Joe Miller’s praise of libertarians has politicos speculating

U.S. Senate candidate Joe Miller sent out a press release on Thursday, applauding the libertarians for “schooling Begich on liberty.” Miller was referring to Alaska Libertarian Party Chair Mike Chambers scolding Begich for telling CBS News that Alaskans are “very libertarian.” Chambers lays out what most libertarians believe, and according to Chambers, it’s not what Begich believes. Read the release in full below.

Miller has continually said that he’s running as a Republican and plans to stay a Republican. However, the release and his embrace of the Libertarian Party has caused further speculation that he’s setting the stage to join that party’s ticket, perhaps after the primary, were he to fail to get his party’s nomination.

In an interview, Chambers denied that he’s involved in some sort of scheme to get Miller on the ticket. In fact, he said that someone from the party is planning to file to run for the seat. He declined to say who, however. But he also said that if Miller loses the primary, the Republican Party will get what it deserves “for not taking responsibility” for whom it elects, he said.

Libertarian Mark Fish, who worked on Miller’s campaign in 2010, and is still close to it, said that he wouldn’t discourage a switch. “If Joe wants to come over to the Libertarian Party, I welcome him,” he said.

What’s clear is that if Miller joins another ticket after the primary, it will make it all that much harder for Republicans to beat Begich in the Fall.

Here’s Miller’s release in full:

Republican US Senate Candidate Joe Miller today responded to a recent statement from Alaska Libertarian Party Chair Michael Chambers regarding Senator Mark Begich’s recent mischaracterization of the libertarian movement in an interview with CBS News.

“I appreciate the fact that the Alaska Libertarian Party is speaking out on the important issues facing our state and nation,” Miller said. “What we don’t need more of is Mark Begich’s progressive ideology masquerading under the banner of liberty. True libertarianism is grounded in Constitutional liberty, and I am proud to share those values with the Alaska Libertarian Party.”

Begich attempted to align himself with libertarianism by suggesting that as Alaskans “we’re very libertarian . . . and we don’t think that government should be interfering in our personal and private lives.”

Alaska Libertarian Party Chair Michael Chambers responded with the following:

“Senator Begich, allow me to define the vast majority of libertarians for your educational benefit, as you seem to be confused:

1. I know of no Alaskan libertarian who would remotely support the government takeover of our healthcare industry.

2. I know of no Alaskan libertarian who would vote to confirm:
•    Eric Holder – anti-gun
•    Elena Kagan – anti-gun
•    Sonia Sotomayor – anti-gun

3. I know of no Alaskan libertarian who supports:
•    Common Core
•    Federal Department of Education
•    suppression of parental rights in education

4. I know of no Alaskan libertarian who would vote to support and advocate:
•    The IRS in any malignant manifestation
•    NDAA and the suspension of habeas corpus
•    NSA invasion of our personal effects
•    The Patriot Act

5. No Alaskan libertarian I know would advocate globalist policies like:
•    The United Nations Law of the Sea Treaty
•    TPP – Trans Pacific Partnerships
•    UN Treaties having any jurisdiction or precedence over the US Constitution.

Certainly, there are a few libertarians who may support the socialist policies you advocate, but to infer that you are ‘libertarian’ in any of your political representations is to vacate any measure of truth.”

Miller concluded, “These are momentous times, and it is imperative that we transcend partisan frames of reference. The only way we can push back federal tyranny is for all Alaskans of good will to unite under the banner of Constitutional Liberty.”

Joe Miller is a husband, father, combat veteran, and advocate of Constitutional liberty who believes in individual rights, private property, free markets and the sanctity of human life.

Contact Amanda Coyne at 


7 thoughts on “Joe Miller’s praise of libertarians has politicos speculating

  1. It Ain't Miller Time

    Joe Miller has moments of brilliance. Then, there are the other times. I thought at the begginning of the race that he had learned from his past and was going to be someone that could broaden his appeal. The reality is that he has less suppport than last time. There is no liberal Republican incumbent. He can’t win the Republican primary this time and he will not run as a third party to give Begich the seat. He has too much class and his values wouldn’t allow him to do such. Electing Begich is against every value the guy has. Good but faulty speculation.

  2. Justin

    What a great, typical week of Alaska politics. First the re-2mergence of the “quitter” Sarah Palin trying to give us advice on leadership and then this story alluding that Joe Miller may well likely run on a third party ticket which in essence will give Mark Begich a victory. This is happy news for Begich because he knows he can’t win in a head-to-head race. He’s never broken 50% to win an election. Miller under the banner of “Mr. Conservative” lives off of campaign funds, is known to scam the federal and state system almost like a seasoned welfate cheat is likely to keep Obama’s Obamacare boy elected. If any Republican were to even consider giving Miller their vote, I believe you might as well register as a Democrat because that is the party you would be helping. Alaska’s RINOs are back and alive, Palin and Miller, dooing everything they can to help the liberal agenda. Both are disgusting people.

  3. Lynn Willis

    Joe Miller might run as a libertarian if he loses the primary – but so what? Our entire state population is about the same as that of Memphis Tennessee so our three federal elected officials are not going to have much impact. Our real problems at this time are much more local and direct
    Alaska is heading into a new fiscal reality that will change the political paradigm in Alaska forever. Only the most self delusional don’t seem to grasp that reality. Some folks apparently define a non-renewable resource as a resource you simply need to find some more of; not a finite resource that will eventually not be available. These folks act as if all we need is more production of non-renewable resources coupled with,a surge in resource prices (and maybe another cash producing event like a super tanker grounding) to maintain the status quo.
    Roger Cremo was correct when he proposed not spending our non-renewable revenues directly but to allow the permanent fund to become large enough to generate necessary revenues. Now we are paying the price for not creating a permanent fund that might have generated the necessary revenues to fund state government. Now we must cut spending or pay taxes or both.
    We are in deficit spending now while our projected state revenues are not that promising. We must deal with the current situation using solutions not witch hunts and displacement or responsibility. I suggest the current Governor, in no small part, has created this current fiscal situation by not controlling spending which he has the State Constitutional power to do using the line item veto over appropriations (Article 2 Section 15)..
    Lastly, facing the unknown and having to adapt to change creates fear and that fear creates opportunity for those who make a living promising to remove that fear with simplistic slogans while blaming boogey men – and so re-enters Sarah Palin into Alaska politics. Ignore her.

  4. 357

    Miller will insure Begich’s election as a way of paying back those who denied him his chance to serve in the United States Senate. He has become more relevant than Begich or Sullivan.

  5. Stephen Haycox

    Don’t you imagine that Joe Miller will be on the November ballot, one way or another. I wager he can’t walk away (have so wagered for some time). But doesn’t Sarah Palin’s swipe at Parnell, her endorsement of the SB21 repeal, and particularly, her almost-endorsement of Bill Walker change the chemistry somewhat? It was her endorsement of Miller than put him in the race in 2010. And doesn’t her endorsement of the repeal, together with Dermot’s very strong column today, put SB21 back on the table, Mike Chenault’s (intentional, I am persuaded) clearing of the August ballot to the contrary notwithstanding?


Comments are closed.