Words cannot express the utter contempt I have for that miserable miscreant and his gaggle of cronies.

http://www.pinkpistols.org/answers2001/redpath.html

Highlights:

“I favor repealing most gun control laws, although I would propose retention and even creation of a few that, according to research by Florida State University criminologist Gary Kleck, who has written at least two pro-gun books, have likely reduced crime.”

How can such a person be regarded by anyone as a libertarian?

GE, is there a thread somewhere you would be so kind as to point me at which establishes Redpath’s gun grabber credentials? I would be indebted if you would send me the link. Thanks.

Figured you would. Pity.

I’ve been on both sides, and if you’ve only been on the receiving end you’ve done pretty well. It’s not pleasant to remember having heard such things directed at you, but it’s downright awful to remember having been stupid enough to have said them.

No offense intended, G.E. Just trying to save you from some future cringing. I tried to think of a kinder and more productive word than ‘stupid’, but one just isn’t coming to mind just now.

You write:

“I agree with Carl. I fervently disagree with Tom Knapp.”

Maybe not as much as you think.

I support the idea of suing versus substitution in New Hampshire.

I wish that the LPNH would sign on to such a suit.

If the Barr campaign makes it onto the ballot in New Hampshire, I hope that George Phillies will withdraw so that there’s only one LP presidential candidate on the ballot there.

HOWEVER:

The LNC is is not a “parent organization” and the affiliates are not its “children.” Precisely the opposite: The LNC is an “umbrella organization” created by and composed of the state parties, which can choose to stand under it, not stand under it, or fold it.

I’d rather the LNC got its shit together than that it lost affiliates … but at some point it has to be one or the other. If it’s going to be the latter, better now than later. The LP is still a miniscule factor on the presidential level; better for any reorganization to take place while that’s still true than for the wheels to come off after it becomes more influential (if it even can become more influential with a dysfunctional LNC coordinating it).

In the instant Canossa, Bill Redpath should very much be playing Henry IV to the LPNH’s Gregory VII — if the goal is to get the LPNH and the LNC on the same side. If that’s not the goal, then it’s time for the LNC to be replaced by some alternative umbrella. The obvious existing choice for such an alternative is the LSLA.

I don’t understand what Phillies is doing to cause the “balkanization” of the LP. It’s the state of MA that won’t allow substitution. As for NH, isn’t it the case that _LP-NH_ paid for the ballot access and decided to put Phillies on the ballot?

And if they hadn’t started their petitioning so early, they might not have gotten on the ballot at all, like in 2004. So I fail to see the harm.

I don’t like the LP having different presidential candidates in different states but calling the situation in NH balkanization is a kind of hyperbole GE is usually known for.

I’m surprised you think the LNC should be able to dictate certain things to the state LPs at the same time that you agree that the national leadership is way down the wrong track. That seems slightly contradictory.

Acting without due authority = criminal.

G.E. while I understand the fact that you don’t trust these folks and loathe the direction the Party is being driven, this sort of language doesn’t really help anyone.

I don’t particularly care for the direction the LP is headed, either, and I’ve been a member for twenty-eight years. I also don’t particlarly care for Bill Redpath’s management nor for many of the decisions the LNC has made since about 2001. But there is a big difference between these folks being wrong about things vs. being evil or criminal.

The fact that the LP’s membership has tanked for the past eight years, the fact that the number of candidates being off by two-thirds, the fact that revenue is off by half or more, and so on — these are all things that should make people think twice about the decisions they make, and to start making better ones. But I don’t believe these folks are evil for refusing to correct their mistakes; I just believe they’re wrong.

G.E. then said:

Go back to murdering babies, Carl.

That doesn’t help, either.

Milsted lives his life as peaceful as the next person. Yes, he advocates “some force”, and yes, when we speak of government that “some force” eventually ends up involving innocent deaths, and yes I agree that innocent deaths are unacceptable. Carl simply thinks sometimes that “some force” must be used to prevent “more force”. I think he’s wrong, but G.E., vilifying one’s opponents with language like that doesn’t really add any enlightenment to the debate.

I would appreciate it if you and everyone else could hold the vitriol in abeyance. I’ve been on the receiving end of vitriol like that from the other side, and in other situations, and it ain’t fun.

Doing the will of the LP Convention == criminal.

Yeah, roight.

The implicit contract of a party or Caucus: a subgroup of the overall voting population that agrees to back whomever that party/caucus chooses.

I agree with Carl. I fervently disagree with Tom Knapp.

I said this on another forum in 2007: “If Libertarians don’t start acknowleding that the parent organization has the right to dictate some basic terms to its affiliates, we are going to continue to have asinine debacles like Arizona 2000 in future races. Anyone who defends the balkanization of the LP in 2000 will also excuse balkanization in the future. That indicates the LP has a serious, serious problem.”

And here we are… Phillies, an open supporter of the 2000 balkanization, committing it himself in 2008.

It appears that “principled” Libertarians cannot abide by contract. Unsurprising. Heinlein wrote the same about reform politicians. This is why the corrupt rule. They keep their word.

Sigh. There he goes again, straight into la-la land with a gratuitous, uninformed, stupid, and just plain asinine insult.

As I understand it, attorney client privilege prevents the attorney from talking. The client (the LNC, in this case) is free to talk all it wants.

There may be other good reasons why you, the treasurer, won’t divulge info regarding Bill Hall’s talk. But it wouldn’t be attorney client privilege.

49 Aaron Starr

This might be interesting if it were accurate.

However, the LNC has been informed on more than one occasion concerning the potential opportunity for a lawsuit in New Hampshire to establish for our party the permanent right for candidate substitution, so that we will not have this problem again in the future.

No lawsuit has been filed yet.

On May 22nd, during the LNC pre-convention meeting in Denver, staff presented in its report the possibility of our needing to sue in New Hampshire.

The report is included in the minutes. Members of the LNC board members who are purported to not know anything about this received copies of these minutes and voted for their approval.

In addition, in a cursory search of e-mails to the entire LNC, I was able to find a ballot access update dated June 29th that further discussed the legal situation in New Hampshire. There are probably other updates, should I care to look for them.

In the case of Bill Hall, our legal counsel, the LNC has been updated by him as recently as today as to the status of this potential litigation. Of course, attorney-client privilege issues prevent me from sharing the contents of this communique with anyone else.

Aaron Starr
Treasurer
Libertarian National Committee

‘Twas I.

That Redpath might be acting inappropriately or poorly is obvious. However, I have not (yet) seen any evidence of anything I’d consider “criminal”.

Mighty uppity today. Did you take your meds,pumpkin?

You’re free to start your own blog and report on “important” stuff, sunshine.