Advertisement
It was Libertarian debate night in Wisconsin Dells.
The interesting thing about this year’s race for Congress in the 3rd District is how the Libertarian race is the most interesting.
Republicans are running yet another underfunded candidate that even the national party is not supporting financially.
So, without a lot of debate and action in the race between incumbent Democrat Ron Kind and Eau Claire Republican Paul Stark, the more interesting race is between Kevin Barrett, a “9/11 truth” advocate who believes the terrorist attacks were an
“inside job” by our own government, and Ben Olson III, a more conventional Libertarian who comes from a prominent Republican family in Wisconsin Dells (his uncle was former Lt. Gov. Jack Olson, who served under Gov. Warren Knowles in the early 1960s). The family also once owned the Olson Boat Lines, which ran the Dells tour boats.
Olson said he once was a Republican, but soured on the major parties because he believed that they both sought to “redistribute income: Republicans to business and Democrats to social programs.”
He argues that the only legitimate role for the federal government is to protect our borders and provide a fair legal system.
He wants to eventually eliminate Social Security, Medicare and many other entitlement programs. The federal Department of Education should also be abolished, along with a federal role in education.
The military should be scaled back to focus on protecting our borders, rather than building an empire overseas.
Both Olson and Barrett want the immediate withdrawal from all U.S. troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. And both want to cut back on the global role of the military.
Barrett believes that the government launched the 9/11 attacks as a way to get the public to go along with new Middle East wars. Olson said later that he doesn’t believe that, but doesn’t criticize Barrett for it because of the possibility that investigations might prove some wrongdoing.
With this huge difference between them, it’s interesting that the thing that got Olson into the race was his disagreement with Barrett over health care and Social Security. Barrett is not a conventional Libertarian in that he sees real merit in government programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
And he wants a Canadian-style single-payer health care system for the United States. Olson argued that he does not believe the federal government should be trusted to run our national health system, but surprisingly he could not say what type of system he would propose in its place.
The two men are clearly different.
Barrett, 49, was the subject of controversy and news coverage a few years ago when, as a part-time University of Wisconsin teacher of a class on Islam, he told students his views about 9/11.
Republicans in particular used it as yet another reason to attack UW, and right-wing Fox News commentators Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly publicly castigated Barrett for his views.
Olson, 55, is a far more conventional politician, and talks in terms of Libertarians “towing the party line.” He said he is a home builder, owns a sawmill, and tends bar a couple of nights a week.
The two men treated each other with respect — and, “9/11 truth” aside, they clearly talked about issues that the major parties have not addressed in the same way.
For instance, do we really need 130 military bases overseas?
It was an interesting debate, before a tiny crowd of about 15 onlookers. I’m not predicting a Libertarian victory, but at least it was a debate.
A Sept. 9 primary will decide who goes on to face Democrat Kind and Republican Stark.
Contact Opinion page editor Richard Mial at (608) 791-8232, or by e-mail at rmial@lacrossetribune.com.
