Re: Candidate Survey

Kansas City Star
1729 Grand Boulevard
Kansas City, Missouri 64108

TO: Candidates for Congress and Senate
FROM: The Kansas City Star Editorial Board

Thank you for taking the time to fill out this questionnaire. If you need additional space for these or other subjects, please feel free to answer on the back or add on pages.

DATE: May 7, 1998

NAME: Martin Lindstedt
ADDRESS: 338 Rabbit Track Road, Granby, Missouri 64844
WORK NUMBER: (417) 472-6901
HOME NUMBER: (417) 472-6901

1. Please list here basic biographical information such as education, occupation, family, etc.

Born in Pierre, South Dakota, on Dec. 25, 1957. By trade I am a truck driver. By profession I am a writer and Resistance leader/philosopher.

2. Please give your experience in elective or appointive office, or as a candidate for elective office.

In 1994 I ran for State Representative from the 132d District. In 1996 I ran for governor. I have ran for municipal office in Granby, Missouri as a municipal judge and city councilman.

In all the abovementioned elections I have lost.

3. If you are an incumbent, what are your accomplishments? What would be your priorities for this office?

4. If you are a challenger, what would be your priorities if elected?

The frontispiece of my campaign is to propose the following bit of civil rights legislation as a proposed Amendment to the u.S CONstitution:

1. Any government official who has used the power of his office to violate the human or Constitutional rights shall be deemed to have no human or Constitutional rights worth respecting.

2. Congress shall make appropriate legislation to enforce this Constitutional provision.

The appropriate legislation would end all immunities created by judicial fiat. In addition, the penalties for corruption and dereliction of duty by omission or commission would be made capital offenses, with the burden of proof against the former regime criminals. Having no Constitutional rights, the regime criminals would be subject to bills of attainder, forfeiture of estate and corruption of blood.

5. How serious do you believe the problems facing Social Security are? What specific reforms, if any, do you favor? (If you are an incumbent, what actions have you taken on this matter?)

Social Security essentially doomed. It is an inter-generational transfer program from the young to the old. Eventually the productive young will be unable to take care of both their young families and somebody else's parents and grandparents. This will be especially the case given that the whites will soon no longer be in a majority and the Third-World composition of a restive and lawless population increases. Sooner or later the system will collapse. The question as to how long the system will last depends upon how long the productive young will allow their paychecks to be looted for Social Security benefits.

I have no reforms to offer, as no reforms are possible. I could recommend that the mythical Social Security Trust Fund be used to pay the Social Security benefits promised and the emancipation of the under-50 payee by paying him back what he contributed. However that is not possible because there never was a Social Security Trust Fund. Republican and Democrat politicians looted these hypothetical funds for general spending as soon as the SS taxes came in.

6. What needs to be done to improve the American health care system? What specific reforms, if any, do you favor?

If people were serious about improving the health care system the government would be removed from all aspects of it other than paying Medicare bills. Doctors would not be licensed by the government, but rather anyone with ability to attract a clientele would be allowed to interact with his customers.

7. Do you believe it is accurate to say that the government is planning to run "budget surpluses" for the next few years? Why or why not?

That is a lie. There has never been any budget surpluses ever. Rather, this "budget surplus" comes from stealing from hypothetical trust funds such as Social Security and the highways.

Since German and Japanese foreign investors have been burned by currency devaluations they no longer buy T-bills. So for the past few years the current regime has been financed largely by running the printing presses. The main purpose of the IRS is to steal money back from the poor and diminishing middle-classes so that this inflation isn't noticed. The rich and powerful make out like the bandits they are by keeping their mouths shut to the theft.

So to say anything about a bogus "budget surplus" is to participate in a fraud. In a regime monetary system run by the printing press, a "surplus" or a "shortfall" is but a matter of how much paper currency can be passed onto the masses.

8. What specific reforms do you favor to improve federal income tax law? (Please discuss tax law, not the IRS). If you are an incumbent, what actions have you taken to improve tax law?

I have no intention of 'improving' federal income tax law. Approximately 35-40 million people no longer file and tens of millions more file returns based upon what they think they can get away with. The present system is based upon nothing more than sucking back the counterfeit currency in order to prevent inflation from becoming noticeable. That and acting as a social engineering tool in order to imprison the regime's enemies for "income-tax violations."

I have no intention of 'improving' federal income tax law. Sooner or later the people will have enough, create a tax revolt, and exterminate politicians and IRS agents. Such happenings are as desirable as they are inevitable.

9. What can the federal government do to prepare against an economic downturn? (i.e. tax cuts, spending cuts, etc.)

Nothing. There is no trust and confidence in the honor of the federal regime. Anything which might delay financial collapse will merely ensure that the inevitable collapse will be more destructive when it arrives.

10. Do you favor campaign finance reform legislation that would prohibit the use of "soft money" in congressional campaigns? Please explain your answer.

No. We all know that the major politicians are thieving whores who accept bribes from the special interests. All I favor is that the persons and organizations which buy these political whores be disclosed by the whores.

11. Would you vote to require full disclosure of all "independent" campaign contributions and spending that mentions the name of a candidate? Please explain your answer.

Yes. We know that politicians are money-grubbing whores. They have no intention of obeying any laws, and the regime courts are so corrupt that there is no point in making new laws that they won't enforce against the ruling regime criminals. So let the extent of the prostitution and corruption be open for all to see.

12. Do you favor direct public financing of congressional campaigns similar to the arrangement used for presidential elections? Please explain your answer.

No. Since we all know that politicians are lying whores, why make the general population, which has gotten wise to them and thus never listen to the lying media or even bother to ratify the political brothel by voting, pick up the tab?

13. Are there departments of the federal government that need to be reduced in size or eliminated? Are there government programs that should be broadened or expanded? Please explain.

Since I think the current regime must be overthrown or allowed to decay into irrelevance, then by logical default I would say that all departments of the federal regime need to be eliminated.

The lying basis of the u.S. CONstitution is based upon a premise of federalism. That is that the federal regime is limited in its powers to the functions which the sovereign states cannot provide separately. This is no longer the case, if it ever was. As the federal regime destroys itself and is wracked apart by civil war, the federal regime must in due course cannibalize itself in an effort for survival. Let this parasitic regime follow its own logic of triage. Until then, lying talk about 'cutting' a minuscule amount here and a minuscule amount there is simply dishonest foolishness.

14. How well do you believe welfare reform is proceeding? What changes - if any - do you believe need to be made in federal welfare laws?

"Welfare reform" is nothing more than welfare bureaucrats further chasing down young men who have remarried and have a new family and shaking them down again for more money so that this money can be paid for some more fat-assed thieving bureaucrats.

I ought to know, because I have helped a friend who, because he pays child support and his ex-wife on welfare has custody of the child, is now being held up to pay 82% of the child-support payments. The welfare mom isn't devoting enough of her minuscule AFDC check to the support of the child, so in her name the welfare bureaucrats have demanded that the original court order be changed to make the working-class father who has never missed a payment pay over $300 a month instead of $150 a month. So because the welfare bureaucrats want more of the welfare dollar to go to them as opposed to the recipients in whose name the AFDC programs were set up, this young man with another family with children will doubtless be squeezed further until he falls behind. Then he can be declared a felon and perhaps put in prison.

So given the thieving and stupid nature of welfare bureaucrats I have no faith in any 'welfare reform' scheme. It is too much to expect lying, thieving politicians who have never had to collect a welfare check to understand anything other than the political posturing to be gained by promoting 'welfare reform.'

15. Should more federal dollars be spent to upgrade child care and to provide more child care opportunities for working parents, as President Clinton has proposed?

No. Why provide more federal dollars to upgrade welfare so that welfare moms can get an inadequate paycheck flipping burgers at McDonalds? Such foolish schemes, along with increasing desperation and underlying poverty, are more expensive as well.

16. For years, the Federal Aviation Administration has been attempting to upgrade the nation's air-traffic control system, yet breakdowns and outages have become a common feature of the news. Some suggest privatizing the system or creating a new government corporation to run it, financed by user fees. What are your thoughts on how to handle this problem?

Privatize the system and let it be supported by user fees, then.

17. Do you support the proposed constitutional amendment, sometimes called the human life amendment, that states that life begins at conception and the fetus has all the rights and protections of a fully developed human being? Do you support the premise of this amendment that anything that interferes with the fertilized egg, including certain contraceptives, constitutes the taking of a life?

Yes. Such is my understanding of the beginning and value of human life.

18. Do you support U.S. tax dollars for family planning, at home and abroad?

No. Such 'family planning' measures usually degenerate into abortion-mill funding.

19. How would you vote to deal with the growing deterioration of the national parks in the face of budget restraints? Do you favor selling national park land?

Yes. But only at full-market value at a public sale.

20. Please describe your general philosophy about trade agreements with other countries. Are there specific changes that you would like to see in current American trade policy?

So-called free-trade is usually nothing more than making sure that corrupt politicians get funding for implementing provisions for the well-connected overseas.

NAFTA and GATT had nothing to do with free or fair trade, but rather the paying off of overseas special interests who had bribed American politicians. I would vote to repeal both NAFTA and GATT.

21. How heavily involved should the federal government be in the oversight and subsidization of higher education?

Not involved at all. In an age of the Internet, almost anyone can afford a computer and an Internet account. The days of the big-brick learning factories are over. I will not support any more pouring of concrete in order to provide kickbacks for politicians from concrete subcontractors.

By the way, the incidence of violence in elementary and grade schools indicates that government control of education has been a failure as well.

22. Should the government charge more money for the use of federal land and resources by private interests?

Yes. However it would be better for there to be much less federal lands as such are not as productive as land in private hands. I do insist that the full market value via public sale be paid for the lease or sale of public lands.

23. Should landowners be compensated if federal laws restrict what they can do to their private property for environmental or other reasons?

Yes. Such laws are a 'taking' by the federal regime, and as such should be compensated.

24. Does the federal government need to be more or less involved in improving the environment?

Less involved. How does one improve on Nature?

25. What countries or parts of the world do you think deserve particular American attention over the next few years, and why?

Whichever countries we rush into in order to meddle will provide the disaster of the moment. Doubtless the situation will continue to decline in the Middle East; but given the hollow nature of our forces, our declining abilities and resources to overawe the rest of the world, the rise of cheap biological weaponry, and the criminal stupidity of our moralizing elites, a foreign-relations disaster can be found most anywhere.

26. Under what circumstances would you vote to commit American ground troops to serve in foreign countries?

Only if the vital interests of national survival are threatened. Since there has been no such threat in recent years, I would almost certainly never, ever vote to commit American ground troops anywhere outside the borders of United States territory.

27. What is the role of the federal government in improving race relations?

Allowing racial nationalists to form their own sovereign states where they can form their own republican forms of government. As White America becomes minority strangers in their own land, a dispossessed majority, no longer masters in their own house, the political and military pressures advancing racial warfare will increase. Far better to allow the de facto situation to become de jure in a peaceful manner. The Hispanics get back large portions of Texas to California, the Blacks are allowed to form their own states in the rural South from Georgia to Louisiana. These new states, if all so wish are allowed into a loose confederation with the remaining white states. Such is the concept of federalism truly enacted to alleviate substantial racial differences brewing up in a multi-ethnic decaying empire.

Anything else is but short-sighted race-baiting for political advantage.

Please sign the questionnaire and return it to the Editorial Board. An addressed, stamped envelope is enclosed. Thank you for your cooperation.

Martin Lindstedt
Libertarian Candidate, U.S. Senator



Back to Surveys, 1998?
Back to Surveys, 1996?
Back to Lindstedt 4 u.S. Senate?
Back to Patrick Henry On-Line?
Baxk to The 32d Missouri Senatorial District Home Page