Comments on: ‘No real upheaval’ in Baldwin campaign

By: G.E.

G.E. — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 15:27:37 +0000

Thank you for offering your side of the story, Mr. Black. We did not state the story as fact, only reporting what our source said.

By: jeremiahblack

jeremiahblack — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 13:26:57 +0000

Hello all. This is Jeremiah Black who is named in the above article. I would like to state, on the public record, that at no time, and in no way has Mr. Simms attempted to get me to quit the Balwin Campaign or lure me away to any competing causes or candidates. I have been a Constituion Party fan since Howard Phillips, and will continue to be one. If anything, it was Mr. Simms who recruited me to the Ron Paul campaign. And Tyler Simms and I did great work together for Ron Paul, and hopefully we will continue to work together for Baldwin to the fullest of our respective abilities. Although I am a grassroots media director, I personally like to stay out of a lot of the day to day “politics” of political campaigns, but if there is a fly in the ointment of the Balwin campaign, it certainly isn’t Mr. Simms. It was great working with him for Dr. Paul, it will be great working with him for Chuck Baldwin in whatever capacities we are able.

Baldwin and the Constitution Party 2008!

- Jeremiah Black, NY, NY

By: G.E.

G.E. — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 18:05:07 +0000

I don’t Jeremiah or you. I asked the people I knew within the campaign. You’re right — I should have asked you.

By: tsims

tsims — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 17:53:26 +0000

So you saw a controversy, asked questions, and wrote up this..hmm…

What did jeremiah say when you talked to him?

I know you never contacted me.

Trent knows how to do that by the way and i know he posts on here so would be very easy to do.

By: G.E.

G.E. — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 17:49:50 +0000

Oh wait… Now I see that you’re alleging that I planted the story at TPW. Wow. Absurd.

By: G.E.

G.E. — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 17:48:50 +0000

I make no leaps. I asked Chuck Baldwin campaign workers, they answered questions, I reported. That’s how it works.

By: tsims

tsims — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 17:47:30 +0000

No..everything in your article is hear say and objectionable. Likewise on the TPW one, that has historic references from ronpaulforums on anita involved from many months ago.

This definitely is marking you both off the list of credible online news sources if you cant research this and find this out.

You make huge leaps in your post, it is very scary, you never being a first person in the campaign, or directly involved in the real issues, you know nothing about. I would hope you would want to close this out and not get involved so that others can move on at this time.

This helps no one to stir up yellow postings, similar to yellow journalism.

By: G.E.

G.E. — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 17:40:08 +0000

This story was posted in response to the Third Party Watch story. The parts I assume you find objectionable (the long text quote) is directly from TPW.

By: tsims

tsims — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 17:35:57 +0000

Do you know someone over there and have started a story at both places?

By: tsims

tsims — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 17:31:43 +0000

jason,

Who is 3rd party watch?

get the picture?

Tyler

By: G.E.

G.E. — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 17:22:05 +0000

Mr. Sims – Trent did not write the story, I did. There’s nothing to retract. If you’d like to have your side of the story known, send me an email and I will print it.

By: tsims

tsims — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 15:32:36 +0000

hey trent i thought you agree to retract this and remove…why is this still here.

By: harveywards

harveywards — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 03:46:40 +0000

This proves that cool heads do prevail. I now know which news sourse to rely on for fair coverage. I just scratched two off my list.

I am toughening up for more political misinformation though.

God has guided me to this campaign, no man will change that.

By: inDglass

inDglass — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 01:29:35 +0000

TPW is listed on the Bob Barr site under "Bloggers for Barr."

By: Trent Hill

Trent Hill — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 01:11:15 +0000

GE,we were linked to by the Nashville Post–pretty cool.

By: G.E.

G.E. — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 00:44:49 +0000

One reason is that until Stephen Gordon reassumed the reins at TPW, mention of IPR was banned. They posted an article under Austin Cassidy’s name and he couldn’t even post a comment saying it wasn’t him!

Luckily, Gordon’s back in charge and things are a little more on the up and up there now. But the world’s big enough for both sites, especially when there are some not-quite-arms-length connections between TPW, its editors, its ownership, and the Barr campaign.

By: SovereignMN

SovereignMN — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 00:40:53 +0000

The TPW ‘article’ was a hit piece without a doubt. Why didn’t I hear of this site sooner? As always, I’m the last to know.

By: G.E.

G.E. — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 00:13:06 +0000

Yes, and lose others (namely me), but I’m expendable!

By: Trent Hill

Trent Hill — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 00:11:22 +0000

GE,

I dont totally agree. Baldwin should deviate substantially on Immigration, while toeing the line otherwise. The one thing conservatives depise McCain for more than anytihng in the Amnesty Bill. If Baldwin makes himself the Border-Hawk, he has a certain attraction to all of those people.

By: G.E.

G.E. — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 23:46:28 +0000

I disagree, bsharitt. Baldwin isn’t in this to win the presidency. If he could get even 1/2 of Ron Paul’s supporters, that would more than double the best CP effort ever. But in attracting Huckabeans and Thompsonites, he will, at best, make a run at 1/10 of the Paul supporters (i.e. traditional CP voters) and only a few “disgruntled conservatives.” Baldwin’s best chances for 500,000+ votes is to ride Ron Pauls coattails and deviate as little as possible.