I am beginning to think that certain so called “Libertarian” women who boast the label of “Libertarian” Girl, Chick, etc are really plants by the Republican-Democrat duopoly to undermine the credibility of the Libertarian Party.  They are more caricatures than real women, who use their sexuality to gain followers rather than their pseudo-intellect. Their pictures purport them to be call girls not serious journalists or politicos. Their inane opinions and shallow interpretations of government are more of an embarrassment than an asset to the name “Libertarian”.

Furthermore-their “libertarianism” never truly supports or promotes the Libertarian Party and its candidates.  They promote the so-called “libertarian” candidates, and officer holders who function as members of the Republican Party. To this accusation, they respond that “Libertarian” is a philosophy.  My question is, if that philosophy is so fundamental to who they are, why are they not supporting the party that most fully embraces that philosophy and bears the label as well?

The latest blow to the true Libertarian Party is the hiring of one of these female Libertarian icons by a certain potential Republican presidential candidate as his new media relations guru.   I am not certain whose credibility is taking a bigger hit the candidate or the Libertarian Party.  If this is an attempt to gain the millennial vote, surely there is a better representative of that generation that could actually be taken seriously. The libertarian views of this female are certainly not in line with the Libertarian Party.

My recommendation to these women is change your label to the one that really fits Neo-Con Republican and leave “Libertarian” to those that really know what it means.

Ben Swann