(I can play acronym games all day!

1. Hawkridge just presented the motion, but she did NOT write the letter. I know who did, as do many others, but until those persons indicate to me it is OK to say so, they will remain anonymous as far as I am concerned.

2. Pshdsa is right on, with the caveat that IMTCO a wasted vote is also a vote cast for a mjaor-party candidate in 99.6% or so of the time (there are always a select few exempt from that).

3. The resolution hogath refers to is out there but AFAIK it hasn’t been moved or seconded. As with the censure motion, I know who wrote that one as well, and the same terms apply.

Not trying to be smug or uppity, here, please understand that. Just stating facts and a little opinion, while exercising source discretion.

Good luck with the future of the LP.

This is because in a debate Ron Paul suggested we were (USA) responsible for the September 11 attacks. Dr. Paul , a government conspiracy (FBI, CIA, Secret Service, . . .) perhaps?

“The Libertarian National Committee is saddened that relations between you and the Libertarian Party may have been injured over recent events concerning your recent press conference on September 10, 2008 and our Presidential Candidate, Bob Barr’s decision not to attend. We wish to assure you that we appreciate all that you have done for the movement for Liberty, your recent campaign for President, and indeed, your 1988 campaign when you carried the banner high for the Libertarian Party. Many of our members have and continue to be among your most fervent supporters. We are sincerely indebted to you for all you have done.

It was never the intent of the Libertarian Party, the Barr for President campaign, nor Bob Barr to insult you or your supporters in any way.

We do have different interests at heart, however, as individuals and groups often do. In this case it was not in the interest of the Libertarian Party, nor the Barr for President campaign, nor, in our view, in the interest of the future of the freedom movement for us to stand together in a group whose whole purpose of coming together was to drain support away from our Party and our Presidential campaign in 2008 and pass it to the other three non-libertarian candidates present. Under such circumstances, in our view, it was inadvisable for our candidate to attend.

(now, finish with the Starr letter above … delete “recently” in the first sentence.)

At that point his fundraising dropped off seriously. At that point the support of his activists began to drop as well. And, at that point, no matter what his statements had been before, Ron Paul’s ability to run a major campaign by switching to the LP or run independent ended.

This was the legacy of Ron Paul’s association with his devious buddy at the Mises Institute. Their plan had been to suck in the dixiecrats, racists and other rightwing loonies as donors, so the rhetoric was twisted to lure them in.

Even Ron Paul’s campaign in 2007 seems to have begun as an attempt to fatten his mailing list and bring in more money for the Paul money machine.

As far back as the early 1980s, before his LP presidential campaign, Ron Paul demanded $100,000 per year payment and a ownership of a list of all donors to a group he signed fundraising letters for.

Yes, Ron Paul stands for a mix of constitutional, conservative and often even libertarian principles and he is usually consistant. But, his primary motivation has always been building the Ron Paul bank account.

Has anyone ever received a donation FROM Ron Paul for a Libertarian campaign of any kind?

but I certainly don’t claim to know all the details and my knowledge of pre-1996 LNC activity is fairly sketchy.

innocent question… has the LNC ever censured — or even formally considered censuring — its presidential candidates in the past? just wondering what, if any, precedents have been set for this proposed action.

it seems the “outrage” bar(r) would need to be set rather high to justify such a thing, but who knows…

I suspect this is a mischaracterization. It’s much more likely that the LNC is dithering about doing anything vs doing nothing than that it is ‘deadlocked’ between two different motions.

The dithering is probably good at this point. This whole apologizing to Paul/bitching at Paul thing is weak. The LNC should *first* pass a resolution agreeing to the 4 points of C4L, *then* take time to consider whether to censure Barr and/or Root for being such lousy candidates and pulling such stupid stunts.

Johnson. Forget Barry Jr. He’d be a disaster. You’d be pining for the good ol’ days of the Barr ‘08 campaign.

It just doesn’t seem like Gary’s gonna jump back in the political fray, though… we can at least hope…