116 responses so far ↓

• 1 Thomas L. Knapp // Oct 6, 2008 at 1:50 pm

  Libertarian Party growth from 1994-2000 was largely driven by an aggressive direct mail effort, usually referred to as “Project Archimedes.”

  That program produced sustained growth in one-year, $25 dues-paying memberships, with a “churn” or non-renewal rate of about 20%, i.e. after five years, almost all of the members who had signed up in a particular year had ceased renewing.

  When “Project Archimedes” was abandoned, the LP’s membership naturally began to decline back toward its 1994 level, since new direct mail checkwriters weren’t being recruited to replace/augment the ones who were deciding not to renew after 1, 2, 3 or 4 years.

  Nothing against direct mail recruitment, as long as it pays for itself, of course, but I don’t think either the growth or the falloff tells us much about the popularity of the party. It just tells us that during a certain period, it was actively asking likely supporters to send money (and attaching the name “membership dues” to the money they sent), and during another certain period, it wasn’t.

• 2 darolew // Oct 6, 2008 at 1:56 pm

  IMHO, 414 members is pretty slim when you consider that membership is free, online, and requires virtually no personal information.

• 3 JimDavidson // Oct 6, 2008 at 2:47 pm

  It sure is, darolew, and it is only 414 members more than are in the darolew fan club. Not many people have joined so far. But, far more have joined as of today than had as of 1 May 2008. I’m very pleased with the members who have chosen to be a part of our growing and stimulating party. Blogged about it, again, at
  http://pauliecannoli.wordpress.com/

  But, you know, we have only just started to get the word out. Obviously, you’ve heard about our party, sneered deeply that we have only 414 members, and won’t join, right? But you are welcome to join, anyway, if you agree with our platform. Being a member of the Boston Tea Party does not require that I like you, nor vice versa.

  Virtually no personal information is collected, and yet I cannot help but wonder if all of our members are going to be rounded up and loaded into boxcars for delivery to death camps. I watched Naomi Wolf’s over reaction to the bailout bill – she says that martial law was threatened to get Congress to pass it – and so I worry.

  Nothing prevents members from using encryption technology or logging into the site through a proxy or crypto hippie virtual privacy network, but very few do, and so I wonder. I’d say worry, but, why worry? Just wondering.

  The point I’m making, which you are ignoring, is that our membership is growing. Why don’t you stop criticising every Boston Tea Party post on this site, and go recruit some members to your party? Then maybe it would grow, too.

• 4 Coming Back to the LP // Oct 6, 2008 at 2:58 pm

  That national LP membership graph is bogus.

  I know from personal participation at the state and national level that the National LP membership was much higher than shown in the periods from 1980 – 1982, and from 1988 – 1994.

  Actually, these numbers, although they are wrong, are not surprising. During the era of Project Archimedes, the LP was in the hands of looters. The pay of the most notorious was based on membership growth. By restating, ie falsifying, the past history to show much lower membership numbers, the direct mail managers were able to skim off huge amounts of LP revenues. They were paid for increases in membership, so they reduced the previous years’ membership numbers in order to fatten their illgotten booty.

  I used to have records of the actual numbers at the time. But, as I recall, the LP paid membership in the early 80s after the Clark campaign exceeded 20,000. It was well into the 20,000s in the early 90s.

  Marc Montoni,

  You used to work in the LP national office in the early 90s. Don’t you have copies of any of the old State Chair reports showing the ACTUAL paid membership numbers?

• 5 Thomas L. Knapp // Oct 6, 2008 at 2:59 pm

  darolew,

  I’m not sure what you mean by “slim,” and comparisons are difficult.

  I suspect that even given its “installed base,” a 37-year head start on recruiting from the same ideological quadrant, and all that free media that Barr/Root supporters like to brag about, the LP is spending far more per new member at this point than the BTP (LP membership is also free, and also available online).

  If we end up the year with 500 members and 50 activists, I’ll consider it a successful first year of real political activity.

• 6 Coming Back to the LP // Oct 6, 2008 at 3:02 pm

  Jim Davidson:
  “I watched Naomi Wolf’s over reaction to the bailout bill – she says that martial law was threatened to get Congress to pass it – and so I worry.”

  Here it is on YouTube:

  You should worry. We should all worry.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaG9d_4zij8&eurl=http://www.boingboing.net/2008/10/06/us-congresspeople-to.html

• 7 Coming Back to the LP // Oct 6, 2008 at 3:07 pm

  JimDavidson:
  ” I watched Naomi Wolf’s over reaction to the bailout bill – she says that martial law was threatened to get Congress to pass it – and so I worry.”

  You should worry. We should all worry.
  Here it is on YouTube:

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaG9d_4zij8

• 8 TheOriginalAndy // Oct 6, 2008 at 4:29 pm

  “Actually, these numbers, although they are wrong, are not surprising. During the era of Project Archimedes, the LP was in the hands of looters.”

  And it’s not now?!?!?!?

• 9 Ross Levin // Oct 6, 2008 at 5:01 pm

  Those numbers don’t seem right for LP membership. It’s the third largest party in the US and only had 35,000 members at its “peak”? If that’s the case, the Modern Whig party might be the fourth largest party!

• 10 paulie cannoli // Oct 6, 2008 at 5:03 pm

  That’s members who plunked down $25 or more.

  The LP has about 200,000 registered Libertarian voters, and many more people who have voted Libertarian at one time or another, describe(d) themselves as Libertarian, etc.

• 11 JimDavidson // Oct 6, 2008 at 5:49 pm

  I remember seeing actual numbers in Texas from the Secretary of State’s office after John Hawley’s second run at the Supreme Court against only one opponent (I think it was a Republican) and got over 900,000 votes. And that is in just one state-wide race. He lost, of course, but it shows there were lots of people who would vote for a yellow dog rather than a Republican.

  The figures my associate John used to generate the graph are from the lpradicals file page on Yahoogroups. If there are other figures for LP membership, great.

  I should mention here, as I did on bostontea.us that David Nolan, one of the LP co-founders, has commented on LP membership dwindling. He wrote in his campaign literature distributed at the Denver LP convention when he was running for LNC that membership is down since 2000. Down by well over 50%.

  Now, what is paid membership in the LP worth? And, if, as the original Andy notes, the LP is in the hands of looters, maybe people aren’t paying their dues, even though they consider themselves to be members of the LP? I have not been a member of the LP since 1998, because I don’t think they deserve any of my money.

  I don’t know if the numbers “seem” right. I don’t really know what that means. They are the numbers we could find. If there are other numbers, by all means trot them out and let’s take a look.

  I do think some of the states have very active memberships which are not all members of the national party. There used to be newsletters like Gulf Coast Liberty which might be used to gauge the size of the party in those states.

  Sunshine is a powerful disinfectant. The Boston Tea Party has been committed to openness, so we publish our membership figures on our front page. I would love to see the LP do the same, so I could scrape the number every time it changed and have some data.

• 12 darolew // Oct 6, 2008 at 6:15 pm

  “It sure is, darolew, and it is only 414 members more than are in the darolew fan club.”

  414 more? Incorrect. I count myself as a member of my own fan club, thus 413 more. Recruiting has been a bit slow.

  “Obviously, you’ve heard about our party, sneered deeply that we have only 414 members, and won’t join, right?”

  I sneered deeply? I just made a remark…

  “But you are welcome to join, anyway, if you agree with our platform.”

  FWIW, I am a member. I joined a long time ago, last spring. “38 weeks 6 days” according to the profile. Before Barr was nominated or anything.

  “Why don’t you stop criticising every Boston Tea Party post on this site, and go recruit some members to your party?”

  Eh? Again, I make one comment and all of a sudden I’m a chronic critic of the BTP…

• 13 paulie cannoli // Oct 6, 2008 at 6:27 pm

  414 more? Incorrect. I count myself as a member of my own fan club, thus 413 more. Recruiting has been a bit slow.

  Are there any requirements for membership? I can apply to join on a provisional basis.

• 14 JimDavidson // Oct 6, 2008 at 6:52 pm

  Just FWIW, bostontea.us has been going wild on the ticker. 417 members last I looked. So, I was giving you credit for 4 fans. Your parents, your spouse, that cousin who likes to go drinking with ya, or the like.

  Yes, I found “414 members is pretty slim” to be a sneer. Text is tough that way. I couldn’t see your lip curl up.

  And, again, what the heck are you doing here wasting time on IPR when you could be recruiting members to your party?! Which is apparently the same as mine.

  By the way, with our slim numbers, we’ve a full national committee, we’ve approved 12 state affiliates, we have about 30 candidates on our voter guide endorsed or nominated, a total of four vice presidential candidates on our tickets, we’re on the ballot in three states, and we have write-in registration filings in another three states. Maybe we can move well without so much lard? I dunno.

• 15 JimDavidson // Oct 6, 2008 at 6:55 pm

  It’s 419 members, now. And, aren’t you glad we don’t take personal info? So I can’t call you up and tell you to go out recruiting. -grin-

• 16 Catholic Trotskyist // Oct 6, 2008 at 7:00 pm

  Congratulations to the Boston Tea Party for its strong rise in membership, and in fighting for true libertarianism. The Boston Tea Party is much more influential than other parties founded this year, such as the Modern Whig Party and my own Catholic Trotskyist Party of America, which has only one member so far, no website, no YouTube channel, no Wikipedia article, no ballot access, etc. but that will change soon.

  God bless the federal reserve. God bless the bailout. God bless the Commission on Presidential Debates, God bless Steve Fossett, God bless the pope, God bless Ted Kennedy, God bless Bill Ayers, and god bless Barack H. Obama. Amen.

• 17 JimDavidson // Oct 6, 2008 at 7:13 pm

  http://www.caseyresearch.com/kkcImages/1223068018-TheFedAdded502BinLast2Weeks.jpg

  Not sure about blessing the Fed. They seem to be in self-blessing mode.

• 18 Steven R Linnabary // Oct 6, 2008 at 8:03 pm

  Thomas L. Knapp // Oct 6, 2008 at 1:50 pm

  Libertarian Party growth from 1994-2000 was largely driven by an aggressive direct mail effort, usually referred to as “Project Archimedes.”

  This is true…as far as it goes. The LP national office also had Steve Dasbach who wrote frequent pithy and topical news releases that were aired all over the country. I’m sure there were several other factors contributing to the steady rise of the LP…until 9/11.

  After 9/11, the LP (and many other DC based educational, lobbying groups and 501c(3)’s ) had a huge falloff in activity. A part of this was due to “fair weather” Libertarians that suddenly became pro war. And a large part was due to the USPS suspending mail service to DC for several months.

  Since that time, the LP has barely survived, with many unskilled or divisive (or both) people working the LP office.

  I would hope that there has been a healthy increase in memberships to the LP since the above graph ends in November of ‘07 ( just as LP activity and memeberships typically pick up).

  PEACE
  Steve

• 19 George Phillies // Oct 6, 2008 at 9:03 pm

  Linnabary claims:

  ” I’m sure there were several other factors contributing to the steady rise of the LP…until 9/11. After 9/11, the LP (and many other DC based educational, lobbying groups and 501c(3)’s ) had a huge falloff in activity.”

  In point of fact, the country’s most prominent, vaguely “l”-leaning group, the ACLU, had income and membership go through the ceiling as a result of 9/11. However, LNC membership peaked in 1999, roughly about the time “Operation Archimedes” was adopted. You can read my book “Funding Liberty” for more details.

  Joe Dehn published extensive state by state membership data as a long time activist and officer, and it looks quite close to the lpradicals list.

• 20 G.E. // Oct 6, 2008 at 9:04 pm

  ACLU = even “vaguely” libertarian-”leaning” = BIG HA!

• 21 Gene Trosper // Oct 6, 2008 at 9:39 pm

  Laugh if you like, G.E., but back in 1991, the ACLU saved my ass from being arrested and fined for having the audacity to organize a hemp rally in Lake Elsinore, CA.

  I was willing to get arrested if need be, but having the ACLU intervene was definitely the better option.

• 22 paulie cannoli // Oct 7, 2008 at 2:40 am

  LP membership numbers for 12/31/2007

  http://www.lp.org/archives/delegation_chairs_manual_2008.pdf

  page 18-19

  As yet have not found anything for 2008.

• 23 paulie cannoli // Oct 7, 2008 at 2:45 am

  pg 29: 14,125 members at that time.

• 24 Thomas M. Sipos // Oct 7, 2008 at 2:52 am

  I hope radicals don’t give up on the LP.

  It’s fine not to pay your dues for now, as a protest. But I hope all radicals rejoin in time to become delegates to the 2010 national convention.

  Kubby almost beat Root for VP, if only there were a few more radical voters in 2008.

  And in 2006, most of the platform planks were tossed out by one or two percentage points in the voting.

• 25 paulie cannoli // Oct 7, 2008 at 3:07 am

  I hope radicals don’t give up on the LP.

  I haven’t yet. But I know some will, and some already have.

• 26 JimDavidson // Oct 7, 2008 at 5:30 am

  Thomas Sipos, I have not paid dues to the national LP since 1998. What has changed since then? Many people have chosen to do as I have chosen, and have stopped paying dues. Perry Willis was the center of controversy, with the Harry Browne campaign being unfairly privileged in the pre-nomination process. The LP headquarters staff were effectively the same as the Browne campaign staff, even before he was nominated. As I recall, Arizona’s LP was “split” and the effective part put Neil Smith and Vin Suprynowicz on the ballot.

  Today, you can put Shane Cory in place of Willis, Barr in place of Browne (without Browne’s credentials as a libertarian), the same problem of LP HQ staff working for Barr before he was nominated has come out, from no less a source than co-founder David Nolan, the best guess I have is that Nader is going to get more votes than the LP nominee, just like in 2000, and, oh, yeah, this time it is New Hampshire playing the part of Arizona, with Phillies and Bennett playing the parts of Smith and Suprynowicz.

  I have no intention of joining your party. I have no desire to be a delegate to your 2010 convention. I visited your convention in Denver, happened to be sitting in one of the Rhode Island delegation’s seat, and was offered their delegation’s voting paper because I was the only person there. Had I been in a more Simon Jester mood, Ruwart would have had all of Rhode Island’s votes in that ballot. But, I don’t vote, really. It’s a principled thing, you would probably not understand.

  Anyway, your party is no different than it was when I left it in 1998. It is not my problem to fix it. It is a broken thing, and I have discarded it. I am working on a bright, shiny, new thing with a faster engine, less lard on the drive shaft, capable of zero to 421 in forty weeks and five days.

  It isn’t for me. The LP is not my thing, it is not my party, it is not my gadget, I didn’t break it, and I’m not gonna fix it.

  If you fix it, and you nominate good candidates who agree with our smaller government platform, I’ll bring voters, I’ll do my best to bring endorsements, I’ll send ballot access volunteers, I’ll do my best to make things easier for your candidate. But I won’t ever join your party. I won’t give one red cent to a nasty piece of work like Aaron Starr to manipulate.

  And if that leaves you one delegate short in 2010, tough. Don’t say I didn’t give advance notice. Plan for my absence.

• 27 Richard Shepard // Oct 7, 2008 at 9:57 am

  Can ANYBODY show me ANY political party in history that is not plagued by corruption?

  Indict the LP and you indict all political parties, forever. They are, after all, made up entirely of fallible humans who are in search of more power. As Lord Acton once observed: Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

  Wake up, everybody! Learn to live with it or find something else to do.

• 28 Trent Hill // Oct 7, 2008 at 10:43 am

  Richard,

  Davidson condemns the LP for “Corruption” but forgets to mention his own miniscule Bost Tea Party was plagued with corruption only 2 short years into its existence. Tom Stevens right a bell?

• 29 JimDavidson // Oct 7, 2008 at 5:02 pm

  Yes, I complain of corruption in the Libertarian Party. Since I was paying dues to the party during some of the Perry Willis scandal – see John Famularo’s comment on my LP membership numbers post on Paulie’s blog – I am entitled to complain about how my money was swindled from me and misspent by the scum who were involved. And I won’t stop indicting you nasty screwball villains for being corrupt then, and corrupt now.

  Here are Famularo’s comments:
  http://pauliecannoli.wordpress.com/2008/10/06/libertarian-party-membership-numbers/

  Now, learn to live with it, Mr. Shepard, is a disgusting thing. Only a worm would crawl so low. Learn to get rid of it. Learn not to tolerate it. Have some principles, and some backbone.

  We have no corruption in the Boston Tea Party, Trent. We had a brief episode of abuse of power, and we cleaned that up quite rapidly. Which is way better than the LP, which still has scumbags making light of the corruption in the LP, both historical and current.

  We designed corruption out of the Boston Tea Party national committee by removing the money from it. There is no money to hire staff, so the staff cannot be corrupted as Perry Willis was, and as Shane Cory was or is, and as Andrew Davis evidently was – issuing press releases attacking one candidate for the party’s presidential nomination – have you no shame Andrew?

  While Tom Stevens was vice chair, earlier this year, he failed to mention that he had already founded the Objectivist party and was seeking ballot access for it in Colorado. He also neglected to mention that his gang of young male admirers had formed four state affiliates without bothering to be formally resident in all of those states. These facts came to light after he abused his office as vice chair by deleting a poll.

  There’s no way to prevent abuses of power, but it speaks to the sensibility of filth like Trent Hill and Richard Shepard that they excuse any wrongdoing on the LP’s part by pointing the finger at the Boston Tea Party. We fixed our problem with an abusive power grabber by forcing him out of office. What have you guys done about Aaron Starr or Bill Redpath? Re-elected them, it seems.

  The Libertarian Party national committee spent its last meeting mired in a scandalous discussion over whether to eliminate one of its at large members from office for the supposed crime of communicating LNC activities to her constituents. The LP paid many thousands of dollars to Shane Cory after he had been forced to resign for acting in a biased fashion that even LP co-founder David Nolan found disgusting. You ought to get control of your party’s headquarters staff, guys, or people are going to think your nominating convention is a sham. Much like Fumalaro’s indictment of the LP membership numbers under Perry Willis.

  It is this sort of disgusting party loyalty, it is this sort of despicable ugly “nothing can be done about corruption so get used to it” attitude that makes me repeatedly rebuke the LP party loyalists and tell them that I won’t have anything to do with your hateful, evil, sycophantic, corrupt, and perverted party of no principles. I despise you for not fixing these problems.

  So, the next time some party stalwart asks me why the Boston Tea Party doesn’t become a caucus within the LP, my answer is, because mud drinkers like Trent Hill and Richard Shepard are ever ready to excuse the corruption within the LP, and no one makes any effective effort to end that corruption.

  You want to roll around in the swill with these jerks, go ahead. But not me. I have ethics they obviously lack.

• 30 JimDavidson // Oct 7, 2008 at 10:59 pm

  The unethical Richard Shepard says, “Learn to live with it …” as if Lord Acton actually liked the corrupting effects of power.

  I’m very much reminded of Clayton Williams, who ran for governor down in Texas, against Ann Richards. You know why he lost? One of the things he did was to take a group of reporters out on a trail ride. It rained one evening as they were sitting around the campfire.

  Clayton said, “The weather is like rape. It’s inevitable, so you have to relax and enjoy it,” or words very much to that effect.

  Corruption is inevitable? No. And rape isn’t inevitable. And you fight against it. You stand up on your feet and you say, “It’s wrong.” You don’t relax, and you don’t enjoy it, or it never stops.

  Rape isn’t inevitable. All that rape prevention requires is a well armed population of women who are willing to kill men who try to rape them, and a society of grand jurors unwilling to indict them. Where gun control is the rule, rape is more common, something they didn’t mention in the Million Mom March.

  Corruption in the LP is not my problem, but I am doing something about it anyway, by keeping my money away from those clowns.

• 31 Richard Shepard // Oct 9, 2008 at 10:25 am

  Just to clarify, I do not consider corruption a virtue. However, I recognize that it is a natural byproduct of human interaction. Ever since Eve gave the apple to Adam humans have done what they wanted to do, and when they wanted to do it, even if the consequences were fatal.

  Mr. Davidson’s straw man argument, that rape isn’t inevitable, is fallacious. Rape is, perhaps, the oldest crime in the book. Yet it still occurs despite the best efforts, over thousands of years, of both individuals and society. Mr. Davidson’s own remedy does not eliminate it. Rather, he seeks only to regulate it through the threat of retaliation.

  The very idea that a political party can exist without some corruption of some kind is absurd. This is obviously a bad thing, and there are different ways to deal with it.

  One way is an investigative reporting model, in which the corruption is ferreted out and exposed, and the wrongdoers exiled, or fined, or whatever. This is not very efficient, as we who have been around the third party movement for a while know. Another mechanism is to have an internal investigation or self-policing apparatus, which also has its problems.

  But that proves my point. Corruption is a given in any organization involving human beings. Mr. Davidson chooses to run from it, hoping that all will be sweetness and light on the far shore. But he is bringing his human being friends with him. They will not shed their propensities for corruption at the shore, but will bring corruption with them.

  So, at the end of the day, the liberty movement is divided and weakened, all in the name of self-righteousness. Good Luck Mr. Davidson.

• 32 JimDavidson // Oct 12, 2008 at 8:36 pm

  Shepard is some sort of evil scum. I don’t run from corruption, I root it out and destroy it. Only scum like Shepard keep giving it a home and sending it money. Sometimes the elimination of corruption involves re-design, something he doesn’t think matters.

  Rape is not inevitable, as he claims. But, he’s probably a rapist, given his views on how women should not be armed.

  Shepard seems to think himself some sort of elder statesman of third party activities. I think of him as some sort of corruption supporting, victim disarming scum.

• 33 JimDavidson // Oct 13, 2008 at 6:20 am

  By the way, in his cover page, Knight says that the elections bureau was refusing to process voter registrations which had no SSN. He also says that he advised Fincher that only registrations that were accepted would be paid. Presumably the same rule was given to Kohlhaas. It is certainly possible that the elections bureau did accept registrations without SSN, even though they said otherwise. So the standard was whether the registrations were accepted. No completed voter registration, no pay. A completed voter registration card, especially one with false information, is not a completed registration. Like it or not, the government gets to say whether a registration is complete. (I myself dislike it very much.)

  We now have the following information about forged SSNs (and thereby falsified voter registrations). Knight alleges that Gary Fincher falsified SSNs on voter registration forms. You say that “Gary made the decision to fill in random numbers on the cards that did not have them.” Knight asserts that he called Fincher and was not provided a denial, that Fincher did not deny falsifying SSNs on voter registration forms. LP Political Director Ron Crickenberger “flew to New Mexico and viewed the forms in the Election Bureau office and informed me the next day that he observed several numbers in the same handwriting which he thought to be Fincher’s.”

  Now, let me guess, maybe Crickenberger decided not to pay Fincher? Crickenberger’s stated role, LP Political Director, appears to be relevant. So, seven years later, what Fincher claims to be a vindication is someone else, you say Redpath (the gun control enthusiast) convinced by Winger (anything is good as long as LP candidates get on the ballot, even suing to get one off is okay) to hit the undo button. For less than $700. Presumably to get someone out in the field gathering petitions. For Bob Barr? Not exactly the most principled person I’ve encountered.

  What I don’t find is anyone denying that Gary Fincher falsified information on voter registration cards.

  According to Knight, hundreds and hundreds of the voter registration cards turned in during that voter drive were not processed by the elections bureau. The LPNM sued to get them processed, but before the court ruled to process all non-defective registrations, the county clerks in NM were instructed to check every LP registration, and hundreds were pulled out as invalid or defective.

  So, it is now my view that you have established and agree that Gary Fincher falsified SSNs on voter registration cards. That is clearly different from leaving the SSN field blank. It appears to me to be criminal in nature at worst, and fraud at least. If it is a crime in New Mexico to put a false SSN in the field on a voter registration card, then you are saying that Gary is a criminal. It is certainly fraud to put in a fake SSN in order to get paid for a defective registration (defective because false information has been added).

  Personally, I think New Mexico has hideous and idiotic laws on voter registration. The fifty forms rule and the 48 hours rule are both very bad. And obviated by the web site with the federal voter reg form which the state is required to accept.

  Personally, I think requiring an SSN on voter registration is a bad thing. My father’s SSN card says it is not to be used for identification. I think socialists run the government in New Mexico.

  However, I think putting false information on a government form is a bad way to get voters registered. That includes filling in the party affiliation when the voter didn’t. That includes putting a false SSN when the voter didn’t put one. I can definitely tell the difference between the Kohlhaas registrations and the Fincher registrations, blank versus falsified data, so your “double standard” bit falls flat.

  I hate the government, I despise the process of registering voters, and I don’t like the forms, the process, the bureau-rats, and the efforts to deny voters choices. But defrauding the LP by falsifying SSNs seems like an unusually poor choice just to get a few hundred dollars. Since the objective is to get the government to accept the registration of voters, putting false data on the forms seems like a foolish way to attain that objective.

  In the event, it did not work. Voters were not registered in large numbers. Hundreds of registrations were turned down. However, the LP, rather than sticking with the guideline that accepted registrations would be paid and refused registrations would not, chose to make a payment to Gary Fincher. This seems like yet another unprincipled action by the LP.

• 34 JimDavidson // Oct 13, 2008 at 6:23 am

  Yes, the other thread was closed for comments. Evidently it is an editorial view that information not be discussed. So, I added my thoughts here.

  Now, let’s see what the Gary Fincher crew do next. Are they going to delete my comments? And remove my posting privileges? What fun.

• 35 Thomas L. Knapp // Oct 13, 2008 at 4:33 pm

  Jim,

  There may be some kind of automatic comment closure date stamp on threads. Or not — I’m certainly interested in why the thread was closed for comments, and hope that the site’s management will explain.

  FYI on the falsification of Social Security numbers on voter registrations: You don’t have to rely on Andy’s statements to prove that allegation. Fincher has publicly admitted to it, although he claims that what he was doing was “guessing at” what those numbers might be.

  (Here’s where, if he operates according to pattern, Fincher threatens to sue me for defamation — bring it on, and we’ll see whether a jury really thinks he believes he can “guess” which of 999,999,999 possible numbers is associated with a particular random passerby, or whether they believe he was just engaged in plain fraud).

• 36 paulie cannoli // Oct 13, 2008 at 4:42 pm

  I don’t know who closed the comments there.

  I’m presuming either Austin or the post’s author?

  They did not discuss it on our internal discussion group.

  Unfortunate, I am having pain in my forearm when I type, so I can’t say much about this or anything else right now.

  However, I am available by phone for those of you who have my number, I can tell you what I think.

  Nobody’s been calling, so I take it there’s not exactly a great deal of interest.

• 37 JimDavidson // Oct 13, 2008 at 5:11 pm

  It isn’t that I’m not interested in what you think, Paul. It’s just that it is “one more thing.”

  As I say in my comments on the BTP site, I really don’t care what the government suffers. If they don’t like the forms filled out with false SSNs, they shouldn’t require SSNs in the first place.

  But it really sucks for a voter if they have their party affiliation switched. It is a hassle to get it switched back, and often they miss a primary to vote in. It makes a person angry. Making voters who never heard the name of our party angry seems exceptionally stupid.

  Then there’s the effectiveness of filling in the wrong SSN. It makes the registration open to being invalidated. Which is not the objective. So, don’t do it.

  I mention these points since it seems likely the BTP is going to be doing some voter registrations, at least in Florida where we actually have recognised party status.

• 38 Gary Fincher // Oct 15, 2008 at 1:26 am

  ” Fincher has publicly admitted to it, although he claims that what he was doing was “guessing at” what those numbers might be.

  (Here’s where, if he operates according to pattern, Fincher threatens to sue me for defamation — bring it on, and we’ll see whether a jury really thinks he believes he can “guess” which of 999,999,999 possible numbers is associated with a particular random passerby, ”

  OR, (put another way) whether a jury really thinks that a Libertarian nominee running for president really thinks he can “defeat” millions of Democrat and Republican voters and catapult into the White House. (why even TRY against such odds, huh, dude?)

  ” or whether they believe he was just engaged in plain fraud).”

  Who’s this idiot? Since when it is it a jury’s job to pass legislation that already doesn’t exist (since current NM law doesn’t make what I did a crime, let alone a crime of “fraud”) on the books of the State? Gawd, this guy must have fallen asleep in Jr. High civics class! Doesn’t the moron know that, largely what I was doing was trying to PREVENT Knight from committing fraud and cheating me out of VR pay, by intimidating me into illegally refusing to register voters unless they provided a SSN? I don’t think anyone should take this fuzzy-thinking guy seriously on ANYTHING he says.

• 39 Gary Fincher // Oct 15, 2008 at 1:28 am

  “By the way, in his cover page, Knight says that the elections bureau was refusing to process voter registrations which had no SSN. He also says that he advised Fincher that only registrations that were accepted would be paid. Presumably the same rule was given to Kohlhaas. ”

  Well, what is PRESUMABLY may turn out to actually be ABSOLUTELY NOT in many cases, and this is one of them. Why would this moron give a “presumption” to Kohlhaas, and not any presumption to ME? This is prejudice at its very worst.

• 40 Gary Fincher // Oct 15, 2008 at 1:30 am

  “No completed voter registration, no pay. A completed voter registration card, especially one with false information, is not a completed registration. ”

  NO, THE DEAL WAS THAT THE VOTER REGISTRATION WAS COMPLETE WITHOUT SSN’s. YOU WERE NOT PRIVY TO THE DEAL STRUCK BETWEEN THE LPNM AND THE VR GATHERERS, SO HE IS TALKING OUT OF HIS ASS. I WAS ACTUALLY IN ON THE DEAL. THIS GUY DOESN’T KNOW WHAT HE’S TALKING ABOUT.

• 41 Gary Fincher // Oct 15, 2008 at 1:32 am

  “What I don’t find is anyone denying that Gary Fincher falsified information on voter registration cards. ”

  No, but what we DO find is this admonishment from a REAL MAN: But so what? It wasn’t criminal or immoral, and it was 9 years ago. What kind of CRYBABY cries about something someone he doesn’t even know making a minor mistake 9 years ago?!?! Can’t a crybaby GET A LIFE? I made a mistake, owned up to it shortly after, made amends and got on with my life. I’m not crying about something Jim Davidson or Tom Knapp did or didn’t do 9 friggin’ years ago. What the HELL does something that happened 9 years ago, that was relatively minor, have to do with the current situation? I think there’s a new market for Kleenex tissues, is what I think.

• 42 Gary Fincher // Oct 15, 2008 at 1:33 am

  “So, it is now my view that you have established and agree that Gary Fincher falsified SSNs on voter registration cards. That is clearly different from leaving the SSN field blank. It appears to me to be criminal in nature at worst, and fraud at least.”

  God, what a moron! “fraud at least?” Fraud IS criminal, ya dumbass. Why are you making a dichotomy between the two? Shouldn’t you be writing blogs on Sesame Street instead of Independent Political Report? How many times do I have to say: according to NM law, there is no criminal infraction resulting from filling in irrelevant information on VR forms. If there had been, the State of NM would have filed charges against me. Duh.

• 43 Gary Fincher // Oct 15, 2008 at 1:35 am

  “If it is a crime in New Mexico to put a false SSN in the field on a voter registration card, then you are saying that Gary is a criminal. It is certainly fraud to put in a fake SSN in order to get paid for a defective registration (defective because false information has been added). ”

  Someone PLEASE tell this guy that “crime” does encompass “fraud”. And that it is NOT “certainly fraud” to try to keep yourself from being cheated out of pay on a VR. And why is he judging who is and who is not a bona fide voter newly registered? I think the voter himself makes that call, not this dumbass.

• 44 Gary Fincher // Oct 15, 2008 at 1:37 am

  “However, I think putting false information on a government form is a bad way to get voters registered.”

  I agree. But tell that to Joe Knight – he’s the one who made a hairy deal of numbers needing to be in that field, not me.

• 45 Gary Fincher // Oct 15, 2008 at 1:39 am

  “That includes filling in the party affiliation when the voter didn’t.”

  To my knowledge, no one did that, though.

  “I can definitely tell the difference between the Kohlhaas registrations and the Fincher registrations,”

  What?!? You looked at the registrations yourself?? What a moronic thing to say! My guess is that you have your head up your ass so much that you COULDN’T EVEN TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ONE KOHLHAAS REGISTRATION AND ANOTHER KOHLHAAS REGISTRATION, IF ONE WERE SHOVED IN YOUR FACE TO EXAMINE.

  “blank versus falsified data, so your “double standard” bit falls flat.”

  The “falsification” was done by Joe Knight, not me or Kohlhaas. And why was Kohlhaas’ allowed to be blank? Can one single person answer me that? Why hasn’t Knight answered that question? So what is it that is “falling flat”? I think it is YOU that is “falling a bit flat”.

• 46 Gary Fincher // Oct 15, 2008 at 1:41 am

  “But defrauding the LP by falsifying SSNs seems like an unusually poor choice just to get a few hundred dollars.”

  Wow, another head-up-your-ass thing to say. You’ve got it EXACTLY BACKWARDS. The issue was only an issue (9 years ago now and irrelevant) because the LPNM tried to DEFRAUD ME out of a few hundred dollars, and I was TRYING TO SALVAGE my hard-earned registrations. I was TRYING TO DEFEND MYSELF AGAINST FRAUD. This reminds me of Sean Haugh accusing Andy of “extortion” when Andy tried to prevent the LP from extorting money from him. Very Orwellian, dude.

• 47 Gary Fincher // Oct 15, 2008 at 1:42 am

  “sticking with the guideline that accepted registrations would be paid and refused registrations would not, chose to make a payment to Gary Fincher. This seems like yet another unprincipled action by the LP.”

  LOL. If the “guideline” had been “stuck to” (for us and not just for Kohlhaas), and all registrations were paid on with or without socialist numbers, then we would have received ALL our pay, right away, and not had to wait 7 years. Seems like this would make the payment PRINCIPLED, not unprincipled. But, with you, Orwell rules!

• 48 Gary Fincher // Oct 15, 2008 at 1:43 am

  Michael Seebeck says, “As for the violence against women idea, that’s a gas, and my wife was also laughing at that one. I can line up at least a dozen women going back two decades to the contrary on that one! I sincerely doubt your prediction would come true at all. ”

  Duh, then how come it happened to ME? Apparently, the ability to line up a dozen women going back two decades is NOT, I repeat NOT, good enough to keep you from getting ACCUSED with violence with women. It’s ridiculous, but ridiculous things happen. So don’t be so fucking smug, Michael, as it will PROBABLY happen (sometime in your life)…whether you like for it to or not.

• 49 Gary Fincher // Oct 15, 2008 at 1:45 am

  “I disagree. I’ve known Angela for many years. She is very sincere, hard working, and ethical. I have not known her to tell any lies, even as jokes. It may be that my experience of her is somewhat limited.”

  I counter-disagree. I’ve known her for only an hour max, when she starts in with vile, malicious, false slander. Not only to me, but to my good friends. Maybe that’s not enough of a sampling time, but I generally don’t give people another chance after they come off as THAT awful on first impression

• 50 JimDavidson // Oct 15, 2008 at 3:57 am

  Mr. Fincher writes, “Well, what is PRESUMABLY may turn out to actually be ABSOLUTELY NOT in many cases, and this is one of them. Why would this moron give a “presumption” to Kohlhaas, and not any presumption to ME? This is prejudice at its very worst.”

  Yes, until my call with Paulie, nobody had accused Kohlhaas of ripping the legs off small animals, brutally beating another human being in front of witnesses, forging SSNs on voter registration cards, telling voters to leave the party affiliation blank, or slamming voter party affiliations to bulk up the LP. After my call with Paulie, I get the impression that Kohlhaas is a creature to be watched closely, too. But, since Kohlhaas is aligned with the criminal Sean Haugh (“burn the petitions, burn m#therf#cker, burn” or words to that effect) one does wonder where Mr. Fincher gets off thinking that I’m taking any side but my own.

  The evidence that Ron Crickenberger made a principled decision not to pay for invalid, forged, or unaccepted voter registrations, having gone to the trouble to travel to New Mexico to look directly at the materials at the elections bureau, seems, to me, to be compelling. The idea that Bill Redpath was urged to make an expedient decision to pay for 1999 voter registration work to get one more person at work on the Barr ballot access activity fits right in with Redpath’s character, as I’ve come to know it.

  I like Angela Keaton. I like what she’s done for the members of the LP she represents on the LNC. I think she has taken a number of important principled stands.

  I like Paulie. He seems like a good guy in many ways, very sincere about the work he does. Obviously, he admits to having committed some criminal act a few years ago for which he was convicted, and he seems, to me, sincere in his efforts to turn over a new leaf.

  I don’t like Andy Jacob or Jacobs. He writes like a jerk. I’m with Tom Knapp on the Andy can go f#ck himself point of view. But, that doesn’t make me leery of hiring him, because on information and belief he and Paulie did good work for the Boston Tea Party in our petition for ballot access activities.

  I have not read through all of Mr. Fincher’s other replies, but I will, tonight. I might choose to respond to some of them. But, one point that I have not made here, which I do want to make, as I did on bostontea.us.

  Here are those thoughts, again:
  Should people hire Gary Fincher to perform voter registrations? I have no idea. Obviously, given these allegations, one would want to have a written contract stipulating what is to be provided in exchange for payment. Falsifying data to get the government to register voters seems like a poor choice, since the government can use the false data to deny the registration. And, you know, make a criminal charge.

  For all the sturm und drang, there does not seem to be any criminal charge in this case. I have not heard from Roger Pope about any criminal charge regarding his violent crime allegation, or stolen car allegation. I think if Pope had evidence that Fincher had killed his dog, he’d have presented it to a police or sheriff’s agency by now.

  Should people hire Gary Fincher to perform petition gathering work? I don’t see why not. I have not seen any information to suggest that he has put compromised petitions together.

  One of the things that is implied in the discussion but not yet examined is the numbers involved. Apparently, Gary was involved in hundreds of voter registrations. Possibly many hundreds, since Knight alleges that hundreds were invalidated. This suggests at least an effectiveness in getting voters to register. If one could get both the production of large numbers and also get no falsified data, that would seem like a good set of results.

  It is a free market. I didn’t solicit the data Joseph Knight sent me, or that Roger Pope sent along. I did look at it, eventually. I didn’t really expect Andy Jacob to be vehemently against this information being discussed. Once he was, though, I was inclined to look further. There is some irony to the fact that I didn’t open all of Joseph’s files until Andy objected so vociferously on the IPR site. Heh.

  So, it is a free market. There are a few people willing to do paid petition work and paid voter registration work. If you want to hire them, I suggest having some specifics in the agreement. Check the work you get when they turn it in. Be careful. Turning in petitions and voter registrations, or any other government paperwork, with false information may itself be a crime. If you do hire people to do this kind of work, pay them. Pay them for results, which is the standard deal, but don’t skimp on payment.

  Because, when you look at the work, it sucks. It is often outside work, in heat or cold, dealing with all kinds of people you probably wouldn’t want to talk to if you had a choice. If you think it is easy to find people to do this kind of work, you probably already know how to find them, which is great. I suspect that alienating the people who do this kind of work is unwise. And a little money can go a long way toward building good will.

  When you look at the laws, they suck. It is unreasonable to have such high ballot access requirements. It is unreasonable to have such perverse voter registration requirements. The system is organised to deny votes to third party candidates, to limit choices by voters, and to make things as difficult as possible for third parties.

  Keep in mind that whether we like all the people in the libertarian parties, whether we get along with all of them, or any of them, we are all part of an oppressed minority. We are oppressed because we want more freedom. And we are in the minority, I’m pretty sure, judging by what I’ve seen. So, when you have the opportunity, try not to be overly judgemental, harsh, and unnecessarily critical of other people in the movement.

  That said, don’t put up with a lot of garbage, either.

• 51 JimDavidson // Oct 15, 2008 at 4:21 am

  Okay, a lot of very rude language, and only one further point to comment about. “What the HELL does something that happened 9 years ago, that was relatively minor, have to do with the current situation?”

  Very simple. The guy who made the principled decision, after coming to New Mexico to look at the evidence, Ron Crickenberger, was recently overruled. Redpath opted to pay Fincher for falsified voter registrations, which is clearly wrong, expedient, unprincipled, and part of a pattern of abuse of power on Redpath’s part. We have a recent video which Andy posted to a different thread on this site to attest to Gary being paid for registrations by the national LP that were performed improperly in New Mexico in 1999. So, it remains a current issue of interest.

  Fincher wants to have it both ways. He admits to faking the SSNs. This means he is admitting to a fourth degree felony of voter registration fraud. He admits to doing so for the purpose of getting paid, which is why I was pointing out that his actions were at worst criminal and at least fraudulent. There are actually many types of fraudulent behavior, such as lending out money which is also on deposit at demand (creating money out of thin air) which are not only not criminal, but actually licensed and authorised by the governments of this weird country.

  Gary Fincher falsified SSNs on voter registration cards to trick Joseph Knight into approving payment for defective voter registrations. Since it is now widely acknowledged that it was possible to put in voter registrations with blank SSN data, Fincher should have, and in future ought to, leave the SSN field blank. There’s no excuse for putting false data in. It is not justifiable on the “but I wouldn’t get paid” basis. Talk about crybaby. “Waaah! I had to break the law, endanger the people I was working for by creating a criminal conspiracy, and defraud the people who were paying me for legit voter reg work by falsifying voter registrations. If I hadn’t done these awful things, I might have missed out on a paycheck, or had to skip a meal.” Principled decisions are made all the time that cost the lives of the men and women who choose to stick to their principles. If you aren’t willing to lay down your life for freedom, go do something else for a living.

  Try washing dishes. I’ve done it. It isn’t glamorous, but there is a persistent need for the work, it pays consistently, and nobody asks you to fill in much government paperwork after the first day.

  Now, for some reason that I haven’t had explained to me, Angela Keaton seems to think well of Sean Haugh. I don’t get it. But, I do understand that Haugh ordered, in writing, that some petitions be destroyed, which I wish to reiterate, I regard as a criminal action. Haugh ordering petitions be destroyed not only was voiding the benefit to the party and to the candidates involved, but also disrupting the will of the voters who had signed the petitions. Doing so is crazy, evil, wrong, unprincipled, and bad. And cannot be justified by anything Gary Fincher has ever done. Gary may be a very reprehensible sort, judging by the accusations against him. He is certainly no friend of mine, calling me and Tom Knapp assorted names, behaving unethically and claiming he had to do so to get paid, etc.

  But, if we are to sort out the many things wrong with the LP, if only to avoid seeing the BTP do them, as well, we have to take principled positions and stick with them. That pretty much means that I agree with Tom Knapp’s position on the Freedom Ballot Access project. It means that I’m never going to suggest that any state affiliate of the Boston Tea Party (and I helped form most of them) nor any candidate seek out and hire Fincher (or Kohlhaas, or Haugh). If he gets hired as a subcontractor, that’s on the list of stuff I don’t micromanage.

  There’s no question. Gary Fincher put fake SSNs on many forms.

  He denies every slamming voter party affiliations. However, we have the investigator’s report of Erin Michael who says she was helped by a man, was told to leave her party affiliation blank, and did not want to be registered LP. We also have the testimony of the investigator that 15 people were contacted none of whom wanted to be registered LP. In these 16 cases I would be willing to say that every single one of those people had no idea what they were doing when they filled out the forms, did not remember reading the materials offered about the LP, or had completely forgotten waking up the day they registered to vote – people do a lot of foolish things, forget a lot of important stuff. But, there is a lot of smoke here, and at least some fire.

  Sean Haugh is wrong for demanding that petitions be burned.

  Gary Fincher is wrong for falsifying SSNs on voter registrations.

  Joseph Knight is wrong for asking for SSNs on anything, ever.

  Bill Redpath is wrong for reversing Crickenberger.

  There are certainly redeeming qualities to all these people.

• 52 paulie cannoli // Oct 15, 2008 at 4:26 am

  Yes, until my call with Paulie, nobody had accused Kohlhaas of ripping the legs off small animals, brutally beating another human being in front of witnesses, forging SSNs on voter registration cards, telling voters to leave the party affiliation blank, or slamming voter party affiliations to bulk up the LP

  To be clear for anyone reading, I did not accuse Scott of any of these things either. I did mention that he did not pay most of the money he owed Andy and Gary for Nebraska, and the LNC members had to pay it out of their own pocket a year later, but did pay himself.

  The evidence that Ron Crickenberger made a principled decision not to pay for invalid, forged, or unaccepted voter registrations, having gone to the trouble to travel to New Mexico to look directly at the materials at the elections bureau, seems, to me, to be compelling.

  What is the evidence that the registrations in question were not accepted by the state? Winger says they were accepted, and would not have been rejected any more than they would have been if they had false phone numbers (another optional field). If there is actual word from the state itself that it rejected any of the registrations in question because of the false SSNs, we should find that out from them directly instead of guessing or assuming, or going on heresay or suppositions.

  The idea that Bill Redpath was urged to make an expedient decision to pay for 1999 voter registration work to get one more person at work on the Barr ballot access activity fits right in with Redpath’s character, as I’ve come to know it.

  Gary was done with LP petitioning when Barr was nominated. He did circulate for Phillies, but it was not clear the substitution would take place then.

  Falsifying data to get the government to register voters seems like a poor choice, since the government can use the false data to deny the registration. And, you know, make a criminal charge.

  For all the sturm und drang, there does not seem to be any criminal charge in this case. I have not heard from Roger Pope about any criminal charge regarding his violent crime allegation, or stolen car allegation. I think if Pope had evidence that Fincher had killed his dog, he’d have presented it to a police or sheriff’s agency by now.

  Similarly, if the false SSNs were criminal, I expect NM would have prosecuted.

  It does remain to be determined conclusively whether any of the registrations were rejected for the false SSNs. Knight says yes, Winger says no. So if anyone wants to take the extra step of asking the NM state elections division directly, by all means do so.

  So, when you have the opportunity, try not to be overly judgemental, harsh, and unnecessarily critical of other people in the movement.

  Amen!

• 53 paulie cannoli // Oct 15, 2008 at 4:31 am

  Okay, a lot of very rude language,

  Yeah, that doesn’t help anything.

• 54 JimDavidson // Oct 15, 2008 at 5:25 am

  “What is the evidence that the registrations in question were not accepted by the state?”

  There is a huge body of evidence that nobody seems to be willing to publish, in part because Joseph Knight uses the name “image#.jpg” for all his files, that a large number of voter registrations were refused by the state. There are news reports from New Mexico reporting hundreds of registrations being refused. There was a court order demanding that some registrations not proven defective at that point be accepted. These seem like bits of data in the public record which could be verified if you don’t already have a copy of Knight’s image files.

  We also have the evidence of Ron Crickenberger going to New Mexico. There ought to be LP expense records. I’m told he flew. And we have the rather compelling evidence that Gary wasn’t paid for many registrations, over six hundred dollars worth, at the time. This strongly suggests that some number of registrations were refused, and payment was therefore refused.

  “Winger says they were accepted,”

  Richard Winger has been asked by me to corroborate this claim. He has not done so. I don’t know what Winger says. I also don’t know on what basis he could conceivably say it. It sounds like nonsense to me. Appeals to authority really don’t work with me.

  “and would not have been rejected any more than they would have been if they had false phone numbers (another optional field).”

  This claim seems very unlikely. In the normal course of existence, a voter registration for Democrat would likely not have been rejected, true. But, these are LP registrations. It turns out that many of the counties were instructed to validate every single one. So, a false phone number would likely have been used to discredit the registration. Same for a false SSN.

  “If there is actual word from the state itself that it rejected any of the registrations in question because of the false SSNs, we should find that out from them directly instead of guessing or assuming, or going on heresay or suppositions.”

  Well, I was going on the published reports in the newspapers, the reports from the private investigator, and so forth. Like I said, Andy went out of his way to upset me, so I went through all of Joseph Knight’s badly named files. You should try it. You might decide that there is some smoke here, even a bit of fire.

  Let me be candid, again. Fincher admits to putting fake information on government forms. This is a stupid thing to do.

  Fincher asserts that Knight told him he had to have SSNs on the forms. I am willing to stipulate that Knight may have done so, and that doing so is itself a stupid thing to do.

  Yeah, you didn’t say that Kohlhaas had done any of those things. I meant to put in at the end of that list “any other terrible wrong thing.” And, to be candid, from what you’ve said, I would not let Kohlhaas work for me in any capacity, ever. In case this hasn’t been clear, same for Fincher, Knight, Haugh, and Redpath.

  When one thinks of the large number of corrupt, abusive, unpleasant, and outrageous people, not to mention the criminals, involved in the LP, it is a wonder anything ever gets done.

• 55 paulie cannoli // Oct 15, 2008 at 12:23 pm

  http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2008/10/socialist-party-usa-candidate-for-president-on-fox-news/#comment-19053

  apparently should be in this thread instead.

• 56 TheOriginalAndy // Oct 15, 2008 at 9:51 pm

  “(Here’s where, if he operates according to pattern, Fincher threatens to sue me for defamation — bring it on, and we’ll see whether a jury really thinks he believes he can ‘guess’ which of 999,999,999 possible numbers is associated with a particular random passerby, or whether they believe he was just engaged in plain fraud).”

  Tom, perhaps you missed this when it was mentioned before, so I will mention it again, THE SOCIAL SECURITY BOXES ON THE NEW MEXICO VOTER REGISTRATION FORMS WERE OPTIONAL (AS IN THEY DID NOT HAVE TO BE FILLED IN FOR THE VOTER REGISTRATION FORM TO COUNT). ONCE AGAIN, THE SOCIAL SECURITY BOX ON THE NEW MEXICO VOTER REGISTRATION FORM WAS OPTIONAL.

  You got this, right? Just in case you didn’t, I’ll repeat it again, THE SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER BOX ON THE NEW MEXICO VOTER REGISTRATION FORM WAS OPTIONAL.

  OK, I assume that you have it straight that the SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER BOX ON THE NEW MEXICO VOTER REGISTRATION FORM WAS OPTIONAL, so now I will move on.

  Fincher collected voter registrations in New Mexico several months before this and turned in cards without Social Security numbers on them (he left it up to the voter as to whether or not they wanted to fill in the SSN), and he turned in voter registrations, some that had the SSN box filled in and others that didn’t, and he got paid for all of them without controversy (during this time he was dealing with Ron Bjornstad and had no dealings with Joe Knight).

  A few months later Fincher was asked to return to New Mexico to do more voter registrations. This time Joe Knight was involved. The Finchers (Gary and his now deceased wife Kay) turned down ballot initiative petition work in other states such as Michigan and California so they could go back to New Mexico to do Libertarian Party voter registration. When they initially spoke to Joe Knight he never said anything about them not getting paid for any registrations where the optional Social Security box was left blank. So Gary and Kay went back to New Mexico and starting working on voter registrations again just as they had done several months prior to this (and remember, there was no controversy during their previous registration drive there). After they had already collected a bunch of registrations, Joe Knight told them that he wasn’t going to pay them on any registrations that did not have the optional Social Security number box filled in. Gary was appalled by this because he is vehemently opposed to the Social Security program and he knew that the Social Security box on the voter registration form was not mandatory. He felt so uncomfortable about aksing people to fill in the optional Social Security number box that if he had been told by Joe Knight that he wasn’t going to pay him for any registrations where the SSN box was blank that he and Kay would have turned down the New Mexico LP voter registration drive and gone to Michigan or California to work on ballot initiatives instead (or done something else).

  As I stated on another thread, about 70-80% of the people whom they registered filled in the Social Security box without questioning it, however, around 20-30% of the people either questioned it, or flat out refused to fill in that box. When a person filling out the registration asked the Finchers if the Social Security box was necessary in order to be a registered voter, the Finchers told them no – which was the truth. When a person filling out a registration expressed that they did not want to fill in the Social Security number box the Finchers did not brow beat them into filling it in because they did not think that it was mandatory (which it wasn’t).

  Joe Knight wanted the Finchers to violate their principles – which were Libertarian principles – by getting everyone they registered to fill in a Social Security Number. The Finchers did not want to do this and would not have accepted the job and wasted their time and money and opportunity costs elsewhere going to New Mexico if Joe Knight had told them about this demand in advance.

  So they were faced with either taking a 20-30% pay cut from Joe Knight by not getting paid on any registrations that did not have the optional Social Security box filled in, or quitting the registration drive and therefore suffering a financial loss by having wasted their time going to New Mexico instead of taking work elsewhere.

  So this is what pushed Gary to fill in random numbers on the registration cards where people left the boxes blank.

  As it turned out, Gary was correct that the Social Security boxes were indeed optional because these registrations where he filled in random numbers were STILL processed by the state (as Richard Winger has pointed out).

  Since the Social Security box was optional, Gary did NOT break any laws by filling in random numbers in those boxes. Note that the state did NOT press any charges against Gary and that these registrations did count.

  If the Finchers had in fact broken any laws, you can bet that the state would have pressed charges against them. I know of instances where people doing voter registrations have gotten prosecuted for fraud, however, in these cases, there were actual laws that were broken and there was evidence to support that there were actual laws that were broken, UNLIKE WITH THE FINCHERS. The Finchers did NOT break any laws and there was NO evidence that the Finchers broke any laws, and this is why there were no charges pressed against them.

  It is rather ironic that the ONLY reason Gary filled in random numbers in the Social Security boxes of SOME of the registrations that they collected was to prevent he and his wife from being DEFRAUDED out of pay by Joe Knight, yet they got accused of fraud for trying to prevent themsevles from being victims of fraud, and what their defense against being defraud was not even fraud which is why the state counted the registrations and did not press charges against them.

  It is also ironic that Scott Kohlhaas worked on the same registration drive and was never ordered by Joe Knight to get Social Security numbers filled in on all of his registrations or else his pay would get docked. Scott Kohlhaas admitted that he turned in registrations where the Social Security boxes were left blank and he got paid on time and in full for his work and Joe Knight never said a thing about it.

  Why did Joe Knight only put the command of getting the optional Social Security boxes filled in on all registrations or else get one’s pay docked to the Finchers, and not to Scott Kohlhaas? Why did he “throw the Finchers to the wolves” and “look the other way” when it came to Kohlhaas?

• 57 Gary Fincher // Oct 15, 2008 at 10:54 pm

  “Very simple. The guy who made the principled decision, after coming to New Mexico to look at the evidence, Ron Crickenberger, was recently overruled. Redpath opted to pay Fincher for falsified voter registrations, which is clearly wrong, expedient, unprincipled, and part of a pattern of abuse of power on Redpath’s part.”

  Here Redpath needs defending. It is clearly RIGHT, not WRONG, for one to be paid for one’s hard work, so Redpath did a principled thing (after consulting with several wise and astute sources, I might add). Also, Crickenberger was in NM *anyway*, for the state convention where he was a speaker, so please don’t BS the readers into thinking that he made a special trip down there to investigate the forms, when ALL HE HAD TO DO WAS ASK ME if I did that, and I would have explained to him what happened, and why I was basically put in a defensive position to pre-empt a defrauding of my pay.

  I have already admitted it was a bad choice, and made amends. I did what national director Dasbach asked of me in order to fix the problem, and he declared the episode over like in 2001. He also restated at Denver that the NM situation from 1999 was so long ago now that it should be over and done with now.

  That said, it PISSES ME OFF TO NO END for me to have to needlessly RELIVE and DEFEND MYSELF over and over and over and over again, the rest of my life, for the benefit of people who just don’t “get it”. Good thing Richard Winger “gets it”. “Fraud”, “falsify” and “crime” are words that don’t belong in the discussion. It was a tactical blunder. Why can’t you (and others) just be a man and call it what it is? Talk about crybaby!

• 58 Gary Fincher // Oct 15, 2008 at 11:15 pm

  On July 24, 2000, Richard Winger wrote:

  Actually, I just had a good conversation with Steve Dasbach. He acknowledged that you are very good and they he is personally sorry to have you “on ice”, or unavailable, even for a hiatus. He said that he had heard thru the grapevine that you have acknowledged to one or two people that, since Joe ordered you to collect SSN’s, when people refused to give their SSN’s, that you then made up numbers. I insisted that this was not “fraud” and that word should never be used to describe this. I also said that it doesn’t follow logically that, just because you did that, therefore you should be barred from working anywhere else. He said the key is that you must do a “mea culpa” for internal purposes only. He said he will discuss this with Bill Hall. He also said that if you had good judgment, when Joseph Knight ordered you to collect SSN’s, you should have gone over Joe’s head and complained directly to the national LP staff about this foolish rule of Joe’s. I certainly agreed with Steve Dasbach about that.

  You don’t need to do anything just now. You can rest assured that Steve Dasbach is not a villain and is not an unreasonable person. If Karen feels that it is a disaster for you to ever admit that you made up a SSN, then, if you have any attorney friends, please, both of you, talk it over with that attorney.*

  *which we did, who in turn confirmed that it was a tactical mistake, but no crime.

• 59 Gary Fincher // Oct 15, 2008 at 11:42 pm

  “having gone to the trouble to travel to New Mexico to look directly at the materials at the elections bureau, seems, to me, to be compelling. ”

  PLEASE stop spreading the misleading impression that Ron Crickenberger made a “special trip” to NM, costing the party wasted funds, on the account of VR forms. I have his boss’ own words here, debunking that:

  On May 30, 2000, Steve Dasbach said:

  You and Karen will be paid as soon as Ron can verify that the accusations about forging SS numbers and/or signatures are false, which
  means he has to fly to NM and personally examine the registration forms in
  question. I believe he is planning on doing this in conjunction with his trip to speak at the NM convention in June.

  Steve Dasbach
  National Director
  Libertarian Party

  (Richard Winger said: I insisted [to Dasbach]that this was not “fraud” and that word should never be used to describe this.)

• 60 Gary Fincher // Oct 15, 2008 at 11:48 pm

  “I don’t like Andy Jacob or Jacobs. He writes like a jerk. I’m with Tom Knapp on the Andy can go f#ck himself ”

  Andy gets passionate because he hates injustice (although I realize you & Knapp have a hard time relating to that) so when he sees it happening, he writes like the firebrand he is. That’s a *good* thing, not a bad thing.

  He is also understandably angry because he sees, just below the exterior, a bias emanating from you and Knapp that is not expressly spoken but palpable to the perceptive eye. I don’t blame him one bit for being impassioned and attempting to stomp out the bigotry, hate and injustice. I’d talk like that if he were the one in a similar witchhunt.

  I’m only the subject of a witchhunt because I’m a whistleblower on Kohlhaas, and have no delusions that anything else at all is going on.

• 61 Gary Fincher // Oct 16, 2008 at 12:01 am

  “Should people hire Gary Fincher to perform voter registrations? I have no idea. ”

  Well,

  Gary has asked me to let you know about the work he did for me here in Arizona. Gary and Kay were wonderful at voter registration. Their work was exemplary, and voter registration requires a great deal more than petitioning.

  While I don’t quite understand what happened in New Mexico, I truly do not believe that either Kay or Gary did anything less than the jobs they
  were hired to do.

  Sincerely, Alexis Thompson
  AZ voter registration coordinator
  ——————
  Kay & Gary:

  You know I’ve been in this business since 1984 and I’ve contracted with thousands of signature collectors. Each season there are a few who try to pass forgeries or just bad work. You two have always been a delight to work with. Your work is clean and professional, you have never caused a location problem or been the object of complaints. My only regret is that I had to do
  without your help when the libertarian party needed you. Especially when we had that $4.00 a sig. petition.

  I can’t believe the Libertarian party doesn’t appreciate not only your very professional approach to signature gathering but your passionate dedication
  to the party.

  Love ya
  Eileen (Ray)
  CA petition/VR coordinator
  —————-

  I also said that it doesn’t follow logically that, just because you did that, therefore you should be barred from working anywhere else.

  Richard Winger
  nation’s leading ballot access expert
  —————–
  However, don’t think I feel you should restrict anything you say or do in your righteous effort to be paid for the work you did and which satisfied the needs of the NMLP. I have made that clear in previous posts to you and to Mr. Knight.

  John Slevin
  nationwide petition/VR coordinator
  —————-

• 62 Gary Fincher // Oct 16, 2008 at 1:26 am

  “Obviously, given these allegations, one would want to have a written contract stipulating what is to be provided in exchange for payment.”

  That’s nothing that should be peculiar to ME, or MY contractual relationships; that’s something that every contractor ought to do automatically.

  However, if you live up to your word and don’t try to cheat me, I won’t make bad judgment errors such as what happened in NM.

  “Falsifying data to get the government to register voters seems like a poor choice,”

  I disagree with your use of verbs, but keep in mind that THE “CHOICE” was Knight’s, not mine. My “choice” would have been to have the same latitude that Scott Kohlhaas did, to collect and get paid on registrations sans SSNs or with, alike.

  “since the government can use the false data to deny the registration. And, you know, make a criminal charge.”

  No, I have debunked this several times in posts here. A tactical error is not *necessarily* a crime. In this case, it’s decidedly NOT.

  And btw, even if it *were* it would be ruled “justifiable filling in of data”, a la “justifiable homicide”, given that it was a DEFENSIVE move (to keep from getting defrauded out of pay).

  “For all the sturm und drang, there does not seem to be any criminal charge in this case. ”

  Why? Because no criminal act was committed by me. Of course, the State AGREES with Joe Knight’s crimes (pro-Social Security) so obviously he wouldn’t get prosecuted. When you dump out on libertarian principles in favor of statism in a crisis, the State LOVES you for it.

  “I have not heard from Roger Pope about any criminal charge regarding his violent crime allegation, or stolen car allegation.”

  And that’s because he made it up (see my other posts).

  “I think if Pope had evidence that Fincher had killed his dog, he’d have presented it to a police or sheriff’s agency by now.”

  No shit. He doesn’t even have much evidence whenever he participates in his favorite hobby – turning Libertarian non-filers into the IRS.

  “Should people hire Gary Fincher to perform petition gathering work? I don’t see why not. I have not seen any information to suggest that he has put compromised petitions together.”

  No, I haven’t (why would I???), and I’ve been doing this for almost 18 years, with references out the wazoo.

  “One of the things that is implied in the discussion but not yet examined is the numbers involved. Apparently, Gary was involved in hundreds of voter registrations. Possibly many hundreds, since Knight alleges that hundreds were invalidated. This suggests at least an effectiveness in getting voters to register. If one could get both the production of large numbers and also get no falsified data, that would seem like a good set of results.”

  And that’s exactly what would have happened had Knight not made a screwy demand while I was under pressure that I didn’t get a chance to think through very well. And that’s exactly what happened in Alaska and Arizona when we did VRs for pay. How come no one in Alaska or Arizona had a problem with any of our registrations? What’s the common denominator? Oh I know! – those are states that don’t have Joe Knight living in them!

  “It is a free market. I didn’t solicit the data Joseph Knight sent me, or that Roger Pope sent along. I did look at it, eventually. I didn’t really expect Andy Jacob to be vehemently against this information being discussed. ”

  THAT’S BECAUSE IT’S BEEN DISCUSSED, OVER AND OVER, AD NAUSEUM, FOR A SPAN OF YEARS AND YEARS, AND BEEN DEBUNKED EVERY TIME. How many times does one have to re-invent the wheel and set the record straight? You would think one time would be enough, but this keeps rearing its ugly head and we have to keep putting out all the brushfires that pop up. He, like I, gets frustrated over having to do so so many times. Please cut him some slack!

  “Turning in petitions and voter registrations, or any other government paperwork, with false information may itself be a crime.”

  No, not really. I think there are only two instances where that is the case (any attorneys, correct me if I’m wrong): 1) the action was an attempt to defraud someone; or 2) the person acting signs the document under penalty of perjury. Neither of these apply to my actions.

  ” If you do hire people to do this kind of work, pay them. Pay them for results, which is the standard deal, but don’t skimp on payment.”

  Amen

  “Because, when you look at the work, it sucks. It is often outside work, in heat or cold, dealing with all kinds of people you probably wouldn’t want to talk to if you had a choice. If you think it is easy to find people to do this kind of work, you probably already know how to find them, which is great. I suspect that alienating the people who do this kind of work is unwise. And a little money can go a long way toward building good will.”

  Agreed.

  “When you look at the laws, they suck. It is unreasonable to have such high ballot access requirements. It is unreasonable to have such perverse voter registration requirements. The system is organised to deny votes to third party candidates, to limit choices by voters, and to make things as difficult as possible for third parties.”

  Yes, it is. That’s why we should never stand up for the State against innocent Libertarians, a la Joe Knight.

• 63 Gary Fincher // Oct 16, 2008 at 2:31 am

  “Okay, a lot of very rude language, and only one further point to comment about. “What the HELL does something that happened 9 years ago, that was relatively minor, have to do with the current situation?”

  Very simple. The guy who made the principled decision, ”

  No, that was an UNPRINCIPLED decision; please don’t get it exactly backwards. We actually had a veritable SEA of people chiming into national imploring them to pay us, including Richard Winger. I would NEVER call Winger “unprincipled”. Steve Dasbach (national director at the time) himself, in 2002, even said that he would “do his best” to get me the money, albeit he never delivered. Keep in mind that the ONLY people in the WORLD at the time of the “controversy” that didn’t think we should get paid were Knight & Crickenberger (unless you count Dasbach, who changed his mind later).

  “after coming to New Mexico to look at the evidence, Ron Crickenberger, was recently overruled. Redpath opted to pay Fincher for falsified voter registrations, which is clearly wrong,”

  Why is it wrong to pay people for the work they performed? To me and most people, it was a damn shame that it took as long as it did to pay me, and was also a shame that Karen never lived long enough to enjoy the earnings. It was WRONG to withhold payment from us.

  “expedient, unprincipled, and part of a pattern of abuse of power on Redpath’s part.”

  No, not at all. Redpath may have his shortcomings, but honoring a debt going back 7 years isn’t one of them. That’s ridiculous to assert otherwise.

  “We have a recent video which Andy posted to a different thread on this site to attest to Gary being paid for registrations by the national LP that were performed improperly in New Mexico in 1999. ”

  No, another video shows that the registrations were performed PROPERLY. As for the SSNs, no one should be put in a position to choose from an array of solely bad options. This is the ONLY reason why “incorrect” social security numbers ever appeared in there.

  Not to sound overly anti-socialistic, but aren’t ALL social security numbers bogus? Who really cares how statist tracking numbers have their digits arranged? You’d have to be a socialist to care about that, or make an issue of it. I take the high road here.

  “So, it remains a current issue of interest.”

  Not with former chair and director Dasbach saying the complete opposite. And last time I checked, April 2007 isn’t a “current” date.

  “Fincher wants to have it both ways. He admits to faking the SSNs. This means he is admitting to a fourth degree felony of voter registration fraud.”

  LOL. No (on the last part of the sentence) but only because I’m actually at a competent level of astuteness when it comes to sophomoric legal frameworks. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that it’s not a crime for a third party to add information they’re not even attesting to on a form, in an optional field, but (apparently) it takes an intermediate level of conceptualization abilities, which (it looks like) many libertarians don’t possess. Alas.

  ” He admits to doing so for the purpose of getting paid,”

  For the purpose of preventing being DEFRAUDED out of pay. Is that really a meaningless difference to you?

  ” which is why I was pointing out that his actions were at worst criminal and at least fraudulent.”

  Great legal mind there – drawing a dichotomy between ‘fraud’ and ‘crime’ LOL. Jeffrey Dahmer was guilty of at worst criminal and at least murder. Yeah.

  ” There are actually many types of fraudulent behavior, such as lending out money which is also on deposit at demand (creating money out of thin air)”

  I never said I agreed with fractional reserve banking.

  Gary Fincher falsified SSNs on voter registration cards to trick Joseph Knight

  OMG…you are twisting logic and reason – and truth – on its head and inside out. No one was tricking anyone – unless maybe Knight tricked us by luring us to NM knowing full well he was going to entice us by thinking non SSN VRs would get paid, when he had other ideas up his sleeve (but only for us, not for Kohlhaas).

  ” into approving payment for defective voter registrations. ”

  If they were “defective”, they were only defective because of Knight’s actions. He could have easily kept his mouth shut and no “false” SSNs would have appeared in the forms’ OPTIONAL space. (Is the picture at least beginning to come clear to you now?)

  “Since it is now widely acknowledged that it was possible to put in voter registrations with blank SSN data, ”

  Possible? They absolutely, positively *should* have been blank on the SSNs. But that wasn’t good enough for Knight. I think he just wanted to cause trouble. If his concern was real, he would have thrown the same monkeywrench/red herring Kohlhaas’ way.

  “Fincher should have, and in future ought to, leave the SSN field blank.”

  WTF???? I should have done something, even if I received a direct threat NOT to?? What kind of armchair quarterbacking is that?? And Oskar Schindler should have just taken the Jews out of Germany in a large motorcade, for all to see, instead of “falsifying” documents and sneaking them out. Love your logic!

  ” There’s no excuse for putting false data in.”

  I think being threatened is a valid excuse, actually. And, as I reminded you above, ALL SSNs are “false data” (put another way, SSNs themselves are not legitimate data – but you sound like a socialist defending the SSN system, so this might not sink in right away).

  Lost in all of this is the fact that KNIGHT TRIED TO SABOTAGE THE DRIVE, while WE WERE TRYING TO SAVE THE DRIVE. Now, admitted, my strategy backfired. That’s why I admit it was a tactical error. But our intentions were noble, while Knight’s were not. Winger confirmed that this is true.

  ” It is not justifiable on the “but I wouldn’t get paid” basis.”

  Let YOU get defrauded out of hard-earned pay and let’s see if you don’t take steps to pre-empt it. I’ll bet you any amount of money, you’re being a hypocrite. You wouldn’t just lie down and let someone defraud you out of pay. Gimme a break!

  “Talk about crybaby. “Waaah!”

  No, I said that about YOU (for crying about something that happened many years ago, that somehow deeply offends your sensibility toward the Social Security Act, I guess). Should I be crying about a mistake you made at the end of the 1990s? I don’t think I would do that.

  ” I had to break the law, endanger the people I was working for”

  No one, except Knight, broke any law. I doubt your mind is open enough to examine the NM statutes, so you’ll probably never understand that this isn’t even CLOSE to being a crime. It’s also DEFENDING myself against being defrauded by Knight. No one but you would fault someone for that!

  ” by creating a criminal conspiracy, and defraud the people ”

  You’ve switched to talking about Knight now, correct?

  “who were paying me for legit voter reg work by falsifying voter registrations.”

  No, the problem is they WEREN’T paying me; that was the problem. They were trying to DEFRAUD me. Anyone, I think, would “falsify” papers if it were the only way to keep from getting conned.

  ” If I hadn’t done these awful things,”

  LOL. Awful things. Wow, you should do a public service spot for the Social Security Administration! That’s an awesome rendition!!

  ” I might have missed out on a paycheck,”

  Yea…let’s see how many paychecks YOU miss out on by getting screwed over. God, what the hypocrite you are!

  ” or had to skip a meal.”

  You’re advocating defrauding someone to the point where they can’t feed themselves? C’mon, Social Security is not THAT sacrosanct to you, is it?

  “Principled decisions are made all the time that cost the lives of the men and women who choose to stick to their principles. ”

  Sorry, I’m not a warmonger, so I’m not going there with you.

  But I stuck to principle. I already said I regret making a tactical blunder, but doesn’t even the best quarterback throw interceptions once in a while? They STILL get paid. You don’t see a coach say to Brett Favre: ‘Hey, you threw two interceptions in that last game; I’m not paying you.’

  “If you aren’t willing to lay down your life for freedom, go do something else for a living.”

  Nobody said I wasn’t. You’re making things up. That tells me a WHOLE LOT about your integrity, that you would make stuff up without knowing what the hell you are talking about. And no, you don’t get to dictate what I do for a living…that’s not freedom. But I guess that’s too fuzzy a concept for you to grasp.

  “Try washing dishes. I’ve done it. ”

  Unlike you, I’m not a fascist. I don’t try to dictate what profession others go into. This right here speaks VOLUMES as to your adherence to libertarian principles (you probably have no grasp whatsoever…well, duh, obviously).

  “It isn’t glamorous, but there is a persistent need for the work, it pays consistently,”

  Keep up the anti-freedom claptrap. I’ll start snoring soon.

  ” and nobody asks you to fill in much government paperwork after the first day.”

  Unlike you, I don’t have TOTAL REVERENCE for government paperwork. I do what needs to get done, do my job well, and the fact of the matter is…I have 200 TIMES more references than you do for being a top-notch petitioner. Wanna lay a wager on it that I’ve got more support than you??

  “Now, for some reason that I haven’t had explained to me, Angela Keaton seems to think well of Sean Haugh. I don’t get it.”

  I thought you just spent hours writing this to DEFEND Haugh?? Are you schitzo or something?

  ” But, I do understand that Haugh ordered, in writing, that some petitions be destroyed, which I wish to reiterate, I regard as a criminal action. ”

  This doesn’t make sense coming from you. You just said he was justified because once I tried to salvage my hard-earned registrations from certain defrauding.

  “Gary may be a very reprehensible sort,”

  Yeah, the State of New York thinks so too. I drove without wearing a seat belt, and minding your own business while going down the road is reprehensible to them, which is why I’m on trial for a misdemeanor. HEY EVERYONE – DID YOU HEAR THAT?? I’M UP ON CHARGES. I’m the mind-my-own business type, so I’m REPREHENSIVE. Be very afraid of me.

  “Actually, judging by the accusations against him. He is certainly no friend of mine,”

  The feeling is mutual; you are not friend of MINE either. I like the logic that the first person that calls another names is OFF THE HOOK

  calling me and Tom Knapp assorted names, behaving unethically and claiming he had to do so to get paid, etc.

  But, if we are to sort out the many things wrong with the LP, if only to avoid seeing the BTP do them, as well, we have to take principled positions and stick with them. That pretty much means that I agree with Tom Knapp’s position on the Freedom Ballot Access project. It means that I’m never going to suggest that any state affiliate of the Boston Tea Party (and I helped form most of them) nor any candidate seek out and hire Fincher (or Kohlhaas, or Haugh). If he gets hired as a subcontractor, that’s on the list of stuff I don’t micromanage.

  There’s no question. Gary Fincher put fake SSNs on many forms.

  He denies every slamming voter party affiliations. However, we have the investigator’s report of Erin Michael who says she was helped by a man, was told to leave her party affiliation blank, and did not want to be registered LP. We also have the testimony of the investigator that 15 people were contacted none of whom wanted to be registered LP. In these 16 cases I would be willing to say that every single one of those people had no idea what they were doing when they filled out the forms, did not remember reading the materials offered about the LP, or had completely forgotten waking up the day they registered to vote – people do a lot of foolish things, forget a lot of important stuff. But, there is a lot of smoke here, and at least some fire.

  Sean Haugh is wrong for demanding that petitions be burned.

  Gary Fincher is wrong for falsifying SSNs on voter registrations.

  Joseph Knight is wrong for asking for SSNs on anything, ever.

  Bill Redpath is wrong for reversing Crickenberger.

  There are certainly redeeming qualities to all these people.

• 64 Gary Fincher // Oct 16, 2008 at 3:08 am

  “Okay, a lot of very rude language, and only one further point to comment about. “What the HELL does something that happened 9 years ago, that was relatively minor, have to do with the current situation?”

  Very simple. The guy who made the principled decision, ”

  No, that was an UNPRINCIPLED decision; please don’t get it exactly backwards. We actually had a veritable SEA of people chiming into national imploring them to pay us, including Richard Winger. I would NEVER call Winger “unprincipled”. Steve Dasbach (national director at the time) himself, in 2002, even said that he would “do his best” to get me the money, albeit he never delivered. Keep in mind that the ONLY people in the WORLD at the time of the “controversy” that didn’t think we should get paid were Knight & Crickenberger (unless you count Dasbach, who changed his mind later).

  “after coming to New Mexico to look at the evidence, Ron Crickenberger, was recently overruled. Redpath opted to pay Fincher for falsified voter registrations, which is clearly wrong,”

  Why is it wrong to pay people for the work they performed? To me and most people, it was a damn shame that it took as long as it did to pay me, and was also a shame that Karen never lived long enough to enjoy the earnings. It was WRONG to withhold payment from us.

  “expedient, unprincipled, and part of a pattern of abuse of power on Redpath’s part.”

  No, not at all. Redpath may have his shortcomings, but honoring a debt going back 7 years isn’t one of them. That’s ridiculous to assert otherwise.

  “We have a recent video which Andy posted to a different thread on this site to attest to Gary being paid for registrations by the national LP that were performed improperly in New Mexico in 1999. ”

  No, another video shows that the registrations were performed PROPERLY. As for the SSNs, no one should be put in a position to choose from an array of solely bad options. This is the ONLY reason why “incorrect” social security numbers ever appeared in there.

  Not to sound overly anti-socialistic, but aren’t ALL social security numbers bogus? Who really cares how statist tracking numbers have their digits arranged? You’d have to be a socialist to care about that, or make an issue of it. I take the high road here.

  “So, it remains a current issue of interest.”

  Not with former chair and director Dasbach saying the complete opposite. And last time I checked, April 2007 isn’t a “current” date.

  “Fincher wants to have it both ways. He admits to faking the SSNs. This means he is admitting to a fourth degree felony of voter registration fraud.”

  LOL. No (on the last part of the sentence) but only because I’m actually at a competent level of astuteness when it comes to sophomoric legal frameworks. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that it’s not a crime for a third party to add information they’re not even attesting to on a form, in an optional field, but (apparently) it takes an intermediate level of conceptualization abilities, which (it looks like) many libertarians don’t possess. Alas.

  ” He admits to doing so for the purpose of getting paid,”

  For the purpose of preventing being DEFRAUDED out of pay. Is that really a meaningless difference to you?

  ” which is why I was pointing out that his actions were at worst criminal and at least fraudulent.”

  Great legal mind there – drawing a dichotomy between ‘fraud’ and ‘crime’ LOL. Jeffrey Dahmer was guilty of at worst criminal and at least murder. Yeah.

  ” There are actually many types of fraudulent behavior, such as lending out money which is also on deposit at demand (creating money out of thin air)”

  I never said I agreed with fractional reserve banking.

  Gary Fincher falsified SSNs on voter registration cards to trick Joseph Knight

  OMG…you are twisting logic and reason – and truth – on its head and inside out. No one was tricking anyone – unless maybe Knight tricked us by luring us to NM knowing full well he was going to entice us by thinking non SSN VRs would get paid, when he had other ideas up his sleeve (but only for us, not for Kohlhaas).

  ” into approving payment for defective voter registrations. ”

  If they were “defective”, they were only defective because of Knight’s actions. He could have easily kept his mouth shut and no “false” SSNs would have appeared in the forms’ OPTIONAL space. (Is the picture at least beginning to come clear to you now?)

  “Since it is now widely acknowledged that it was possible to put in voter registrations with blank SSN data, ”

  Possible? They absolutely, positively *should* have been blank on the SSNs. But that wasn’t good enough for Knight. I think he just wanted to cause trouble. If his concern was real, he would have thrown the same monkeywrench/red herring Kohlhaas’ way.

  “Fincher should have, and in future ought to, leave the SSN field blank.”

  WTF???? I should have done something, even if I received a direct threat NOT to?? What kind of armchair quarterbacking is that?? And Oskar Schindler should have just taken the Jews out of Germany in a large motorcade, for all to see, instead of “falsifying” documents and sneaking them out. Love your logic!

  ” There’s no excuse for putting false data in.”

  I think being threatened is a valid excuse, actually. And, as I reminded you above, ALL SSNs are “false data” (put another way, SSNs themselves are not legitimate data – but you sound like a socialist defending the SSN system, so this might not sink in right away).

  Lost in all of this is the fact that KNIGHT TRIED TO SABOTAGE THE DRIVE, while WE WERE TRYING TO SAVE THE DRIVE. Now, admitted, my strategy backfired. That’s why I admit it was a tactical error. But our intentions were noble, while Knight’s were not. Winger confirmed that this is true.

  ” It is not justifiable on the “but I wouldn’t get paid” basis.”

  Let YOU get defrauded out of hard-earned pay and let’s see if you don’t take steps to pre-empt it. I’ll bet you any amount of money, you’re being a hypocrite. You wouldn’t just lie down and let someone defraud you out of pay. Gimme a break!

  “Talk about crybaby. “Waaah!”

  No, I said that about YOU (for crying about something that happened many years ago, that somehow deeply offends your sensibility toward the Social Security Act, I guess). Should I be crying about a mistake you made at the end of the 1990s? I don’t think I would do that.

  ” I had to break the law, endanger the people I was working for”

  No one, except Knight, broke any law. I doubt your mind is open enough to examine the NM statutes, so you’ll probably never understand that this isn’t even CLOSE to being a crime. It’s also DEFENDING myself against being defrauded by Knight. No one but you would fault someone for that!

  ” by creating a criminal conspiracy, and defraud the people ”

  You’ve switched to talking about Knight now, correct?

  “who were paying me for legit voter reg work by falsifying voter registrations.”

  No, the problem is they WEREN’T paying me; that was the problem. They were trying to DEFRAUD me. Anyone, I think, would “falsify” papers if it were the only way to keep from getting conned.

  ” If I hadn’t done these awful things,”

  LOL. Awful things. Wow, you should do a public service spot for the Social Security Administration! That’s an awesome rendition!!

  ” I might have missed out on a paycheck,”

  Yea…let’s see how many paychecks YOU miss out on by getting screwed over. God, what the hypocrite you are!

  ” or had to skip a meal.”

  You’re advocating defrauding someone to the point where they can’t feed themselves? C’mon, Social Security is not THAT sacrosanct to you, is it?

  “Principled decisions are made all the time that cost the lives of the men and women who choose to stick to their principles. ”

  Sorry, I’m not a warmonger, so I’m not going there with you.

  But I stuck to principle. I already said I regret making a tactical blunder, but doesn’t even the best quarterback throw interceptions once in a while? They STILL get paid. You don’t see a coach say to Brett Favre: ‘Hey, you threw two interceptions in that last game; I’m not paying you.’

  “If you aren’t willing to lay down your life for freedom, go do something else for a living.”

  Nobody said I wasn’t. You’re making things up. That tells me a WHOLE LOT about your integrity, that you would make stuff up without knowing what the hell you are talking about. And no, you don’t get to dictate what I do for a living…that’s not freedom. But I guess that’s too fuzzy a concept for you to grasp.

  “Try washing dishes. I’ve done it. ”

  Unlike you, I’m not a fascist. I don’t try to dictate what profession others go into. This right here speaks VOLUMES as to your adherence to libertarian principles (you probably have no grasp whatsoever…well, duh, obviously).

  “It isn’t glamorous, but there is a persistent need for the work, it pays consistently,”

  Keep up the anti-freedom claptrap. I’ll start snoring soon.

  ” and nobody asks you to fill in much government paperwork after the first day.”

  Unlike you, I don’t have TOTAL REVERENCE for government paperwork. I do what needs to get done, do my job well, and the fact of the matter is…I have 200 TIMES more references than you do for being a top-notch petitioner. Wanna lay a wager on it that I’ve got more support than you??

  “Now, for some reason that I haven’t had explained to me, Angela Keaton seems to think well of Sean Haugh. I don’t get it.”

  I thought you just spent hours writing this to DEFEND Haugh?? Are you schitzo or something?

  ” But, I do understand that Haugh ordered, in writing, that some petitions be destroyed, which I wish to reiterate, I regard as a criminal action. ”

  This doesn’t make sense coming from you. You just said he was justified because once I tried to salvage my hard-earned registrations from certain defrauding.

  “Gary may be a very reprehensible sort,”

  Yeah, the State of New York thinks so too. I drove without wearing a seat belt, and minding your own business while going down the road is reprehensible to them, which is why I’m on trial for a misdemeanor. HEY EVERYONE – DID YOU HEAR THAT?? I’M UP ON CHARGES. I’m the mind-my-own business type, so I’m REPREHENSIVE. Be very afraid of me.

  “Actually, judging by the accusations against him. He is certainly no friend of mine, calling me and Tom Knapp assorted names, ”

  The feeling is mutual; you are not friend of MINE either. I like the logic that the first person that calls another names is OFF THE HOOK, but RESPONDING IN KIND is a no-no, a taboo. To be honest, I don’t really like anyone who adopts that standard. Sorry.

  ” behaving unethically and claiming he had to do so to get paid, etc.”

  Mischaracterizing things, not listening, advocating fraudulent non-payment for work, are qualities that I don’t esteem at all. So I find you and Knapp reprehensive. In fact, I just got a review on you that you were “completely bad news” and a “pathetic waste of time”. After this, I believe it. Oh, and BTW, I *do* think that slander is a crime, when it’s based on false allegations.

  “But, if we are to sort out the many things wrong with the LP, if only to avoid seeing the BTP do them, as well, we have to take principled positions and stick with them. That pretty much means that I agree with Tom Knapp’s position on the Freedom Ballot Access project. It means that I’m never going to suggest that any state affiliate of the Boston Tea Party (and I helped form most of them) nor any candidate seek out and hire Fincher”

  Talk about waffling and inconsistent. You just contradicted something you just said, scrolling up. And this is EXACTLY why I’ve retained an attorney to SUE everyone, and that includes YOU now, who spreads false allegations (that are provable false) about me that result in damaging my work livelihood. I am passing your post on to my attorney.

  But you refuse to hire top-notch circulators at your own peril. Obviously, you’re going to fail, with the defeatist attitude you have (“I’m not going to hire quality petitioiners”)

  “There’s no question. Gary Fincher put fake SSNs on many forms.”

  No one would be successful explaining the concept of “extenuating circumstances” to you, let alone explain how defense against defrauding works.

  God, I almost feel BAD that I’m doing my best to SMASH the institution – Social Security Administration – you find so sacred. But abolish it I must and I’m going to continue to eschew and disparage SS tracking numbers as long as I can breathe.

  “He denies every slamming voter party affiliations.”

  That sounds like some kind of slang – or ebonics – that I’m unfortunately not familiar with. Did I “slam” VR forms down on the card table? I dunno. I have no idea what you are meaning. Speak English to me.

  ” However, we have the investigator’s report of Erin Michael who says she was helped by a man, was told to leave her party affiliation blank, and did not want to be registered LP.”

  LOL. That never happened. The people who worked with us corroborated that. Your continuing insistence (because you don’t listen) that something happened that actually didn’t happen, makes me wonder about your motives, and your intelligence (well, I’ve already found that suspect LOL).

  I have documented how we got the voter registrations, and so did Robert Lucero (who had the most to gain by saying that we tricked voters).

  But there’s good news and bad news. Bad news is that Knight removed Lucero’s testimony from the investigative report before giving it to you, because it was the “smoking gun” that proved us right. Good news: I saved it (Yay!) and so here it is. Read it and weep:

  Investigative Report

  January 3, 2000

  Interview:
  Robert Lucero
  Bureau Of Elections Coordinator
  Bernalillo County
  505-768-4104

  Mr Lucero stated that he had personally gone to the sight where the Finchers
  were registering voters and posed as a potential registrant.
  Mr Lucero stated that he had asked the Finchers many questions concerning
  their efforts and received many answers he considered in violation of the
  election code.

  Mr Lucero stated that he asked if they were only signing up “Libertarians” or
  could he sign up as a “Republican” to which he stated that Mr Fincher told
  him “that would defeat their purpose.”

  Mr Lucero stated that he had contacted the District Attorneys office
  concerning possible violations of the Election Code and that they would be
  doing an investigation also.

  Mr Lucero furnished me with (2) letters written in reference to the situation
  and they are included in this report.

  Mr Lucero seemed a little hesitant to discuss an ongoing investigation with
  this investigator but did say that he had heard that they were ” also having
  problems with the Libertarian Party registration in Las Cruces.”*

  *note that we did not work in Las Cruces (although, who knows, Knight may have changed the story by now to have us covering that area) but Kohlhaas did. Curious how Kohlhaas got those same allegations, yet Teflon-dude comes out not being smeared. How do you do that? Also note that I think he too was innocent of tricking voters. I don’t even think you could trick voters like that, actually, without all hell breaking loose, at the sites, and fast.

  ” We also have the testimony of the investigator that 15 people were contacted none of whom wanted to be registered LP.:”

  Duh. They obviously wanted to, or they wouldn’t have agreed to do so. (Why do I have to explain such sophomoric concepts to grown adults??)

  Bjornstad informed me that the elections people called up voters, browbeated them and shaming them about registering Libertarian, and convincing them to have misgivings. Obviously, some people caved and would rather lie than take accountability. But probably not the overwhelming majority. The minority stack of VRs was placed aside, and handed to Dick Tracy when he came into the elections office. Big mistake, though: Elections Coordinator Lucero himself refrained from lying when he had everything to gain by doing so.

  ” In these 16 cases I would be willing to say that every single one of those people had no idea what they were doing when they filled out the forms,”

  If they did (have no idea) then it wsn’t for a lack of pitching by us. We had Libertarian Party displays on the table, including an explanation of the objective of the VR drive. But that’s weak; what form, that looks exactly like a voter registration form, and SAYS voter registration, would they think they were filling out? Where they had to write in “LIB” (for Libertarian) and put their date of birth, place of birth and other personal information?

  “did not remember reading the materials offered about the LP, or had completely forgotten waking up the day they registered to vote – people do a lot of foolish things, forget a lot of important stuff. But, there is a lot of smoke here, and at least some fire.”

  No. I again call your attention to Lucero’s testimony. Listen to the guy. He actually accurately reported how we actually did it!

  “Sean Haugh is wrong for demanding that petitions be burned.”

  No shit. But I’m surprised at YOU saying this.

  “Gary Fincher is wrong for falsifying SSNs on voter registrations.”

  Only to the extent that it backfired as a strategy. It did, however, prevent SOME defrauding of our pay from happening, and in that vein, it wasn’t all bad.

  “Joseph Knight is wrong for asking for SSNs on anything, ever.”

  Did somebody else write this? You just waxed poetically for 55 paragraphs about the virtues of Social Security, and how revered the numbers should be.

  “Bill Redpath is wrong for reversing Crickenberger.”

  You got it completely backwards. I ADMIRE Redpath for reversing Crickenberger. I’m proud of him for that, and I was glad to finally, at long last, get my pay.

  “There are certainly redeeming qualities to all these people.”

  Glad to know I have some “redeeming qualities” LOL. But you won’t say that after I admit that I never let cops browbeat me into wearing a seat belt. It makes me “reprehensible”. Remember?

• 65 Gary Fincher // Oct 16, 2008 at 3:36 am

  “We also have the evidence of Ron Crickenberger going to New Mexico. There ought to be LP expense records. I’m told he flew.”

  What does it prove that Ron Crickenberger flew to New Mexico?

  ” And we have the rather compelling evidence that Gary wasn’t paid for many registrations, over six hundred dollars worth, at the time. This strongly suggests that some number of registrations were refused, and payment was therefore refused.”

  No, that’s not ‘compelling evidence’ of anything, and no, they weren’t refused (by the state) when the decision was made not to pay us. In fact, it was done very much behind our back, in a backstabbing kind of way. When we left the state to go to Indiana, we were under the impression that we were about to receive that pay imminenly, but at that point it was actually already known that they intended not to pay us.

  “Richard Winger has been asked by me to corroborate this claim. He has not done so. I don’t know what Winger says. I also don’t know on what basis he could conceivably say it. It sounds like nonsense to me.”

  How does it sound like nonsense? Why would a voter be penalized (his/her registration not be accepted) because some other person collected the registration from him/her and wrote something on the form later? What sounds like nonsense to ME is that the voter would be penalized. I’d be pissed if they said my registration didn’t count because someone added my SSN later after I turned the form in.

  ” Appeals to authority really don’t work with me.”

  Obviously. That’s why your learning is stunted; refusal to listen to someone who just *might* know more about a subject than you.

  “and would not have been rejected any more than they would have been if they had false phone numbers (another optional field).”

  This claim seems very unlikely. In the normal course of existence, a voter registration for Democrat would likely not have been rejected, true. But, these are LP registrations. It turns out that many of the counties were instructed to validate every single one. So, a false phone number would likely have been used to discredit the registration. Same for a false SSN. ”

  That contention doesn’t fly. It’s the VOTER’S wishes that takes precedent, not the prerogative of the elections bureaucrat.

  “If there is actual word from the state itself that it rejected any of the registrations in question because of the false SSNs, we should find that out from them directly instead of guessing or assuming, or going on heresay or suppositions.”

  “Well, I was going on the published reports in the newspapers,”

  Apparently, appeals to media “authority” work with you. LOL LOL. However, I saw those newspaper reports; they were riddled with falsehoods, nontruths, and inaccuracies. They aren’t to be believed.

  ” the reports from the private investigator, and so forth. ”

  Which, as I said, vindicated us.

  “Like I said, Andy went out of his way to upset me, so I went through all of Joseph Knight’s badly named files. You should try it. You might decide that there is some smoke here, even a bit of fire.”

  No, not on the “tricking voters” charge. Because it never happened, even once. If it had, I would be saying it did.

  “Let me be candid, again. Fincher admits to putting fake information on government forms. This is a stupid thing to do. ”

  Only if you have total reverence for the State. But for the rest of us, it’s all about being circumspect. Sure, it turned out to be a bad tactic; but at the time I thought it was the only option that could possibly save the drive.

  “Fincher asserts that Knight told him he had to have SSNs on the forms. I am willing to stipulate that Knight may have done so, and that doing so is itself a stupid thing to do.”

  Then why did he get by with trying to defraud us?

  “In case this hasn’t been clear, same for Fincher, Knight, Haugh, and Redpath.”

  Only because I don’t believe in SSNs or seat belts. Once again, WHO GIVES A SHIT WHICH DIGITS OF AN EVIL TRACKING NUMBER APPEAR IN AN OPTIONAL SPACE ON ANY FORM, ESP A VR FORM? I question why it is you give such a shit. How is this immoral? From a moral and rational standpoint, it doesn’t matter at all. From a strategic standpoint (the cat & mouse game with the State), it was a miscalculation, bad move to make. I put my bishop in the path for the Knight (pun intended) to capture me. (in this case, I’m considering Joe Knight as part of The State).

• 66 JimDavidson // Oct 18, 2008 at 5:07 pm

  Joe Knight is not part of the state. He was not part of the state in 1999 during these events.

  Who cares which digits are placed on the form? The state cares, some of the time. The state has the power to, and in Ohio recently a Republican judge ruled that the state must, review the registrations of any voter. Putting false information on the registration can be used to invalidate the voter registration, causing the voter to have to cast a provisional ballot, or be refused the opportunity to vote.

  There is no excuse for lying, Gary. Putting false information on the form was not justified. Doing so created a controversy over whether you ought to be paid. Problems with the voter registration drive caused a libertarian party to face frequent and repeated criticisms. Get real.

  If you do a job and you don’t like the conditions of the job and you falsify information to try to get around the conditions and get paid anyway, nobody is going to think you are a saint. If you want people to admire you for your behavior, try taking a principled stand.

• 67 JimDavidson // Oct 18, 2008 at 5:10 pm

  Your absence of belief in seat belts does not make them cease to exist.

• 68 Gary Fincher // Oct 19, 2008 at 11:53 am

  JimDavidson // Oct 18, 2008 at 5:07 pm

  “Joe Knight is not part of the state. He was not part of the state in 1999 during these events.”

  Not true; he joined forces with the State, switching sides.

  “Who cares which digits are placed on the form? The state cares, some of the time.”

  But Libertarians shouldn’t. The State caring is the reason that constituted a tactical error rather than a non-error. If the State didn’t care either, nothing at all would have happened and I would not have been criticized for it.

  ” The state has the power to, and in Ohio recently a Republican judge ruled that the state must, review the registrations of any voter. Putting false information on the registration can be used to invalidate the voter registration, causing the voter to have to cast a provisional ballot, or be refused the opportunity to vote.”

  I suppose that’s only if it can be proved that the VOTER HIMSELF put “false” information on the form. You still have not provided me evidence against my contention that ALL social security numbers are bogus (false).

  “There is no excuse for lying, Gary.”

  Then why do you do it?

  “Problems with the voter registration drive caused a libertarian party to face frequent and repeated criticisms. Get real.”

  LOL. You tell me to “get real”, while forgetting that this is 9 year old news. In 2000 I already “got real” and made amends for my mistake. I was told by the powers that be in the party at the time that if I followed protocol, I would then be eligible to receive my pay. What I DON’T need is YOU, coming in acting like “an authority”, 9 years later, as if the issue is now a fresh one, erasing history, and thinking you’re going to make me jump through the same hoops all over again. So this is when I tell YOU to “get real”. If you think I’m going to go through the hoops again 9 years later just because YOU unilaterally think I should, you do need to get real and have another thing coming. Sorry to burst your bubble. You’re also now included in my lawsuit, for giving me what my attorney says I need for it, so congratulations.

  “If you do a job and you don’t like the conditions of the job”

  LOL LOL. You remind me of when I’m petitioning in a public place and am told by some control-freak figure, “You can’t solicit here, you have to leave”, to which I respond by a very thorough explanation of how what I’m doing is not ’soliciting’ but, according to various court rulings, is ‘petitioning’, going through how and why the courts have made a distinction between the two. But their invariable response: “Yeah I know but you can’t solicit here.” LOL

  Similarly, I have told you at least 5 times that the conditions of the drive were originally that we get paid on ALL registrations, with or without SSNs, and that Knight attempted to unilaterally and illegitimately breach the conditions (for us but not for Kohlhaas), and your response has always been: “Yeah I know but the conditions were that you had to have SSNs in order to get paid”. LMFAO LMFAO

  I have very little patience for people who are too stupid to even have basic English reading comprehension skills.

  Sorry, dodo.

• 69 Gary Fincher // Oct 19, 2008 at 1:41 pm

  “JimDavidson // Oct 18, 2008 at 5:10 pm

  Your absence of belief in seat belts does not make them cease to exist”

  LOL. Sometimes, you just have to draw a picture (for some people).

  My belief is in not WEARING seat belts.

  One would think that would just be UNDERSTOOD. What intelligent person would think that I meant to say that I don’t think seat belts EXIST? Geez.

• 70 TheOriginalAndy // Oct 28, 2008 at 12:35 am

  “The idea that Bill Redpath was urged to make an expedient decision to pay for 1999 voter registration work to get one more person at work on the Barr ballot access activity fits right in with Redpath’s character, as I’ve come to know it.”

  Bill Redpath paid Gary for the 1999 New Mexico voter registrations that he got stiffed on in 2007, OVER 1 YEAR BEFORE ANYONE KNEW THAT BOB BARR WAS EVEN GOING TO RUN!

  Gary had contacted Bill Redpath about this issue a few years before this and it took Bill until 2007 to get around to paying him. Bill decided to pay him after consulting with Richard Winger on the subject. He paid Gary $679. This amount did NOT include any interest for being over 7 years late.

  “The evidence that Ron Crickenberger made a principled decision not to pay for invalid, forged, or unaccepted voter registrations, having gone to the trouble to travel to New Mexico to look directly at the materials at the elections bureau, seems, to me, to be compelling.”

  Jesus FUCKING Christ! For the I-don’t-know-how-manyith-time, Ron Crickenberger did NOT make a special trip to New Mexico to examine the voter registrations. The fact of the matter is that Ron Crickenberger had already been scheduled to speak at the New Mexico LP Convention well before this and was going to New Mexico anyway. Since Ron was in New Mexico anyway, he did examine the voter registrations, but he did NOT make a special trip to do it.

  Ron decided not to pay the Finchers, but it was not based on any principles or logic, but rather it was based on scapegoating good Libertarian activists/petitioners by “throwing them to the wolves.”

  “If you do a job and you don’t like the conditions of the job and you falsify information to try to get around the conditions and get paid anyway, nobody is going to think you are a saint.”

  The terms of the job CHANGED after he was already there working for at least 2 weeks, and the change only applied to the Finchers and not to Kohlhaas. This change was the demand by Joe Knight that the Finchers would not get paid on any voter registrations that did not have Social(ist) (In)Security Numbers on them. If the Finchers had been told of this when they were originally offered the job they would have REJECTED the job and not gone to New Mexico on that occassion in the first place.

  “Yeah, you didn’t say that Kohlhaas had done any of those things. I meant to put in at the end of that list “any other terrible wrong thing.” And, to be candid, from what you’ve said, I would not let Kohlhaas work for me in any capacity, ever. In case this hasn’t been clear, same for Fincher, Knight, Haugh, and Redpath.”

  Then you are a FOOL. Gary is simply one of the top petitioners in the country. He’s got a history of doing top notch work. This is why his services are so in demand from other political parties and ballot initiative coordinators from all over the country.

  Do not lump Gary in with the dishonest Kohlhaas and the deranged/incompetent Haugh.

• 71 TheOriginalAndy // Oct 28, 2008 at 1:06 am

  “Now, for some reason that I haven’t had explained to me, Angela Keaton seems to think well of Sean Haugh. I don’t get it. But, I do understand that Haugh ordered, in writing, that some petitions be destroyed, which I wish to reiterate, I regard as a criminal action. Haugh ordering petitions be destroyed not only was voiding the benefit to the party and to the candidates involved, but also disrupting the will of the voters who had signed the petitions. Doing so is crazy, evil, wrong, unprincipled, and bad.”

  It was also criminal. Why does Sean Haugh still have a job with the LP?

  And cannot be justified by anything Gary Fincher has ever done. Gary may be a very reprehensible sort, judging by the accusations against him.”

  The accusations against him are false.

  “He is certainly no friend of mine, calling me and Tom Knapp assorted names, behaving unethically and claiming he had to do so to get paid, etc.”

  You’ve never even met Gary, nor have you met me, yet you sure do like to throw out accusations and cast down judgements on people whom you’ve never met and on subjects where you’ve got no direct knowledge.

  “But, if we are to sort out the many things wrong with the LP, if only to avoid seeing the BTP do them, as well, we have to take principled positions and stick with them. That pretty much means that I agree with Tom Knapp’s position on the Freedom Ballot Access project. It means that I’m never going to suggest that any state affiliate of the Boston Tea Party (and I helped form most of them) nor any candidate seek out and hire Fincher (or Kohlhaas, or Haugh). If he gets hired as a subcontractor, that’s on the list of stuff I don’t micromanage.”

  Then you are already shooting the Boston Tea Party in the foot by trying to block one of the top petitioners in the country and one of the tiny handful that is an actual libertarian activist, from working.

  You are obviously ignorant of Gary’s long list of references which include Carla Howell, Paul Jacob, Eileen Ray, John Michael, Allison Potter, Richard Winger, and other movers and shakers in the petition world.

  Unlike you, I’ve actually worked with Gary on many occassions and I’ve never once seen or heard of him doing bad work.

  Last year I roomed with him at Carla Howell’s family’s beach house when two ballot initiatives were going on in Massachusetts, one to End the State Income Tax and the other to Reduce Penalties on Marijuana Pocession. I saw the validity reports and Gary never did bad work.

  I hired Gary to work on some ballot initiatives in South Dakota and he never once did bad work. The same goes in Arkansas.

  Gary worked on paid voter registration drives in Alaska, California, Arizona, and Maine with no controversy and there was no controversy during his first stint doing voter registrations in New Mexico (Joe Knight was not involved in that registration drive).

  Gary has worked on numerous petition drives and registered thousands of people to vote since the New Mexico controversy (and before the New Mexico controversy for that matter). If he were really the bad guy that he is being made out to be, then why doesn’t he have problems all over the country? Why do so many coordinators and proponents call him for work, and why do they keep calling him back if he’s such a bad guy? The anwsers to these questions should tell you that the accusations are bullshit.

• 72 paulie cannoli // Oct 28, 2008 at 1:18 am

  Whoever doesn’t get the last word is a rotten egg!

• 73 TheOriginalAndy // Oct 28, 2008 at 1:49 am

  “Redpath opted to pay Fincher for falsified voter registrations,”

  THERE WERE NO FALSIFIED VOTER REGISTRATIONS!

  “which is clearly wrong, expedient, unprincipled, and part of a pattern of abuse of power on Redpath’s part.”

  This was not abuse on Redpath’s part. If anything, he underpaid Fincher as Fincher SHOULD HAVE also recieved 7 years worth of interest and a public apology.

  “We have a recent video which Andy posted to a different thread on this site to attest to Gary being paid for registrations by the national LP that were performed improperly in New Mexico in 1999. So, it remains a current issue of interest.”

  Gary was paid for the 1999 work in New Mexico that he got stiffed on during the Spring of 2007. The ONLY reason that it is being discussed now is because Sean Haugh was looking for an excuse to justify trying to burn signatures that Fincher collected in Massachusetts earlier this year which was a blatant attempt to defraud Mr. Fincher and/or Libertarian Party donors out of money and was also a blantant violation of Massachusetts election law.

• 74 JimDavidson // Oct 28, 2008 at 2:14 am

  Dude, it is just pathetic to say, in all caps, that there were no falsified voter registrations. If you put false information on a voter registration card, and do so knowingly, that is a falsified voter registration. It might still “count” and the voter involved might never vote. But it is still falsified.

  You can say Gary put random numbers in. So what? He knew that he wasn’t putting in the SSN of the registrant. He ought not to have felt he had to put SSNs in, true, because Knight should never have told him he had to do so, and Knight is a jerk for having done so.

  But nobody held a gun to Gary’s head. He chose to put random numbers on the registration forms. Doing so falsified the registrations. It also created the opportunity for the state to invalidate those registrations if they checked SSNs.

  Okay, the state of NM is also an ass for placing an SSN field on the voter reg cards, and for (so he says) telling Knight they required it be filled in.

  But none of these facts are in contention. The whole world can now come here to this thread and find out that Gary performed a deliberate act in placing information he had no reason to believe was true, and which he knew the odds were a billion to one against being true, on voter registration cards. Doing so created falsified registrations.

  You don’t have to like it. But you really ought to be a part of the world in which it is understood.

  The reason it is being discussed now is because I wanted to discuss it. I wanted to discuss it because Joe Knight sent me these endless, mindlessly named files a while ago and it was another thing on my desk to get done. I wanted to discuss it because some of the people involved in the LP wanted it to be discussed, and I like some of them.

  I completely agree. Sean Haugh was a complete ass for ordering that petitions be burned. Doing so was wrong, I believe it was a criminal act, it is documented, and it does not matter, to me, whether Gary did bad things in 1999 or not. It is completely asinine to try to make Sean out as good because there is some evidence Gary was once bad. This is a bizarre type of reasoning, and I don’t dig it.

  But, equally, you aren’t making Gary look good by typing in all caps that there were no falsified registrations. Gary has already said what he did and why.

  Obviously, this matter is upsetting. I think it is going to blow over, eventually. But I also think it is substantial.

  The LP has a long history of screwing over petition gatherers. It is doing so this year. I think that tells us a lot about the LP.

  The petition gatherers are not all angels. None of you guys are saints, Andy, Gary, Paulie. Okay? Do you have to be perfect?

  No. You do important work. You do stuff that I couldn’t do very well, and wouldn’t want to try doing. So what if you’ve done some stuff in the past? Who hasn’t?

• 75 Thomas L. Knapp // Oct 28, 2008 at 2:24 am

  Andy,

  You write:

  “Since the Social Security box was optional, Gary did NOT break any laws by filling in random numbers in those boxes.”

  I don’t know if he broke any laws or not. As others have point out, not all frauds are covered by applicable laws. However, filling in false information on a form for a valuable consideration (payment) is fraud and falsification. There’s no getting around that.

  I might not get so wrapped around that axle, of course, if it wasn’t for the Andy and Gary tag team: “Anyone who disagrees with either of us on anything is a FOOL or a LIAR. We’re always right, and if we say black is white you had better not wear it after Labor Day.”

• 76 paulie cannoli // Oct 28, 2008 at 2:34 am

  The petition gatherers are not all angels.
  

  Certainly not me.

  
  None of you guys are saints, Andy, Gary, Paulie.

  I put the aint in saint.

  
  Okay? Do you have to be perfect?

  Nope. Never claimed to be. I’m trying to be good. That’s hard enough.

• 77 JimDavidson // Oct 28, 2008 at 8:54 am

  You wear black which is white after Labor Day? Eww.

• 78 paulie cannoli // Oct 28, 2008 at 2:57 pm

  Oh, please!

  I’m not going to let y’all make me a rotten egg that easily.

  

• 79 TheOriginalAndy // Oct 28, 2008 at 8:29 pm

  “The petition gatherers are not all angels. None of you guys are saints, Andy, Gary, Paulie. Okay? Do you have to be perfect?”

  I don’t like this comment at all because it implies that I’ve done something wrong which is completely false. I have NEVER done anything wrong in the petition business.

  If you want to make the comment the “Your no angel” comment to me, then specifically tell me what exactly it is that I’ve done that is wrong. If you can’t come up with anything, then you should post a retraction.

  I have a repuation for being one of the most honest people in the business, but of course you wouldn’t know that since you don’t actually know about which you are speaking. I have NEVER forged signatures, engaged in deceptive tactics, had a pattern of bad validity, or ripped anybody off.

  In 2006 when Scott Kohlhaas did not pay myself and other petitioners for work done on an LP ballot access drive in Nebraska (he raised enough money to pay himself his projected commission in advance (which was a VIOLATION of his contract) and then left us unpaid), I reached into my own pocket and paid out $6,000 to other petitioners (Paul was one of them). I was owed $4,000 myself so when you add this up I was owed $10,000. I did not recieve the bulk of this money until 11 months later, and I never did recieve the interest penalty/bonus that I was promised. So I basically gave a $10,000 loan (without my concent) to the Libertarian Party. Have you ever given a $10,000 interest free loan to the Libertarian Party? Do you even have $10,000 to loan to the Libertarian Party?

  I have turned down THOUSANDS of dollars in potential income by turning down work on causes in which I did not believe. For instance, in 2004 there were 6 ballot initiatives going on in Washington and I could have made a lot of money there but I turned it down to work for less money getting signatures for Libertarian Party ballot access in Texas instead.

  I know that Gary has actually turned down more lucrative work to help the Libertarian Party as well.

  I have spent a few thousand dollars of my own money photo copying pamphlets and flyers and copying VHS tapes and DVDs to hand out to people while gathering signatures. I have handed out THOUSANDS of pro-liberty flyers, pamphlets, and hundreds of VHS tapes and DVDs. I have registered many people to vote as Libertarians when I wasn’t NOT even getting paid to do it. I have gathered contacts to start up campus Libertarian clubs.

  Gary and I have gone above and beyond the call of duty on many occassions for the Libertarian Party/Movement and what thanks do we get for it? We’ve got people like you who don’t even know us dragging our names through the mud with false accusations on internet forums.

  You’ve got a HELL of a lot of nerve coming on here and casting judgements on people whom you don’t even know. How DARE you run me and one of my colleagues down when you don’t even know us!

  Right now is an appropriate time to say what Tom Knapp said to me, and that is, “GO FUCK YOURSELF!”

• 80 Gary Fincher // Oct 28, 2008 at 8:30 pm

  “I don’t know if he broke any laws or not. As others have point out, not all frauds are covered by applicable laws.”

  Fraud is against the law, BUT (see below):

  ” However, filling in false information on a form for a valuable consideration (payment) is fraud and falsification. There’s no getting around that.”

  No, because payment was SUPPOSED to be forthcoming, anyway, no matter what. My actions are self-defense, not fraud. Fraud is defined as trying to defraud someone out of something that you wouldn’t otherwise deserve.

• 81 paulie cannoli // Oct 28, 2008 at 8:31 pm

  I think you are reading far too much into that comment.

• 82 paulie cannoli // Oct 28, 2008 at 8:31 pm

  That was @ Andy #79

• 83 TheOriginalAndy // Oct 28, 2008 at 8:44 pm

  “I don’t know if he broke any laws or not. As others have point out, not all frauds are covered by applicable laws. However, filling in false information on a form for a valuable consideration (payment) is fraud and falsification. There’s no getting around that.”

  He did not break any laws because what he did was not illegal. The state did not press any charges because no crime was committed.

  The Social(ist) (In)Security Number was NOT legally required to be a registered voter. That box on the registration form was OPTIONAL.

  There are other boxes on voter registration forms that are optional, such as phone number. Suppose that Gary had put in a wrong phone number, or area code, it wouldn’t matter because that box is optional.

  I’ve seen voter registration forms that have boxes for e-mail addressses. If somebody filled in a wrong e-mail address it would not matter because that box is optional.

  And once again, the ONLY reason that the Social(ist) (In)Security Numbers ever became an issue is because Joe Knight TURNED IT INTO AN ISSUE, by CHANGING the terms of the Finchers work AFTER they had already travelled to New Mexico and worked there for 2 weeks, by demanding that they have the OPTIONAL Social(ist) (In)Security Number boxes filled in on all registrations or else he was going to dock their pay. And, as has been mentioned several times before, Scott Kohlhaas was gathering Libertarian Party registrations in Las Cruces yet Joe Knight NEVER put this demand on him as Kohlhaas got paid in full and on time for all his registrations, including ones that did NOT have Social(ist) (In)Security Numbers on them. If it was so damn important to Joe Knight that all of the registrations have the optional Social(ist) (In)Security Number boxes filled in, then why did he not put this demand on Scott Kohlhaas and why did Kohlhaas get paid for registrations that did not have Social(ist) (In)Security Numbers on them?

• 84 TheOriginalAndy // Oct 28, 2008 at 8:54 pm

  “But, equally, you aren’t making Gary look good by typing in all caps that there were no falsified registrations. Gary has already said what he did and why. ”

  JESUS FUCKING CHRIST!!!! Just because Gary had wrong Social Security Numbers on SOME (a small percentage of the total registrations collected) voter registrations it does NOT mean that these registrations were falsified. The people that he registered were REAL people who actually lived in New Mexico and were eligible to vote. Therefore, by definition, these were NOT falsified registrations.

• 85 paulie cannoli // Oct 28, 2008 at 8:58 pm

  OK, maybe I’ll have to be a rotten egg.

• 86 Jason_Gatties // Oct 28, 2008 at 9:08 pm

  Wow, this thread took a strange turn from the time I first read it. Granted, I read it right after it was originally posted. Just saying…

• 87 TheOriginalAndy // Oct 28, 2008 at 9:14 pm

  “You can say Gary put random numbers in. So what? He knew that he wasn’t putting in the SSN of the registrant. He ought not to have felt he had to put SSNs in, true, because Knight should never have told him he had to do so, and Knight is a jerk for having done so.”

  Yes, and so this whole thing is actually Joe Knight’s fault.

  “But nobody held a gun to Gary’s head. ”

  In a sense, Joe Knight held a gun to Gary’s head because he threatened to dock his pay for any voter registration that did not have the OPTIONAL Social Security Number box filled in. This demand was ONLY put on the Finchers and not put on Kohlhaas who was working on the same freaking voter registration drive.

  “He chose to put random numbers on the registration forms. Doing so falsified the registrations.”

  No, it made one box that was optional wrong, it did not make the registration itself falsified.

  “It also created the opportunity for the state to invalidate those registrations if they checked SSNs. ”

  The state has no grounds to disqualify a registration if a box that is optional is wrong. Heck, I’ve talked to people who work in voter registration offices who have told me that they’ve actually looked up information that IS mandatory such as addresses to fix a registration where somebody made a mistake or had sloppy handwriting.

  “Okay, the state of NM is also an ass for placing an SSN field on the voter reg cards, and for (so he says) telling Knight they required it be filled in.”

  In some states it actually says on the form that the Social Security Number is OPTIONAL.

  I worked in Alabama in 2006 and in 2008. The voter registration forms in 2006 had a box for Social Security Numbers on them but below it in small print it said, “Social Security Numbers are requested, but not required to be a registered voter.” Since then the State of Alabama has printed up new voter registration forms where it has a box that says Alabama Drivers License Number of last four digits of a Social Security Number and it does NOT say whether the box is optional or mandatory (I wouldn’t be suprised that if one pushed the issue, one would likely find that it is still optional), however, some of the old registration forms where it says that the Social Security Numbers are optional are still in circulation.

  I worked in California in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005 and I registered thousands of people to vote there. The forms in California had a box that asked for a California Drivers License or the last four digits of a Social Security Number, but at the bottom of the form in the instructions are it actually said that the Drivers License or last four digits of a Social Security Number were optional! California may have changed their registration forms in 2005 or 2006 so I’m not sure if the forms still say this or not, but I know that they at least said this at one time.

  I know that Gary was in Rhode Island for a while and he registered to vote there. The form in Rhode Island asked for a Social Security Number. Gary did not want to fill this in so he called the Rhode Island election office and he asked them what they do if somebody leaves the Social Security box blank. They told him that they just assign the person a random voter registration number and process the form!

  “But none of these facts are in contention. The whole world can now come here to this thread and find out that Gary performed a deliberate act in placing information he had no reason to believe was true, and which he knew the odds were a billion to one against being true, on voter registration cards. Doing so created falsified registrations.”

  No, it was real registration that had the information in one box that was OPTIONAL wrong. This is NOT the same thing as a falsified regristration.

  And once again, the ONLY reason that he did this was to prevent Joe Knight from DEFRAUDING him out of pay.

• 88 paulie cannoli // Oct 28, 2008 at 9:17 pm

  Wow, this thread took a strange turn from the time I first read it. Granted, I read it right after it was originally posted. Just saying…

  Basically, it was on another thread that was closed out as a result (still not sure by whom, but it was) and migrated over here, and has gone around and around in endless cycles of repeating the same things over and over again ever since.

• 89 paulie cannoli // Oct 28, 2008 at 9:20 pm

  Since then the State of Alabama has printed up new voter registration forms where it has a box that says Alabama Drivers License Number of last four digits of a Social Security Number and it does NOT say whether the box is optional or mandatory (I wouldn’t be suprised that if one pushed the issue, one would likely find that it is still optional), however, some of the old registration forms where it says that the Social Security Numbers are optional are still in circulation.

  They want either the whole drivers license/ID number or the last 4 of the SSN. If you don’t give either, you can be “registered,” but may not be allowed to vote unless you show a valid state ID when you actually go vote.

• 90 TheOriginalAndy // Oct 28, 2008 at 9:20 pm

  “JimDavidson // Oct 28, 2008 at 2:14 am

  Dude, it is just pathetic to say, in all caps, that there were no falsified voter registrations. If you put false information on a voter registration card, and do so knowingly, that is a falsified voter registration. It might still “count” and the voter involved might never vote. But it is still falsified.”

  NO, IT MEANS THAT AN OPTIONAL BOX HAS SOMETHING WRONG IN IT, BUT THE PEOPLE ARE REAL PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN NEW MEXICO AND ARE ELIGIBLE TO VOTE AND ACTUALLY SIGNED THE FREAKIN’ FORM!

  Since they were REAL people who lived in New Mexico and were eligible to vote and who signed the forms the registrations by definition were NOT falsified.

• 91 TheOriginalAndy // Oct 28, 2008 at 9:24 pm

  “They want either the whole drivers license/ID number or the last 4 of the SSN. If you don’t give either, you can be ‘registered,’ but may not be allowed to vote unless you show a valid state ID when you actually go vote.”

  While I would question the constitutionality of having to show a Drivers License or Social Security Number at the polls (since neither are likely constitutional), you just proved my point because all the person who filled out the form would have to do is pull out their drivers license or Social Security card and they could vote.

  Also, just because they “want” a drivers license or Social Security Number it does NOT mean that it is legally required.

• 92 paulie cannoli // Oct 28, 2008 at 9:28 pm

  DL/state ID only, no SS card, and they won’t let me vote without it, so I guess I won’t be voting, since they won’t renew my ID without an SS number.

• 93 TheOriginalAndy // Oct 28, 2008 at 9:31 pm

  “So what if you’ve done some stuff in the past? Who hasn’t?”

  I haven’t done anything wrong in conjunction with petitioning!

• 94 TheOriginalAndy // Oct 28, 2008 at 9:47 pm

  Here is a video of Gary and Kay Fincher working on the New Mexico LP voter registration drive.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdIdgHvILOc

  Note that they clearly say voter registration. Note that they clearly say that the voter registrations will help keep a third party on the ballot. They have signs on the table that say LIBERTARIAN in big, bold letters and they can clearly be heard saying Libertarian.

• 95 TheOriginalAndy // Oct 28, 2008 at 9:50 pm

  Here’s a video of the Finchers working on the New Mexico LP voter registration drive.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdIdgHvILOc

  Note that they clearly say voter registration. Note that they clearly say that by filling out a voter registration they will be helping to keep a third party choice on the ballot. Note that they have signs on the table that say LIBERTARIAN in big, bold letters and that they clearly say Libertarian.

• 96 Gary Fincher // Oct 29, 2008 at 1:44 pm

  I checked it out in Rhode Island, and they indicate that if you don’t provide a SSN or DL or State ID, the elections board will assign you a random number.

  Sure, ID is required when you actually vote, but a lot of things can be used to “ID” you, including newspaper clippings and HS yearbooks. (I used both when applying to get a passport). In theory, the mayor walking by as you’re in line to vote who knows you, verifying that that’s who you are, is sufficient ID to let you vote.

• 97 Gary Fincher // Oct 29, 2008 at 1:46 pm

  92 paulie cannoli // Oct 28, 2008 at 9:28 pm

  DL/state ID only, no SS card, and they won’t let me vote without it, so I guess I won’t be voting, since they won’t renew my ID without an SS number.

  They just have to be satisfied that they know who you are, and that you won’t vote twice. I’ll bet you’d be surprised: if you take ample documentation that proves you are who you are (but without state-issued ID), they might very well let you vote. Get creative.

• 98 TheOriginalAndy // Nov 12, 2008 at 1:38 am

  I notice that Jim Davidson and Tom Knapp both ran away from this thread rather than retract the bullshit lies that they spread.

• 99 paulie cannoli // Nov 12, 2008 at 1:41 am

  This thread is from October 6. We’ve had about 500 threads since then. That may have something to do with it.

• 100 TheOriginalAndy // Nov 12, 2008 at 1:55 am

  Bullshit. Davidson and Knapp certainly had no problem pulling this thread up when it came to posting slander. We refuted it and they ran away.

  I don’t appreciate having my name dragged through the mud, and I also don’t appreciate having the name of one of my friends/co-workers/colleagues – Gary – dragged through the mud either.

  Decent people retract and apologize after they bear false witness against thy neighbor.

• 101 paulie cannoli // Nov 12, 2008 at 1:56 am

  You really think it’s impossible for people to lose track of a thread after it’s on around page 50?

• 102 TheOriginalAndy // Nov 12, 2008 at 2:02 am

  They conviently “lost track” of this thread after we refuted all of the charges.

  I don’t respect people who spread bullshit and then run away.

• 103 TheOriginalAndy // Nov 12, 2008 at 2:02 am

  They conviently “lost track” of this thread after we refuted all of the charges.

  I don’t respect people who spread bullshit and then run away.

• 104 Gary Fincher // Nov 12, 2008 at 2:03 am

  “You really think it’s impossible for people to lose track of a thread after it’s on around page 50?”

  Maybe casual observers. But not culpable ones.

  You really think Dick Nixon “lost track” of those 18 minutes of Oval Office tape?

• 105 Gary Fincher // Nov 12, 2008 at 2:04 am

  How come neither Andy, Paulie nor I “lost track”?

• 106 paulie cannoli // Nov 12, 2008 at 2:05 am

  Maybe they just got tired of this conversation? At the very least you should move it to a more current thread. How about the ones about Angela and/or Tom running for President?

  Esp. since it’s really not all that related to the BTP…

• 107 paulie cannoli // Nov 12, 2008 at 2:05 am

  How come neither Andy, Paulie nor I “lost track”?

  In my case, it’s because I posted the thread, so every time someone posts to it it pops up in my email.

• 108 TheOriginalAndy // Nov 12, 2008 at 2:13 am

  “paulie cannoli // Nov 12, 2008 at 2:05 am

  Maybe they just got tired of this conversation? At the very least you should move it to a more current thread.”

  Oh yes, they “got tired” of it after they spread lies and then they ran away after we refuted everything they said.

  Yeah, that’s really a responsible, decent thing to do, spread lies about people and then run away because you are tired of talking about it.

  “How about the ones about Angela and/or Tom running for President?”

  Wow, just what the LP needs.

• 109 paulie cannoli // Nov 12, 2008 at 2:14 am

  You can keep the conversation going all you want. I’m just suggesting you move it to a more current subject post.

• 110 TheOriginalAndy // Nov 12, 2008 at 2:17 am

  Most of or all of the relavent information is here, so this seems like an appropriate place.

• 111 paulie cannoli // Nov 12, 2008 at 2:18 am

  Knock yourself out. Don’t be surprised if everyone else ignores this ancient thread though.

• 112 JimDavidson // Nov 12, 2008 at 4:14 am

  Yawn. You wanna get some coffee, Paulie?

• 113 TheOriginalAndy // Nov 12, 2008 at 6:05 am

  “JimDavidson // Nov 12, 2008 at 4:14 am

  Yawn. You wanna get some coffee, Paulie?”

  So Jim Davidson obvisouly believes that it is OK to spread lies about people and then run away after being called out for it. Spreading lies is the initiation of FRAUD and this is exactly what Jim Davidson has done.

• 114 paulie cannoli // Nov 12, 2008 at 10:58 am

  Yawn. You wanna get some coffee, Paulie?

  I’ve had all the coffee my bladder can hold. Got meth?

• 115 MarcMontoni // Dec 15, 2008 at 9:33 pm

  http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2008/10/boston-tea-party-organizational-update/#comment-18098

  Sorry to re-open an old thread, but I noticed that in comment 4, “Coming Back to the LP” said this:

  That national LP membership graph is bogus…. I know from personal participation at the state and national level that the National LP membership was much higher than shown in the periods from 1980 – 1982, and from 1988 – 1994.

  Actually, the graph isn’t bogus; it’s actually pretty accurate. I would prefer a *monthly* sampling of data points rather than an annual, becuase more data points would make clear a lot of things that aren’t clear with an annual sampling. Monthly sampling, and then a scan of the LNC’s decisions at each quarterly meeting, would probably be fairly revealing as far as a cause-and-effect pattern resulting from LNC actions.

  I was working in the office when the LP peaked at over 12,000 members in 1992. I left in February 1993; my boss at the time, Nick Dunbar, left a couple of months later. Within a year after we left, the LP promptly lost about 4,000 members. I remember because I was reading the membership statistics that were posted to Joe Dehn’s “LPUS” message list (now defunct).

  At the time, I was very upset that the work of three years of my life was being thrown down the toilet, for no other reason than subsequent staff at LPHQ simply failing to do the work necessary. It wasn’t just because of the normal fall-off between Presidential elections. Rather, it was because all of the practices that we had refined to maximize membership retention and assuring new prospect sign-ups were summarily discarded. Membership renewal letters that had been going out monthly, on autopilot, stopped going out. Information packets, in that pre-Internet era, which had been going out on the same day as the new prospects came in, stopped going out at all. I’d organized a weekly “volunteer night” while I was there, which was usually attended by a half-dozen people from the area, and got gobs of LPHQ work done — but after I left, it evaporated. And so on.

  Things didn’t start picking up again until 1994.

  Actually, these numbers, although they are wrong, are not surprising. During the era of Project Archimedes, the LP was in the hands of looters. The pay of the most notorious was based on membership growth. By restating, ie falsifying, the past history to show much lower membership numbers, the direct mail managers were able to skim off huge amounts of LP revenues. They were paid for increases in membership, so they reduced the previous years’ membership numbers in order to fatten their illgotten booty.

  That isn’t true. Salary figures were decided upon in advance by the LNC. You can look at FEC records that show pretty consistent pay amounts (other than raises) of the individual you’re not naming, as well as everyone else in the office — and none of them were based on membership growth. There may have been bonuses awarded for good performance, but they were a small fraction of regular pay, and the standards were set high enough that it was fairly rare the staff got any.

  I used to have records of the actual numbers at the time. But, as I recall, the LP paid membership in the early 80s after the Clark campaign exceeded 20,000.

  It was well into the 20,000s in the early 90s.

  Not in the early 90’s, no it didn’t. See above. It only went above 20,000 for the first time ever in 1996.

  Marc Montoni,

  You used to work in the LP national office in the early 90s. Don’t you have copies of any of the old State Chair reports showing the ACTUAL paid membership numbers?

  They are still hanging out on the web somewhere, and in my paper files. But the numbers on the spreadsheet are accurate. The only times they are NOT accurate are during the Seehusen years. During that time, hundreds of duplicate records were created for members already on the database, and Seehusen consistently reported non-member subscribers as “members” in his reports to the LNC.

  These incorrect practices were all duly reported to Seehusen. Seehusen refused to correct the situation; and his staffers repeatedly attacked those reporting the discrepancies. I don’t believe his numbers have ever been corrected, so in that sense, only for those years, yes, the numbers are “bogus”.

• 116 paulie cannoli // Dec 15, 2008 at 9:38 pm

  Sorry to re-open an old thread

  Oh, c’mon, admit it…you just didn’t want to be a rotten egg, right?

  

Leave a Comment