party and the Constitutional Party is we want less taxes, we want more individual liberty. That's constitutional based. So I would say to the Republican Party again, and I will say this loudly, do a better job because you've not done a good job. Just because you can claim that we have more Republicans now does not mean that those Republicans are true conservative Reagan Republicans or Lincoln conservatives, you know, even mind you. So, so I would say that the constitutional part I said this to, to Marshall Wilson and Trisha Jackson several weeks ago at their convention is that this time is ripe for a third party to get in to the Senate and if they take votes from Shelley Moore Capito, and I'm sure that some of her surrogates are listening to, will listen to this, that those chamber of Commerce conservatives that, that she's pulling in and the corporate, the corporatists that are being pulled in, if we get more people that say, you know, yeah, I'm, I might be a Republican but this is the general election and I want a true constitutionalist in there to vote and they'll vote for S. Marshall Wilson. And if that means that we get a constitutional conservative in the Senate again, the Republican Party should have done a better job of maintaining those principles and quit coming out in an election year with millions and millions of dollars to do the same thing that we say the media is doing and that is propagandize the voters and let the voters make a true decision based on their principles.
- [65:06]
B
I, I, I appreciate that Joe. And, and that's, you know, one of the things I, I tell voters, and I just begun using it on some of my materials is, you know, no vote is owed. Just because you and I agree on 9 out of 10 things my vote isn't owed to you. If you, if the 10 thing is for me a red flag or a line in the sand issue and you get that wrong, then you might, you know, I will Vote for the candidate that gets that one right. And I, I think too often, and both sides do this, but you know, we're kind of picking on the GOP here in the, in the state. I, I think they pound their chest on some of these, you know, social issues that are very important to individuals. Don't get me wrong, I know that they are, but they pound their chest that they've won on those issues and they are losing on taxation, on personal property rights, on individual liberty, that, you know, we jokingly say that a lot of the Republicans campaign as libertarians and then govern as Democrats. And you probably could say something very similar. They campaign as constitutionalists and we haven't trademarked that yet. And some of us don't even believe in intellectual property, Joe, So be sure and run with that.
- [66:28]
A
That.
- [66:28]
B
But that's what happens unfortunately. And I think one of that comment you made about a hive mind is more and more people are breaking away from the hive mind. And I think in other states you're seeing it in the Democrat Party, some of the socialists and the communists are taking over certain states. In those parties and some of those major cities. I think you're seeing a bifurcation in the Democratic Party that we don't see here in West Virginia. But I think what we're seeing is a bifurcation in the Republican Party of those left left centers, those corporatists, the Chamber of Commerce Republicans and liberty leaning individuals who are, whether they're in the Freedom Caucus, whether they're joining the Libertarian Party or the Constitutional Party, are saying that the GOP is no longer the party that represents individuals who believe in smaller government, less taxes and more freedom. They're looking for a new home. So Joe, I appreciate you coming on and chatting with today. It was great to, to hear your story and, and pick your brain a little bit. I'll give you opportunity to share any last thoughts you have.
- [67:35]
A
Well, I would say this right here. You know, I ran for the senate district here in Gilmer, Calhoun, Lewis, Harrison county and half the western half of the Taylor county and Senate District 12. And I will tell you that, you know, we secured over 3, 000 votes. People who align with me and that was in a closed primary. You asked the question a minute ago. What, what, what would my answer be to Republicans? I was like, hey, do better, do a better job. And so there is a, you know, my former opponent who is now the Republican candidate for, for the general election. There are Republican voters out there, about 3, 000 plus Republican voters that did not vote for that, that gentleman, you know those, if we have a constitutional, a Constitution party representative here in this state and then you have people from the Democrat Party that want to vote for, you know, what I call the old blue dog Democrats. They want to vote for conservative values. They have an opportunity. If we can get a conservative Constitutional Party conservative in on the ballot in November, they have a chance to win in this district. And if they don't win and a Democrat wins, then I would say to the Republicans, you should have done better. And you know, we just have to continue to stretch forward and say that there are alternatives. We don't have just a binary choice between, you know, the, the duopoly and that, that voters need to educate themselves and we need to get into that 79% then this is just a Republican Party, Democrat Party. You know, when they, when they're told to vote, they're hive mind, they get out and vote. And, and that's could be what happens to this district in, in November because if the same people go to 21 get out and vote in the general election, the Republican Party stands to lose this district potentially. So I would just say that look hard, if you're listening to this show, do it, do a real deep look inside of your conservative values and look at an alternative because not everything is as it seems from the GOP or the Democrat Party and there are alternatives out here that we can select from that will strengthen our government here in the state of West Virginia and give us a choice.
- [70:24]
B
I agree wholeheartedly. And I think the more points of view, whether that's parties or just candidates in general, that, that people have to choose from, the more likely we touch that other 70, you know, plus percent and get them involved and at least interested if they have someone who, you know, again on that nine to 10 issues, if they find someone that hits that, that 10th issue, that's that major thing for them, they may now be interested enough to listen to other options and be involved like they weren't before. So, you know, as a fellow third partier out there, we appreciate, you know, the, the, the, the courage that it takes to stand off and, and separate yourself from the, the duopoly. It's not a, not an easy hill to be on. So appreciate you taking that stance and, and thanks for joining us, Joe. Again our guest was Joseph early, former GOP Senate candidate, now member of the Constitution Party. Thanks for listening to Mountain State Liberty cast. Tune in next time for our next episode. And until then, don't hurt people and don't take their stuff.