Posted on | September 8, 2010 | 41 Comments
In the comments of yesterday’s post about Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s continuing push for the Alaska Libertarian Party nomination, commenter “Carl” offered a theory that libertarian blogger Thomas Knapp finds sensible:
What she’s looking for is a lifeboat — a nice, lucrative job as a corporate lobbyist, VP of a “defense” contractor firm, something like that that keeps her well-paid and down south.
The bluff — aimed at the Republican establishment higher-ups who can summon that kind of lifeboat for her with a few words in the right ears — is “hook me up or I hand this seat to the Democrats.”
To quote Allahpundit, “Hmmmmm.” But I’m invoking Occam’s Razor here and sticking with the simplest explanation: Murkowski is just another D.C. power-junkie addicted to having a bunch of staffers who call her “Senator” as they jump to satisfy her every whim.
“She doesn’t want to give up power, even though she lost,” as Dan Riehl says. That’s your Single Bullet Theory, and any speculation beyond that takes you into Grassy Knoll territory.
For Murkowski to run as a Libertarian, [LP Senate candidate] Haase would have to step aside and the party would need to reverse its vote barring her from the ticket.
“It would be a serious flip-flop,” party chairman [Scott] Kohlhaas said. “And I don’t think it’s happening.” . . .
Haase said Murkowski does have Libertarian tendencies but that her support for the war on drugs is a problem.
Maybe Lisa could talk to 2008 LP presidential candidate Bob Barr about the drug issue. Bob used to be hardcore against drugs when he was a Republican, but has mellowed out as a Libertarian. Not quite Cheech and Chong, but no longer Sgt. Stadanko.
As I noted yesterday, Murkowski isn’t the only Republican talking to the LP. Bill Walker, who placed third in the GOP gubernatorial primary (challenging Gov. Sean Parnell), reached out to the Libertarians after being turned down by the Alaska Independence Party.
Still, time is running short. The current candidates would have to write a letter to the state Division of Elections withdrawing their names and the party would have to agree to substitute the new candidates as the official nominees. And the elections office must have the new nominations by Sept. 15.
So this storyline can only continue for another week and, as Epler explains, the prospect of Murkowski attempting a write-in candidacy is remote. The practical effect of the continuing shenanigans at this point is to give the media an excuse to ignore the guy who actually won the Republican nomination.