Libertarian Wayne Allyn Root in Media Across USA
Oct 14, 2010
Libertarian National Congressional Committee Chairman Wayne Allyn Root has once again had a busy week in the media. Wayne was a guest or interviewed by the following media in the past week:
“G. Gordon Liddy Show” National Radio
FoxNews.com “Strategy Room” National on SkypeTV
“Big Biz Show” National Radio
Wayne Guest Hosts on KXNT (CBS Radio) in Las Vegas
Seven Magazine Las Vegas, Nevada (Magazine Interview on Libertarianism in Nevada)
Las Vegas Review Journal Wayne’s Bi-Monthly Column
Newsmax.com Wayne’s Bi-Monthly Column
“Straight Talk w/Jerry Hughes” Accent Radio Network
“The Chuck Wilder Show” National Radio
Wayne co-hosts “Winning Strategies w/ Tim Connolly Show” Houston, TX
“Captain’s America Radio” National Radio
“The Jayne Carroll Show” Hillsboro, Oregon
“KRXA Morning Show with Hal Ginsberg” Monterey, CA
91 responses so far ↓
1 Robert Milnes // Oct 14, 2010 at 10:51 pm
When are the radicals going to take back the LP from the rightists?
Nominate me for 2012. I’ll straighten out the LP.
2 NewFederalist // Oct 15, 2010 at 6:45 am
*SIGH*
3 Don Wills // Oct 15, 2010 at 2:19 pm
I heard Wayne on the G. Gordon Liddy show. He was excellent! Used the word libertarian several times, some in contexts where it could have been interpreted as either Libertarian or libertarian. He made it clear that he didn’t trust the GOP if they win the Presidency, Senate and House in 2012. He concluded that a third party (e.g. the LP) would then become a truly viable force in US politics.
The days when the LP was just a bunch of anarchists are long gone. Folks like Wayne who believe in limited government and the Constitution are the future of the party. For those of you who fancy yourselves as being saviors of the LP by retaking it and making it into an exclusive debating club for radical anarchists – it’s time to either hop on the train or step out of the way.
4 paulie // Oct 15, 2010 at 2:32 pm
When was that exactly? I know there have always been anarchists in the LP, and hopefully always will be, but I don’t know of any time when we were a majority, much less all of the LP. Unless maybe you mean something more by “anarchists” than, well, anarchists?
Try as I have, I’ve never yet found anyone who wants to do that. Can you point me in the right direction?
5 Thomas L. Knapp // Oct 15, 2010 at 2:38 pm
“The days when the LP was just a bunch of anarchists are long gone.”
Not only are they long gone, they were never here.
But hey, if it makes you feel better to try and convince yourself that doing the same thing you’ve done for 40 years is actually doing something different, enjoy.
6 Don Wills // Oct 15, 2010 at 10:17 pm
The Rothbardians (i.e. anarchists) took over leadership of the LP in the early eighties (when Ed Crane et al were ushered out the door) and have had control ever since. Even though LP Chairman Hinkle and a few others on the LNC are anarchists, the times they are a changin’.
paulie – You want to be pointed in a direction to find some anarchists who want to purify the LP and rid it of Wayne Root and his supporters? Look no further than http://www.freedomsphoenix.com.
Thomas – if you think that what Wayne Root is trying to accomplish in the LP is “the same thing you’ve done for 40 years”, you are seriously misinformed.
7 paulie // Oct 15, 2010 at 10:51 pm
The Rothbardians (i.e. anarchists) took over leadership of the LP in the early eighties (when Ed Crane et al were ushered out the door) and have had control ever since.
Rothbardians anarchists have never had leadership of the LP. Been among the leadership, yes, but never anything like had control. And Rothbardian anarchists in the LP are not in favor of “making the party an exclusive debating club for radical anarchists”.
Crane and co. were not ushered out the door – they left after losing a convention vote in 1983. Had they wished to, they could have stuck around and fought for a different result the next time. They decided their efforts were better spent elsewhere.
Rothbard’s core group left the LP in 1989, for the same reason.
You want to be pointed in a direction to find some anarchists who want to purify the LP and rid it of Wayne Root and his supporters?
No, I want to be pointed in the direction of those who fancy (them)selves as being saviors of the LP by retaking it and making it into an exclusive debating club for radical anarchists, as you originally stated. Even taking out the historically inaccurate “re”taking, I’m just not aware of people who want the LP to be an “exclusive debating club for radical anarchists” — as far as I know, such people exist primarily, if not exclusively, in the imagination of those who oppose them.
8 Hmmm ... // Oct 15, 2010 at 10:55 pm
Actually, the Crane machine was primarily of group of pragmatic anarchists trying to present a reasonable message backed by dedicated activists.
The Berglandistas that took over were a combination of jealous anarchists with a more radical but less effective message and opportunists wanting to use the LP to make a buck.
Both of those groups are ancient history to the LP of today.
9 Thomas L. Knapp // Oct 15, 2010 at 11:23 pm
“if you think that what Wayne Root is trying to accomplish in the LP is ‘the same thing you’ve done for 40 years’, you are seriously misinformed.”
What’s different about it, apart from the rhetoric getting an iota more Reaganesque and the internal machinations getting a good deal slimier?
10 George Phillies // Oct 16, 2010 at 4:24 am
“Even though Chairman Hinkle and…”
The title is *Chair*. We rejected the sexist rose fertilizer from animals a very long time ago. If you want to sit on our National Committee, you should at least know the Party Bylaws.
Meanwhile, the National Committee is arguing about where to put the 2012 convention, based on a motion by the Chair to put it in Austin, and opposition efforts to put it in a Resort outside of Las Vegas. Admittedly, Las Vegas stands as the model for a decrepit economy due to government intervention, but, well, I would have to transfer a bunch of posts, and have other things to do at the moment.
11 George Phillies // Oct 16, 2010 at 4:28 am
I believe ‘the same thing as done for the last 40 years’ is closer to trying to arrange a Republican — that’s people who speak well of Ronald Reagan other than in reference to a specific issue , and ‘republican’ as the comprehensible label for the bottom of the Nolan chart — take over of the National Party, but I may be mistaken.
12 George Phillies // Oct 16, 2010 at 4:29 am
Constitutionalism, like the claim that corporations are human beings with civil rights a la Citizens United, is not libertarianism.
13 George Phillies // Oct 16, 2010 at 4:31 am
Perhaps these anarchists are more like the people who believe don’t ask don’t tell is there to protect male soldiers from being attacked by gay soldiers, which is to say, they are fictive.
14 Same Old, Same Old... // Oct 16, 2010 at 4:48 am
Don: “The days when the LP was just a bunch of anarchists are long gone….it’s time to either hop on the train or step out of the way.”
Why? The train isn’t going anywhere.
The LP has been saying this same old shit for 40 years.
It’s always “our time.”
The American people are always “finally fed up with the major parties.”
Victory is always “just around the corner.”
And the LP is always “not your father’s LP anymore.”
Root is great a self-promotion, but his efforts have yet to yield results in terms of electing people or changing state policy.
But as always, the delusional within the LP measure success not by such concrete results, but by the number of times someone said the word “libertarian” on a radio show.
15 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 5:35 am
The Berglandistas that took over were a combination of jealous anarchists with a more radical but less effective message and opportunists wanting to use the LP to make a buck.
Who were these opportunists, and how were they using the LP to make a buck?
16 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 5:48 am
BTW, let’s try this from another direction: why would anyone want to make the LP into an exclusive debating club for anarchists? Having one of those is as easy as setting up a website (or booking a meeting space, once you have found enough anarchists who actually want to take a little time off from being at the computer).
Political parties act within a lot of constraints – government reporting and contribution limit requirements, various other structure and paperwork burdens imposed by the state, including but not limited to ballot access barriers. They suffer from takeover attempts by outside groups looking for a ballot line. Those could all be done away with by being something besides a political party.
Quite a few non-political party libertarian groups already exist, including some anarchist ones, and more are set up on a fairly regular basis.
So, it just doesn’t strike me as even logical that anyone who would want to be in an exclusive anarchist debating club to waste their time on making the LP into one. It just so much easier to do it in any one of numerous other ways.
Maybe that explains why I never meet people who want to do that.
17 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 5:59 am
Meanwhile, the National Committee is arguing about where to put the 2012 convention, based on a motion by the Chair to put it in Austin, and opposition efforts to put it in a Resort outside of Las Vegas.
Austin, please. Confidential sources familiar with Vegas tell me that the place being considered in Vegas is very expensive, not very good, and far from all the action that makes Vegas a fun place to go for many people. It’s basically the closest thing to a cruise ship without actually being a cruise ship, and way less fun than a cruise ship to boot.
The place in Austin where they had the LNC/LSLA was good. Fairly central to the US population for people who travel by car, not too far from a couple of airline hub cities, and right across the street from the greyhound station for dog bus riders like me. The hotel was not overly expensive compared with most of the same class of hotels, and there was a cheaper place right next door. IIRC, wifi worked in the meeting rooms. Food in walking distance. They should seriously consider it if there is a big enough meeting room.
18 Robert Capozzi // Oct 16, 2010 at 6:12 am
pc: why would anyone want to make the LP into an exclusive debating club for anarchists?
me: Great question. It’s all part of the yin/yang; love/hate; victim/victimizer complex. The insane part of our mind LOVES to make “them” wrong to prove that I am right! This sanctimonious desire is a means to project guilt as a way to reclaim innocence.
The anarchist/minarchist duality is a means to create an isolated world of right/wrong in a safe, confined space. That is the LP. Sometimes the anarchists are ascendant in this very little box; sometimes the minarchists are.
Either/or thinking is magnified when both sides of this inconsequential conflict are absolutists. Rothbard was right! It’s logically proven! No, Nozick was right! He’s the deeper thinker!
Perhaps unconsciously, most Ls LIKE the inconsequential standing of the LP. It protects the self-image of “innocent victim,” too “principled” to dirty one’s hands with actual politics.
The notion of lessarchism and the Rodney King Caucus have thus far not healed this dualistic split. The absolutism is ferocious, even metamorphic at this point — fused into the L thought system.
IMO.
19 Robert Capozzi // Oct 16, 2010 at 6:29 am
pc: Who were these opportunists, and how were they using the LP to make a buck?
me: sounds like a reference to Emerling/Cloud.
20 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 6:55 am
sounds like a reference to Emerling/Cloud.
Well, supposing for a minute that it is, is that really a more profitable way to go than, say, selling used cars, being a televangelist, or working as a political consultant/campaign manager/motivational speaker/fundraiser for those with a lot more money than the LP, among other pursuits?
I have a hard time believing that Michael is solely or primarily an “opportunist.”
Is the notion here that he doesn’t really believe in libertarian ideas at all (if so, is there any evidence for that?) Some sort of crypto-socialist notion that making any kind of living (especially above poverty level) as a full time (L)ibertarian is inherently wrong, immoral and dirty?
Could there be some element of jealousy that he is relatively more successful at some tasks than other people?
I want to understand this line of attack, as some people have directed it at me as well.
21 Robert Capozzi // Oct 16, 2010 at 8:03 am
pc, I have no opinion of Cloud and his activities, so I’m not the best person to answer. I do believe that Bergland and his allies changed the path of the LP in ways that I didn’t find productive.
I have no problem with professional Ls making a decent living. Better talent should be compensated for the value they generate.
There does seem to be a thread in the L psyche that is cheap to a fault. Recall Phillies going ballistic over the “Limo Services” line in Barr’s FEC filing. He offered no granularity or analysis of the line item, he seemed to just have images of the author of DOMA cruising around town in a stretch drinking champagne on the donor’s dime, posing fraudently at a L, tarnishing the brand for centuries to come. Catastrophizing can get mighty ugly.
It was an extreme example of the L persecution complex that I believe is near the root of our dysfunction.
22 George Phillies // Oct 16, 2010 at 8:44 am
@17
The Red Rock. Restaurant prices are astronomical.
23 George Phillies // Oct 16, 2010 at 8:48 am
@17
The Red Rock. Restaurant prices are astronomical.
@16 Throwaway line from the people who gave us candidates like Barr, those being people who will hopefully not show their faces too often in the future. That includes several current LNC members who threw away one of the more favorable opportunities we had to advance our party.
Having written the book on the matter, I can happily say that Barr 2008 made the Browne campaigns look like models of fiscal efficiency.
24 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 9:26 am
The Red Rock. Restaurant prices are astronomical.
Especially if it is not in easy walking distance from a variety of outside food choices, as I suspect is likely the case.
I’m guessing that getting there from the airport or bus terminal is not cheap either, and the sleeping rooms are probably not that great a deal either. Am I correct?
25 Don Wills // Oct 16, 2010 at 9:40 am
paulie and George don’t know what they’re talking about concerning the Red Rock. The prices of rooms are about the same as the other choices being considered, and the rooms are beautiful. There are fast foods restaurants, mid-priced restaurants and very expensive restaurants on the property. The time and cost to and from the airport is similar to the hotels on the strip. There is a free shuttle bus to and from the strip. The Red Rock cost more than a billion dollars to build and is only a few years old. The Red Rock is by far and away the most luxurious of the choices being considered.
26 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 9:52 am
Granted, I don’t know what I am talking about from direct experience. But I think my sources are pretty reliable, and very knowledgeable about Vegas. Unfortunately, I’m not at liberty to disclose them.
I concede that I could be wrong.
I do know that the place in Austin was great, because I was there, and Austin also makes sense in general.
27 Don Wills // Oct 16, 2010 at 10:06 am
paulie – Austin is not under consideration for 2012. And your undercover Vegas sources are wrong about a large event like the LP Convention.
28 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 10:17 am
Austin is not under consideration for 2012.
Hmmm, I though Phillies said that Hinkle’s motion was for Austin. Was that wrong, or was it rejected?
What cities are being considered?
29 Root Is Shamless // Oct 16, 2010 at 10:48 am
Since Root is running for the LP presidential nomination (I’m not sure if that is his current official position, as that changes from moment to moment) it’s blatantly sleazy for the LNC, on which Root sits, to set the convention in a place that gives Root a home state advantage.
Root is distasteful not just because of his ignoring of any conflicts of interest in his aggressive self-promotion — but because of the shameless, blatant, no-class style with which Root does so.
Root is like a greedy kid who shoves everyone aside to get grab as much candy as he can — and doesn’t even give a damn if anyone sees him doing it.
30 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 10:53 am
Shamless – great typo
Since Root is running for the LP presidential nomination (I’m not sure if that is his current official position, as that changes from moment to moment) it’s blatantly sleazy for the LNC, on which Root sits, to set the convention in a place that gives Root a home state advantage.
So, we have to eliminate every state from consideration if someone from that state is likely to run for the nomination?
I mean, I have never voted for Root for Chair, or for the Presidential or Vice-Presidential nomination, but I want to be fair as best I can.
31 Don Wills // Oct 16, 2010 at 10:56 am
There is a 2012 LP Presidential candidate from Texas. Having the convention in Texas provides the same advantage to that person as having the convention in LV confers to Root.
But FWIW, IMO, the advantage is very close to zero for any presidential candidate if the convention is held in their home state.
32 Root Is Shameless // Oct 16, 2010 at 11:04 am
Good catch on the typo.
So, we have to eliminate every state from consideration if someone from that state is likely to run for the nomination?
If possible, why not? Normally, we’re only talking a handful of states.
Of course, someone could jump into the race after a convention site is chosen. But not likely if the choice is carefully considered.
But I wouldn’t mind Vegas so much if it was significantly cheaper than any other possible venue. However, I’m sure that Root and Starr (father of the cruise convention), in addition to giving Root the home state advantage, would also like to price out radical povertarians, if possible.
The Root/Reform faction are not Big Tent team players, but are out to purge and dominate, though they accuse their opponents of doing that. Just look at how they purged Angela Keaton, and tried to purge Lee Wrights.
33 George Phillies // Oct 16, 2010 at 11:48 am
And how they tried to purge Rachel Hawkridge from the Convention Committee, and scheduled its phone meetings at an hour she could not attend.
34 George Phillies // Oct 16, 2010 at 11:53 am
From the LNC Discuss list:
“Motion submitted by the Chair:
Shall the LNC hold it’s 2012 national convention in Dallas, TX at the Hyatt
Grand Regency Hotel over the weekend of May 19/20 2012?
Mark Hinkle”
I stand corrected. Dallas, not Austin; they are a bit of a distance apart.
35 George Phillies // Oct 16, 2010 at 12:04 pm
Mind you, for people at any considerable distance this is a distinction without much of a difference.
36 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 12:12 pm
I don’t know the place they are considering in Dallas, but Dallas itself is a great idea.
37 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 12:30 pm
DW,
There is a 2012 LP Presidential candidate from Texas.
Possibly more than one. My understanding is that Mr. Wrights currently lives in Texas, and that there is a move underway to get John Jay Myers into the race (and I didn’t even start it…although I may jump on board!)
Having the convention in Texas provides the same advantage to that person as having the convention in LV confers to Root.
I agree. I don’t think entire states should be eliminated for that reason. Especially since the likely contenders may well change quite a bit between now and 2012:
At this point in 2006, the only candidates in the race that I remember were Kubby and Phillies, neither of which ended up among the top four contenders in Denver. At this point in 2002, Badnarik may or may not have been running, but if he was, he was certainly not a top contender. And at this point in 1998, I’m not sure whether Browne was officially running again or not, but at some point between 1996 and 2000 he said he would only consider running again if the party grew to at least 200,000 or 250,000 dues paying members.
So, I just don’t see that as being a valid objection. We simply are not likely to know what states the likely contenders will be from 2 years ahead of time, and I liked the suggestion someone made of picking the convention cities 4 years ahead rather than two.
But FWIW, IMO, the advantage is very close to zero for any presidential candidate if the convention is held in their home state.
That depends on how good they are at bringing supporters to the convention. If the convention state’s delegation fills up, they might end up in other delegations.
38 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 12:34 pm
Well, Dallas is a major airline hub, as well as the Greyhound hub, so that probably makes a difference.
39 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 12:47 pm
It’s not possible. Consider the examples above from 2006, 2002 and possibly 1998 (I am not sure about 1998). Or consider 1983, when people thought they knew who the nominee would be right up until right before the convention, and were completely wrong.
I’d say it’s extremely likely that people will jump into the race after the convention site is chosen. And while we can select sites in states which are the least likely to produce presidential contenders – low population states with tiny LP memberships, say the Dakotas – other factors should probably be considered more. One thing that helps make a convention a success is a strong state/local LP in the host city area which can help with planning and logistics.
There are would-be purgers/dominators as well as big tenters on “both” sides.
Ms. Keaton left voluntarily, after her employer asked her to choose between her job and remaining on the LNC, in large part out of consideration for her health. The LNC offered to have Mary Ruwart and possibly some other people (I don’t recall exactly) mediate a way for her to continue on the LNC without being disruptive.
In Denver, she told me that she did not want to seek another LNC term and that the party had sold out (we were still on speaking terms then). Then, she changed her mind again and said she needed to run so as to monkeywrench the majority on the LNC as much as possible. Draw your own conclusions.
40 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 12:59 pm
I’m not sure what this clip has to do with the last few comments, but somehow I can’t shake the feeling that there is some sort of connection.
41 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 1:05 pm
This one’s completely unrelated, though. I’m completely sure of that, even if I’m not sure of anything else.
42 George Phillies // Oct 16, 2010 at 1:20 pm
Red Rock: Assuming one can trust mapquest, there are a large number of restaurants at various prices within a short walk, a few tenths of a mile.
There are no other hotels or motels within two miles; there is a La Quinta at a bit over two miles.
43 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 1:24 pm
There are no other hotels or motels within two miles; there is a La Quinta at a bit over two miles.
Ah…there had to be a catch.
I say the LP does Dallas: Thousands of Debbies can’t be wrong!
44 George Phillies // Oct 16, 2010 at 1:27 pm
If the Hyatt under consideration in Dallas is the Hyatt in downtown Dallas, there are a lot of hotels and 30 restaurants within a half mile.
Also, the Dallas site has an organizer, Nancy Neale.
45 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 1:28 pm
Just as long as she doesn’t book Boortz again
46 George Phillies // Oct 16, 2010 at 1:29 pm
@43 Paulie, that was a terrible pun.
However, while the restaurants are a breakeven if you are willing to stretch your legs, the nearby hotels are clearly in favor of Dallas.
47 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 1:36 pm
Paulie, that was a terrible pun.
Yes, I know. Shame on me.
However, while the restaurants are a breakeven if you are willing to stretch your legs, the nearby hotels are clearly in favor of Dallas.
I would see it that way too. I know there are some people who would want to make sure that as few people as possible stay off-site, but I think it’s better if people who couldn’t make it there at all otherwise stay off-site than if they stay away completely.
48 LibertarianGirl // Oct 16, 2010 at 3:18 pm
debbie does vegas!!!!!!
49 LibertarianGirl // Oct 16, 2010 at 3:22 pm
first of all , as a LPNevada activist for 10 years , the amount of delegates we would provide for Wayne is small , we are a tiny player in the members game , so that point is completely moot
50 LibertarianGirl // Oct 16, 2010 at 3:28 pm
GP_and opposition efforts to put it in a Resort outside of Las Vegas.
me_ whileRedrock doesnt thrill me for a venue , IT IS NOT OUTSIDE LAS VEGAS. Be fair George its in a suburb , yes , a 20 min ride from the strip AND with free shuttles from the airport, unlike the $40 ride I took in St Louis
51 LibertarianGirl // Oct 16, 2010 at 3:35 pm
Don Wills // Oct 16, 2010 at 9:40 am
paulie and George don’t know what they’re talking about concerning the Red Rock. The prices of rooms are about the same as the other choices being considered, and the rooms are beautiful. There are fast foods restaurants, mid-priced restaurants and very expensive restaurants on the property. The time and cost to and from the airport is similar to the hotels on the strip. There is a free shuttle bus to and from the strip. The Red Rock cost more than a billion dollars to build and is only a few years old. The Red Rock is by far and away the most luxurious of the choices being considered.
me_ Im a native and what you say is bullshit. the rooms might be comparable to those of other sites being considered but they ARE NOT comparable to many , many other places in Vegas. the food is not cheap , outrageous , not that either , but not cheap.
The Redrock lies in an well-to-do suburb of Las Vegas and I dont know of any other cheap rooms nearby. The shuttles are FREE IF you stay on site if you dont , the cab ride from the airport or cheap motel on thee strip is gonna be alot , at least 40 bucks. To say it willcost the same to take a cab to redrock as to the Strip is the biggest lie Ive heard allweek , the airport is 5 minfrom the Strip RedRock is at least 30
52 LibertarianGirl // Oct 16, 2010 at 3:40 pm
DW_The time and cost to and from the airport is similar to the hotels on the strip.
me-uh uh , u dont live here do you?
having said that Id like it in Vegas (1st choice) and Texas 2nd
53 George Phillies // Oct 16, 2010 at 4:18 pm
@49
The fact that your state party only has a modest number of activists is true, but it sort of misses the point.
So is the hotel in the city or in the suburbs? I note that, from the MGM Grand, Mapquest says 12.63 miles to the Red Rock.
54 LibertarianGirl // Oct 16, 2010 at 4:29 pm
its a suburb but its still in las vegas , however it is not as close as the Strip to the airport , not even close , but it is not like its in a different town . and the amount of time it would take to get there would be entirely dependent on the time of day. Rush hour would be a bitch ( M-F 7am-9am 4pm-6pm)
and I dont belive I am mssing the point , there was discussion holding it here would give some sort of upper hand to Wayne in attendance , I dont think so.
55 Paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 4:35 pm
debbie does vegas!!!!!!
Play Donna for me (??????)
56 George Phillies // Oct 16, 2010 at 4:44 pm
@54
The number of people in your party is not the issue in giving Wayne an attendance boost.
57 Paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 4:46 pm
The fact that your state party only has a modest number of activists is true, but it sort of misses the point.
In theory, Wayne could bring in a bunch of non-LP Tea Party people from the Vegas area and pack a bunch of different delegations. In practice, this usually does not work out nearly to the degree feared for or hoped by anyone.
[Hilariously: I suggested this tactic repeatedly early on to a campaign I was working on and was as usual ignored. The candidate then "discovered" this idea as if it was something new when he was getting a ride from another activist after one of the state conventions. He then made it a "top secret" plan for the campaign and I got in hot water when I posted about it, not realizing such a common and obvious thing would be a secret.
No, it did not work out, and contrary to rumors I don't think it worked too well for other people who have tried it any time I have seen.]
58 Paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 4:49 pm
So is the hotel in the city or in the suburbs?
The city of Las Vegas municipality is a lot smaller than most people think. The strip and a lot of other things people think of as Las Vegas are not under that jurisdiction.
I think LG meant that it was part of the continuously urbanized area around Las Vegas.
I think with the info she posted, I can once again say that it does price people out in various ways, for instance if they want to stay at another motel, if they arrive by greyhound, etc.
59 LibertarianGirl // Oct 16, 2010 at 4:50 pm
Viva la Donna!~
60 LibertarianGirl // Oct 16, 2010 at 4:53 pm
P_In theory, Wayne could bring in a bunch of non-LP Tea Party people from the Vegas area and pack a bunch of different delegations. In practice, this usually does not work out nearly to the degree feared for or hoped by anyone.
me_ in theory , any candidate could do that anywhere. Tea Parties aint helping us , theyll be supporting and rooting for the GOP nom.
61 LibertarianGirl // Oct 16, 2010 at 4:58 pm
GP_The number of people in your party is not the issue in giving Wayne an attendance boost.
me_then what is , that he couldnt do somewhere else ,and dont say close to Cali , cause Texas aint so far either
62 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 5:02 pm
in theory , any candidate could do that anywhere. Tea Parties aint helping us , theyll be supporting and rooting for the GOP nom.
Yes, but this theory….well, OK, hypothesis….oh, fine, fevered imaginary scenario goes something like:
Wayne gets a bunch of Republicans to come out as first and only time LP delegates specifically to seal the nomination for him. Then, as the nominee, he says “don’t vote for me, vote for Sarah Palin (or whoever the Republican is).” Then he gets a major talk show deal and/or a Senate or Governor seat or something as a Republican.
I don’t think any of that will happen, though.
Like I said, convention packing is a lot harder than people think. Sure, it sounds easy, but it just isn’t when it comes right down to doing it.
63 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 5:08 pm
LG is your phone on?
64 LibertarianGirl // Oct 16, 2010 at 5:15 pm
*sigh* its dead and the charger is at my friends house , right now Im baby-sitting Gma , Ill either buy a new charger on the way home or have my friend bring it over on Monday.
i should not be allowed to own a phone:)
65 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 5:19 pm
OK, call me later then.
66 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 5:22 pm
Oh yeah, and check out Key of Awesome and Richard Cheese on youtube…lovinit
67 Anonymous Rabble-Rouser // Oct 16, 2010 at 5:55 pm
http://peterschiffchannel.blogspot.com/2010/10/libertarian-vs-socialist-heated-debate.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PeterSchiffBlog+%28Peter+Schiff++Blog%29
Mr. Tutti Frutti Rooti announced at 6:10 in that he’s running in 2012.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled blather.
68 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 6:18 pm
ARR, if you are still with us, what is the date of that interview?
Root did say he was a 2012 candidate, but then he announced he would not be a 2012 candidate while seeking the Chair position.
He did not get the chair position, so he may be running again, but he did also say that the LP is not at the level it needs to be for him to run, and that hasn’t changed.
Then again, Browne said something similar at some point between ’96 and ’00, then ran again anyway. It wasn’t a big point against him. So, if Root is running again, it won’t really matter that he said at one point that he wouldn’t.
Anyway, so what if he’s running?
Wrights is probably running, and I hope John Jay Myers runs. That’s not why I want the convention in Dallas, but it would be a silly reason to not have it in Dallas, and what’s good for the goose…
69 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 6:31 pm
@66 Richard Cheese samples at #40-41 above.
Key of Awesome samples:
70 Anonymous Rabble-Rouser // Oct 16, 2010 at 6:46 pm
dated 10-15, meaning yesterday, both on the blog and rt.com.
Like any of you couldn’t figure that one out…
71 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 7:13 pm
Well, I could, I just wasn’t motivated enough, since, as I said, I just don’t think it is all that important whether he is running or not.
Thanks for answering, though.
Anyway: Dallas would be preferable to Vegas to me, but I don’t really see a Vegas convention as the end of the world or of the party.
72 Michael H. Wilson // Oct 16, 2010 at 7:25 pm
So if Wayne has announced doesn’t he have a lot of paperwork to file with the FEC?
73 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 7:27 pm
That doesn’t have to do be done yet.
74 Libertarian vs. Socialist on Russia Today; Root says he’s running for President in 2012 | Independent Political Report // Oct 16, 2010 at 7:46 pm
[...] on petitioners]paulie on Libertarian Wayne Allyn Root in Media Across USAAnonymous Rabble-Rouser on Libertarian Wayne Allyn Root in Media Across USAA Casual Observer on [Thread for discussion on petitioners]paulie on Libertarian Wayne Allyn Root in [...]
75 Thomas L. Knapp // Oct 16, 2010 at 7:52 pm
While Root/Starr have obvious reasons for wanting a Vegas convention, that doesn’t mean it’s a bad idea.
It could be a really GOOD idea, if the attitude is to concentrate on planning a convention per se, instead of concentrating on making the convention as expensive to reach and attend as humanly possible.
Texas is also a good pick, but George, Dallas v. Austin is not a “distinction without a difference” if you live far away. Dallas-Fort Worth is a major airline hub. Fares there are going to be lower than to Austin from almost everywhere. That doesn’t make Austin a bad selection, but travel costs should be part of the equation.
As far as convention packing goes, both Texas and Vegas represent possibilities. So does any other likely choice. Unless the LP wants to choose between Anchorage, Minot and Philadelphia (the one in Mississippi, not Pennsylvania), all it can really do is rely on state delegations to police themselves against being packed.
76 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 8:09 pm
@75 agreed.
And some trivia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mean_center_of_United_States_population
The mean center of U.S. population is determined by the United States Census Bureau from the results of each census. The Bureau defines it to be:
the point at which an imaginary, flat, weightless, and rigid map of the United States would balance perfectly if weights of identical value were placed on it so that each weight represented the location of one person on the date of the census.
…
http://www.census.gov/geo/www/cenpop/cb01cn66.html
2000 U.S. Population Centered in Phelps County, Mo.
The area around Edgar Springs, Mo., now shares an honor known only to
21 other U.S. communities, Census Bureau officials announced today. The
Edgar Springs area is the new U.S. population center.
Driving distance from Edgar Springs, MO to Dallas:
8 hours 29 minutes / 526.97 miles according to Mapquest.
Edgar Springs to Austin: 11 hours 41 minutes / 723.18 miles
Edgar Springs to Vegas: 22 hours 11 minutes / 1511.35 miles
77 libertariangirl // Oct 16, 2010 at 8:37 pm
Vegas will have the cheapest flights available , we want you to leave your money at the tables:) no joke
78 Michael H. Wilson // Oct 16, 2010 at 8:44 pm
Circus-circus has a camp ground and it looks like you can arrive on a bike with a tent and get a spot for about 30 bucks a night or you can rent an Airstream trailer and four can sleep in it. Last Time I thru thee I stayed in Mesquite for #38 a night for two of us and got a huge room and its 90 minutes away.
Just pointing out that there are alternatives.
79 Michael H. Wilson // Oct 16, 2010 at 8:45 pm
Got to learn to proof read!
80 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 8:46 pm
Wasn’t it $400 or something crazy on the dog bus?
I mean, for those of us on the no-fly list and all
81 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 8:49 pm
Circus-circus has a camp ground and it looks like you can arrive on a bike with a tent and get a spot for about 30 bucks a night or you can rent an Airstream trailer and four can sleep in it.
That’s a pretty long bike ride to Red Rock, though. I suppose it would be good exercise, at least, LOL.
82 libertariangirl // Oct 16, 2010 at 9:13 pm
P , if u werent allergic to cats u could stay at my place , and ur THE ONLY ONE , maybe TK
83 Michael H. Wilson // Oct 16, 2010 at 9:30 pm
Maybe catch the bus paulie.
84 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 9:58 pm
P , if u werent allergic to cats u could stay at my place , and ur THE ONLY ONE , maybe TK
Thanks! Speaking of cats…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAfpq6EPKck&list=SL
But yeah, there’s the allergy thing…
Maybe catch the bus paulie.
http://www.rtcsouthernnevada.com/transit/route/206/206%283-28-10%29.pdf
Can’t get there til noon on Saturday or 2:30 PM on Sunday by bus. Otherwise looks OK.
If you mean Greyhound, see comments above.
85 Thomas L. Knapp // Oct 16, 2010 at 10:24 pm
“Vegas will have the cheapest flights available”
I edited it out of my previous comment, but no. As a matter of fact, for Memorial Day Weekend of 2011 (the closest analog I could get to the likely actual convention date), Vegas was more expensive ($300+ round-trip from St. Louis was the lowest fare I found) than Austin (~$250) or Dallas ($~200).
It’s possible to get VERY cheap fares/rooms in Vegas, but that’s usually as part of a package sponsored by one of the casinos from a single major city, not for a crowd flowing in from a bunch of different cities. But, the LP could probably at least get a very good group room rate.
If I came out there I’d take you up on the offer, LG — I’m not the least bit allergic to cats or I’d be dead by now — but at this time, I have no plans to attend. If I came out, it would be to take some of the casinos’ money and visit with friends.
Regards,
Tom
86 George Phillies // Oct 16, 2010 at 10:56 pm
Readers may not recall that Austin when last I checked had a major active set of military bases, so that the air traffic out of there on civilian flights is more than you might have expected. Also, being a hub for a single airline can push costs through the ceiling, but it is random whether it does or not.
87 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 10:59 pm
it would be to take some of the casinos’ money
Famous last words
For what it’s worth, I’m not sure whether I’ll go or not.
My attendance record is 2000, 2004, 2008 and 2010. So, maybe 2010 took the place of 2012.
Every presidential year I went, it ended up costing me a lot in opportunity cost as well as more than I figured in actual costs. I never made near as much difference, or had near as good a time, as I figured ahead of time. 2004 was more disappointing than 2000, and 2008 even more so. None of them helped me land contracts.
On the other hand, I genuinely enjoyed the 2010 convention on several different levels. So maybe I should skip the presidential years and go in the non-presidential years.
If I do go, maybe I’ll go as a non-delegate and concentrate exclusively on reporting and socializing. Haven’t tried that yet, I was a delegate every time I went.
88 paulie // Oct 16, 2010 at 11:02 pm
Album version – embedding disabled
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3MGfJ3eMGA
89 libertariangirl // Oct 17, 2010 at 10:19 am
TK , BlackJack , best odds in tha house!
Vegas wasnt built on winners but ya never know…
, heres the key tho , and this is wisdom:
WHEN YOU WIN WALK AWAY , DO NOT THINK YOUWILL KEEPWINNING , WHEN YOU LOSE A SET AMOUNT , WALK AWAY , DONT THINK OH SHIT MY LUCK WILL CNANGE AND ILL GET IT BACK.
90 Thomas L. Knapp // Oct 17, 2010 at 11:48 am
LG,
Good rules — I wrote a book around them a few years back. Of course, that book was on the game with the worst odds in the house (roulette).
Blackjack can be the best odds in the house if you know what you’re doing and are willing to concentrate to some lesser (basic odds-maximizing betting strategy) or greater (counting systems) on doing it right. If not, well, the casinos love card counters because most of them are bad card counters.
The best odds in the house for a leisure gambler — someone who just wants to have a good time, down some of those free drinks, not lose his shirt and maybe come out nicely ahead without it being work — are on craps. Bet the pass line and take the free odds.
I usually end up playing roulette, and I remain ahead over the long term because I follow a somewhat more elaborate set of the rules you mention above.
91 paulie // Oct 17, 2010 at 11:51 am
Don’t they use multiple decks now to make card counting a lot harder?
Leave a Comment