George Phillies, who sought the Libertarian Party’s presidential nomination and will be on the ballot as a Libertarian in New Hampshire, says Wes Benedict, who recently applied for the LP’s vacant executive directorship, is “totally unfit for the position.”
Says Dr. Phillies:
While a member of the LNC, Mr. Benedict actively funded the Presidential campaign of a Republican. He and his fellow LNC members voted to use LNC resources, moneys arising from donations of party members to support our party’s candidates, to support the Presidential campaign of the same candidate.
He was hardly alone in this. For example, our Presidential candidate’s Leadership PAC spent the larger part of the current election cycle vigorously funding the campaigns of various Republic Senators, men whose stands were the opposite of Libertarian on a wide range of issues.
Mr Benedict, in my opinion, has proven his lack of loyalty to our party.
He is, in my opinion, totally unfit for this position.
The LP’s executive directorship has been vacant since Shane Cory resigned in May.
45 responses so far ↓
1 NewFederalist // Aug 14, 2008 at 4:57 pm
Oh, oh. I think the fan is about to receive a fecal visit!
2 G.E. // Aug 14, 2008 at 5:02 pm
I don’t know why some of that text is larger. It was not intended to be.
3 Trent Hill // Aug 14, 2008 at 5:26 pm
How dare the LP look past party-loyalties to lend aid to a candidate who truly represents freedom and would later send converts flooding into their party!!!
4 inDglass // Aug 14, 2008 at 5:28 pm
Wordpress adds stupid HTML tags that mess up formatting when you don’t want it to. If you edit the post and go to the HTML tab you might see something that says “font size” or “h3″ or something like that in it, and if you delete that code it should go back to normal.
5 George Donnelly // Aug 14, 2008 at 5:32 pm
It’s my impression that most Ron-Paul-ites are staying in the GOP in order to work towards its takeover. Have many come to the LP who weren’t already there? I don’t think so.
6 Trent Hill // Aug 14, 2008 at 5:34 pm
George,
Most Ron Paul-ites might remain registered GOP’ers. But few, if any, will be helping or voting for McCain. We have LOTS of them helping the Baldwin campaign. If Barr weren’t such a moron, he’d have ‘em too.
7 George Donnelly // Aug 14, 2008 at 5:37 pm
Trent you must not have gotten the memo. The Paulbots are going to writing RP in en-masse – even though their votes probably won’t be counted.
8 Fred Church Ortiz // Aug 14, 2008 at 5:44 pm
Have many come to the LP who weren’t already there? I don’t think so.
Well, I came back to the LP on the heels of the RP campaign after a long period of disinterest, so maybe I count.
Downhill ride of my life
9 Trent Hill // Aug 14, 2008 at 5:44 pm
George,
No–they arent. A team of us called the 800 Ron Paul donors in our Congressional district. 30-40 of them claimed this is what they were doing. After we explained the rules of write-in candidacies, only 2 of them insisted upon it. The Paulites are splitting mostly into two groups. Barr and Baldwin. Whats left is splitting between Nader, McCain, and Obama.
10 George Donnelly // Aug 14, 2008 at 5:49 pm
I hope you’re right Trent but just because it’s true of your district doesn’t mean it’s true of all of them.
It’s true, the LP and Barr really screwed up.
11 Tim in Ohio // Aug 14, 2008 at 6:09 pm
I’m a Paul supporter. I had always been registered as a Republican, but the way they treated Ron Paul was the last straw.
Now I’m working on trying to get some LP support in Southeastern Ohio. Frustration.
12 MattSwartz // Aug 14, 2008 at 6:49 pm
Ron Paul’s big educational push was for the abolition of the Fed and the return to honest money. Since Barr is silent on this while Baldwin campaigns on it, Barr is less apt to pull from the new Ron Paul demographic.
13 Joseph // Aug 14, 2008 at 7:09 pm
Given the caliber of help Mr. Phillies has utilized in his own state in the recent past, he is hardly one to comment on anybody’s fitness for any LP position.
14 Trent Hill // Aug 14, 2008 at 9:21 pm
ZING.
15 G.E. // Aug 14, 2008 at 9:22 pm
BTW: Wes Benedict also supports Bill Redpath.
NEXT!
16 Robert Milnes // Aug 14, 2008 at 10:17 pm
Once again I agree with Prof. Phillies. G.E. agreed.
17 Robert Milnes // Aug 14, 2008 at 10:22 pm
I also agree with Tom K. re: Gravel/NI4D. It would be a step in the right direction.
18 Robert Milnes // Aug 14, 2008 at 10:25 pm
I await Prof. Phillies’ suggestion for new exec. director.
19 George Phillies // Aug 14, 2008 at 10:54 pm
Joseph is perhaps referring to Gary Fincher, a distinguished long-term Libertarian petitioner who turned in 2000+ signatures in under two weeks, with a 90% validity rate, at an excellent price. In contrast, the LNC contracted for and paid for 15,000 signatures, a number that in my opinion was irrationally large, given that the state party had specified that it would be paying for a large number of signatures, and a total of 15 or 16,000 raw signatures was quite enough. Had I been asked, I would have suggested that they were overdoing things. The LNC also paid well over $2 a signature.
Or perhaps Joseph is insulting the good names of long-time Libertarian activists Paulie Cannolli and Carol McMahon, who were also collecting large numbers of signatures for us. They also did an excellent job.
20 wesbenedict // Aug 15, 2008 at 12:03 am
Does anyone have the amount George Phillies spent on his campaign for president at hand? He got 49 votes from delegates on the first round for 7.9% (according to Wikipedia). He might be the biggest spending loser for president ever in the history of the Libertarian Party based on an amount spent per delegate vote received in the first round at a convention. Oops. I just remembered Imperato. Never mind.
21 wesbenedict // Aug 15, 2008 at 12:21 am
Nevertheless, it would be an interesting statistic to know if George Phillies was the biggest spending loser ever to come in less than first, or less than second, or less than third, or whatever that may be.
I don’t mind G.E. ranting against me. He’s one of the few libertarians out there who still apparently understands and stands up for free trade and against “energy independence” (protectionism).
Gains from trade: losing G.E.’s support for ED but retaining his support for free trade.
22 Mike Theodore // Aug 15, 2008 at 12:44 am
Wait, he’s rambling about his support for Paul?
G.E., does his support of Redpath display how he’ll work in the office?
23 G.E. // Aug 15, 2008 at 1:13 am
It shows far too much tolerance for corruption.
24 Robert Milnes // Aug 15, 2008 at 1:44 am
Wes, far and away the least delegates/$ should go to Ron Paul.
25 Lance Brown // Aug 15, 2008 at 2:16 am
Wow, mega-zing by Mr. Milnes. Nice one.
I tend to agree with Phillies on the broader point that folks working for LP national (or in any LP leadership position, really) should not be supporting presidential candidates of the opposing party. Especially a candidate who was actively siphoning away support from our own party’s candidates. If you think that a Republican candidate for president is the answer to our country’s woes, then you probably should not be in the LP.
26 Fred Church Ortiz // Aug 15, 2008 at 2:18 am
K.
27 Lance Brown // Aug 15, 2008 at 2:21 am
wes,
Will calling out LP activists as losers on blogs be a big part of your agenda as ED? It’s an innovative approach…very edgy.
In case you need some ammo, I’m probably the biggest loser candidate if you go by length of campaign vs delegates earned. I don’t know if you have a chart that you’re filling in or something.
28 langa // Aug 15, 2008 at 3:22 am
“If you think that a Republican candidate for president is the answer to our country’s woes, then you probably should not be in the LP.”
Why not? The LP just nominated a Republican candidate for President, didn’t they?
29 Eric Sundwall // Aug 15, 2008 at 8:47 am
George and Wes are typically the smartest guys in the room, just ask them.
Wes is certainly qualified for the position and there my well be an issue of conflict of interest in this single regard. It should be noted that prior to the end of the last LNC term Mr. Benedict stated he had no interest in the position. Certainly people are entitled to changing their mind.
Will that potential conflict of interest be the deciding factor in the final decision for ED ? Doubtful, but who knows.
I figure Milnes is the best bet, he’ll represent the pathological element of membership the best. His singular focus on the Progressive Alliance will save the world.
30 George Phillies // Aug 15, 2008 at 9:44 am
If anyone actually asks me if I am the smartest guy in the room, I will answer that I have no idea.
Anyone competent to be our party’s Executive Director should have no trouble looking up on FEC filings how much each of the candidates actually spent by the end of May.
If you do so, you will find that Senator Gravel spent by far the most, and had already been in debates with the eventual Democratic nominee, Mr. Jingozian spent a great deal more than I did, Mr. Barr spent more than I did, and I probably finished fourth in spending. In spending per delegate vote, someone who cares should check Christine Smith, Barr drops backward in the pack, and Gravel and Jingozian remain ahead of me. I am skipping Mr. Imperato, whose FEC filings are challenging to interpret, and whose vote the Chair refused to count as a vote for him.
Facts can be your friends, but if you want to quote them you should probably find out what they are first.
Readers may recall that as the last convention approached there was a sudden shift of region borders, with all the states adjoining Texas suddenly discovering they wanted to be in a different region. There was then an appeal from the Texas state chair, more or less committing as to who would not be running for Regional Representative. It seemed an odd promise.
31 Robert Milnes // Aug 15, 2008 at 9:45 am
It’s ok, my multitude of supporters. No need to come directly to my defense. I’ve developed an immunity to reactionary attacks of radical elements as pathological. nami.org
32 Jason_Gatties // Aug 15, 2008 at 1:18 pm
Even though I respect the opinion of my friend GE, I disagree in this situation. What Wes has done for our Texas group is amazing. He would be a great pick for Executive Director and will make us all forget the “Shane Cory” era.
33 Sean Scallon // Aug 15, 2008 at 2:09 pm
The Boston Tea Party awaits Mr. Phillies and Mr. Miles.
34 Joseph // Aug 15, 2008 at 10:42 pm
Yes Mr. Phillies, I WAS referring to Gary Fincher. You know, the guy who created a public relations and legal nightmare in New Mexico by falsifying social security numbers on voter registration forms and lying to voters about changing their party registrations. Your using him in MA was a slap in the face of every Libertarian – and voter – in New Mexico.
No doubt Fincher and his friends will want another round of “did not” and “did too.” Save it. I’ve sent the documentation of what happened in NM to a number of blogs, including this one.
I trust Mr. Benedict, if selected, would keep this man on national’s “do not hire” list.
35 G.E. // Aug 15, 2008 at 11:08 pm
Who Phillies used is of no one’s business but people in Massachusetts.
36 Mike Theodore // Aug 16, 2008 at 12:56 am
G.E.,
You don’t like Wes because of his support of Redpath, which I’m unsure why he does, but it’s his opinion. Who exactly would you recommend for this job?
37 G.E. // Aug 16, 2008 at 2:02 am
I didn’t say I “didn’t like” Wes.
I said anyone who condones Bill Redpath’s actions as chair, before or after his re-election, is too tolerant of corruption to be trusted in the position Wes seeks.
Whom do I suggest?
It doesn’t matter. Because anyone who’s against the Redpath regime’s crimes will not be hired. A crony criminal will get the job, bilk the part for $100k a year or more, and then we’ll have a convention in Hawaii where only the neocon libertines will be able to attend, etc., ad infinitum.
38 Mike Theodore // Aug 16, 2008 at 2:18 am
What about someone for the “regime” who isn’t a crony criminal?
39 G.E. // Aug 16, 2008 at 2:21 am
That’s like trying to find a Nazi who isn’t an anti-Semite.
40 Mike Theodore // Aug 16, 2008 at 2:25 am
So you’d recommend someone to Redpath that despises Redpath?
41 G.E. // Aug 16, 2008 at 2:30 am
I’d recommend that whoever gets this job is going to be a crook, or at the very least, tolerant of crooks, and that’s just the way it’s going to be. If we can engineer Regime Change in 2010, then we might be able to hire someone as competent as Wes — maybe even Wes himself. I have no reason to believe Wes is corrupt, just that he’s tolerant of corruption — he’ll “look the other way,” as he obviously has since he supported Redpath for re-election.
But if the DeFraud neocon Caucus is able to ensure a low turnout in ‘10, then we’re screwed ’til ‘12. The good news: The DeFraud spoils system is hemorrhaging cash and it certainly cannot continue to feed off its host for another four years. The plan to nominate a neocon elitist has backfired, and even sacrificing every possible libertarian principle in an effort to appeal to racist warmongers hasn’t brought in any bucks and will not translate into votes. If the DeFraudster’s had any shame — which they don’t — they’d all crawl under a government-owned rock and stay away from the LP forever. But they’ll keep at it until the well runs dry.
42 Joseph // Aug 16, 2008 at 6:39 am
G.E., you are right. Mass can use anybody they want. In fact if the national LP wants to use him, THAT’S really none of my business either since I’m no longer a member of the national LP.
I just made the point that if Phillies was willing to hire someone with Fincher’s background, then his comments on hiring others is less credible. That’s my opinion and I respect your right to disagree with it.
Hey, I’m just putting the info out there. What ANYBODY does with it is THEIR business.
43 G.E. // Aug 16, 2008 at 1:36 pm
Fair enough, Joseph.
By the way: What do you expect us to do with the 60+ files you sent us?
44 Joseph // Aug 17, 2008 at 2:49 am
“What do you expect us to do with the 60+ files you sent us?”
Have an INFORMED opinion instead of just an opinion. (Or publish them if you get bored and want to start a shit storm).
45 darolew // Aug 17, 2008 at 1:20 pm
I feel tempted to ask why G.E. so vehemently believes that Redpath et al. are corrupt criminals, but I figure that’s a bad idea. I imagine, that in G.E.’s mind, Redpath’s “criminal empire” is so obvious that anyone who fails to see it is “tolerant of corruption” and/or an idiot.
Leave a Comment