452 responses so far ↓

• 1 Trent Hill // Nov 11, 2008 at 5:42 pm

  -Anarchist Radical, check.
  -Credentials, check–works with AntiWar.com and is on the LNC
  -Crossover appeal, check–her husband works with CATO/Reason.

• 2 G.E. // Nov 11, 2008 at 5:44 pm

  They really should strip for campaign cash. Let the toothless FEC come after them. Anything done in mockery of the state is for the advancement of liberty.

• 3 paulie cannoli // Nov 11, 2008 at 5:49 pm

  With hyperlinks here

  http://ladyliberty.wordpress.com/2008/11/11/keatonshinghal-2012/

• 4 Mike Theodore // Nov 11, 2008 at 5:57 pm

  I am now terrified, my good friends.

• 5 paulie cannoli // Nov 11, 2008 at 5:59 pm

  So far, I’m for Knapp.

• 6 Andy Craig // Nov 11, 2008 at 6:05 pm

  I’m a big fan of her husband, but I don’t really know enough about Angela to comment yet.

  What I can say for certain is that it’s at least three years too early to be starting this shit.

• 7 paulie cannoli // Nov 11, 2008 at 6:07 pm

  What I can say for certain is that it’s at least three years too early to be starting this shit.

  I disagree. The bigger the head start, the better.

  Smaller parties and independents suffer far more than the big parties from campaigns put together hastily at the last minute without much opportunity to gather steam.

• 8 Mike Theodore // Nov 11, 2008 at 6:15 pm

  Not too early to start, but way too early for me to be paying attention.

  I don’t know who her husband is, but apparently he’s some kind of social butterfly.

• 9 Peter Orvetti // Nov 11, 2008 at 6:44 pm

  Is this for reals, or a mock campaign? My impression was that it was the latter.

• 10 Libertarian Joseph // Nov 11, 2008 at 6:44 pm

  I hope Gravel learns alot and runs again in 2012.

  Other than that, these girls have no business being nominated in 2012. They’re obviously not serious.

• 11 Thomas L. Knapp // Nov 11, 2008 at 6:48 pm

  Wayne Allyn Root’s 2012 campaign started in 2006.

  Because he generally operates as a glutton for punishment, I have to suspect that George Phillies’s 2012 campaign also started in 2006.

  Bob Barr’s 2012 campaign, if he intends to run again, started months ago.

  Too early? Humbug!

• 12 Libertarian Joseph // Nov 11, 2008 at 6:51 pm

  I’m not old enough to run :p

• 13 Andy Craig // Nov 11, 2008 at 7:05 pm

  Mike-

  Her husband, Brian Doherty, is a writer/journalist that floats around the CATO/reason crowd. He wrote “Radicals for Capitalism”, an excellent (only?) history of modern libertarianism.

• 14 Trent Hill // Nov 11, 2008 at 7:11 pm

  Andy,

  Im fairly certain it isnt the ONLY history. But it is certainly the best. I just recenty re-read it.

• 15 Trent Hill // Nov 11, 2008 at 7:11 pm

  And despite floating around with the CATO/Reason crowd, Doherty is an anarcho-capitalist.

• 16 Andy Craig // Nov 11, 2008 at 7:17 pm

  Speaking of which, the post-election slump does seem like a good time to go re-read Radicals for Capitalism. I know a good bit more now from closely observing/following a broad swath of libertarian people and organizations over the past year than I did when I first read the book.

• 17 G.E. // Nov 11, 2008 at 7:41 pm

  Betrayal of the American Right is far better, though not entirely on the same topic.

• 18 Trent Hill // Nov 11, 2008 at 7:46 pm

  Yea,not really on the same topic.

• 19 joeydauben // Nov 11, 2008 at 7:55 pm

  We will go from the most media-savvy ticket to the most attractive, and guys, if ya haven’t seen Shingal at least, then wow. Just put her in front of the cameras. That’s all there is to it.

  Keaton, don’t know her, but she’s pretty dang attractive as well.

  I’d stomach a hot radical ticket. So I’m a sell-out to the reformer crowd. Oh well. I’m driven more by marketing a product than actually trying it out (just give me the glitter and pretty pictures and flashy images…yay)

  Ha, I gotta stop drinking so much coffee on newspaper deadline day.

• 20 joeydauben // Nov 11, 2008 at 8:32 pm

  Let me rephrase that.

  I wouldn’t compromise just for the sake of good looks; the platform (brains) has to be there, too, but honestly, this is a good ticket.

  I bought WAR2012.com. Hmm. Hope that generates some buzz.

• 21 Libertarian Joseph // Nov 11, 2008 at 8:34 pm

  I don’t think it will generate a damn thing.

• 22 LaineRBT // Nov 11, 2008 at 8:48 pm

  So, is she a stripper first and a libertarian activist second or what?

• 23 Eternaverse // Nov 11, 2008 at 8:54 pm

  This ticket is Awesome! It would be possible for them to get both the Libertarian Party and Boston Tea Party nomination, which would be very cool.

• 24 Libertarian Joseph // Nov 11, 2008 at 9:00 pm

  Very cool? Very ineffective.

• 25 Ross Levin // Nov 11, 2008 at 9:01 pm

  I am announcing my 2036 bid for the presidency. I will be running as an independent, so I will need all of the head start on fundraising that I can get.

  Go to http://www.poop.com for more details.

• 26 Libertarian Joseph // Nov 11, 2008 at 9:02 pm

  Why not just run for 2012? You won’t win, so you won’ have to worry about fulfilling the age requirement.

• 27 Eternaverse // Nov 11, 2008 at 9:10 pm

  We in the Boston Tea Party are already planning for the 2012 presidential election. If the LP does not nominate an ethical candidate we will most certainly nominate one of our own. We will have had a lot of time to plan, unlike in the most recent election. We will at a very MINIMUM place a candidate on 25 state ballots, and will try to be on all 50. It would be wise for the LP to nominate an ethical candidate and for Angela to seek our endorsement.

• 28 Ross Levin // Nov 11, 2008 at 9:11 pm

  I’m too busy for 2012. Although I’m not sure about 2016 or any of the following years. I might use them to build up my support.

• 29 Libertarian Joseph // Nov 11, 2008 at 9:11 pm

  Ah I see. So the BTP is like a lobbying firm to the LP.

• 30 Robert Milnes // Nov 11, 2008 at 9:25 pm

  Keaton and ENM are presently my top 2 for vp on my Progressive Libertarian Alliance Independent ticket. I’ll be seeking as many ballots as possible including LP & BTP, partly to avoid splitting the vote.

• 31 Denver Delegate // Nov 11, 2008 at 9:34 pm

  The “Keaton/Shinghal 2012″ campaign already sounds at least four times better than the “Houston 500.”

• 32 paulie cannoli // Nov 11, 2008 at 9:35 pm

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houston_(porn_star)

• 33 paulie cannoli // Nov 11, 2008 at 9:36 pm

  Copy and paste URL.

• 34 G.E. // Nov 11, 2008 at 10:17 pm

  Doherty is an anarcho-capitalist.

  I guess so. His take on the 14th amendment and the Heller decision is VERY non-anarchist, non-paleo, and non-libertarian, though, and right in line with the cretins at tReason/Stato.

  Yea,not really on the same topic.

  Not entirely, but there is a lot of overlap (between Betrayal of the American Right and Radicals for Capitalism), and while Doherty’s book is very very good, Rothbard’s is better (and a lot shorter).

• 35 Ross Levin // Nov 11, 2008 at 10:32 pm

  Robert - why not try to run for a more local office?

• 36 HumbleTravis // Nov 11, 2008 at 10:42 pm

  Raimondo’s book (Reclaiming the American Right) overlaps significantly with Rothbard’s and I’d recommend it as well.

• 37 Eternaverse // Nov 11, 2008 at 10:48 pm

  Tom Knapp just announced, see knapp2012.com.

• 38 JimDavidson // Nov 11, 2008 at 11:04 pm

  The thing that Michelle wrote, “we’re fucking Libertarians” is the highest recommendation conceivable. And the other stuff is good, too. They have 150 supporters on their Facebook group.

  Libertarian Joseph isn’t a libertarian.

• 39 Libertarian Joseph // Nov 11, 2008 at 11:06 pm

  You’re right, Jim. I’m ancap.

  I bet I’m still more libertarian than you.

• 40 Fred Church Ortiz // Nov 11, 2008 at 11:06 pm

  The thing that Michelle wrote, “we’re fucking Libertarians” is the highest recommendation conceivable.

  I thought it meant something else at first.

• 41 johncjackson // Nov 11, 2008 at 11:12 pm

  The only radical candidate is the one that doesn’t run.

• 42 johncjackson // Nov 11, 2008 at 11:13 pm

  Yeah, I read that “we’re fucking Libertarians” in the same way as ” we’re fucking Matt Damon” and I thought that was the vote getting strategy.

• 43 paulie cannoli // Nov 11, 2008 at 11:13 pm

  The only radical candidate is the one that doesn’t run.

  Horsepucky.

• 44 TheOriginalAndy // Nov 12, 2008 at 1:22 am

  Ifr anyone takes the campaign of this stupid, phony, lying, backstabbing, crazy, fucked up bitch seriously then this party is truly fucked.

  Those of you who think that Angela Keaton is a wonderful person don’t know the other side of her.

• 45 TheOriginalAndy // Nov 12, 2008 at 1:44 am

  “Trent Hill // Nov 11, 2008 at 5:42 pm

  -Anarchist Radical, check.”

  Angela Keaton is a fraud. She’s a mentally unstable whackjob who initiates force and fraud and can’t debate her way out of paper bag.

  “-Credentials, check–works with AntiWar.com and is on the LNC”

  So what if she works at Anti-War.com, this doesn’t mean that she’d be a good candidate.

  So what if she’s on the LNC, lots of people who have been elected to the LNC who don’t deserve to be there.

  “-Crossover appeal, check–her husband works with CATO/Reason.”

  Oh wow, the Stato Institute and tReason, her husband works for sell out groups. Whoop-dee-freakin’-do.

• 46 Gary Fincher // Nov 12, 2008 at 1:53 am

  I certainly don’t have anything against Michelle; I’ve met her and like her.

  Angela, however, is a different story. She seems to have ZERO integrity and ZERO grams of common courtesy. She doesn’t have enough people skills to be ANY kind of candidate, let alone president.

  Sorry, this is a non-starter.

• 47 Thomas M. Sipos // Nov 12, 2008 at 1:55 am

  Robert Milnes: “Keaton and ENM are presently my top 2 for vp on my Progressive Libertarian Alliance Independent ticket.”

  Keaton is far better established, with far more support, than you, Robert.

  This being so, how can you offer her the vp slot?

  Wouldn’t it be more appropriate for you to beg her to run as her vp?

  Since you have no support Robert, wouldn’t it be more realistic for you to go around begging the real candidates to let you run as their vp?

• 48 TheOriginalAndy // Nov 12, 2008 at 2:19 am

  “Keaton is far better established, with far more support, than you, Robert.”

  Keaton should be a candidate to join Milnes in a mental institution.

• 49 paulie cannoli // Nov 12, 2008 at 2:22 am

  When you put it that way, it’s bound to convince everybody.

• 50 Trent Hill // Nov 12, 2008 at 2:45 am

  Times like these make me wish GE had a “ban one person per decade” policy. I’d skip Libertarian Joseph, Robert Milnes, and Catholic Trotskyite just to give “TheOriginalAndy” the boot. He’s obnoxious.

• 51 paulie cannoli // Nov 12, 2008 at 2:48 am

  I’m against banning any of them. None of them have really crossed the line (such as serious threats, revealing personal information without consent, knowingly making malicious false claims and the like).

• 52 Trent Hill // Nov 12, 2008 at 2:50 am

  Sure. Just being obnoxious. And I’d never actually ban any of them. But if I had to ban just one. It’d definetly be Andy.

• 53 paulie cannoli // Nov 12, 2008 at 2:52 am

  He’s definitely very persistent.

• 54 G.E. // Nov 12, 2008 at 3:04 am

  G.E. is no longer in charge at any level, Trent.

  But I’d never ban Andy, who is an awesome guy.

  I remain neutral in the feud between him and Ms. Keaton, because I’m not the type of guy who likes to stir shit up, yaknow?

• 55 Steven Druckenmiller // Nov 12, 2008 at 3:19 am

  Oh goody…so a ticket that glibly refers to “retarded children” and stripping for fundraising is the kind of thing we get to look forward to for the next four years.

  Yippee. This has train wreck written all over it.

  I get that “Cargo Cult Seriousness” point Mr. Knapp made earlier…but really? Can’t we try just a little?

• 56 paulie cannoli // Nov 12, 2008 at 3:20 am

  Why bother?

• 57 chuckmoulton // Nov 12, 2008 at 3:29 am

  Angela has credentials, a quick wit, a radical message, and the makings of a great campaign staff on deck. I hope she’s serious about running!

• 58 paulie cannoli // Nov 12, 2008 at 3:31 am

  What campaign staff?

• 59 Steven Druckenmiller // Nov 12, 2008 at 3:35 am

  Mr. Moulton,

  Does she sound serious to you? The fact that you have to wonder if this is serious should make you reevaluate your support.

• 60 Jeremy Young // Nov 12, 2008 at 3:40 am

  Steven, not really. I supported Stephen Colbert in early 2008, and I was pretty darn sure he wasn’t serious.

• 61 chuckmoulton // Nov 12, 2008 at 3:53 am

  Does she sound serious to you?

  I don’t think running for an office and telling jokes / having fun are mutually exclusive. A candidate that can disarm, entertain, and educate with humor is refreshing.

  What campaign staff?

  Angela is networked into many people in the policy / think tank scene and has a gifted writer for a husband. That leads me to believe she could tap some of them for policy papers and/or speechwriting help.

  And she’s networked into the radical caucus which can help her with early support, conventioneering, etc. I bet she could easily recruit a decent campaign treasurer from that mix.

  That may all seem trivial, but in 2008 several candidates for the LP nomination started knowing practically no one and floundering about for campaign infrastructure.

• 62 Steven Druckenmiller // Nov 12, 2008 at 3:57 am

  I do not think a sense of humor is mutually exclusive to being a candidate either.

  On the other hand, the entire post about the candidacy sounds like a glib joke, so forgive me if that is how I am taking it.

• 63 JimDavidson // Nov 12, 2008 at 4:10 am

  Steven, if this campaign manages not to take itself too seriously, it could be a lot of fun. It is going to raise a lot of money. There is nothing wrong with having fun.

  And what’s wrong with making a topical reference to the mentally handicapped?

• 64 JimDavidson // Nov 12, 2008 at 4:12 am

  I also think that several million votes could be pulled by attractive female libertarians who amuse the voters. It would make an excellent protest vote.

• 65 Steven Druckenmiller // Nov 12, 2008 at 4:25 am

  I did not see the words “mentally handicapped” in there. What I did see was “retarded”, which is just about as outdated as “mongoloid”.

  If you act like a joke, treat is as a joke and willingly acknowledge that you are voting for the ticket for precisely that reason, just do not be surprised when people think “Libertarian = joke”.

  If you want a ticket that is “for the lulz”, we can just call it the Clown Party and be done with it.

• 66 TheOriginalAndy // Nov 12, 2008 at 5:39 am

  “Trent Hill // Nov 12, 2008 at 2:45 am

  Times like these make me wish GE had a “ban one person per decade” policy. I’d skip Libertarian Joseph, Robert Milnes, and Catholic Trotskyite just to give “TheOriginalAndy” the boot. He’s obnoxious.”

  Trent, I am merely exposing the TRUTH about Angela Keaton. At one time I too ASSUMED that Angela Keaton was a decent person, but this was BEFORE she showed me her TRUE character.

  I spoke to Angela Keaton 3 times.

  The first time was on the phone in early July of 2007. Paul was talking to her and she put me on the phone with Angela and I spoke to her for about 10-15 minutes. She SEEMED like good person to me (but remember, appearances can be decieving).

  The 2nd time that I spoke to her was about 2 weeks later at the LNC meeting in Pittsburg. She was sitting at a bar in the hotel lobby speaking to Aaron Starr and Paul. I had a brief, cordial conversation with her. Once again, she SEEMED like a decent person.

  The third time that I spoke to her was at the LP National Convention in Denver. This was a very brief but cordial conversation. And once again, she SEEMED like decent person. In fact, I actually VOTED FOR HER to be on the LNC (which turned out to be a BIG MISTAKE and a vote I wish that I could take back).

  So these were my interactions with Angela Keaton. I didn’t know her very well, but from what I knew of her I had a positive opinion of her at the time.

  Gary interacted with Angela Keaton even less than I did. In fact, I think that his only interaction with her was a very brief but friendly conversation at the National Convention in Denver (a conversation which probably lasted under a minute). Gary had also ASSUMED that Anegla Keaton was a decent person and he also voted for her to be on the LNC (a vote which he also regrets).

  This all changed after the Sean Haugh petition buring scandal broke. For those of you who don’t know, Sean Haugh is a major league asshole and a phony as well as an incompetent goofball who has been leeching off of the Libertarian Party for years.

  Sean Haugh, acting on a petty grudge (which he created) as well as acting as a cover-up man for the rip off artist Scott Kohlhaas, attempted to burn 2,000 Libertarian Party ballot access petition signatures which were gathered by vetran Libertarian Party petitioner/activist Gary Fincher. Mr. Fincher had been invited to petition in Massachusetts by the State Chair of the Massachusetts LP George Phillies (note that Mr. Fincher had petitioned in Massachusetts 15 times before this and had gathered the signatures to put George Phillies on the ballot when he ran for office sevearl years ago, and also note that Mr. Fincher had been in Massachusetts as recently as the fall of 2007 when he gathered a large number of signatures for Carla Howell’s End the Massachusetts State Income Tax initiative as well as another initiative to Reduce Penalties on Marijuana Pocession). Note that the destruction of ballot access petition signatures is a crime and that in Massachusetts it actually says that it is a crime on the petition forms. Sean Haugh said to “burn (quite literally)” the signatures “whether they had been paid for or not” which showed a CLEAR intent to defraud Mr. Fincher and/or Libertarian Party donors out of money (note that if the signatures had been destroyed, LP donors would have had to have paid a mercenary signature gathering outfit to replace the 2,000 signatures at a higher pay rate than what Mr. Fincher was getting). Sean Haugh said this in an e-mail and he actually called up Carol McMahon of the Massachusetts LP and ORDERED her to do this. Fortunately Carolyn McMahon is not twsited like Sean Haugh is and did not carry out this ILLEGAL and IMMORAL order. Incidentily, the signatures were found to have been of high validity after they were checked, and also note that Mr. Fincher was the top petitioner while he was on that petition drive.

  Sean Haugh has a track record of engaging in other nefarious and irrational acts which have damaged the party, and he is largely responsible for 5 of the LP’s ballot access FAILURES this year.

  When this scandal was fresh in the news Angela Keaton came out of nowhere and spread a bunch of lies about myself and Mr. Fincher in a pathetic attempt to sheild Sean Haugh so he can keep leeching off of Libertarian Party donors as he has been doing for the past decade plus. The statements that she made were so twisted that if any of you people knew the actual facts then you would lose all respect for Angela Keaton (as I did).

  For instance, Angela Keaton claimed that I showed up at the LNC meeting in Pittsburg and “extorted” money out of the LNC. This is a COMPLETE DISTORION of reality. What REALLY happened was that I worked on a Libertarian Party ballot access petition drive in Nebraska in the fall of 2006. Gary was also there as was Paul and another guy named Mark (note that prior to Nebraska, Gary, Mark, and I had successfully put the LP back on the ballot in North Dakota). Scott Kohlhaas was the fundraiser for this petition drive. He had a deal with the Nebraska LP where he was to recieve a 40% per week fundraising commission and the remaining 60% was to be used to pay the petitioners. Mr. Kohlhaas had assured us that we would be paid as we went while we were in Nebraska. What ended up happening is that Mr. Kohlhaas renegged on his agreement, as he paid himself his PROJECTED commission before he had finished raising enough money to complete the project, and then he left the petitioners unpaid for months and months with false promises that “the money is about to come.” So Slick Scotty took most of the money for himself and left us hanging. Paul and Mark were hard up for cash so I TOOK IT UPON MYSELF TO PAY THEM $6,000 OUT OF MY OWN POCKET SO THEY DID NOT HAVE TO WAIT TO GET PAID (and note that Kohlhaas had told me that I was going to get paid within two weeks so at the time I had assumed that I was going to be reimubrsed quickly). I was also owed another $4,000, so I left Nebraska (and note that Paul, Mark, and I went to Maryland after this and saved ballot access for the Maryland LP) being owed a WHOPPING SUM OF $10,000. Yes, you read that right, $10,000. Gary was owed $4,000. We were assured that the money was “coming soon” on several occassions, but we did not recieve the bulk of it until 10-11 MONTHS AFTER THE WORK WAS DONE.

  I ask everyone out there to think about this, how would you feel if you did work (and Nebraska was a SHITTY place to work, especially during that time period) and told that you were going to be paid, but then had $10,000 or $4,000 withheld from you for months and months, and what if you did not recieve the majority of it until 10-11 months later? I bet that you’d be pissed.

  Now what if the fundraiser Scott Kohlhaas claimed that he was going to pay you a .50 cent per signature bonus/penalty fee for the pay being late and then you NEVER recieved it? I bet that you’d be even more pissed.

  What if the fundraiser Scott Kohlhaas had made continual promises to pay you, but then didn’t deliver, and then what if the Chairman of the Party Bill Redpath ordered him to pay you, but he still didn’t? I bet that you’d be even more pissed.

  Then what if the Chairman of the Party Bill Redpath said that he would pay you “credit card style interest” due to the payment being late, and then you NEVER recieved it? I bet that you’d be even more pissed.

  What if Scott Kohlhaas stopped returning your phone calls after a March 10 conference call where he promised to pay you, and during which he ADMITTED that he had already been paid and that he “kept the fundraiser (himself) happy” while you didn’t get paid (note that this conference call is recorded and put it in mp3 format)? I bet that you’d being pretty fucking furious.

  Then, what if Scott Kohlhaas (acting upon pressure from Bill Redpath), claimed that he was going to raise the rest of the money to pay you, but then told Bill Redpath an amount that screwed you out of the expense money for motels and travel which you were promised? I bet that you’d be fuming.

  Then what if Shane Cory got involved, and he turned out to be a difficult person with which to deal and who didn’t care if you didn’t recieved the expenses and pentalty/interest that you were promised? Man, I bet that you’d really be pissed now!

  So what if you just happened to be working in Ohio (where your work is instramental in getting the LP on the ballot in Ohio for 2008) when you heard that there was an LNC meeting in Pittsburg so you decided to show up to get some anwsers, and then what if you showed up in the back of the room and you overheard Admiral Colley says, “Let’s just not pay these guys…” (Hey, who cares if we are a part of a party that defrauds petitioners out of money and employees sleezeballs to work as fundraisers and Political Directors? Who cares if we are on the ballot or not?) to which Bill Redpath responds, “For those of you who don’t know, t? he petitioners in question are in the back of the room right now.” which causes Admiral Colley gets an “Oh shit!” look of embarrassment on his face? Wow, talk about a slap in the face!

  What if the LNC wants to cover-up the fact that the fundraiser that they hire is a rip off artist and a lying sleezeball (check the FEC reports over the past couple of years and look at all of the payments that whent to Scott Kohlhaas of Alaska. Note that he was recieving $5,000 per month checks from the LNC during a time in which they KNEW that he owed us money, and note that this does NOT include money that he makes off of other projects such as deals with state parties and off of Alaska ballot initiatives), so they agree to pay you the money that you are owed for your work to put the Libertarian Party back on the ballot in Nebraska for the 2008 election (which actually saved the party time and money since you did most of the work to give the party a headstart on ballot access for 2008), but they limit the fundraising to the handful of individuals who were sitting in the room (Note that Admiral Colley, Angela Keaton, and Shane Cory contributed NOTHING, not that they were obligated to contribute, but the fact that they did not illustrates what kind of people they are, given that Colley and Cory helped hold up your pay, and given that Angela Keaton would go on to lie about you about a year later), so an agreement is finally made to pay you, but it does NOT include the interest/penalty bonus as promised by Bill Redpath and Scott Kohlhaas, and then the PAY IS HELD UP FOR ANOTHER 6 WEEKS BY SHANE CORY (and note that Shane wanted to charge us for a wire transfer fee to recieve our pay after he delayed us getting it for another 6 freakin’ weeks!)?

  Then what if Shane Cory acts like the National LP has absolutely no interest in whether or not the Libertarian Party is on the ballot in Nebraska or not, but then in a fundraising letter that he send out in September of 2007 one of the thing that he asks for a donation for is to finish the LP of Nebraska petition drive (note that we finished 80% of it but then got called away to rescue the LP of Maryland)? WAIT A FREAKIN’ MINUTE HERE, I THOUGHT THAT SHANE SAID THAT THE LNC HAD NO INTEREST IN WHETHER OR NOT THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY OF NEBRAKSA WAS ON THE BALLOT OR NOT! Note that several months after this the LNC paid some woman to finish the LP of Nebraska petition drive (it is on the FED reports that they paid her).

  So let’s get this straight. I am owed $4,000, I bail out the petition drive by paying two petitioners - Mark and Paul - $6,000 OUT OF MY OWN POCKET (HOW MANY PEOPLE HERE WOULD HAVE DONE THIS? WOULD TRENT HILL OR ANGELA KEATON HAVE PAID $6,000 OUT OF THEIR OWN POCKETS WHEN THEY WERE ALREADY OWED $4,000, WHICH MEANT THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN OWED $10,000?), so I am owed $10,000. Gary is owed $4,000. We were told that we’d be paid all of the money while were were in Nebraska. We did NOT recieve it. We were told we’d get it within 2 weeks. This did not happen. Then we were told that we’d get it by the end of December. It did not come. Then we were told we’d recieve it by the end of January. It did not come. Then we were told that we’d recieve it all by the end of February and it did not come. We were told that we’d recieve all of the money by the end of March and it did not come. Some payments did trickle in between February and late March but by early April the payments dried up. We did not recieve the rest of the money until September 1st, 10-11 months after the work was done (a long delay like this was NEVER part of the agreement).

  During this time period Gary went through some personal tragedy as he had a major car problem and later ended up in the hospital for a few weeks from a foot infection (he came close to having to get his foot amputated). LP National KNEW that Gary was in the hospital and really needed the money but they still dragged their feet (pun intended) about paying him.

  For Angela Keaton to later twist these events into “They showed up at an LNC meeting and extorted money out of the LNC.” is completely insane and is a demented version of reality.

  If anyone had money extorted from them it was Gary and I (Paul and Mark as well but they were shielded from most of this since I paid them out of my own pocket) as FRAUD was initiated against us and we essentially thousands of dollars held hostage from us in the form of an interest free loan.

  This is just one example of the VILE SLANDER that came from Angela Keaton in her attempt to protect the job of Sean Haugh. Other LIES from Ms. Keaton have already been debunked on other threads. Did Angela Keaton stick around after making her bogus claims? Did she ever post a retraction or an apology? No, she spread lies and then ran away!

  As if this wasn’t bad enough, Angela Keaton then went on to stab Paul in the back. Paul had bought into Angela con-job and considered Angela to be a friend. The two even spoke of working on various projects together. Paul knows Gary and I quite well and had intimate knowledge of many of the events that were being discussed in regaurds to the petition buring scandal, the Nebraska fundraising scandal, etc…, so Paul posted some factual information that backed up Gary and myself. After doing this, his “friend” Angela Keaton called up Paul and started screaming and cursing at him like a MANIAC and said that she was never going to speak to him again and that she was going to try to prevent him from working and then she hung up the phone on him (this childish tantrum from Ms. Keaton was very Sean Haugh like, so it is not suprising that these to “birds” flock together). Once again, Paul had done NOTHING more than post some facts that he KNEW to be true in relation to the sitaution with Gary and I, and for this his “friend” Angela Keaton STABBED HIM IN THE BACK. Paul was hurt by Angela Keaton turning on him for no legitimate reason, and Angela Keaton NEVER apologized for this.

  This tells you what kind of person Angela Keaton really is, and what it says is NOT good as she is a liar and a backstabber and is mentally unstable.

• 67 TheOriginalAndy // Nov 12, 2008 at 5:41 am

  “chuckmoulton // Nov 12, 2008 at 3:29 am

  Angela has credentials, a quick wit, a radical message, and the makings of a great campaign staff on deck. I hope she’s serious about running!”

  Then you must want to see the Libertarian Party get flushed down the toilet.

• 68 TheOriginalAndy // Nov 12, 2008 at 5:52 am

  “Trent Hill // Nov 12, 2008 at 2:50 am

  Sure. Just being obnoxious. And I’d never actually ban any of them. But if I had to ban just one. It’d definetly be Andy.”

  That’s the way to stand up for free speech, Trent!

  Somebody says something that you don’t like and then ban them!

  It is really easy for you to sit back on your high horse when you arent’t the one who got ripped off, lied to, stabbed in the back, and slandered.

  Tell us Trent, have you ever had thousands of dollars that you were owed withheld from you for months and months?

  Did you ever have a person that you barely knew but would have considered to be a friendly acquaintance come out of the woodwork and post a bunch of lies about you on-line (like what Ms. Keaton did to Gary and I)?

  Did you ever have a person you thought to be a friend stab you in the back (like what Ms. Keaton did to Paul)?

  Are you a person that has to be bit by a snake yourself in order to know that snakes can be dangerous?

  Trent, if you were the one that got stabbed in the back I’d bet that you’d be singing a different tune.

• 69 Thomas L. Knapp // Nov 12, 2008 at 7:49 am

  “Somebody says something that you don’t like and then ban them!”

  Well, hell — Sean Haugh says something that you and Gary Fincher don’t like, and you claim he should go to jail, not just be banned from some blog.

• 70 TheOriginalAndy // Nov 12, 2008 at 8:25 am

  “Well, hell — Sean Haugh says something that you and Gary Fincher don’t like, and you claim he should go to jail, not just be banned from some blog.”

  Wow, Tom just illustrated his lack of intelligence and shows why nobody should take him seriously as a candidate for anything.

  Sean Haugh - as Political Director of the Libertarian Party - ORDERED 2,000 high validity ballot access petition signatures to be BURNED (QUITE LITERALLY). This is not merely making a statement, this is the ordering of a CRIME.

  This is like if a gangster orders a hit (ie-murder), or a government official gives an order that violates the Constitution.

  The destruction of ballot access petition signatures is in fact a crime. In Massachusetts it actually says that it is a crime on the petitions, as it says that anyone who alters, defaces, mutilates, destroys, or supresses a petition is guilty of a crime with fines of up to $1,000 and up to one year in prison.

  Sean Haugh ordered a CRIME to be committed. This is something that is a crime from a libertarian perspective as it is the destruction of property and fraud.

  Sean Haugh had a clear criminal intent to defraud Mr. Fincher and/or Libertarian Party donors out of money, not to mention the fact that Sean Haugh’s actions were also an attempt to defraud the candidates on the petition as well as the voters of Massachusetts.

  Attempting to committ and/or ordering a crime to be committed is in fact a crime.

  The fact of the matter is that Sean Haugh abused his position within the LP and ordered a crime to be committed, and in addition to this, he squandered thousands of dollars of donors money and contributed to the Libertarian Party failing to make the ballot in several states this year.

  I have not ordered any crimes to be committed nor have I said anything that was not true.

• 71 miche // Nov 12, 2008 at 8:35 am

  I’ve gotten such a kick out of these comments and I don’t quite know where to start but I’ll attempt to quell a few worries starting with this one:

  I haven’t stripped in many years but after my last national media exposure,, I learned that stripping for politics makes good news. And even though my husband keeps me quite well cared for, I’ve no problem swinging around a brass pole again for a good cause.

  On the Paul/Angela issue (and I’m only assuming we’re talking about the same Paul), the problem is that Paul doesn’t respect boundaries. I’m happy to qualify that comment with details but I don’t want to clog the thread with a book length comment. Shoot me an email if you want the skinny…

  Retarded isn’t a bad word but even if it were, libertarians can’t be shy about saying it. Jeez, you’d think some people here took being PC a leetle beet too seriously.

  If you think this candidacy is a joke then I invite you to review the efforts and results of Barr/Root 2008.

  Please visit my site for updates on Keaton/Shinghal 2012 positions and talking points.

• 72 Thomas M. Sipos // Nov 12, 2008 at 10:07 am

  I like Angela. I hope she’s serious about running.

  I never heard of Michelle Shinghal. But I see that she’s wearing a Ron Paul t-shirt. A good sign.

  I gave a write-in vote to Ron Paul in the general election.

  I can be happy with a Keaton/Shinghal ticket in 2012.

• 73 Thomas M. Sipos // Nov 12, 2008 at 10:10 am

  BTW, Shinghal isn’t Elf Nino’s Mom, is she?

• 74 miche // Nov 12, 2008 at 10:40 am

  No, I’m Libertarian Lady but I think ENM is awesome.

• 75 Peter Orvetti // Nov 12, 2008 at 10:41 am

  So you two are actually running?

• 76 paulie cannoli // Nov 12, 2008 at 10:43 am

  On the Paul/Angela issue (and I’m only assuming we’re talking about the same Paul), the problem is that Paul doesn’t respect boundaries. I’m happy to qualify that comment with details but I don’t want to clog the thread with a book length comment. Shoot me an email if you want the skinny…

  Well, if you’re going to talk shit about me, I’d rather you do it in public. We have plenty of space, and you wouldn’t be the first one to put a book length comment up here. Anyone who is not interested can scroll past it.

  I’m really glad you took the time to get my side of the story* before deciding what the whole “paul/Angela problem” is.

  Please do email me your book length comment (I would very much prefer you post it here, though) .

  BTW, Shinghal isn’t Elf Nino’s Mom, is she?

  I’ve only physically met one of them, but no, not if they are to be believed.

• 77 paulie cannoli // Nov 12, 2008 at 10:46 am

  *Actually, no, Michelle never asked me for my side of the story.

• 78 miche // Nov 12, 2008 at 10:48 am

  I wouldn’t talk shit about you Paulie.

• 79 paulie cannoli // Nov 12, 2008 at 10:55 am

  I wouldn’t talk shit about you Paulie.

  Well, you say that you have a lot to say about me. I’d like to know what it is.

• 80 miche // Nov 12, 2008 at 10:58 am

  My awareness of the Paulie/Angela problem has less to do with the very public petitioning issue and more to do with a personal one. As a party to a relationship defining moment (Denver), I understand why Angela has extricated herself from the relationship.

• 81 miche // Nov 12, 2008 at 11:04 am

  Paulie,
  The way you got pissed at us when we didn’t allow you to crash in our room in Denver said everything needed about your respect level for our personal boundaries.

  You wouldn’t (couldn’t) understand that single guys don’t crash in the room of married women unaccompanied by their spouses.

  It’s a respect thing and it indeed changed the temperature of our relationship. The difference between Angela and myself is that you’ve not bashed me in blog threads yet. Of course, there aren’t any business issues that can come between us and therefore no real ammo for you or I to use against each other.

• 82 paulie cannoli // Nov 12, 2008 at 11:18 am

  The way you got pissed at us when we didn’t allow you to crash in our room in Denver said everything needed about your respect level for our personal boundaries.

  Oh, lord. You know, I apologized for that and you said you accepted my apology.

  So to recap, I was drunk and half way to passing out, and the couch was separated by a wall from your bedroom.

  Angela had no problem with me crashing on the floor in her and another married woman’s room. That may have been the night before, or a couple of days earlier. And there was no wall in THAT room.

  There are other things I could say here, which I won’t, because I actually *do* respect boundaries.

  But, in case you forgot, I once again apologize for making some drunken protests before vacating your couch.

  Strangely enough we kept talking after that, and even talked about me moving out to Texas and working for you. It wasn’t until much later that you stopped returning my calls.

  The difference between Angela and myself is that you’ve not bashed me in blog threads yet

  Where did I bash Angela? I’ve been very careful NOT to do that, despite being severely tempted.

  But you said that you had a book length comment about me, and that couldn’t have been it. What else am I guilty of?

• 83 miche // Nov 12, 2008 at 11:28 am

  Um, we never talked about you moving to Texas to work for me. We did talk about my new business and I encouraged you to seek out the course in your area. I did say that there seemed to be huge opportunities in that field of work and that if I ever got to the point of having enough projects I could see farming some out.

  I now encourage you to re-read my comment carefully because I never said there was a book length comment about you. I said that I could write a book length comment on the respect of boundaries issue.

  This isn’t a Paul v Michelle fight and I don’t want it to devolve into such a thing. Your fight isn’t with me. Hell, you probably don’t even need to have a fight with Keaton but the way she’s been trashed (yes, you’ve been ugly toward her) I don’t see a mended fence anytime soon.

• 84 Steven Druckenmiller // Nov 12, 2008 at 11:29 am

  Mmmm, personal in-drama and LP catfights.

  High School Musical IV: The Liberty Years.

• 85 miche // Nov 12, 2008 at 11:42 am

  I know, Steven. Ain’t it grand?

  (is it weird that when I read your name I read it as Drunk on Miller?)

• 86 paulie cannoli // Nov 12, 2008 at 12:03 pm

  I said that I could write a book length comment on the respect of boundaries issue.

  MS] On the Paul/Angela issue (and I’m only assuming we’re talking about the same Paul), the problem is that Paul doesn’t respect boundaries. I’m happy to qualify that comment with details but I don’t want to clog the thread with a book length comment. Shoot me an email if you want the skinny…

  p] My apologies, I thought you said that you had a book full of details about me not respecting boundaries. You brought up one incident, which I apologized for, and you accepted my apology and said it was not going to be a big deal between us, and kept talking to me on the phone for at least a couple of months after that.

  So, are there other things I am guilty of? If so, please let me know what they are.

  This isn’t a Paul v Michelle fight and I don’t want it to devolve into such a thing.

  Neither do I. But I hate having unresolved issues, so if I did something I shouldn’t have, I would like to be aware of it, so I can apologize.
  Also, since you have offered to email it to other people, I’d love to know what all I stand accused of besides the Denver incident, if anything.

  Hell, you probably don’t even need to have a fight with Keaton but the way she’s been trashed (yes, you’ve been ugly toward her)

  Wow. That’s an interesting take on things. When and where was I ugly to her?

  Let me recap what happened.

  There was a thread here several months ago about Sean Haugh ordering that Gary’s petitions be burned. In the course of that thread, at Andy’s insistence, I confirmed that I have never seen Gary do bad work, and that I have seen him do plenty of good work.

  At that time I was still talking to Angela, and she offered to investigate the situation in her capacity as an LNC member, and also to look into other problems which several of us have had with working for LPHQ this year. At the same time she said she did not really have time for it, and I was very careful to tell her several times not to get involved if it would overextend her time commitments.

  Nevertheless she did choose to get involved. She talked to Sean Haugh on the phone and he referred her to one or more people that had some bad things to say about Gary, and she followed up on those. However, Gary provided a long list of positive references, and she admittedly did not follow up on any of them.

  One of the things she said in that thread was that Gary has a history of criminal violence against women. Since that is a very serious charge, I asked for proof - and I was very careful to say that if Angela was too busy, someone else please clue me in to what she is talking about.

  Months later, Tom Knapp clued me in that what was being discussed was Roger Pope’s allegations against Gary. I know Roger, and I know that he is far from being a reliable source. I also know that Gary has denied those charges.
  He provided his middle name and date of birth so anyone could check it out themselves.

  I know that Tom told me at least a month ago, maybe several, that he would get a police report to substantiate the charges, and I asked him to share it with me as soon as he got it. So far, nothing.

  Note that I did not say that Gary did not do what he was accused of. I want to be very careful not to claim to know facts that I do not know. I said that I would like to see some proof. That is all. I have yet to see any proof.

  There is also the NM issue from ten years ago, which has been discussed to death here, at LFV, and on libertarian email and internet boards for years and years. I testified as to what I knew - again, not much, because I was not there. I also said that even if all the charges against Gary were true, that would not excuse ordering that his signatures be burned.

  Angela’s reaction to that was to cut off ties with me. She asked me to not call her or email her. I asked if she would be willing to talk about it first, and she said no.

  Then, maybe a month later she did email me, to say I need to apologize to Sean Haugh and Robert Kraus when ENM posts the files about Gary. At that time I had no idea what files she was talking about, but it turned out it was the same stuff that Joe Knight has been saying for years, of which I am well aware. Gary has addressed those allegations many times in readily available places.

  So I am still wondering what it is that I should be apologizing to Sean and Robert about. If the allegations against Gary are all true, does that justify ordering that perfectly good petitions which Phillies paid for out of his own pocket be burned ten years later in a different state? Does it justify firing me because I know Gary, and because I truthfully gave my take on the situation? Does it justify at one point firing Mark, on a mere (incorrect) guess that he had brought Gary into Massachusetts?

  I’d still love to know what I did that Angela lashed out at me. I’d love to know where I’ve allegedly been ugly to her, when I’ve been very restrained and careful, and the most negative thing I said is that her behavior towards me as described above makes me doubt that she was right and the rest of the LNC was wrong.

  I don’t see a mended fence anytime soon.

  Well, that we can agree on. I can’t have a friend who will flip on me so quickly and thoroughly, without taking the time to talk to me.

• 87 paulie cannoli // Nov 12, 2008 at 12:12 pm

  (is it weird that when I read your name I read it as Drunk on Miller?)

  LOL Great minds think alike…

• 88 Steven Druckenmiller // Nov 12, 2008 at 12:19 pm

  I know, Steven. Ain’t it grand?

  (is it weird that when I read your name I read it as Drunk on Miller?)

  No problem. It happens so routinely that I have become accustomed to it.

  For what it’s worth, you always entertain with your comments on Hit + Run and I do not have any personal feelings about your ticket for the LP. But I do think one thing we got right about Barr/Root was “presentability to the public” is a value in and of itself.

  I drink and appreciate strippers appropriately…but America is still personally conservative enough to think it is not appropriate for a presidential candidate to brag about either.

• 89 paulie cannoli // Nov 12, 2008 at 12:21 pm

  I drink and appreciate strippers appropriately…but America is still personally conservative enough to think it is not appropriate for a p