From an article at the Examiner.com:
Roger J. Stone Jr, the celebrated political consultant, lobbyist and strategist, and youngest staffer on Richard Nixon’s 1972 re-election campaign, announced Wednesday that he has quit the Republican Party. Stone – who has been noted for his use of opposition research for Republican candidates – is now registered as a Libertarian.
My first experience with the Libertarian Party was in New York where a small faction of anarchists held a state convention while refusing to allow all candidates access to the rules and a list of the voting delegates. Joe Stalin would have been proud of the tactics used to nominate a non-libertarian registered Republican who had only recently run as a candidate for the left-wing Green Party. But these childish tactics are not the norm in the largely democratic Libertarian Party. I have found Libertarian Party activists in California, Texas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Colorado, Washington, and Michigan have proven to be democratic, reasonable, dedicated and interested in victory.
30 responses so far ↓
1 Steven Wilson // Feb 17, 2012 at 10:32 am
He is a consultant for Gary Johnson. It was just a matter of time.
2 Scott Lieberman // Feb 17, 2012 at 11:28 am
When you have 20 minutes available, I suggest you read this article on Roger Stone.
It is educational, and it is a fun read.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/06/02/080602fa_fact_toobin?currentPage=all
Scott Lieberman
3 Ad Hoc // Feb 17, 2012 at 12:57 pm
Good news for the GOP; bad news for the LP.
4 Eric Sundwall // Feb 17, 2012 at 1:23 pm
A couple upstate bumpkins beat him hands down and he’s still crying . . . your working for peanuts now buddy. Welcome to the third party jungle.
5 bruuno // Feb 17, 2012 at 4:46 pm
I personally think Gary Johnson will be an excellent candidate for the LP but Stone is the fly in the ointment. My guess it is only a matter of time before Johnson realizes that. Having talked to people who know both personally I can’t imagine an odder couple.
6 Henry Wilkerson // Feb 17, 2012 at 10:57 pm
Stone is clearly frustrated with the Republicans. His defection indicates the GOP ship is sinking. The real story here is that he is not the only one jumping ship. I know of several prominent, life-long Republicans joining Stone. I believe they are doing so because Gary Johnson embodies most of the conservative nature we badly need restored in this country. Gary Johnson’s more liberal ideas that would natually appeal to a Democratic base, like drug law reforms and not discriminating against gays are things that were going to happen anyway. Bringing those ideas into the fore is a way for this country to move forward. The Stone example is a omen that should not be taken lightly.
7 paulie // Feb 18, 2012 at 12:42 pm
It’s sinking just a bit less due to his defection.
The rats may be leaving the sinking ship, but that’s no reason to welcome them on board our lifeboat.
8 Vito // Feb 18, 2012 at 1:05 pm
Eric Sundwall is an asswipe.
He uses Fascist tactics to win the NYLP nomination for a Green Party freak, Warren Redlich and brags about it.
Yeah Stone stopped the Redlich from getting 50,000 votes and permanent ballot status.
So who won and who lost bumpkin?
9 Christopher Carlson // Feb 18, 2012 at 1:21 pm
I see a few intelligent comments on this article and some others here in the independent. I see some other not so intelligent ones that ought to be flagged. They are straightforward attacks against other bloggers for simply voicing an opinion. This guy “paulie” is some kind of hacker. Paulie, can you summon more than a few words of meaningless dribble?
10 paulie // Feb 18, 2012 at 1:26 pm
Redlich’s views are far from the Green Party, and what “fascist tactics” did Sundwall brag about?
The LP lost, thanks to Stone. As for who will win the lawsuit, we’ll see.
11 paulie // Feb 18, 2012 at 1:31 pm
Yeah, mostly yours and your other personae are the ones that I should take down. I’ll give it just a little longer before I decide about that, though.
You are a commenter, not a blogger, here. If you are a blogger link your blog to your comments.
The fact that your opinion is nonsense is one thing, but repeating yourself over and over under different names is something else entirely.
LOL, I wish.
I’ve summoned a lot more words than your nonsense deserves.
It would probably be better if I just removed it, but I haven’t quite reached that conclusion yet.
12 Thomas L. Knapp // Feb 18, 2012 at 2:04 pm
I wonder how many candidates have lain awake at night pondering the question of which is worse: To have Stone against them, or to have Stone working for them.
My guess is it’s worse to have him working against you.
13 paulie // Feb 18, 2012 at 2:05 pm
Probably correct, although it may be a close call and may also depend on the particulars of any given campaign.
14 Christopher Carlson // Feb 18, 2012 at 2:23 pm
Perhaps commentary I left here concerning you, paulie was ill considered. For that you have my apology. Tell me though how it is appropriate for the site administrator to produce bias pundantry in the site he administrates and if your answer is fair, you will no longer be bothered by me whatsoever.
15 Paulie // Feb 18, 2012 at 2:46 pm
CC @14,
I’m one of, not the, admin, and I’m free to express my opinion in the comments all I wish. At the request of the site owners I try to keep it out of articles, but comments are a different matter.
No apology necessary, and you are free to comment under whatever name you wish, but if you post under multiple names to make the same point so that it seems “more popular” (or whatever), I may draw attention to it.
A dozen comments like that is annoying. If it becomes, say, several dozen, I or one of the other people here may actually start taking them down.
But short of that, your opinion as well as mine is welcome in the comment section.
16 Be Rational // Feb 18, 2012 at 2:57 pm
Dear Gary Johnson,
The problem is now clear – it’s Stone.
Say no to Stone in the your campaign – or we say no to you getting the nomination.
17 Steven Wilson // Feb 18, 2012 at 3:24 pm
Whether or not you like him, Johnson needs him. If he does get the nomination, Johnson will need Stone to help with the separation between brands of Freedom.
Stone is very good at decoy. He is even better at burn and learn. I can’t comment on how involved he is with Johnson on a daily basis, but Stone does his job well.
Many posters here don’t acknowledge a simple truth in America. Politics is a battle. You don’t berate your soldiers for being brutal when that is exactly how you win the battle.
If you support Gary Johnson be grateful he is with Johnson now.
18 JP Quick // Feb 18, 2012 at 3:39 pm
@12,
Bingo.
@16,
Not the problem. Pretty sure he’s not even “in” the campaign.
19 Ad Hoc // Feb 18, 2012 at 4:03 pm
@18 He’s associated with it in a variety of ways.
@17 Johnson doesn’t have the LP nomination at this point, so it should certainly concern libertarians that Stone’s tactics might be used to secure it for him.
It should also be of some concern what direction Stone might steer the campaign and, long term, the LP in. Foreign policy and its domestic implications comes immediately to mind.
If Johnson does get the nomination, what is it exactly that he needs Stone for? Opposition research on Virgil Goode? Dirty tricks against Jill Stein?
Finally, as you say, Stone is good at decoy. It may be that he is sincerely joining the LP, or it may be that he is infiltrating it. Do you know which one it is? I don’t.
20 Lavra // Feb 18, 2012 at 5:04 pm
@19: ” He’s associated with it in a variety of ways.”
Can you name any of the ways he’s associated with the campaign?
21 Ad Hoc // Feb 18, 2012 at 9:09 pm
See article at http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2011/12/warren-redlich-johnsons-poor-choice-of-friends/
22 Ad Hoc // Feb 18, 2012 at 9:13 pm
From that article:
Stone endorsed Johnson as a presidential candidate. The Johnson campaign posted Stone’s endorsement on their campaign website. A few days ago a Stone interview with Johnson, consisting entirely of glowing statements from Stone and soft-pitch questions, was posted on Vimeo.
Of course, if Johnson campaign money is going to Stone, it may be being kept off reports by being funneled through Political Advisers in Utah, as is much of Johnson campaign spending.
And if the Johnson campaign is taking advice from Stone it may not be immediately obvious either.
It would hardly be surprising if Stone’s involvement is largely below board, would it?
23 Gene Berkman // Feb 18, 2012 at 9:51 pm
I think maybe Gary Johnson misunderstand when Bob Dylan sang “everybody must get stoned.”
He did not sing “everybody must get Stone”
24 bruuno // Feb 18, 2012 at 11:49 pm
#24- Time to refill the prescription
25 Winston Montpierre // Feb 19, 2012 at 12:02 am
The independentpoliticalreport is getting beaucoup attention on google and this rant about pauli is getting attention. What happened to the days when we commented on the subject matter of the news piece?
26 Jill Pyeatt // Feb 19, 2012 at 12:46 am
I removed them, and will continue to when I see them pop up.
27 paulie // Feb 19, 2012 at 9:00 am
Yeah, traffic has gone through the roof. Why, IPR had to buy additional server space just because of this post alone.
I don’t remember those days.
28 paulie // Feb 19, 2012 at 9:01 am
Thanks!
29 Lavra // Feb 19, 2012 at 10:11 am
@22: none of the things you listed suggest involvement with the campaign. Many people have endorsed Governor Johnson (garyjohnson2012.com/endorsements), and anyone can give advice (just send an email to email@garyjohnson2012.com). Stone is not “involved” in the campaign at all.
30 Ad Hoc // Feb 19, 2012 at 10:50 am
Let’s try that agin.
The Johnson campaign posted Stone’s endorsement on their campaign website. A few days ago a Stone interview with Johnson, consisting entirely of glowing statements from Stone and soft-pitch questions, was posted on Vimeo.
Of course, if Johnson campaign money is going to Stone, it may be being kept off reports by being funneled through Political Advisers in Utah, as is much of Johnson campaign spending.
And if the Johnson campaign is taking advice from Stone it may not be immediately obvious either.
anyone can give advice (just send an email to email@garyjohnson2012.com
Well, yes, but there is a difference between giving advice and taking that advice.
There’s clearly not a one way conversation there, since Johnson gets interviewed by Stone and the Johnson campaign touts Stone’s endorsement.
Does it go further than that, and if so, how much further? I can’t say I know for sure, at this point it’s all just suspicion. Do you know, or are you just guessing when you say
Stone is not “involved” in the campaign at all.
?
Taken literally that’s obviously not the case since Johnson could not be appearing with Stone or having his campaign forward Stone’s column, which are both by definition forms of involvement, and, come to think of it, even if you are on the campaign team, it is possible that there may be things happening with the campaign that you are not being made aware of, so how can you say with any certainty that there is not additional involvement beyond what we know for a fact?
Sorry for that run on sentence, I don’t feel like fixing it.
Leave a Comment