According to recently published FEC reports, former Executive Director of the Libertarian Party, Shane Cory, was paid $17,870.97 by the Libertarian Party between May 14 and June 11 of this year.
Mr. Cory resigned in May after issuing a press release calling for more government which many observers thought was intended to smear LP presidential front-runner Mary Ruwart and benefit eventual nominee Bob Barr. After stepping down from his position at the LP, Cory immediately went to work for Richard Viguerie’s Third Party Wach, which “just happened” to be the source of the original smears against Dr. Ruwart.
Interestingly, Bob Barr thanked Mr. Cory in his nomination acceptance speech.
For what?
Cory was not allowed to work on Barr’s campaign while Political Director — was he working for Barr as editor of Third Party Watch? Cory later left his position at TPW to work for Barr in an official capacity.
48 responses so far ↓
1 darolew // Jul 21, 2008 at 2:51 am
“Interestingly, Bob Barr thanked Mr. Cory in his nomination acceptance speech.
For what?”
I’m not really a Barr apologist or a Shane Cory defender…but isn’t wording like that a little over the top? The neutrality in the article leaves something to be desired. Stuff like this wouldn’t pass as good material for mainstream press, or even online media like Wikinews…
Yeah, “the article stated nothing but fact” etc. It’d still be silly to say it wasn’t biased.
It would have been better to write an opinionated piece on a personal blog and then link to it, with a NPOV summary and/or a excerpt.
2 Mike Theodore // Jul 21, 2008 at 3:12 am
I agree with darolew. G.E., whether or not I agree with your thoughts, this seems more of an angry rant than a news piece. This is a news site, not a blog. You can link to a blog written by you, or (as you’ve done before) put your thoughts in the comments section immediately after posting.
Choice is up to you, G.E.
Is this a news site, or an official rant blog?
3 G.E. // Jul 21, 2008 at 3:18 am
I’m posing a valid, journalistic question. Instead of criticizing me for asking it, you could both endeavor to answer it.
There’s no “anger” in this post. I share no personal opinions or thoughts in this article.
4 Mike Theodore // Jul 21, 2008 at 3:20 am
Ok G.E., just leaving you with that thought.
5 G.E. // Jul 21, 2008 at 3:26 am
Okay: I clearly am biased against Shane Cory and Sean Haugh and the other Redpathian cronies. I try to be objective in my news reporting. People can decide whether I succeed or fail in doing so. I make no secret of my biases and undoubtedly fall short of perfect objectivity.
But I think asking that question is legitimate.
Why did Barr thank Cory in his acceptance speech?
It would seem that he either:
a) Was illegally working for Barr as Political Director
or
b) Was working for Barr while moderating TPW — which just so happened to censor anti-Barr comments, ban anti-Barr bloggers, and de-credential Libertarians for the convention in the wake of the sale from Gordon to Viguerie and hiring of Cory — i.e. was Barr thanking him for all of that?
or
c) There’s some other explanation.
If so, what is it?
6 Mike Theodore // Jul 21, 2008 at 3:34 am
My mind goes with a and b.
Long shot here, maybe it was just meaningless praising. He put Redpath on a pedestal at every chance he could. Could have just been a pointless praise for his “work” as political director.
I really wouldn’t expect Bob-O to be all up-in-arms about inner LNC scandals.
7 G.E. // Jul 21, 2008 at 3:36 am
Very implausible explanation, but not entirely impossible.
I made a few minor edits to the article to correct for any excessive “bias.”
8 Mike Theodore // Jul 21, 2008 at 3:40 am
Do you know of anyone in the campaign that you could call or email?
9 G.E. // Jul 21, 2008 at 3:45 am
Bob Barr doesn’t respond to libertarian bloggers, Mike. Where have you been?
10 G.E. // Jul 21, 2008 at 3:46 am
The question has been asked of the Barr campaign by more important people than me — i.e. other presidential candidates — and there have been no answers.
11 Mike Theodore // Jul 21, 2008 at 3:46 am
Of course, I’m just asking if you know anyone personally in the campaign that might try and stick up for him?
12 cbennett // Jul 21, 2008 at 3:52 am
I see my membership dues continued to pay for those who no longer are “staff” at LPHQ or are the LP and Bob Barr’s campaign interlocking their funds outside of ballot access.
13 G.E. // Jul 21, 2008 at 3:56 am
darolew – By the way: I didn’t mean to dismiss your criticisms. They’re valid, and I appreciate you making them in a constructive manner.
14 Steven R Linnabary // Jul 21, 2008 at 5:56 am
darolew & Mike, if you want balance, read what they have to say on the subject at TPW!
In Shanes defense, $17,870.97 paid by the Libertarian Party to Shane Cory could be comparable to what the professional ED’s at the republican and democrat parties are paid immediately prior to their national conventions. Why should our ED’s be paid any less for their “professionalism”?
PEACE
Steve
15 paulie cannoli // Jul 21, 2008 at 7:44 am
Steve,
The pay in question was after Shane resigned. The explanation provided was that it was back vacation pay etc.
As for the explanation: it’s certainly possible that it was just thanking Shane for his work as ED in general, not work for the Barr campaign specifically. Or, perhaps he was thanking Shane in advance for his upcoming work on the Barr campaign?
Yes, it’s also possible that it was thanking him for something he did at TPW. Of course, turd potty watch is a privately owned website and he had every right to use it to help Barr if that is what he wanted to do.
And, yes, it’s possible that Shane did something he was not supposed to do as ED. The question is certainly a valid one, but the mere fact of Barr thanking him from the stage does not prove anything.
16 George Donnelly // Jul 21, 2008 at 9:01 am
> Stuff like this wouldn’t pass as good material for mainstream press, or even online media like Wikinews…
Why does it have to? The point of a weblog is to start and hold a conversation. IPR is consistently very very successful on this measure.
17 David Tomlin // Jul 21, 2008 at 9:20 am
‘TPW — which just so happened to censor anti-Barr comments, ban anti-Barr bloggers, and de-credential Libertarians for the convention . . .’
The de-credentialing I’ve heard about, but I’m blank on the rest. I’d like to know more, like who was banned and who was censored and when and why.
I can say that I’ve posted a fair number of anti-Barr comments at TPW, and I’ve never been censored.
18 George Phillies // Jul 21, 2008 at 10:02 am
Linnabary writes “In Shanes defense, $17,870.97 paid by the Libertarian Party to Shane Cory could be comparable to what the professional ED’s at the republican and democrat parties are paid immediately prior to their national conventions. Why should our ED’s be paid any less for their “professionalismâ€?”
Let me urge you to look up total LNC fundraising as opposed to total DNC or RNC fundraising. You might also compare the number of LNC, DNC, and RNC employees.
Mr. Cory’s de facto services to the Barr campaign via his decisions and acts as ED were, in my opinion, of far more value to Barr than his services as TPW editor.
19 Steve LaBianca // Jul 21, 2008 at 10:03 am
The last that I heard was that Cory was “earning” about $85,000/yr. Even if we assume that the pay of nearly $18k was for unused vacation, sick and personal time off pay, that would be about 11 weeks of pay!
When Angela Keaton questioned this back in June, Redpath responded that pay for Cory AFTER his resignation was simply unpaid payroll/salary liabilities.
Sorry, there is definitely more explanation needed here. Was Cory given “severance”? If so, then Redpath has given a less than full disclosure on what was post “employment” pay. If it isn’t severance, then how is it that he had 11 weeks of vacation/sick time unused (assuming that he had taken NO time off this year)? This is unheard of, even for the socialist European countries!
Whatever the case, even the best contracts for union workers would turn those union workers green with envy over Cory’s fringes!
20 George Phillies // Jul 21, 2008 at 10:34 am
There is an LNC policy voted by the National Committee after the 2002 disaster restricting how much vacation time may be accumulated. My recollection is that the time in question is one year’s accumulation, but that would be in the LNC minutes from some years back that the LNC staff continues to hide from the LP’s membership.
21 JimDavidson // Jul 21, 2008 at 11:34 am
The wonder is that Angela Keaton, a member in good standing of the Libertarian Party’s national committee, re-elected in Denver, asked about these very same issues in early June. She was told by Bill Redpath to shut up. I think there were some very severe exchanges of words, and it seems terribly wrong, to me.
The LP members who pay their dues, as Chris Bennett points out above, and as George Phillies extends upon quite brilliantly, are being very badly used by the slush fund scum at the LP staff. The officers seem to be in cahoots with the staffers to spend member dues wantonly. Which makes me, the sort of guy who got pissed off about this thing ten years ago, not want to join the LP again. I used to be a member, and I stopped being a member because of exactly this kind of garbage.
There is a lot of talk about how the Boston Tea Party members are quitters or cowards or traitors, but the fact is, we’re the only ones with any guts, decency, or determination. We’re determined to be free in spite of the scum who take our money and don’t give us a libertarian party. So we’ve hatched a new plan to have a libertarian party without membership dues.
22 G.E. // Jul 21, 2008 at 12:33 pm
paulie said: “Of course, turd potty watch is a privately owned website and he had every right to use it to help Barr if that is what he wanted to do.”
In a free society, yes. But this would certainly run afoul of campaign-finance laws. And even in a free society, people should be up front about things of this nature.
Shane Cory took the stage with Barr. In what capacity? Would Cory, as former ED, have taken the stage if Mary Ruwart had prevailed? Would any other candidate have likely thanked him?
23 Citizen Nothing // Jul 21, 2008 at 2:27 pm
I find it amusing that such a trivial sum could cause such a commotion. Or at least I would, except for how idiotic it must appear to the rest of the world.
(Of course, $17K and change probably represents the entire budget of the Boston Tea Party for the next 13 years.)
“…a libertarian party without membership dues.”
You let us all know how that works out for you, OK?
Do I wish someone other than Barr won the nomination. Hell, yes. (I was hoping for Doug Stanhope, myself.)
But even assuming that Cory gave an early assist to Barr, which, based on the flimsy evidence at hand is a big assumption, it certainly doesn’t seem to be a hanging offense.
God, I hate the splitters – just politically, mind you. I’m sure that personally you’re all quite pleasant and nearly sane.
24 Jerry S. // Jul 21, 2008 at 3:03 pm
You who call $17K given at one time to that joker trivial are out of touch with the real world. A $85k salary for anyone in a Party that polls less than one half of one percent in the previous six POTUS races is INSANITY. Just because some of you are making big bucks doesn’t mean INEPT party office holders need it, they sure AS HELL DON’t deserve it. SPEND the money on outreach, NOT bums!
You people who allowed these salaries have let this get out of hand. They won’t get another penny of my money to fund the jackass FAILURES! In a free market libertarian society you reward PRODUCTIVITY not what these DUDS are producing! WHICH is FAILURE.
25 Citizen Nothing // Jul 21, 2008 at 3:12 pm
Maybe you should apply, Jerry S. You sound as if you’d be great at outreach. Or at LEAST at random CAPITALIZATION!
26 G.E. // Jul 21, 2008 at 3:17 pm
Calling $18k for one month a “trivial sum” is typical of the elitist libertines masquerading as Libertarians who run the LP.
A lot of people do actual, real productive work, and make little more than $18k in a year.
27 Citizen Nothing // Jul 21, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Fool! You have unmasked the Elitist Libertine!
Now you shall pay the price!!! And that price is—(wait for it…) $18,000!!!!
Bwahahahah!
28 G.E. // Jul 21, 2008 at 4:00 pm
Yeah, you’re right libertine. What’s $18k? The Beltway parasites who control the LP spend more on their weekly Brie budgets, no doubt.
29 Citizen Nothing // Jul 21, 2008 at 4:09 pm
Funny you should mention that, G.E.
I’m looking for someone to organize my brie and block my top hats. Some of those productive $18k-a-year guys should send me a resume.
30 G.E. // Jul 21, 2008 at 4:43 pm
Better yet, CN, how about you buy IPR from us for $60k and turn it into another Barr propaganda mill. One is never enough.
31 Citizen Nothing // Jul 21, 2008 at 4:50 pm
But what about my brie?
32 G.E. // Jul 21, 2008 at 4:55 pm
That depends. Is it the legit kind with rine or is it creme de brie?
33 Steven R Linnabary // Jul 21, 2008 at 5:11 pm
WOW!!
I’m going to have to watch what I say in the morning before I leave for work!!
FWIW, I was being facetious. It is idiotic that we pay somebody in that payrange, without the results at the ballot box to show for it.
PEACE
Steve
34 SteveDasbach // Jul 21, 2008 at 6:49 pm
Shane resigned as ED prior to the convention. He was a convention delegate and worked the floor for Barr as a volunteer.
It has been the case for at least two decades that any monies owed departing LPHQ staff are paid over time, usually at the employee’s regular salary rate, rather than in a lump sum (which I believe the employee could legally insist on).
It has also been the case that when cash flow is tight, director-level staff often agree to defer payment of their bonus until the f0llowing year.
Finally, 3-6 months severance for a departing ED is usual and customary for non-profit organizations with the LP’s budget and staff size. The LP severance pay is far below industry standards, which is one of the factors that makes it hard to recruit the best available candidates.
35 G.E. // Jul 21, 2008 at 7:13 pm
It’s normal practice to get severance pay when you voluntarily resign?
36 inDglass // Jul 21, 2008 at 7:26 pm
As a Ron Paul supporter, I never fully jumped into the Republican Party because I didn’t want to give my money to such a corrupt organization. I thought I would rather work through a third party like the LP where my money would support principled people focused on issues and not power. Was I ever wrong?
If the LP becomes Republican-lite, it will fail. If people are going to give their money to a big corrupt organization, they might as well give it to one that will actually win elections.
If the LP stuck to its principles, people would be willing to sacrifice the power of the GOP to at least be a part of something honest and unique. If it is the same damn thing but just less successful, why would anyone bother?
37 George Phillies // Jul 21, 2008 at 9:59 pm
Mr. Dasbach writes:
“Finally, 3-6 months severance for a departing ED is usual and customary”
Severance is something given to people when you send them on their way in favorable conditions. That has nothing to do with Mr. Cory. Either he quit a few weeks before the National Convention, in which case he left his organization in the lurch and one could argue deserved not a penny of severance, or perhaps as some have claimed he was tipped out the door due to his transparent attack on Mary Ruwart and allowed to resign, which raises similar questions.
The assertion that LNC members were routinely paid on a biweekly basis for a long time is at best misleading. In fact, when the last substantial group of staff departed, the staff took huge amounts of accumulated paid vacation time because neither the LNC nor the National Director had set policies to prevent them from accumulating vast vacation time reserves, and they were entitled to the time paid on that basis.
However, the FEC report shows that Cory was being paid while he was serving as a delegate. Did he actually resign? This could, of course, be an error in the FEC filing.
The assertion that the LNC routinely gives bonuses is subject to ready examination by comparison with FEC reports of past years. It appears that such a comparison is needful.
Perhaps LNC members on this list can explain the standards that were set for giving the alleged bonuses, the method that was used to validate if the implied metrics were satisfied, where the discussion of this issue is to be found in LNC minutes, and where the bonuses are hiding in the LNC budget.
Readers interested in more antics from the past should read my book Funding Liberty http://3mpub.com/phillies also available for free at cmlc.org.
38 George Donnelly // Jul 21, 2008 at 10:21 pm
Interested in reading the book but cmlc.org is unreachable.
39 Mike Theodore // Jul 21, 2008 at 10:22 pm
Same here.
40 George Phillies // Jul 22, 2008 at 12:55 am
The hosting service appears to be down for a range of my web sites. I have emailed them. 1and1.com has historically been good.
41 G.E. // Jul 22, 2008 at 1:18 am
Dr. Phillies – IPR is also hosted on 1and1, and I’ve had nothing but trouble with them.
42 donald raymond lake // Jul 22, 2008 at 5:02 am
GE, you are the Cory Quirk of the Libertarian movement
43 George Phillies // Jul 22, 2008 at 6:37 am
http://cmlc.org/headerfundingliberty.htm
up and running just before I typed.
Mind you, cmlc.org is a presentation page, not a blog.
44 G.E. // Jul 22, 2008 at 7:15 am
DRL – No, I don’t steal other people’s articles and repost them as my own.
45 donald raymond lake // Jul 22, 2008 at 4:14 pm
Not YET………..
46 G.E. // Jul 22, 2008 at 4:15 pm
What basis do you have to pre-accuse me of theft? How ridiculous.
47 svf // Jul 22, 2008 at 4:19 pm
G.E.: what basis did you have to pre-accuse Barr of accepting federal campaign matching funds?
just sayin’…
48 G.E. // Jul 22, 2008 at 4:21 pm
Touche
Leave a Comment