March 2012 Open Thread

See descriptions under the previous open threads if you don’t know what the open threads are about (although it’s pretty self-explanatory).

Please do not expect any of the IPR writers to be personally responsible for posting whatever items you send us.

This is not the paying job of any of the IPR writers.  We all do this in our spare time.  Paulie generally forwards all non-spam messages sent to contact.ipr@gmail.com to all IPR writers, but it is up to each of the writers individually whether they decide to post any given item or not.

If there are items you would like to see posted on IPR you can:

A) Send them to contact.ipr@gmail.com
B) Post them in the comments to this thread
C) Ask to be signed up to write at IPR

Anything posted as a story at IPR should directly relate to alternative (“third”) parties or independent candidates, either by subject or by author. We ask that if you sign up to write here that you not post your own personal editorials as stories, although you may post other people’s editorials and/or ask other people to post yours. You may of course editorialize all you want in comments regardless of whether you are signed up to post stories or not.

If you post comments that do not show up, do not assume that you are being censored.  There is an automated spam filter and it makes mistakes from time to time.  If you alert us to what you believe is a legitimate comment that is not showing up via contact.ipr@gmail.com, someone may take the time to manually get it out of spam.  Or not.  Paulie does it when he has the time; the other writer rarely do.  If you don’t alert us, chances are we won’t know.  If you sign up to write at IPR you can also get your own comments out of spam, as well as post images and videos in comments (other people can not).

Same goes for any comment that you believe should be removed.  We very rarely remove any comments except obvious spam, although it is at the discretion of the individual IPR writers.  Please do not expect anyone to be monitoring all the comments.  If you see something that you believe should be removed, ask the IPR writers.  They may or may not decide to do so.  Items that may be removed can include threats of violence, libel, slurs, violations of people’s privacy against their express wishes, and repeated harpings on a single subject in numerous unrelated threads after the pattern causes a great deal of annoyance expressed by our other readers.  However, that does not mean any such items necessarily WILL be removed, especially if you don’t ask via IPR email.  As with posting IPR stories, that is entirely up to our volunteer staff and/or the website owners (who also own many other sites).

There is no group decision process on which stories get posted.  Nor is there any group attempt to favor one party or candidate over others.  Each of our writers makes a personal decision on what to post, subject to removal by Trent Hill or the company he works for.  If you are signed up to write here and not sure whether a particular story belongs on IPR, ask on our email list.

Please do NOT repeat NOT email us any requests that any specific individual personally post anything.

contact.ipr@gmail.com automatically forwards to the first several people that signed up to post stories here.  Unfortunately, most of them have not posted here in a long time, or post very rarely.  Trent is the only person who can add people to that email list.  For reasons unknown to me he stopped adding new people that Paulie has signed up here to the list a long time ago.  Paulie created a second IPR list for the new people and whenever he can, he forwards any non-spam items we get at contact.ipr@gmail.com to this second list.  However, that does not guarantee anyone will post those stories.  Paulie of course hopes they do, but he can no longer do more here than everyone else, since it is interfering with his real-life actual responsibilities (e.g., actual paying work elsewhere).  Also, it’s reasonably certain that every other IPR writer has better access to the internet than Paulie does right now.

If you would like to stay in touch with Paulie personally, he prefers phone calls (415-690-6352) to email.  Paulie doesn’t own a computer, and even if he did, he would need to limit his time on it.

Discuss almost whatever you want in the comments on this thread, other than stuff that would get you and/or IPR in legal trouble, or stuff that has already been quarantined in “special” threads.

This can include news items IPR should be covering, as well as just about anything else.

Call 415-690-6352 if you need to get a hold of Paulie, or contact.ipr@gmail.com and/or comments on this thread (both if possible) for news tips to IPR.  Paulie will continue forwarding anything he receives that he believes is appropriate for IPR to other IPR writers.

IPR would like to sign up new writers to help get articles and news up.  Please contact us if you’d like to help!


366 thoughts on “March 2012 Open Thread

  1. Liberty

    Reporting live from the Crowne Plaza Resort in Ventura, California at the California Libertarian Convention.

    People are filing in. Meetings at noon. Registration at 3 pm.

    Will keep you posted here.

  2. Humongous Fungus

    @3

    Currently 9-5. Just one vote shy of the 2/3 required to dump Briscoe’s nomination.

  3. Jill Pyeatt

    My vote is that she should be dumped. Flat-out lying about your accomplishments (or, in her case, lack of same) shows a character weakness that I find unacceptable.

  4. Humongous Fungus

    Milnes latest update (3/2) is his funniest yet. He thinks he can get National Education Association and other big unions to switch to support him, away from Obama, if he gets the BTP nomination.

    At this point the BTP should nominate NOTA.

  5. Humongous Fungus

    According to John Wayne Smith

    Johnson got 70% vote in the Georgia straw poll, Still came in second and Wright 3rd.

  6. NewFederalist

    I also agree that Briscoe should be “dethroned”. While the nomination of the BTP is worth less than the nomination of the Prohibition Party, it still is embarrassing that a total liar should get the nomination. Since the party has ballot status in zero states it really doesn’t matter but rewarding a liar is never a good policy. Why the chair felt compelled to retain her and then go to the membership to do what he should have done is beyond me. He’ll make a great nominee in 2016… great leadership qualities!

  7. Dr. Tom Stevens

    Re: 3

    What is the bylaw authority for taking away a Presidential Nomination duly secured in accordance with the BTP bylaws?

    I thought many said that was not possible.

  8. Ad Hoc

    @13

    “Review of Chair’s decision

    Per Article 9 h) of the BTP bylaws, the requisite number of party members have requested a review of the Chair’s decision to retain Tiffany Briscoe as the BTP Presidential nominee.
    The request for reconsideration can be found at http://bostontea.us/node/1093

    The poll will remain open until 7:15PM (CDT) Tuesday March 6, 2012. A 2/3 majority is required to overturn the decision.

    A “yes” vote is a vote to overturn the Chair’s decision.

    http://bostontea.us/node/1094

    Per BTP precedent, new member registration is disabled during polling.”

  9. Darryl W. Perry

    @11 – I do not have authority under the bylaws to unilaterally remove a Presidential nominee, nor do I believe the Chair should have that authority. For further information see #18

  10. Dr. Tom Stevens

    Re: 19

    If the BTP Chair does not have the authority to RETAIN or REMOVE a Presidential Nominee duly chosen during a BTP Nominating Process, then overturning a ruling to keep Ms. Briscoe will have NO EFFECT on her being the nominee.

    What am I missing?

  11. Darryl W Perry

    @Tom Stevens, please see the thread related involving my request that she either issue a statement clarifying her misrepresentation of herslef or that she resign. I also stated that if she failed to do either, I would motion the National Committee to consider removing her. She posted a clarification that she had misrepresented herself, so I did not motion to have her removed for fraudulantly representing herself. The appeal made by Milnes is essentially an appeal to overturn the inaction to remove Briscoe for her misrepresentation.

  12. Melty

    Americans Elect lists RJ Harris as a “declared candidate” not a “draft candidate” ….. has Harris said he wants the Americans Elect nomination?

  13. Dr. Tom Stevens

    Re: 23

    You cannot move to overturn “inaction” by the Chair, especially when it is questionable whether even the BTP National Committee has the power to remove a duly selected Presidential Nominee. Perhaps you should have ruled the Motion to Overturn Your Inaction out of order and if someone moved to overturn that decision, you could rightfully say that the effect would be null and void since there is simply no authority in the bylaws to remove a duly selected Presidential Nominee.

    Ms. Briscoe may have misrepresented her credentials and you can urge her to resign, pass a resolution of disapproval, and many more things but I don’t see where anyone has the power to remove her as the nominee.

  14. Deran

    HUNTSMAN and AMERICANS ELECT?

    Does anyone have any opinions on, or more indepth knowledge about, what this all might mean for AE?

    Jon Huntsman, who has repeatedly said he is not interested in a presidential campaign outside the GOP, and has endorsed Romney, getting himself kicked out of a GOP fundraiser for calling for a “third party”?

    AE Pres or VP nominee?

    http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/23/10490379-huntsman-promotes-third-party-movement-despite-endorsing-romney

  15. Ad Hoc

    From that article

    Huntsman, who was elected to Ford Motor Co.’s board of directors, was quick to add that he is not interested in being the standard-bearer for his proposed alternative movement.

    “That ain’t gonna be me, by the way,” he said, quashing any possibility of a comeback run for the White House this cycle. “I’m not interested in that.”

    So, he’s either going to have to change his mind or perhaps run for VP if he goes AE.

    I do think they’d be interested in him, but whether he would agree, I guess we’ll see.

  16. wolfefan

    SInce I’ve been critical of Wayne Root in the past for allowing his website to imply that he is a candidate for the LP Presidential nomination in 2012, I thought I should note that the bio section of the site no longer carries any such implication or suggestion. Thanks to whomever made the change for him.

  17. Rob Banks

    He (or whoever helps him with the site) may also want to consider that describing someone as being “on steroids” is not necessarily a good thing.

  18. Jill Pyeatt

    wolfefan @ 30: Interesting observation, since there’s speculation that he wants to be Johnson’s vp, should GJ get the nomination.

  19. NewFederalist

    If Johnson gets the nomination I sure hope Root is not the veep choice. I would prefer a Lee Wrights or a Roger Gary type. Someone who has been with the LP for many years and is a good philosophical counterweight to some of the positions the governor has taken in his days as a Republican.

  20. Jill Pyeatt

    I think that Wrights would be an excellent vp. He would complement Johnson and fill in on some of GJ’s weaknesses.

  21. Precede with Caution, via Lake

    Public Citizen’s ‘Stand Up for Main Street’ event.

    Get ready to celebrate Public Citizen with Ray Romano.

    The Emmy Award-winning star of “Everybody Loves Raymond” — one of the most beloved television shows of all time — is headlining our second annual “Stand Up for Main Street” event.

    Some of the brightest, most talented comedians in America are coming together to raise awareness of everything Public Citizen is doing to keep runaway corporate power at bay.

    And you’re invited!

  22. Precede with Caution, via Lake

    [New post] Maryland Green Party to Defend Ballot Access Petition in State’s High Court
    Saturday, March 3, 2012:
    This sender is DomainKeys verified
    “OntheWilderSide”
    Add sender to Contacts

    STOP IT, STOP IT, STOP IT

  23. Darryl W. Perry

    The Death of Free Speech

    I’ve previously reported on the vanishing right to peaceably assemble, now two more rights supposedly guaranteed by the First Amendment are on the verge of being killed. On March 1 HR 347 was submitted to the White House for President Obama’s signature. The bill passed the Senate by unanimous consent and had only 3 “nays” in the House (42 Representatives did not vote). Justin Amash (one of the three to vote against the bill) posted on his facebook page “Current law makes it illegal to enter or remain in an area where certain government officials (more particularly, those with Secret Service protection) will be visiting temporarily if and only if the person knows it’s illegal to enter the restricted area but does so anyway. [H.R. 347] expands current law to make it a crime to enter or remain in an area where an official is visiting even if the person does not know it’s illegal to be in that area and has no reason to suspect it’s illegal.”

    In addition to making it illegal to unknowingly trespass in an area that has been deemed “restricted” it is now illegal to heckle and possibly even question a “protected” person if law enforcement or Secret Service deems your action as “disorderly or disruptive conduct” and you are “within such proximity to, any restricted building or grounds… that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions.” This bill, which will likely become law, will essentially codify into law the use of “free speech zones” and criminalize activity such as asking Rick Santorum if he has ever googled himself.

    It is being reported that HR 347 will also “seriously diminish the right of American citizens to petition their Government for a redress of grievances by outlawing protests where key government officials or other VIP’s may be nearby.” A violation of this law gets you either a fine or up to 10 years in prison; both if you dare to exercise your right to bear arms during your protest – as Chris (last name withheld) did during a 2009 protest in Phoenix, Arizona – even if you harmed no one.

  24. Precede with Caution, via Lake

    “David Collison,

    Jaimie Dives of the Reform Party of Utah will be giving a presentation
    Sunday at 8PM Central time.

    The meeting will be presented online via
    GoToMeeting and by teleconference.

    If you are interested in learning what
    worked, what didn’t, and how we can apply those techniques to the upcoming
    Texas petitioning, please email chairman@reformparty.org for a meeting link.

  25. paulie

    I worked Texas in 2004 and they had us check our own validity, supposedly with the same database the state used, and there was no field that showed whether anyone voted in the primary or not that I could see.

    The sheer number of signatures alone is daunting, though.

  26. paulie

    Good idea. If I get back to posting articles soon enough, I’ll try to remember to do that (or you can remind me). If not, I recommend that someone else should post it.

  27. LNC Orders Chair to Spend Money

    It seems the back and forth within the LNC about Project Saratoga has reached a new high, with the large majority of the LNC ordering the Treasurer to start paying within a readily counted number of hours.

    LNC Chair Hinkle claims that the motion that was passed is out of order.

  28. George Phillies -- LNC Inaction

    @47 No, it was a motion. Passed 11-4.

    @48 Project Saratoga is a proposal to centralize — in some sense — LP State Computer Operations through the LSLA. (Its partisans may demur). A draft proposal appeared with a request for a response from states within a couple of weeks to this tiny 300+ page draft document. It will do everything! Well, equally well!. It uses Joomla and CivicRM, in the proposal. There was a draft budget and an implicit time line.

    The LNC voted to pay for some part of it. There have been reasons advanced why the money should not be paid, and it has not. The Gang of Ten put in a motion ordering that the money be paid. That motion passed 11-4.

    The matter will be covered in the next Liberty for America, though we are also busy with the recent Johnson effort to pack state delegations with their supporters, not to mention “Sued” and the ongoing Oregon litigation currently using work paid for by the LNC.

    Having supervised a large computational project, it appeared to me that the estimated budget and timeline for Project Saratoga were a bit optimistic, say, as to the order of magnitude, but sometimes you can find really good stuff out their that works with tiny amounts of customization, and sometimes people are counting on more volunteer effort than might be simplemindedly be inferred. The budget for web hosting was truly impressive.

    I looked askance at what appeared to be a suggestion that my state association should hand its information out to storage with the LSLA, LSLA Officers being:

    Chairman, Michael Johnston
    Secretary, Aaron Starr
    Treasurer, Brett H. Pojunis

  29. wes wagner

    GP@50

    Yeah .. the lsla still hasn’t managed to successfully add me back to the state chairs list.

    It is hard to imagine why ant state organization would want to hand control of their data asset to them.

  30. Darryl W. Perry

    http://bostontea.us/node/1097
    The poll to overturn the Chair’s decision to retain Tiffany Briscoe as the Presidential nominee (i.e. Chair did not motion the National Committee to remove Briscoe after it was discovered that she misrepresented herself to the party) has closed.

    In checking to ensure that all votes were validly cast (i.e.no one was voting with multiple accounts) I discovered that 4 “no” votes were cast by people who did not log into site tracking aas having visited the poll. After consulting with someone who knows more about Drupal than I do, it was determined that these votes were potentially cast by someone hacking into the site. These 4 votes have been deemed invalid.

    The membership voted 9 to 3 to overturn the Chair’s decision and in favor of removing Tiffany Briscoe as the BTP’s Presidential nominee.

    NOTA is now the Presidential nominee.

  31. Ron Paul 3rd Party

    I think Ron Paul’s campaign really needs to get together and see that they’re pulling in the independent vote all over and that’s in the GOP primaries/caucuses.

    We’ve seen the polling for him with Democrats and he does extremely well. I think Ron Paul should start talking to Libertarian Party leaders and even Constitution Party leaders about a 3rd Party run.

    I don’t know if Peter Ackerman’s Americans Elect would actually somehow allow Ron Paul to be their nominee. I personally think Ron Paul needs to run 3rd Party, especially with Rick Santorum looking like he could end up being the GOP nominee.

  32. paulie

    @RP3p

    I think Ron Paul’s campaign really needs to get together and see that they’re pulling in the independent vote all over and that’s in the GOP primaries/caucuses.

    That’s been known all along. I think he is more interested in paving the way for Rand Paul in the Republican Party in future presidential elections than seeing what he can do in vote percentage as an alt party candidate.

    I think Ron Paul should start talking to Libertarian Party leaders and even Constitution Party leaders about a 3rd Party run.

    He could have either of those nominations easily without talking to any leaders. LP makes a lot more sense from the ballot access standpoint. But see above.

    I don’t know if Peter Ackerman’s Americans Elect would actually somehow allow Ron Paul to be their nominee.

    Well, he is the leading draft candidate, but the background of the board does make me skeptical.

    Rick Santorum looking like he could end up being the GOP nominee.

    Romney is way ahead of Santorum. Rand Paul VP is not impossible.

    @BTP

    If the VP nominee is not willing to take over for P nom, go with NOTA

  33. Precede with Caution, via Lake

    FOX 9 Morning News with Tom Halden
    At Issue with Tom Hauser
    WCCO Morning News with Esme Murhpy

    We have a long way to go before November 6…and I’ll need your help. Please visit peteforsenate.com and join our campaign [Minnesota].

    We must reverse the path of expanding government and chart a new course to prosperity, based on limited government, free markets, and our Constitution.

    Sincerely, Pete Hegseth

  34. Darryl W. Perry

    Paulie and/or Jill,
    Just curious; have either of you been receiving my weekly articles?
    In addition to the IPR email address, I’m sending them to your personal email addresses.

  35. Jill Pyeatt

    DWP @ 57: Yes, I do get your articles, and I post them when I can. We were out of town last weekend, and so of course now I’m behind on everything in my personal life. I made sure I posted the speeches from the convention, since 6 people took the time and expense to go to the CA convention and I was dismayed that the convention planners saw fit to only post Mr. Johnson’s. I would like to post something about the removal of Tiffany Briscoe, and hope to do so over the weekend.

  36. Darryl W. Perry

    I received an email today from Tiffany Briscoe. She stated that she will defy the vote of the BTP membership to remove her as the Presidential nominee and that she still considers herself the BTP Presidential nominee.

    Below is my reply:

    Ms. Briscoe,
    It’s hard to say what would have happened had you honestly represented yourself from the time you decided to seek the BTP nomination. However you did not and the members who voted based on a misrepresentation of facts. After it was discovered that you misrepresented yourself, you were given an opportunity to resign or admit your misrepresentation. Several members petitioned to overturn my acceptance of your statement admitting that you misrepresented yourself and the membership voted to remove you as the nominee. You are no longer the BTP Presidential nominee; to continue representing yourself as such is an act of fraud.
    As Chair of the BTP, I will do everything in my power and ability to ensure you are not on any ballot or certified as a write-in candidate as the BTP nominee.

    In Peace, Freedom, Love & Liberty,
    Darryl W. Perry
    Chair Boston Tea Party National Committee
    http://BostonTea.us

  37. paulie

    Paulie and/or Jill,
    Just curious; have either of you been receiving my weekly articles?
    In addition to the IPR email address, I’m sending them to your personal email addresses.

    Yep. I forward all of them to all IPR writers. If and when (hopefully soon) I get back to posting IPR articles myself I will just post them. But for now I have to remain on break from posting any articles about anything at all.

  38. Let the T-Rex of Talk Radio Entertain U2day

    The First Constitution Party Presidential debate of 2012, entitled, Introductions, hosted by Constitutionally Correct.

    http://www.constitutionallycorrect.org/index.php?view=episode&id=10048%3Acp-debate-introductions-debate-1-of-6&option=com_episodespeaker

    This is the first of 6 debates that will take place every Thursday evening at 8:30 p.m., Central Time. The next debate will be the Commander-in-Chief debate March 15.

    Constitution Party Presidential Debate – INTRODUCTIONS

    The first Constitution Party Presidential Debate was hosted by Constitutionally Correct and was on Thursday, March 8, at 8:30 CENTRAL. This is a debate that was done by teleconferencing and there was 6 candidates on the call (in alphabetical order):

    * Susan Ducey
    * Virgil Goode
    * Michael Kennedy
    * John Maeler
    * Laurie Roth
    * Robby Wells

    You can listen in on the debate by calling into: 646-716-5522 Thursdays 9:30 pm EDT.

    Or you can log into and listen to the debate online by going to:

    http://www.blogtalkradio.com/constitutionally-correct

  39. Precede with Caution, via Lake

    1912 ——- 2012:

    “We are going to keep coming out into the street, but we have to think of something more concrete, something other than protests,” said Nikolai Belyaev, who was briefly detained after being caught up in a crowd of [anti Putin] protesters who refused to go straight home after demonstrating in central Moscow on Monday.

    A manager at a French chemicals firm in Moscow who saw himself until recently as apolitical, he has quit his job and thrown himself into the protest movement.

    “I very much want to hope that society is not going to fall asleep again.

    I see my personal goal as developing a civil awareness in others,” he said.

    “The authorities have not yet realized that a new tradition of societal control over power is being born in Russia.”

  40. LPOregon Files Response

    The LNC passed a motion ordering their chair to spend money on project Saratoga. The chair has now reminded their parliamentary geniuses that when the motion was first made he ruled it out of order, and that if they did not like it they should have made a motion to over-rule the chair, which they did not.

    Apparently members of one of the factions have worked out how members of one of the other factions are stacking the speaker list to favor LNC etc outcomes favorable to their faction.

  41. George Phillies

    @63 You might consider that the Tyrannosaurus Rex had a brain the size of a small nut, and by linking to Alex Jones you have linked to a far larger collector of nuts.

  42. Pingback: BTP Removes Tiffany Briscoe as Presidential Nominee | Independent Political Report

  43. Let the T-Rex of Talk Radio Entertain U2day

    @68 – I don’t have to worry with that, I boycotted the pompus ass over 20 years ago!

    @ 666 – Alex Jones IS~” The T-REX of political talk “~
    LISTEN 24/7 ANYTIME-3 million listeners and growing ! LISTEN while you check facebook, your email or while you surf the web. The message NEEDS to be HEARD !!!

    I don’t consider anything, but what I choose to consider! I don’t willingly participate in the kleptocracy and then claim to be a libertarian.

    ANYONE who lives off FORCED taxpayers funds is a FRAUD libertarian, if they claim to be one. Get a PRIVATE sector job, then you will be the real deal !!!

    Nelson Aldrich did more than any other power elite controlled US politician to destroy the original decentralized republic and subvert the US Constitution. Aldrich was directly responsible for implementing a banker elite controlled fascist empire, which America still has today. This march toward global governance rule over the entire world continues today with the Rockefeller-inspired CFR and other organizations advancing a one-world view of the future.: – http://thedailybell.com/2666/Nelson-Aldrich

    Financial Illiteracy of Those Who Mock Conspiracy Theorists: – http://thedailybell.com/3552/Anthony-Wile-Financial-Illiteracy-of-Those-Who-Mock-Conspiracy-Theorists

    Global Dominance Group: http://thedailybell.com/3232/Mickey-Huff-on-Project-Censored-the-Reality-of-World-Government-and-the-Masquerade-of-a-Free-Press

    Freedom International Newsfeed: – http://www.mediafreedominternational.org/

    Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)
    The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is another malevolent invention of the Anglo-American elite, also pushed forward in the modern era by David Rockefeller. Located in New York, it “advises” US political regimes and has been active since 1921. The CFR’s mission: “[To provide] a resource for its members, government officials, business executives, journalists, educators and students, civic and religious leaders, and other interested citizens in order to help them better understand the world and the foreign policy choices facing the United States and other countries.”

    The CFR maintains a think tank called, unsurprisingly the “David Rockefeller Studies Program.” It is made up of 50 scholars, a number of fellows who receive scholarships to study American foreign policy and recommend courses of action that are then made available to the larger public, academia and of course, the mainstream media.

    Foreign Affairs has long been the CFR’s main journal, and in the past has been used as a kind of elite template. Those who wished to find out what wars and ruin the elites intended to foment could read the journal to see. Often the journal published predictive articles as such plots had to be rationalized before they could be put into action. One of the more famous series of articles in the journal was published in the 1970s and involved an upcoming crisis between Islam and the West. That has, in fact, occurred.

    The Council on Foreign Relations has its own history of development, but rather than present it in all of its inaccuracies and obfuscations, we shall simply assert that the CFR is fundamentally an outgrowth of elite-funded Cecil Rhodes (after whom Rhodesia was named). Rhodes was an unabashed royalist who believed in England’s manifest destiny. Perhaps an agent or protégé of the Rothschilds, Rhodes was extremely successful in extracting wealth from Africa, which mightily increased Britain’s wealth and his own as well.

    Rhodes used some of his accrued fortune to set up his Rhodes Scholarships and also to fund the Royal Institute of International Affairs and its sister organization in America, the Council on Foreign Relations. These institutes were positioned as think tanks but were actually designed to control the political processes of the Anglo-American imperium and to shape it so that it further represented the interests of the Rothschild-affiliated banking classes.

    Today, the CFR is one of the longest running of elite organizations, claims some 5,000 members and has produced numerous highly ranked officials in many US administrations as its sister Royal Institute no doubt has in Britain. It has influence with the CIA and armed forces as well. Seven American presidents have made speeches to the Council on Foreign Relations; Bill Clinton and George W. Bush did so while still in office.

    It is useless to recite the CFR’s many denials of its influence on US presidential administrations. They are patently false. The Council on Foreign Relations and its satellite think tanks and affiliated academic and media organizations remain enormously influential. Theoretical support for America’s serial wars, its endless funding of internationalist organizations and its enthusiastic support of the central banking, fiat money controlled economies can all be seen to have emanated from the Council on Foreign Relations. It remains a preeminent fount of mischief and supporter and organizer of the US military-industrial complex, which supports the larger internationalist aims of the City of London and its Rothschild-led banking elite.

  44. Wes Wagner

    MW @73

    Well first Aaron Starr promised he would pay for it… then he got Hinkle to write a check from the LNC treasury… then he hung Hinkle out to dry by refusing to reimburse the LNC, and now he is going to blame Hinkle and knife him in the back (probably through Rutherford).

  45. just saying

    @53: Paul knows he is winning the independent vote, but he also knows a third candidate will be locked out of the debates. The polls will be rigged to keep him below 15% and if that doesn’t work, they will just raise the threshold.

    One reason why I don’t totally discount the possibility that Paul would accept Romney’s VP nomination — Paul would remain in the national debate that way. If he runs as the LP candidate, he won’t.

  46. paulie

    he also knows a third candidate will be locked out of the debates.

    There’s a high chance the Americans Elect candidate will be in the debates, and a moderate chance that Ron Paul as an LP candidate might make the cut.

  47. paulie

    One reason why I don’t totally discount the possibility that Paul would accept Romney’s VP nomination — Paul would remain in the national debate that way.

    I would discount the possibility that the Republicans would give anyone with his age and his foreign policy and fiscal views any spot on their ticket. Rand Paul would make a lot more sense as a VP choice and would keep the Paul Wing on the reservation. He’s younger, less extreme, and could parlay the VP run into a more credible presidential run in the future, something Ron Paul probably can’t do. If there is a VP offer anywhere near Paul, he would be wise to recommend Rand rather than himself.

    However, a Romney-Santorum ticket seems more likely.

  48. Carol Moore

    Hmmm… first we have a non=explanation of what an “open thread” – “hey stupid, go look around and figure it out.” Then we have a long explanation of – not an open thread? IndepPolReport Policy? Not clear what. Not very good editorial practice, IMHO.

  49. paulie

    Marc copied the text from two of my past open threads and combined them, apparently. I would have just went with the first line and left it at that, as I have been doing more recently.

  50. paulie

    Anyone covering the LNC meeting this weekend?

    I tried to recruit someone to broadcast it. As far as I know at this point I have not had any luck with that.

  51. paulie

    I am at the meeting right now. Look at replacing Randy Eshelman on the LNC .

    Doug, is anyone broadcasting it? Tweeting? If so, where’s the feed?

    If not, does anyone have a computer with a webcam and someone else in the gallery that can push the buttons?

    Also, I haven’t received that email I called you about. If you get a chance to send it I would really appreciate it.

  52. LNC MEETING UP

    They are discussing an executive session. Some people are very hard to hear . Issues include the LSLA-IT matter, the Oregon lawsuit and the LNC’s local attorney’s involvement in it. Tehre are presentations at 2PM so there is a cutoff on executive session times. Aaron Starr is apparently being invited in to part of the executive session.

  53. paulie

    My email to IPR writers sent a few minutes ago:

    …..I’m still on break from posting IPR threads myself due to my lack of access to computers that don’t totally suck at the moment. I also need to get my butt out to work today, hopefully sooner rather than later. After I leave here for the day I will not be on email but phone calls and texts at 415-690-6352 would be good.

    ………….

    Someone please post article to ipr

    thx

    …………

  54. LNC MEETING STILL OFF AIR

    @93 The issues I could hear included “the LSLA-IT matter, the Oregon lawsuit and the LNC’s local attorney’s involvement in it”. ma not sure that list is complete.

    Phillies writes:
    Saturday noon. LNC still off air.

  55. Mark Hilgenberg

    George,

    When you get to the floor fee debate, let them know states are on your side.

    The Utah EC voted to approve this resolution today.

    “Whereas the Libertarian Party bylaws do not authorize a floor fee for delegates, whereas in forty years of LP conventions no attempt to impose a floor fee on delegates has ever been sustained, and whereas the imposition of any floor fee constitutes an unjustified interference in the right of the affiliate parties to select their own delegates to the national convention, therefore the Utah LP hereby rebukes the convention oversight committee’s attempt to impose such a fee as a condition of delegates performing their function at the business meeting, urges the LNC to reverse the proposed floor fee, and encourages our delegates to oppose, and if necessary make motions from the floor to invalidate, any such fee as it may be used to prevent any delegate from access to the business of the convention.”

  56. paulie

    Seems that much of or all of the meeting might be executive session? Is that going to become the new norm? I guess the trend has been heading that way for years.

    Or, did the stream just not come back on because someone forgot to turn it back on or had computer problems or something?

    If anyone knows of other tweet feeds about it, other feeds etc please post.

  57. Pingback: LNC Meeting Thread | Independent Political Report

  58. Marc Montoni

    Sorry Paulie, have been out and about with some small people who live in my house. There’s a lady who also lives in my house, who says she’s my wife, who says they’re my kids. I’m sure she means well, so I have to believe her. Heading out and about again in a few minutes. Love the company of the cops mentioned above, of course, but love running around the local arboretum with these guys so much more.

    Have a good day petitioning.

  59. paulie

    Marc,

    No slam was intended at you or any one individual personally, we have about 30 people signed up at IPR now so I was hoping that between all of them someone would be around to do it.

    It looks like we posted our articles at almost the same time, so I turned mine into just the live feed article and yours can be the one for posting comments.

  60. George Phillies

    Still No Feed, and I am going out to get lunch.

    The video that Dave Blau (flickboy2) uses is “live only”, so someone really needs to keep track of it.

    And, Marc, have a good time at the arboretum.

  61. paulie

    Have a good day petitioning.

    We’re taking longer to locate a rental car than expected so I’m still here for now. Hopefully not too much longer…

  62. Carol Moore

    OK, I don’t know why my complaint about format got copies to LNC meeting thread. OH, so many males to discipline, so little time. Anyway, yes come up with a nice short explanation for those who wander in stupid… like us SEXagenarians…

  63. paulie

    Because I was in a hurry and grabbed the whole block of text that contained the comments relevant to the LNC meeting (I thought we were ready to leave here for the day) and didn’t have time to edit that out.

    The short explanation you seek is in past open threads. If it’s not self-explanatory what an open thread is, and can’t be figured out from reading it, go to the past open threads (start from the first ones). It’s in there.

  64. Precede with Caution, via Lake

    Ash Roughani, Founder, California Moderate Party

    I briefly explained this week on Fox&Hounds how we’re going to find our leaders.

    Hint: it involves a defection strategy. More on that in the coming weeks.

    (follow on Twitter | like us on Facebook | forward to a friend )

    Copyright © 2012 CA Moderate Party Beta, All rights reserved.

    This email was sent to individuals who expressed interest in receiving updates about the California Moderate Party.

    CA Moderate Party Beta
    615 28th St. #B
    Sacramento, CA 95816

  65. Carol Moore

    So Paulies they one who says “hey, stupid, figure it out yourself.” Seriously, a lot of people are hesitant about posting the wrong thing – especially women (even me and you know how big my meatballs are) so if you want to be women and shy libertarian male friendly, you have to make clear what’s going on and what is permissible. Not everyone has those big meatballs you and Marc have. :-0 :-)

  66. paulie

    Carol, if you are going to quote me, please do so accurately.

    I did not call anyone stupid.

    Quite the opposite, I presume people have at least a modest modicum of intelligence.

    From the text of the article above:

    “Discuss almost whatever you want in the comments on this thread, other than stuff that would get you and/or IPR in legal trouble, or stuff that has already been quarantined in “special” threads.

    This can include news items IPR should be covering, as well as just about anything else.”

    Is that unclear?

  67. Carol Moore

    Sorry for appearing to quote you when being facetious. Sorry that my anger at Marc’s poor moderation style on aother list carried over here. Must start meditating!! To be more constructive, though still confused about how much of intro open thread related: most people won’t search for past open threads, just wonder what’s so mysterious it can’t be cut and pasted to this intro. And then when they read the rest which I guess is related to IPR the first bold sentence is “Please do not expect any of the IPR writers to be personally responsible for posting whatever items you send us.” So very confusing. Too bad software doesn’t allow corrections so people won’t get confused/frustrated coming to this particular open thread.

  68. Dennis

    Former Republican, now member of Reform Party, to run against Garrett

    By Max Pizarro | March 8th, 2012 – 12:42pm

    Mark D. Quick, a former elected member of the Warren County Republican Committee, wants to run as a third party candidate for the 5th Congressional District
    currently occupied by U.S. Rep. Scott Garrett (R-5).
    “I have had enough of public officials putting party above principle,” said Quick, who abandoned the GOP last year. “As we look across the state and into the
    future, it has become clear that the status quo needs to change. Our government has lost its way.”
    Quick said he is seeking the nomination of the Reform Party of New Jersey, founded by a group of conservative student activists in 2010. Quick’s announcement
    came shortly after former Louisiana Governor Buddy Roemer’s decision to seek the party’s presidential nod.
    In 2010, Garrett canceled a radio debate after Quick, then a Republican candidate for Congress, allegedly had a physical altercation with the congressman’s staff.

    http://www.politickernj.com/55387/former-republican-now-member-reform-party-run-against-garrett

  69. George Phillies

    Important news for civilization: Advertisers are bailing on Republican hate radio.

    The news pages http://www.radio-info.com/news/when-it-comes-to-advertisers-avoiding-controversial-shows-its-not-just-rush

    report that “Premiere Networks is circulating a list of 98 advertisers who want to avoid “environments likely to stir negative sentiments.” ” Radio-info.com is staying on top of this story, so you should track it there, but they quote a Premiere Radio Network source as saying:

    “To all Traffic Managers:…More than 350 different advertisers sponsor the programs and services provided to your station on a barter basis…They’ve specifically asked that you schedule their commercials in dayparts or programs free of content that you know are deemed to be offensive or controversial (for example, Mark Levin, Rush Limbaugh, Tom Leykis, Michael Savage, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity).”

  70. Catholic Trotskyist

    Paulie at 95, the Socialist Organizer Party is a Trotskyist sect which split from the Socialist Workers Party I believe. I told you about it in 2008, but you said they could not be covered here because they don’t actually run candidates for office.

  71. Let the T-Rex of Talk Radio Entertain U2day

    The former New Mexico governor becomes a Libertarian, and perhaps a spoiler.
    By W. James Antle III | March 1, 2012

    “Maybe this is dreaming,” Gary Johnson says, “but I do think there is a chance of being up on the debate stage with President Obama and the Republican nominee.” The former governor of New Mexico is used to big dreams. But for now he is focused on the somewhat more manageable task of winning the Libertarian Party’s presidential nomination.

    Johnson began his campaign as a Republican, in the party where he had spent his whole political career. He had endorsed Ron Paul in 2008, and many saw him as a logical choice to take Paul’s libertarian ideas further into the mainstream. Johnson was younger, has executive experience, and has little baggage from the intra-libertarian ideological wars of the past. But he also had less money and organization, and when Paul decided to run again his supporters remained loyal. Paul quickly became a factor in Iowa, where he ultimately finished a strong third, and New Hampshire, where he ran second.

    Johnson languished; he was invited to only two GOP debates, in one coming up with a memorable quip about his neighbor’s dog creating more “shovel-ready” projects than Obama. (This was overshadowed by subsequent back-and-forth over whether Johnson had borrowed the joke from Rush Limbaugh.) The exclusion cost him dearly and still obviously annoys him. “I sent a letter to the Republican National Committee,” he says. “I didn’t ask them to make sure I was included in the debates. I asked to be included in the polls they were using to decide who to include in the debates.”

    His irritation is justified. Here was a two-term governor of a swing state with a record of balancing the budget and cutting taxes, yet he could not even get on the same debate stage as an ex-CEO of a midsized pizza company or a three-term congressional backbencher. When Johnson was listed in the polls, he was competitive with Rick Santorum and Jon Huntsman, who were both included in most debates. The networks treated Johnson like Buddy Roemer (another former governor) and fringe candidate Fred Karger.

    In December, Johnson decided he had had enough. He bolted the Republican Party and announced he was seeking the Libertarian nomination. In some respects, the LP is a much better fit. Johnson is a fiscal conservative, but he also supports gay marriage, open immigration, and legal abortion until fetal viability. He raised eyebrows by reaching out to pagan voters and other groups alien to the Christian right. Some of this may have been happenstance rather than deliberate strategy—running as a Republican in New Mexico, Johnson forged a tactical alliance with pro-lifers on moderate abortion restrictions despite his pro-choice stance—but opposition to the drug war has been a defining stance for him.

    During the 1990s, Johnson was the only governor in the country to advocate drug decriminalization. No state’s chief executive has been eager to break that ground since. Johnson favors the full legalization of marijuana and argues that drug addiction should be treated as a medical problem rather than a crime. He is cheerfully open about his own youthful drug use—“I never exhaled,” he told the New Republic—and even admitted to the Weekly Standard that he had used marijuana for medicinal purposes from 2005 to 2008 after fracturing a vertebra in a paragliding accident.

    While all of this is considered terribly eccentric in Republican circles, Johnson’s history is an asset in the Libertarian Party. But the ex-governor isn’t some stoner out of “Dazed and Confused” or “Fast Times at Ridgemont High.” He built a multimillion-dollar construction business. He is an avid athlete who climbs mountains, runs, and bicycles. And he was by most accounts a successful governor.

    Johnson cut taxes 14 times and never approved a single tax increase. Yet by the time he left office in 2003, New Mexico was one of only four states with a balanced budget. That’s because Johnson was a steadfast foe of government spending, earning the nickname “Governor Veto.” Johnson vetoed over 750 bills, more than all the other governors combined. Unlike some other would-be presidents, his record of fiscal conservatism isn’t confined to warming up the crowd at a Tea Party rally.

    “As governor, Mr. Johnson showed that a non-ideological, pragmatic libertarianism can work as a governing philosophy,” wrote libertarian blogger Will Wilkinson (who proceeded to argue that this would actually doom him in the Republican primaries). “Independent voters hankering for a genuine alternative to Barack Lyndon Roosevelt Obama on the left and Fox News flunkies on the right might have their man,” opined the Reason Foundation’s Shikha Dalmia.

    That’s exactly the opening Johnson hopes to exploit in a general election. “Most people are fiscally conservative and socially liberal,” he says. He describes the two-party system as “broken.” Now outside of it, Johnson is running on a post-partisan, post-fusionist brand of libertarianism straight out of Declaration of Independents, the book by Reason editors Nick Gillespie and Matt Welch, built on the idea that the freedom philosophy offers solutions to the masses disenchanted with politics as usual.

    Johnson cites poll numbers showing that many Americans are willing to vote third party and has joked that “Mickey Mouse would poll 15 percent against Obama and Romney.” Some actual poll numbers have been encouraging for Johnson. Public Policy Polling has him at 6 percent in North Carolina, a state Republicans are trying to turn red again after it voted narrowly for Obama in 2008. Other surveys have shown him drawing similar support at a national level.

    But to get to the general election, Johnson first has to win the Libertarian nomination. Despite the fact that he would have the strongest political résumé in party history—no Libertarian presidential candidate has ever governed a state before—in the LP nothing is guaranteed. It took Bob Barr, a former Republican congressman, six ballots to beat a field of mostly unknown candidates in 2008. Twenty years earlier, Ron Paul barely edged out activist Russell Means at a bruising party convention that hurt feelings and fractured alliances. Johnson says he expects to face at least nine opponents at the party’s May 4–6 convention in Las Vegas.

    Barr could end up being a problem for Johnson. He too was a prominent former Republican elected official who migrated to the Libertarian Party. The party also nominated an ex-Republican and libertarian pragmatist for vice president. The ticket’s poll numbers in a three-way race were good, setting expectations for a record showing. Instead Barr didn’t get a higher percentage of the vote than more obscure—and more radical—past nominees.

    Yet Barr did improve the party’s raw vote totals, which may be a better metric for comparing candidates who received less than 1 percent of the popular vote. More importantly, Johnson would run a very different general election campaign. Barr positioned himself as a right-wing alternative to the Republican nominee, competing with the Constitution Party’s Chuck Baldwin. That has seldom been a successful approach and became even more difficult once John McCain picked Sarah Palin as his running mate, soothing disaffected conservatives.

    “I’ve debated Bob Barr,” Johnson recalls. He says the 2008 Libertarian nominee evolved into a capable defender of the party’s principles, but that his record doesn’t compare. Johnson isn’t going try to run to the right of the Republican nominee. He is going to campaign against drug laws, the Patriot Act, immigration restrictions, and attempts to thwart gay marriage, wooing socially liberal voters too.

    Foreign policy is another possible weak spot, though on this issue Libertarians are a fractious bunch. The party platform is officially noninterventionist and so, at first glance, is Johnson. He opposed the Iraq War from the beginning. He supported the initial invasion of Afghanistan after the 9/11 terrorist attacks but opposes the decade-long occupation and now favors withdrawal. Johnson is not clamoring for war with Iran.

    But Johnson muddied the waters by telling the Weekly Standard that he favored unspecified humanitarian interventions. He has said the United States shouldn’t tolerate genocide, for example. In our interview he was more specific, citing the Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda as the kind of enemy he would strike. He also stressed the importance of a strategic alliance with Israel and expressed some concern about the Iranian nuclear program.

    Johnson notes that what he is proposing in Uganda would be limited, based on a statute passed by Congress, and would not be a unilateral presidential war—unlike the operation against Libya, which Obama initiated, Congress never approved, and Johnson opposed. He isn’t exactly Ron Paul on foreign policy, but he is much further from John McCain.

    There are some concerns that Johnson will run afoul of state sore loser laws if he is the nominee, imperiling Libertarian ballot access. He ended his Republican campaign before 2012 but remains on the primary ballot in many states. The LP prides itself on getting on the ballot in nearly 50 states, something most minor parties cannot do.

    Johnson benefits from a tremendous amount of goodwill in the liberty movement. “When Gary says he is going to do something he does it,” says Steve Kubby, a California marijuana-legalization advocate who has run for office as a Libertarian. “Whether it’s climbing Mount Everest, balancing the budget, or fighting [against] the drug war.” William Westmiller, a libertarian Republican activist, calls Johnson “a principled and experienced politician.”

    Superficially, Gary Johnson and Ron Paul are working at cross-purposes. First they were competing for the same votes in the Republican primaries. Now Paul is trying to bring libertarian-leaning voters into the Republican Party while Johnson is attempting to run a viable third party campaign. But a good bit of Paul’s leverage within the GOP stems from his ability to appeal to voters who aren’t guaranteed to back the party’s nominee. The Washington Post reports that Romney in particular covets Paul’s supporters; former Vice President Dan Quayle has gone so far as to tell National Review that Republicans will lose in November without them.

    Paul has no desire to repeat his 1988 third-party run. His son Rand’s ascendancy within the Republican Party makes this option even less attractive. Johnson gives Paul’s supporters somewhere to go in November if the GOP doesn’t court them. If Paulites stay organized within the GOP but become a swing vote in the election, the Paul and Johnson candidacies might be mutually reinforcing.

    “If there were a reasonable expectation that Ron Paul would win the GOP nomination, it might have created a conflicting appeal that would have been problematic for the movement,” says Westmiller. “That isn’t likely, so it’s good to have a worthy liberty candidate for the general election campaign.” Johnson makes this point himself. “I give people a choice if Ron Paul isn’t the Republican nominee,” he says.

    As Kubby sees it, supporting the former governor is a choice to keep the government out of things “that are none of its damn business.” The soft-spoken, professorial Gary Johnson probably wouldn’t put it like that, though he’d almost certainly agree.

    *^* Our economy is tangled up right now. People are worried about their jobs and their futures. So how do we start to fix the problems? Given that we have a long race in front of us, we need to get back to basics. We need to do the hard work that makes us stronger and we need to have clear goals and plans to keep us on track. It all gets back to common sense government. We need a government that sets the rules and creates a level playing field for all competitors. We need government that lives within its means.

    Right now, Washington is borrowing 43 cents out of every dollar it’s spending. We have to stop the spending and start thinking about providing the best service at the lowest price. When I was governor of New Mexico I saw how running the government is a lot like preparing for a triathlon. When we make good decisions, they build on themselves. Every lap in the pool, every spin on the bike, and every run prepares us for competition. Then there comes a time in every race where we have to dig deep and to push through and the results are worth it.

    Do you want to keep America the strongest country in the world? Do you want to do the hard work it’s going to take to restore fiscal discipline? It all starts with you and me. This is about America. LIVE FREE.

    – Gary Johnson

    Gary Johnson is a Libertarian candidate for President in 2012. He has been an outspoken advocate for efficient government, lower taxes, winning the war on drug abuse, protection of civil liberties, revitalization of the economy and promoting entrepreneurship and privatization.

    Donate today at http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/

    Gary “IRONMAN” Johnson 2012: The Athlete’s Guide to Good Government – http://www.youtube.com/user/govgaryjohnson?feature=BF#p/u/15/FmDLD4h7Ydg

  72. paulie

    Antle via T-Rex @125: Much to respond to … later

    CT @124

    Thanks. I did forget. I think we could maybe cover them, but not often.

    GP @123:

    Sirius/XM radio may be the wave of the future for reich wing hate radio. Stern and Imus paved the way for shock jocks, and if advertisers and radio stations abandon Limburgher he may be next.

    Carol @122:

    most people won’t search for past open threads, just wonder what’s so mysterious it can’t be cut and pasted to this intro.

    I was in a big hurry when I initially wrote that a few months ago, wanted to dump the older longer rant that is appended afterwards in this one, and really “open thread” IS pretty self-explanatory, especially if you read the comments on the current and past ones, but even if you don’t.

    And then when they read the rest which I guess is related to IPR the first bold sentence is “Please do not expect any of the IPR writers to be personally responsible for posting whatever items you send us.”

    What happens is that I have times when I have a lot of time on my hands and easy internet access and I put up tons of IPR articles day after day. Then various people expect me to be able to do it all the time and later, when I am busy with work and/or have little internet access for weeks and months at a time, bombard me with IPR comments and personal emails addressed to me alone to post various things and “why haven’t you posted this?” “why haven’t you posted that?” “Are you trying to be biased by ignoring x, y and z” So the rant was partially my response to that, partially an IPR FAQ, etc.

    People kept doing it anyway though, and circumstances kept changing, so after a couple of months I dumped the long rant in favor of the short “figure it out” message.

    Then this month I have been managing my time (and the crappy internet access I have at the moment) by only posting comments and not articles so I asked if someone else would post the open thread this time.

    Marc stepped up and combined the “figure it out” and the long rant.

    Next month if I am back to posting articles I’ll do something different.

    If you want to sign up to write for IPR you could do it your own way some month.

  73. NewFederalist

    Oh, oh… trouble in liberyland.

    You’ve probably heard by now of the unfortunate conflict between Charles Koch and the Cato Institute. Bill Niskanen’s widow, Kathryn Washburn, and I, along with the Institute itself, have been sued in Kansas court by Koch over the question of who controls Bill’s “shares” in Cato. The Shareholders’ Agreement makes clear to me and to our attorneys that Kathy controls them. Charles thinks they now belong to the Koch brothers, who plan to use that control to pack the Cato board with conservatives. I have tried for more than two decades to eliminate the shareholder arrangement which has, in fact, lain dormant for more than three decades. Please visit http://www.cato.org/SaveCato for all the details. I’ve also attached a memo http://www.cato.org/SaveCato/kochquest.pdf from our chairman, Bob Levy, that addresses the points Charles Koch has recently made. All this is deeply disappointing to me, as I’m sure it is to you. This should be a time of celebration for Cato – the completion of our beautiful headquarters expansion, the growing libertarian mood in the nation, planning for our May 4 Milton Friedman Prize Dinner – but instead we must deal with what I view to be an unconscionable takeover attempt of the crown jewel of the libertarian movement worldwide, your Cato Institute.

    Let me make one other point. At this juncture I can understand why you might not want to contribute to our capital campaign. We are at $46 million toward our $50 million goal. But Cato remains Cato and our principled libertarian mission moves forward based on the generous operating funds you provide. We need you to continue that support, or our defense of Cato’s independence becomes more difficult. Thanks, as always, for your loyalty to Cato’s mission.

    Gratefully, Ed

  74. Precede with Caution, via Lake

    San Diego County looking for help to walk, telephone or mail to registered voters for Dr. Paul: Tuesday, March 13, 2012

    “Mike Benoit”

    ………. Ron Paul meet-up group is looking for help so we can win some delegates for Paul.

    We are targeting districts we feel confident we can win.

    We need people who live out this way to walk precincts with us, but if you live out of town you can work small precincts for us by phone or by mail.

    The process is easy, we can email you the material the lists.

    When we educate them we will win. San Diego is already a hot bed for Paul.

    Help us make the winning difference.

    Please email me back with “I will help”

  75. George Phillies

    @134 Well, Wayne does make clear why the Republican party is shedding female voters like a maple tree shedding leaves in late fall. This is a huge opportunity for all Americans.

    What Republican bigot hate radio is seeing is real libertarianism in action.

    You remember all those claims that absent government intervention public pressure would have suppressed segregation?

    The hypothesized line was: “Sell to everyone, or we’ll withhold our spending from your stores.”

    Well, here it is! *Libertarianism in action!*

    The message: Stop supporting conservative hatemongers — but I repeat myself — or you won’t be doing it with my dollars.

    Decent Americans are not using force. Decent Americans are not using fraud. Decent Americans are using the power of personal persuasion based on their pocketbooks.

    And their message is: If you advertise on right wing hate radio, you will do it with someone else’s money, because you are not getting mine!

    Decent Americans are using their voices in support of a Libertarian Party platform plank:

    We reject bigotry!

    In particular, decent Americans are using libertarian thinking — voluntary individual choice — to advance against Republican Far Right hatemongering, lying, conspiracy ranting, not to mention mysogynistical smearing of hard-working young women.

    Thanks to satellite radio and internet, Mr Limbaugh and his crackpot allies will still be able to reach all Americans. They just won’t be paid $50 million a year to do so.

  76. Jill Pyeatt

    @ 134: I think this is a horrible article, and I’m glad he’s identifying much more closely with Republicans now.

  77. Michael H. Wilson

    Jill I would not post it if I made the decision. It is not about the libertarian movement or the Libertarian Party. Hell I’ve been a candidate three times and my writing does not get posted. Then of course I don’t submit it.

    But most insulting is Roots use of the word lynching. People who are lynched usually die. It has been done primarily to blacks in the U.S. and sometimes others such as Indians and Jews. Plainly it is homicide without a trial.

    Limbaugh is not dead and no one put a noose around his neck. He has just been criticized. Whether the criticism is right or not I personally don’t give a damn.

  78. Jill Pyeatt

    This man still identifies with the Libertarian brand, unfortunately, even though he says the “L” word less and less these days. This article is a good example of how he’s destroying our brand.

  79. Paulie

    Limbaugh spent days on end repeatedly trashing Ms. Fluke with offensive language, statements and insinuations on his nationally broadcast program for the “crime” of testifying to Congress about her experience and that of other Georgetown graduate teaching assistants.

    The incredibly imbecilic Limurgher apparently does not realize that the number of birth control pills used is not a function of how much sex someone has – they are taken once a day if someone might have sex as a precaution in order to maintain a steady level in the bloodstream. He also demanded that she and her friends post sex tapes online for him and his audience to jerk off to, as a condition of the young women receiving health insurance.

    He said her parents, who are actually conservatives, should be ashamed of her and repeated it numerous times over several days to an audience of millions, likely including many of her parents’ friends and perhaps her parents themselves. `

    Agreed with Phillies @135.

    MHW, your writing has been posted before and will be posted again when I return to posting articles. It does help if you submit it, but does not guarantee anything.

    I would post Wayne’s article, even though I don’t agree with it, if I was not on break from posting any and all articles, and I have passed along Jill’s request to all IPR writers.

  80. Michael H. Wilson

    Thanks paulie. I know my stuff has been posted (I hesitate to call it writing).

    I’ve been moving and attending more than enough government meetings plus we had some nasty drug raids in our county and some of us are working to help the defendants. I haven’t spent much time on anything worthwhile in some days. Thanks again.

  81. Precede with Caution, via Lake

    Public Citizen:

    Ever since the Supreme Court issued its perverse ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission a little over two years ago, all of us have been working together to protect our democracy from a hostile corporate takeover.

    When we started, many people and pundits thought our movement for a constitutional amendment to overturn the ruling was a pipe dream.

    The momentum you’ve helped generate just keeps growing:

    Last week, on Super Tuesday, voters in 65 cities and towns throughout Vermont passed resolutions calling for a constitutional amendment.

    Public Citizen activists are leading this unprecedented push in the Green Mountain State.

    Public Citizen activists in California, Maryland and Massachusetts are well on their way to passing similar measures.

    We just launched Resolutions Week, an organizing drive to get hundreds of local resolutions passed in the second week of June.

  82. Hugh Mann

    If there wasn’t enough political power in existence to make it worth buying, money in politics would not be a problem.

    So long as politics is in control of money, money will find ways to buy politics.

  83. Darryl W. Perry

    http://www.ballot-access.org/2012/03/13/missouri-bill-advances-raises-presidential-primary-filing-fee-from-1000-to-10000/

    On March 8, the Missouri House Rules Committee passed HB 1060, which, among other things, raises the presidential primary filing fee from $1,000 to $10,000. It provides for a petition in lieu of the filing fee of 5,000 signatures, but only for candidates who swear they can’t afford the filing fee.

    Me: Why not just abolish the primary since it’s a beauty contest anyways?

  84. paulie

    Shouldn’t all the parties make the rules for, conduct, and pay for their own candidate nomination processes instead of sticking the taxpayers with the tab?

  85. William Saturn

    When Third Party Watch died, were any of the articles and comments saved elsewhere? Did anyone save them on their computer? Has there been any effort to restore the articles?

  86. Precede with Caution, via Lake

    they better hold themselves to the same standard. ——- Bealah Man blog

    Well, apparently, Oklahoma Representatives have voted that they should also be made to take piss tests, just like those who are seeking assistance from the government in this Depression.

    I find it hard to believe that the state senate will vote lockstep, but the house vote was won by a very large margin (82-6).

    On a side note of importance to me, is the fact that this bill was sponsored by a Republican named Guy Liebman of Oklahoma City, who tried to fight the amendment that brought on the counter action.

    You see, he doesn’t believe that he should be held to the same standard that poor folk are held to.

    [This is telling and deserves my award called "The Richard Noggin'". ]

    Also note that Richard, er, Guy, is up for re-election this year and it is time to put this old horse’s ass out to pasture.

    The hypocrisy is stifling, especially when you consider all of those people that now run things have done the very same things and now hold most of the power in this country.

    People like Clinton, Bush and Obama (and MANY others). Cenk calls them out and describes this hypocrisy very well:

    You see, Mr and Mrs Redneck, there are different rules for different social classes.

    I know how much you want to be in their class, but the truth is that you NEVER will be. Get that thru your thick skulls.

  87. Dennis

    I think this should be posted as an article in its own right.

    For immediate release

    For Further Information contact:
    Jake Zychick
    Website: http://www.reformparty.org
    email: ReformPartyNJ@Gmail.com
    office phone: (201) 248-7525

    Presidential Candidate Will Address RPNJ Convention

    The Reform Party of New Jersey has announced that presidential candidate Andre Barnett, a veteran of the United States Army and successful entrepreneur, will address their state convention on April 14th in Piscataway.

    “We are excited and privileged to have Andre Barnett speak at our convention,” said Chairman Jacob Zychick. “The Reform Party will be running an impressive slate of candidates here in New Jersey and I know I speak for our membership when I say that any one of the party’s presidential contenders would make an exciting addition to our ticket!”

    Barnett is the first of the Reform Party presidential hopefuls to accept the invitation to appear at the event, a courtesy that was extended to every candidate that has announced their intention to seek the party’s nomination. Barnett, who declared his candidacy on May 6th of last year, served his country in Bosnia during the 1990s. After being wounded in a helicopter accident, Barnett turned his attention to the private sector, and founded WiseDome Incorporated. He later become a highly praised fitness personality.

    The Reform Party of New Jersey’s state convention will occur on April 14th, 2012 at the John F. Kennedy Library, 500 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, New Jersey. The call to order will occur at 11:00AM.

    For more information about the event please visit http://www.reformpartynj.org or http://www.andrebarnett2012.com

    ###

  88. Precede with Caution, via Lake

    Flag this message
    Panelists Say Today’s Youth Probably Won’t Live Better Than the Previous Generation
    Thursday, March 15, 2012 3:54 PM

    From: “The Gallup Panel”

    donlake@ymail.com / Dear DONALD R LAKE :

    Thank you for participating in the Gallup Panel!

    Please enjoy the following findings from recent surveys you may have completed.

    —-
    A recent Gallup survey asked Panel members how likely they think it is that today’s youth will live a better life than that of their parents.

    Using a 5-point scale, with 1 being “not at all likely” and 5 being “extremely likely,” panelists compared how today’s youth will compare to the previous generation in areas such as having a better living standard and a better education.

    The data don’t project a positive opinion.

    Overall, 22% of panelists say it is not at all likely that today’s youth will have a better life than their parents. Comparatively, 3% say it is extremely likely that today’s youth will live better than the previous generation.

    Fifty-five percent of panelists give a 1 or a 2 when answering the question, compared to 14% of respondents who give a 4 or a 5.

    But the youth are more positive than older panelists.

    ifty-six percent of panelists aged 55 or older rate the question with a 1 or a 2; 57% of those aged 40 to 54 do so, too.

    Comparatively, 48% of those aged 18 to 39 rate the question a 1 or a 2.

    Similarly, 18- to 39-year-olds (18%) are more likely than 40- to 54-year-olds (13%) and those aged 55 or older (12%) to give the question a 4 or a 5 response.

    —-
    Last month, the site published a piece about panelists’ negative opinions about the U.S. economy.

    Thank you, The Gallup Panel Team

    You received this email because you are a Gallup Panel member and directed us to send email to this address.

    Unsubscribe, copyright © 2012 Gallup, Inc. All rights reserved.

    Gallup World Headquarters, 901 F Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20004 USA

  89. Trent Hill

    “When Third Party Watch died, were any of the articles and comments saved elsewhere? Did anyone save them on their computer? Has there been any effort to restore the articles?”

    I offered to purchase it from Viguerie when he let it fall into disrepair. I also offered to buy the articles and comments from him when the site went offline. I did not receive replies to either email, which is a shame, as ThirdPartyWatch was, to me, an important archive of third party history. But, the WayBackMachine has copies (Google, I mean).

  90. Paulie

    Try asking Steve Gordon if you can get a hold of him, possibly Shane Cory or David Franke who both ran it for a while after him, or maybe Austin Cassidy who started the site and sold it to Gordon.

    You could also try posing an article here and maybe that will catch the notice of someone who backed up a copy.

  91. Gary Johnson Needs You !

    Gary Johnson’s Team
    March Matching Funds Mania – Donate NOW, it will be worth TWICE as much !!!
    “Recoup Some Of Your Tax Funds To The Campaign”
    http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/
    We want to have some fun with “March Madness*” and finish the important task of qualifying for federal matching funds.

    1. To qualify for federal matching funds the campaign must raise $5000 from each of any 20 states.

    2. Only the first $250 of your donations to the campaign count toward the qualifying goal.(But ALL funds are met so give what you can over $250) So if you and your spouse are considering donating and were just going to donate $500, then it is better if you both donate $250 so your family’s full donation gets matched.

    3. As a Libertarian Party candidate for President, only donations received prior to the LP Convention qualify for matching funds. If you were thinking about waiting until after the convention to contribute – don’t. Donate now and your dollars will be worth twice as much.

    4. Legend:

    A state with a * after its name has qualified.
    States with an amount noted are states still in progress, and the amount is how much more we need to raise to qualify.

    5. If you live in one of the states in which we are trying to qualify, or have friends in those states, please donate and encourage them to donate.

    SOUTH
    1 Texas *
    16
    8 Alabama
    9 Oklahoma
    5 Tennessee ($3,242)
    12 Mississippi
    4 North Carolina ($1,014)
    13 West Virginia
    6 South Carolina ($3,593)
    11 Arkansas
    3 Georgia *
    14
    7 Louisiana ($3,737)
    10 Kentucky
    2 Florida *
    15

    WEST
    1 California *
    16
    8 Utah
    9 Hawaii
    5 Arizona ($100)
    12 Wyoming
    4 Colorado *
    13 Montana
    6 Oregon ($1,004)
    11 Idaho
    3 Washington *
    14
    7 Nevada ($2,982)
    10 Alaska
    2 New Mexico

    EAST
    1 New York *
    16
    8 New Jersey ($3,056)
    9 Washington DC ($3,530)
    5 Massachusetts ($1,565)
    12 Delaware
    4 Maryland *
    13 Rhode Island
    6 New Hampshire ($1,440)
    11 Maine
    3 Pennsylvania *
    14
    7 Connecticut ($2,275)
    10 Vermont
    2 Virginia *
    15

    MIDWEST
    1 Illinois *
    16
    8 Iowa
    9 Kansas
    5 Wisconsin ($3,258)
    12 North Dakota
    4 Missouri ($2,860)
    13
    6 Indiana ($3,538)
    11 South Dakota
    3 Michigan ($1,078)
    14
    7 Minnesota ($3,616)
    10 Nebraska
    2 Ohio *

    6. Cushion – while $5k from 20 states is the minimum to qualify, we want to have enough cushion to make sure we qualify on our first attempt. Thus, our goal for the March Matching Funds Mania is to qualify in 24 states by raising $6k in less-than-$250 dollar donations.

    * “March Madness” is a trademark of the NCAA and is in no way related to Gary Johnson for President 2012.
    http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/

    Become a Delegate – http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/become-a-delegate

  92. George Phillies

    @162 And a large parts of the money was raised via telling Republicans that he was running for the Republican nomination for President. That was really honest of him.

  93. Matt Cholko

    I consider myself something of a “radical,” but I support the campaign’s decision to take matching funds. The money has been stolen from us, lets get some of it back.

    As for GP’s point at 164, I don’t completely disagree. I would be pissed if I donated to a LP candidate who then decided to take my money and run as an independent, for example. On the other hand, it is reasonably well known that unused campaign funds can be, and almost always are, put towards other political purposes. So, I wouldn’t call it fraud exactly. If I run for X office this year, but don’t spend all of my campaign’s money, then run again next year for office Y and make use of the money from the previous year’s campaign, did I defraud my donors?

  94. War, War, Glorious War!

    ?”War, War, glorious war, thank God I am only four score and ten and still young enough to ride forth” — for no points, source the quotation.

    Gary Johnson endorsed our invasion of Kenya.

    And, by the way, in a bit we will be invading the Democratic Republic of the Congo, too, because the LRA is said to be hiding there.

  95. Thomas L. Knapp

    @165,

    “I support the campaign’s decision to take matching funds.”

    “Deciding” to take a welfare check from Uncle Sugar is one thing.

    Getting Uncle Sugar to actually right that welfare check is another.

    And at this point, with less than two months to go until the LP’s nominating convention, the numbers @159 say he’s only 60% of the way to qualifying for the welfare check, likely with his best pre-nomination fundraising days well behind him.

    He probably shouldn’t be counting that money just yet.

  96. Matt Cholko

    TK @167 – Agreed 100%

    I truly hope that the Johnson campaign (assuming he gets the nomination) receives matching funds. I truly hope he gets a high enough percentage to help with ballot access in some of the very low threshold states. I truly hope that he gets into the debates in the fall. I hope he wins the election.

    Realistically though, there is no way in hell that he will be in the debates or win the election. I wish the campaign would stop saying that crap. I don’t see much chance that he sets records with his vote totals either, but I wouldn’t mind the campaign using ballot access level vote goals as a way to get people fired up. Likewise, I don’t see anything wrong with them talking about the reasonable (though maybe a bit unlikely) goal of meeting the requirements for matching funds.

    They shouldn’t be counting the money. But, they do have to run a campaign and keep their donors and volunteers motivated.

  97. George Phillies

    @168 Matt, this is a standard way that Republican carpetbaggers like Barr put up a smoke and mirror screen to hustle the rubes before National.

    “take matching funds” is a slight variation, because past Republican carpetbaggers had advisers with the brains to tell them that “campaigning with stolen money” would offend the party’s radicals and purists. Johnson is less well-advised.

  98. Gary Johnson Needs You !

    Town Hall with Grover Norquist & Gary Johnson

    Monday March 19

    5:30 PM PST / 6:30 PM MST / 7:30 PM CST / 8:30 PM EST

    Governor Gary Johnson will be hosting an on-line Town Hall with a very special guest, Grover Norquist. Grover Norquist is a conservative activist, and founder and president of Americans for Tax Reform. He is best known as the promoter of the “Taxpayer Protection Pledge”, which was signed by 95% of all Republican Congressmen and all but one of the 2012 Republican presidential candidates, to oppose increases in marginal income tax rates for individuals and businesses, as well as net reductions or eliminations of deductions and credits without a matching reduced tax rate.
    To participate in the online town hall go to: http://www.GaryJohnson2012.com

    For more information click here – https://www.facebook.com/events/191925127577521/

    Become a Delegate – http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/become-a-delegate

    Everyone is welcome to support the WINNER before, during and after the convention this time. It is a GUARANTEE !
    Highly Successful Two Term Gov. GARY JOHNSON welcomes your support !

    Please contribute what you can { http://www.LP.org/contribute } to help Gary Johnson and the LP reach Ballot Access in all Fifty States and D.C.

  99. wolfefan

    Grover Norquist? Geez… I’m not an LP member but Gary Johnson is looking worse and worse to me. He needs to find some new friends…

  100. wolfefan

    Just not a fan… his arrogance is annoying to me, his project to have a memorial to Ronald Reagan in every county in the US smacks of a personality cult, his consistent revisionism of what Reagan did and didn’t do is dishonest, his definitions of what is or is not a tax/spending increase change depending on which party proposes it, and worst of all he once described Nero Wolfe as a detective who weighed over 300 lbs. Anyone who claims to be a fan of Wolfe should know that he never topped 300. :)

  101. Gary Johnson Needs You !

    - Updated figures for each state
    Gary Johnson’s Team
    March Matching Funds Mania –
    Donate NOW, it will be worth TWICE as much !!!
    “Recoup Some Of Your Tax Funds To The Campaign”
    http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/

    - Updated figures
    SOUTH
    1 Texas * Please keep contributing
    8 Alabama ($4,280)
    9 Oklahoma ($4,048)
    5 Tennessee ($3,242)
    12 Mississippi ($5,328)
    4 North Carolina ($739)
    13 West Virginia ($5,608)
    6 South Carolina ($3,568)
    11 Arkansas ($5,072)
    3 Georgia * Please keep contributing
    7 Louisiana ($3,737)
    10 Kentucky ($4,746)
    2 Florida * Please keep contributing

    West
    1 California * Please keep contributing
    8 Utah ($4,232)
    9 Hawaii ($4,740)
    5 Arizona ($75)
    12 Wyoming ($5,113)
    4 Colorado * Please keep contributing
    13 Montana ($5,166)
    6 Oregon ($719)
    11 Idaho ($5,036)
    3 Washington * Please keep contributing
    7 Nevada ($2,682)
    10 Alaska ($4,849)
    2 New Mexico * Please keep contributing

    East
    1. New York * Please keep contributing
    8 New Jersey ($3,056)
    9 Washington DC ($3,530)
    5 Massachusetts ($1,515)
    12 Delaware ($5,250)
    4 Maryland * Please keep contributing
    13 Rhode Island ($5,361)
    6 New Hampshire ($1,397)
    11 Maine ($4,864)
    3 Pennsylvania * Please keep contributing
    7 Connecticut ($2,275)
    10 Vermont ($4,119)
    2 Virginia * Please keep contributing

    Midwest
    1 Illinois * Please keep contributing
    8 Iowa ($4,176)
    9 Kansas ($4,738)
    5 Wisconsin ($3,258)
    12 North Dakota ($5,820)
    4 Missouri ($2,860)
    6 Indiana ($3,538)
    11 South Dakota ($5,416)
    3 Michigan * Please keep contributing
    7 Minnesota ($3,616)
    10 Nebraska ($4,844)
    2 Ohio * Please keep contributing

    Johnson for President 2012.
    http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/
    Become a Delegate – http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/become-a-delegate

  102. George Phillies

    Introduction

    Our Party faces an incredible opportunity. Our Republican opponents have discredited themselves, and the Democrats are little better off. On issue after issue the American people support our stands, not our opponents’.

    Alas, our party is in great difficulty. Over the past decade, membership and income have crashed. Many state parties have faltered. Others have ceased to exist. If our national party continues on its present course, it will cease to exist.

    It’s time for a change. It’s time to focus national party resources on doing real politics. It’s time to do outreach, support candidates, support volunteers and state parties, and set our party on the road for political majority status.

    The LP has been in existence for nearly 40 years. Two years ago, James Oaksun wrote that our party is facing an existential crisis. Matters have gotten worse since.

    Two years ago, the New Path Slate offered an approach to taking advantage of our position. Our Party chose a different path.

  103. Darryl W. Perry

    George, will the New Path be putting forth a slate again this year?

    I will have some advertising space in the Free Patriot Press LP newsletter/voter guide. Please contact me if interested in buying an ad.

    Ad sales will be used to cover the cost of printing 600 copies of the newsletter.

    Paulie, will you still be able to distribute these?

  104. Robert Capozzi

    GP, yes, do you plan on presenting a New New Path slate in Vegas?

    More important, any theories on why your candidacy for Chair did not succeed in ’10? Do you think that the revelation that you narced to the FEC had anything to do with it?

    I would think that you could be forgiven by the rank and file if you simply owned up to that rash act, apologized, and provided an outline of how you’ve changed your approach and attitude.

    Or, you can continue to alienate…

  105. Thomas L. Knapp

    @179,

    The rank and file were very much on GP’s side on that issue, and un-elected the Treasurer who had brought the situation in question about, then doubled down in such a way as to make an FEC investigation the only plausible way forward.

  106. Jill Pyeatt

    DWP @ 178: I believe the only three candidates for chair are Mark Hinkle, Mark Rutherford, and Wes Wagner. If anyone knows of someone else, please let us know here at IPR so we can start getting info out.

  107. Robert Capozzi

    180 tk, “the only plausible way forward” in HIS mind, perhaps.

    I wasn’t there in ’10, but are you saying that GP is some sort of martyr figure? That he had to destroy his reputation in the party in order to save the party?

    Or are you saying that his narcing is not a primary reason he was not elected Chair?

  108. paulie

    RC, DWP

    Phillies is part of a slate with Wes Wagner for Chair and Jeff Weston of the Oregon LP for Secretary, with Phillies running for treasurer and no Vice Chair candidate last time I checked.

  109. paulie

    More important, any theories on why your candidacy for Chair did not succeed in ’10?

    He ran for chair in 2000, 2004, 2006 and 2010 iirc, another LNC office (secretary or treasurer iirc) in 2002 and presidential nomination in 2002, and the percentages were not all that different any of those times, again iirc.

  110. Thomas L. Knapp

    RC@182,

    “Or are you saying that his narcing is not a primary reason he was not elected Chair?”

    Well, let’s see.

    When he ran for chair in 2000 and lost, he hadn’t asked the FEC to investigate the LNC after the LNC’s treasurer abused an LNC member in executive session for asking a simple question that could have been cleared up in 5 seconds.

    When he ran for chair in 2002 and lost, he hadn’t asked the FEC to investigate the LNC after the LNC’s treasurer abused an LNC member in executive session for asking a simple question that could have been cleared up in 5 seconds.

    When he ran for chair in 2004 and lost, he hadn’t asked the FEC to investigate the LNC after the LNC’s treasurer abused an LNC member in executive session for asking a simple question that could have been cleared up in 5 seconds.

    When he ran for chair in 2006 and lost, he hadn’t asked the FEC to investigate the LNC after the LNC’s treasurer abused an LNC member in executive session for asking a simple question that could have been cleared up in 5 seconds.

    He didn’t run for chair in 2008, but given four previous runs and four previous defeats, I think it’s reasonable to assume that the reason for his loss in 2010 was not asking the FEC to investigate the LNC after the LNC’s treasurer abused an LNC member in executive session for asking a simple question that could have been cleared up in 5 seconds.

    I do think, though, that the LNC’s treasurer abusing an LNC member in executive session for asking a simple question that could have been cleared up in 5 seconds did play at least some role in that treasurer’s failure of re-election.

  111. Darryl W. Perry

    I just sent all three of the announced candidates for Chair the following questions:

    Why are you running for LP Chair?

    What are your qualifications?

    Why should someone vote for you?

    Do you support a top-down or bottom-up approach to political activism? How will this affect how you act in your role as Chair?

    Would you be willing to work with other minor parties on press releases and events that promote the general ideas of freedom & liberty?

  112. Kleptocracy And You

    Matching funds doesn’t seem out of line for a Moderate Libertarian to go after. As for someone talking about “campaigning with stolen funds” well the hypocrites need to get a real job in the private sector and quit “living on stolen funds” everyday of their lives ! Johnson is a Moderate L who is right on 70 to 80% of the issues the LP could do much worse !.

    Gary Johnson “The BIG Difference Between Marijuana & Alcohol Is Marijuana Is A LOT SAFER!” – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFf4P20cWmU

    Gary Johnson 2012: Don’t Get Fooled: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNXdoeF3KaM&NR=1

    Gary Johnson 2012: End the Drug War Now – http://www.youtube.com/user/govgaryjohnson?feature=BF#p/u/16/MBOXUjHhrVM

    Imagine President Gary Johnson – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUEa7V3TgGQ&feature=related

  113. Kleptocracy And You

    I’m a little late on this but I wholeheartily endorse this candidate for the US Senate and you should TOO !!!

    It’s time for a FRIEND BOMB for this Texas wide Senate campaign, we want to have the broadest base possible, so let me tell you why I am running:

    I am running to end the wars and our occupations over seas.

    I am running to cut the ties that the Banks and Wall Street have to Government.

    I am running to allow people to live their lives as they see fit, sleep with who you want, marry who you want, smoke what you want, pray to who you want or don’t.

    I am running because I know our government is corrupt, and that most governments are corrupt, and I want to remove as much power from the government as possible, so we have as little corruption to worry about as possible.

    I want to get government out of business, and allow the Free Market (a truly free market to work).

    I want to limit what government can do for their corrupt friends, thereby ending our worry over lobbyists.

    I understand there is a bias in our media, I hope to expose it.

    It is my intention to make the news as boring as possible.

    If you think this adds up to someone you could vote for, share my facebook campaign site with your friends.

    http://www.facebook.com/pages/John-Jay-Myers-for-Congress/184388183106

    U.S.Senator John Jay Myers, L-TX

    Got a nice ring to it !!!

    My advice to all LP candidates is to remember “it’s the ECONOMY stupid” lead with your solutions to that, then fill in the rest of your plan. The Ds and Rs have led us to the brink, let the Ls solve it….

  114. George Phillies

    Kleptasaurus Rex should consider that the core issue is civil liberties. Being a rich person in a dictatorship is a losing position.

    Also, running on the economy is going to be a losing position in the real world. The large factor holding up the unemployment rate last month was people who have started looking for jobs again. Under the Obama administration — or as Democrats WILL put it “Thanks to President Obama” — the stock market has now recovered from the collapse it suffered under the Bush administration, PCEs and exports are higher than they were before the recession started, etc.

  115. Wes Wagner

    The tomfuckery with the Oregon delegation has begun.

    On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 6:07 PM, Emily Salvette wrote:

    Hi Wes,

    It’s because we’ve received 2 lists from Oregon. The credentials committee will need to study the situation and rule on which list to accept and seat prior to the convention. We haven’t started that process yet. We’ll keep you and the other Oregon contingent informed as we proceed.

    Thanks for your patience,
    Emily

    — On Mon, 3/19/12, Wes Wagner wrote:

    From: Wes Wagner

    Subject: Re: LP Credentials 2012-
    To: “Ben Bachrach”
    Cc: “Emily Salvette”
    Date: Monday, March 19, 2012, 8:57 PM

    I have a question. Why are we being asked to fill out a spreadsheet instead of being given credentials to enter our delegates like other states?

    Sincerely,
    Wes Wagner
    Chairperson, Libertarian Party of Oregon

  116. Darryl W. Perry

    Mr. Wagner,
    Did you get my email with the questionnaire (see comment 189) for a “voter guide” to be distributed at the LP convention? The only email address I could find for you was a gmail address that I don’t know if you use.

  117. Wes Wagner

    DWP @194

    I did received it… have not completed it yet. You did hit my main personal email address so your google-fu is strong.

  118. paulie

    Received @193 as an email and forwarded it to IPR writers to post as an article, if anyone is interested. I added the following comment:

    This also may have ballot access implications. As I understand it, Wes Wagner has promised that his Oregon LP (the one with ballot access from the state and current official recognition from LPHQ/LNC) will place the LP presidential ticket on the ballot if they are seated as the Oregon delegation at the convention. However, if the Burke/Reeves side is the recognized Oregon delegation, the LP may have to do a ballot access drive in Oregon or possibly have a different candidate than the national ticket on the ballot for president there. CCed Mr. Wagner to make sure my understanding is correct.

    Given that the LNC eventually agreed to accept the Judicial Committee’s ruling on this, tho under protest, I’m not sure on what basis Wagner et al would not be in charge of selecting the delegation.

    Wes Wagner promptly replied:

    That is correct… I have zero intent of placing the LP nominee on the ballot if our delegation is not seated, and 100% intent of doing so if our delegation is seated. It is in the best interest of the libertarians of Oregon to have an orderly presidential nomination process, however, it is not in their interests to be victims of national politics and the continuance of an attempted republican coup gone horribly wrong (and nationals continued attempts at furtherance) and to reward that behavior after being further victimized.

    Your understanding of our disposition on the ballot access is correct.

    -Wes Wagner

  119. Chuck Moulton

    Paulie wrote (@200):

    If Wes Wagner is not seated as a delegate, does that mean he is also ineligible to run for chair?

    He just needs to be a sustaining member of the national LP.

    Obviously the California bylaws are different from national, but my personal experience in CA may be on point. I attended my first LPCA convention before I moved to California for a year. I joined the LPCA when I sent in my convention registration fee (about a month before the convention IIRC). Because I didn’t qualify under CA’s 90 day rule I could not be seated as a delegate. Thus though I attended the convention I didn’t vote on anything. I was nominated by another person (a delegate) to serve on the LPCA’s executive committee and was able to give a brief speech urging people to vote for me even though I was not a delegate. (I was elected as an alternate and subsequently appointed to fill an at-large vacancy a few hours later.)

    I would think national would be similar: a non-delegate could accept a nomination and give a nomination speech if he meets the sustaining member qualification. As a further example, Admiral Colley was nominated for (and won) an at-large LNC position without attending that particular national convention.

  120. Thomas L. Knapp

    @193,

    The credentials committee may have received “2 lists from Oregon,” but it only received one list from the LNC’s affiliate in Oregon.

    Salvette seems to be suggesting that if I send her a note claiming that myself, my cat and three strangers I met on an outing to the park are Missouri’s delegates, that that note will constitute one of “2 lists from Missouri” and be placed in contention with the one actually submitted by LPMO.

    And that’s kind of fucking stupid.

  121. Brian Holtz

    You mean the Credentials Committee is ignoring our rules and instead just doing what they think is in the best interest of the Party?

    Where oh where did they get THAT idea?

  122. S. Marty Pantz IV, Esq.

    I hope at least one LP member in each state submits an alternate list to the credentials committee, and posts their response, if any, here.

  123. Brian Holtz

    Maybe CredCom will write back asking the submitter for a copy of their bylaws and the minutes of the convention at which they were adopted.

  124. wes wagner

    BH@210

    If only there was some official body of the organization that was able to examine evidence like that… and consider it.. and render a decision based on evidence submitted with some sort of corporate final authority.

    Then maybe all these issues wouldn’t keep coming up.

  125. Angus Middleholden

    I hope the credential committee will be charged with raising money for and managing the Oregon ballot access drive that would not be needed if they seat Wagner and friends, but will be needed if they don’t.

    According to Ballot Access News the deadline for the petition drive will be 28 Aug, with 21,804
    valid signatures needed for full party status or
    18,279 valid needed for the presidential ticket only, with no party label on the ballot (listed as independent candidates).

    Americans Elect has turned in approximately 37,000 signatures in Oregon, to meet a requirement of 21,804 valid signatures.

  126. Angus Middleholden

    My sources in the petition business tell me that it’s starting to get very competitive to hire petitioners, especially with multiple initiatives coming out in CA (one of which is now paying $3 a signature on the street, and more will be coming out as well as going up in price).

    Other initiative states may have multiple initiatives (Washington State among others is a distinct possibility).

    For anyone who wants to be in other states getting party/candidate signatures, Americans Elect has the resources to raise the rates as high as they need to in order to get the job done.

    I sure hope the Libertarians have enough money and manpower to keep up!

  127. S. Marty Pantz IV, Esq.

    WW 211

    Let me grasp the theory; the JudCom has jurisdiction over NatCom but not over CredCom …do I have that right?

    I was once an expert on Soviet politburology, but this is starting to get too byzantine and complicated for me.

  128. Jill Pyeatt

    BH @ 207: What makes you think the Credentials Committee is working in the best interest of the Party?

  129. wes wagner

    TK @216

    Well it isn’t fraud if it is obviously parody and the is no intent to deceive … so I disagree with the f word here.

    No reasonable individual would think your claim is valid as you stated it.

    Sort of like how if people appoint themselves to offices that are not vacant in the absence of quorum it should not be taken seriously.

    Wasn’t that the point ?

  130. Common Tater

    Fraud may or may not be in the eye of the bee holder, but those bee stings can be painful, especially in the eye.

  131. JT

    Phillies: “Also, running on the economy is going to be a losing position in the real world.”

    Right, because the economy now is pretty good and getting better. Except:

    http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/inside-americas-economic-angst

    Libertarians don’t need to decide whether to run on the economy or civil liberties or foreign policy. They’re all part and parcel of the same thing. Of course, a Libertarian candidate may chose to pay attention to something more than something else.

  132. Common Tater

    @219 Regardless of what you think of Ernie Hancock, I think he makes that same point well when he says:

    Freedom is the answer. Now what’s the question?

  133. Darryl W. Perry

    http://www.freepatriot-press.com/2012/03/arrested-protesting-sudanese-war-crimes.html

    By now, most people have probably heard about George Clooney’s arrest on Friday, March 16, outside the Sudanese Embassy in Washington, DC. In addition to Clooney, several others were arrested, including his father, several members of Congress (Al Green, Jim McGovern, Jim Moran and John Olver), Martin Luther King III & the president of the NAACP. These men were joined in protest by a reported crowd of roughly 100 people. The Washington Post reports, “[t]he group was protesting the Sudanese hunger crisis, accusing President Omar al-Bashir of blocking food and humanitarian assistance from reaching hundreds of thousands of Sudanese.”

    Before being arrested Clooney said humanitarian aid needs to be allowed into Sudan and the government in Khartoum needs to stop randomly killing innocent men, women and children. Clooney even had a comment for the Sudanese President, “stop raping them, and stop starving them. That’s all we ask.”

    Earlier in the week Clooney met with President Obama and testified before the US Senate regarding War Crimes committed by Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir. It is unknown whether Clooney also condemns the possible War Crimes that have been committed by the American military.

    As a libertarian, I do not believe it is acceptable for anyone to commit such acts. Sadly, my view is not held by all. Many people sat quietly as George W. Bush used the American military to invade two countries without declarations of war and many more sit quietly as, Nobel Peace Prize winner, Barack Obama uses the military to carry out unmanned drone attacks on civilians who have been listed for execution without trial. These acts by both Bush & Obama are as much violations of the laws of war as the acts by al-Bashir. Everyone who commits war crimes should be held accountable for their actions, it should not matter if the person committing war crimes is one of “us” or “them.”

  134. Darryl W. Perry

    Thanks Paulie! I posted this in the Libertarians for Peace Yahoo! group and the following reply was sent:

    I agree with your point, though I am reluctant to have the US military bring them to justice for obvious reasons (i.e., it tends to commit even MORE war crimes!) Unfortunately some libertarians agree with this view point for any and all states EXCEPT Israel where their form of pandering in Israel is to say that the United States, it’s people AND libertarians should not “single Israel out” for criticism. What they mean, of course, is “criticize Israel at all” which Wayne Root expressed so explicitly in 2010.

  135. JT

    Me: “Of course, a Libertarian candidate may chose to pay attention to something more than something else.”

    Should be “choose,” obviously.

  136. Darryl W. Perry

    The poll on the motion to hold a new Presidential nominating convention has passed by a vote of 16-4.
    More than 2/3 of voting party members voted to hold a new nomination, this will be treated as an 11B convention in accordance with the bylaws. Nominations are open and the special nominating convention will begin at approximately 7PM (CDT) March 30, 2012.
    Nominations are open here

  137. Brian Holtz

    WW@211 If only there was some official body of the organization that was able to examine evidence like [bylaws and the minutes of the convention at which they were adopted]

    Alas, the body that was supposed to do that instead chose to begin and end its examination at a government web site that doesn’t get correctly updated unless outgoing officers decide to follow the rules.

    It’s interesting that you pine for the LPUS to have some such official body, because when you threw out the LPOR bylaws and replaced them with new ones written outside any convention and approved by five people, you conveniently dissolved the LPOR Judicial Committee. And now in your response to the lawsuit, you say that Bylaws violations cannot be appealed to government courts, either. In the new LPOR, its officers are the only judges of whether the officers are in fact following the LPOR’s “bylaws”.

    JP@215 I didn’t say “the Credentials Committee is working in the best interest of the Party”. I said it is “doing what they think is in the best interest of the Party”.

    WW@217 it isn’t fraud if it is obviously parody … Sort of like how if people appoint themselves to offices that are not vacant

    The parody here is when the alleged non-vacancy is a result of throwing out the actual bylaws and replacing them with new ones adopted by five votes outside any convention and then appointing oneself to the offices those novel bylaws create.

  138. Thomas L. Knapp

    “The parody here is when the alleged non-vacancy is a result of throwing out the actual bylaws and replacing them with new ones adopted by five votes outside any convention and then appointing oneself to the offices those novel bylaws create.”

    Since the parody alluded to involves Missouri, it’s probably worth noting that that state’s LP executive committee has been in open revolt against its own bylaws, the state committee which controls those bylaws, and Missouri election law for several years now, recognizing no authority but whatever the hell it happens to feel like doing at any given time.

  139. Jill Pyeatt

    BH @ 226: What makes you think they are “doing what they think is in the best interest of the Party”?

  140. Precede with Caution, via Lake

    Tell President Obama not to nominate Larry Summers to head the World Bank.

    Add your name to our “Forget Larry” petition to President Obama.

    This is the Larry Summers who as Treasury Secretary in the Clinton administration helped spearhead the deregulatory spree that precipitated the financial crash of 2008 and the Great Recession.

    This is the Larry Summers who as chief economist at the World Bank wrote in a leaked memo, “I’ve always thought that under-populated countries in Africa are vastly under-polluted.

  141. Brian Holtz

    Jill, my default assumptions about Libertarians involved in Party business is that they are doing what they think is in the best interest of the Party.

  142. Ctomp

    On her website, Briscoe demonstrates a creative memory:
    “To begin with, the campaign chose not to run with a party in this election cycle. We went from Democrats to a ticket for the Boston Tea Party. We thank both entities for their well-accepted support, but Tiffany Briscoe is not meant to follow a definite political party. Lately, a controversy arose within the party’s internal structures, which led to an referendum on Tiffany’s status as presidential nominee. She unfortunately lost, by a couple of votes, even though the referendum was unbinding and meaningless legally-speaking. And while our decision to leave the BTP had nothing to do with this event, as it originated from earlier thoughts and discussions, we still wish a good luck to the Boston Tea Party, which remains one of the last political entities faithful to the Constitution.”

  143. Jill Pyeatt

    BH @ 230: Thanks for your answer. I read it a few hours ago and have been mulling it over for a while. I have to say that you’re a much more optimistic person than I am. I really can’t say that my default position is that Libertarians involved in Party business are doing what they think is in the best interest of the party. I’m afraid that in some cases the primary interest for some people is their own ego.

    This is an interesting revelation I’ve had today, and I’m a bit depressed about it.

  144. Brian Holtz

    It seems like it would take a certain amount of ego to assume that other people (e.g. CredCom) would secretly concede that you care more about the interests of the Party. Ditto to assume that someone (e.g. Roger Stone) would find the Party enough of a threat to secretly conspire against it.

    It seems intellectually lazy to assume anything but the best intentions in those one disagrees with. If they’re wrong, then they’re wrong regardless of their intentions, no? And if you can’t show that they’re wrong without invoking their intentions, then the only people you’re going to persuade are mind-readers.

  145. Precede with Caution, via Lake

    John Stossel in Oakland, CA, April 19th!

    Emmy Award and Peabody Award-winning TV journalist John Stossel has long argued that the government is not a neutral arbiter of truth.

    A self-described skeptic, he has dismantled society’s sacred cows with unerring common sense.

    In his April 19 talk at the Independent Institute, Stossel will debunk the most sacred cow of all: the belief that government can solve our problems.

    Stossel insists that we discard the idea of the “perfect” government–left or right–and retrain our brains to look only at the facts,

  146. Robert Capozzi

    233 jp: I have to say that you’re a much more optimistic person than I am. I really can’t say that my default position is that Libertarians involved in Party business are doing what they think is in the best interest of the party. I’m afraid that in some cases the primary interest for some people is their own ego. This is an interesting revelation I’ve had today, and I’m a bit depressed about it.

    me: Even egomaniacs think they are doing the right thing. Assume they are simply unconscious, and things fall into place.

  147. Precede with Caution, via Lake

    Two days ago UFPJ launched the Iran Pledge of Resistance and the results exceeded our greatest hopes.

    Far more than 1000 people pledged in less than 24 hours!!

    Over the next weeks as these numbers continue to grow, UFPJ will be organizing local affinity groups, producing and distributing materials, and planning actions.

    As the initiator of this grassroots effort, UFPJ has taken this on with all its weight.

    We hired additional staff and put up the seed money that was needed.

  148. Precede with Caution, via Lake

    THE COVER SYMBOL OF MSM:

    Backhanded Compliment of the Month: Mayor’s Aide to [San Diego} U-T

    The U-T San Diego editorial board, normally in line with agreements the Chamber of Commerce and other big business orgs call “essential,” panned the latest deal in the march toward an expanded Convention Center.

    The editorial provoked a funny exchange on Twitter.

    You’ll remember hotel owners successfully pushed the city to give the Convention and Visitors Bureau the sales and marketing functions of the Convention Center.

    This was their demand in exchange for their support of an increase in the hotel-room tax needed for expansion.

    Obviously motivated by its own vision of the waterfront and future convention facilities, the U-T wrote the deal would make the expansion harder to pull off.

    That’s because organized labor “probably legitimately” had reason to worry that this deal would steer business away from its workers at the Convention Center.

    And that would hurt future negotiations.

    Labor leader Lorena Gonzalez was thrilled: “Yes. The enemy of my enemy IS my friend,” she wrote.

    To which, Bill Osborne, the U-T’s editorial page editor responded: “In politics, there should be no enemies, just people who occasionally disagree.”

    Gerry Braun, the mayor’s director of special projects and a former columnist at Osborne’s paper, gave Osborne what has to be called the backhanded compliment of the month: “You lost me at ‘probably legitimately.’

    But, sincerely, I do enjoy your eloquent flogging of your owners’ dead horse.”

  149. paulie

    LG

    I haven’t been on email yet today, I sent you an email along with several people about that, you should email that to them if you haven’t already.

    Also try LP Radicals yahoo and facebook groups.

  150. Jill Pyeatt

    LG, Alan and I are interested in less expensive lodging, if someone gets a bloc of rooms.

  151. LibertarianGirl

    okay , I think Ill give people 1 week to get it together regarding a group bookingn and if not just book asap at either place , Rampart or Suncoast , the savings is significant…

  152. LibertarianGirl

    I sent emails to every group and person I can think of. Im thinking at least 6 to 10 rooms before we qualify for group rates , but Im not certain. either way , noone but Jill has responded thus far.

  153. Darryl W. Perry

    LG and/or Jill,
    I will have some ad space in the special LP edition of the Free Patriot Press newsletter. I though you may want to buy an ad so that everyone knows about the “alternative” events you may be holding.
    I will be printing 500 copies – and am only seeking to cover these print costs with ad sales.

    Paulie will be distributing these for me.

  154. Darryl W. Perry

    I received the following email today:

    Dear Fellow Libertarian,
    The Libertarian National Committee is currently deciding on the site of our 2016 Nominating Convention. Ohio has already been selected for the location of the 2014 convention.
    Please take the survey now to give us your opinions!
    Thank you,
    Mark Hinkle
    LNC Chair

  155. Darryl W. Perry


    Open Letter to Party Members on the 2012 Presidential Nomination

    Dear fellow members,

    In this election cycle, the Boston Tea Party has already once nominated, then removed, a presidential candidate (Tiffany Briscoe of Maryland). On March 30th, it will once again convene to replace that candidate with a new nominee.

    I am writing to ask you to cast your vote in that new nomination process for “None Of The Above.”

    I understand that such a request should be backed up with sound argument as to why, and I’ll do my best to provide that argument…

    For sake of brevity, I refrained from posting the full letter.

  156. Chuck Moulton

    George Phillies wrote (@253):

    Note also the dates.

    If you think it is important to bring young college age people to the convention, only the late-May date works.

    Yeah, it really baffles me that they say they want to get more people involved, then pick the absolute worst dates for college students.

    I teach college students. I have to cancel my last day of class (Friday, May 4) to make it to most of the 2012 convention. Even though I’m on the bylaws committee, I can’t make the pre-convention bylaws committee meeting without canceling another day of class (Wednesday, May 2), which I won’t do. I’ve spoken with 4 other libertarian professors who would like to come to the 2012 national convention but can’t because of the dates.

    I don’t think this LNC is so stupid as to not realize how bad these dates are for college students, so the only conclusion I’m left with is that they are deliberately picking dates to minimize college turnout (perhaps because they think college students would be more radical / less moderate).

    All that said, my understanding was the LNC already picked the convention location… so I’m confused as to what the survey is for.

  157. Thane Eichenauer

    @256 @258
    There aren’t any perfect dates. If the convention were a week later or a month later that is a week or a month that the nominee doesn’t have to campaign. If vacation days for college students and college professors should be a priority then I recommend you lobby future LP convention planners to keep certain periods at the top of the list. Now it is only sour grapes or dare I say it “conspiracy theorizing”. Again, IMO and I could be wrong but the convention is when it is.

  158. Robert Capozzi

    259 te: If the convention were a week later or a month later that is a week or a month that the nominee doesn’t have to campaign.

    me: Thanks for stating the obvious! It wearies me when I hear assertions without any sense of the trade-offs involved. ANY date, ANY place, is not convenient or optimal for SOMEONE.

    Is the presence of more college professors and students than would otherwise attend worth the lost campaign time? It might be. Make the case, CM and/or GP.

    I would note that conventions are first and foremost party business, a point I think both of you made regarding the floor fee. Whether it’s vital that academic participation be maximized at business meetings is not obvious.

  159. paulie

    I sent emails to every group and person I can think of.

    LP Radicals group on facebook seems to be pretty active lately. The yahoo group is still around, as is one for grassroots libertarian caucus if you are not on that already. I get email notifications of new facebook posts on the group, but I don’t get yahoo groups through email so I haven’t checked where all you have posted. Susan also set up a ride share board, dunno about a room share board but it might be OK to use the ride share board for room share also?

  160. Chuck Moulton

    Thane Eichenauer wrote (@259):

    There aren’t any perfect dates. If the convention were a week later or a month later that is a week or a month that the nominee doesn’t have to campaign. If vacation days for college students and college professors should be a priority then I recommend you lobby future LP convention planners to keep certain periods at the top of the list.

    If that’s the real tradeoff, then have it earlier (April, March). That would give the presidential candidate even more time and wouldn’t be at the very end of the semester or the very start of finals period.

    Conventions energize attendees, making them more committed to libertarian activism. Getting more college student participation both builds the party’s future (our increasingly older demographics will eventually die off) and also increases the volunteer base for activities like ballot access petitioning. Limiting convention participation has long term costs. Unfortunately many on the LNC seem to be short term thinkers.

    By the way, recently the LNC has also been avoiding holiday weekends rather than targeting holiday weekends (departing from past practices), which strongly favors people with families over working people without families. Many delegates need to take off days from work to attend the whole convention. When the convention is on holiday weekends people don’t need to take as many vacation days. Those with kids prefer leaving the holiday weekends for other family vacations. Again, this tends to sway the demographics to less radical / more moderate attendees.

  161. Robert Capozzi

    263 cm: If that’s the real tradeoff, then have it earlier (April, March).

    me: Thanks, yes, that makes sense. Now what’s the argument against March-April?

  162. George Phillies

    The convention is not on two weekend days, it is on somewhat more days; pushing the convention into the academic year makes things difficult for people with K-12 families also, depending on your local school year.

  163. Robert Capozzi

    gp, are you suggesting July, then? What about the families with kids who need to go to summer school?

    SOMEONE will be inconvenienced with any date. The question is: What works best for the mission?

  164. paulie

    I doubt anyone will be surprised that I agree with Chuck.

    As for ideal dates, personally I think Labor Day of the year before the presidential election was a better way to do it, and the benefits we were supposed to get from moving it into the election year have not materialized.

  165. paulie

    Perhaps college students aren’t the “quality” some LNC members desire.

    If the LP is that hell bent to commit suicide, should I keep trying to intervene?

  166. Thomas L. Knapp

    Paulie @268,

    “If the LP is that hell bent to commit suicide, should I keep trying to intervene?”

    Well, no, but I think you misunderstand the situation.

    The LP is not “hell bent to commit suicide.”

    The LP is a pretty much a Gentleman’s Club masquerading as a political party, sort of like the Hellfire Clubs of 18th century England were Gentleman’s Clubs disguised as satanic cults.

  167. Paulie

    TLK 269,

    Makes sense.

    However, even Gentlemen’s Clubs have to replenish themselves with a new generation periodically, I would suspect.

    Can we go ahead now and book the 2020 or 2024 convention in the community activities room at an old folks’ home in Ft. Lauterdale? Most of the surviving party members should already be living on the premises by then.

    The mandatory minimum floor fee can be one month’s SS check, one month’s medicare check plus one month’s “fairtax prebate” per delegate and the convention overhead costs will be low. Most of the speakers will already be living there too, so it should be phenomenally profitable.

  168. Darryl W Perry

    How about booking the convention on a 4 night Carribean cruise from Miami? That way only the most quality people could attend – can’t have any povertarians messing around in the rich man’s club!

  169. Robert Capozzi

    p, with the LP, it’s not about suicide, it was nearly stillborn and in the ICU ever since.

  170. Michael H. Wilson

    re DWP @ 271. I don’t know about a rich man’s club, but in looking at the conventions around the nation and the one I attended last weekend this party is primarily made up of older white males.

    The LP has every reason in the world to reach out to younger people, those of low income, women and minority groups, but the LP does not take advantage of the opportunity.

    The party has much to offer but little desire to do so as we fade away.

  171. NewFederalist

    Wow! Such optimism! The LP isn’t dead it is just sickly. If more LP members developed laryngitis instead of oral diarrhea there might be hope.

  172. paulie

    it’s not about suicide, it was nearly stillborn and in the ICU ever since.

    There are degrees of self-sabotage. Actively resisting youth involvement is an obvious one.

  173. Darryl W. Perry

    @274 – there is a rich man’s club in the LP now, it’s not the majority (yet) however, a certain “media personality” has said that he wants “high quality people” in the party, which as I understand it, was a hint at “more rich people” who will go along with a redefinition of the term “libertarian”

  174. George Phillies

    Our National Convention is the weekend of May 6. For some of our delegates, this trip is already a major financial sacrifice.

    Recently, the LNC voted to impose a fee on delegates for the privilege of voting in the business meeting. This fee, which is contrary to all precedent at national conventions, also appears to violate National Party Bylaws.

    Fortunately, Regional Alternate Brad Ploeger has drafted a petition to the Judicial cCommittee on this issue. You can read it at:

    https://www.change.org/petitions/jc-petition

    If you are a national party Sustaining Member, please sign it. Remember, the business meetings do not feed or entertain the delegates.

  175. Steven Berson

    The Modern Whig Party announced that they will be holding a national convention in August 3 – 5 in Bloomington Minnesota.

    from ->
    http://www.facebook.com/events/275828172497385/

    // August 3 at 12:00am until August 5 at 11:30pm

    Bloomington, MN

    It is national convention time! The convention will be held in Bloomington, Minnesota which is just south of Minneapolis. The convention will be held August 3-5th. The convention will include state chapter training, training in Whig philosophy and methodology, training in the Whig Roundtables and Q& A’s. Whig candidates and potential Whig candidates, possibly even for president, will be speaking. We have four confirmed speakers already and are reaching out to others like John Avlon, Alan Nathan, Sen. Olympia Snowe, Sen. Chuck Hagel, Gov. Angus King, Thomas Friedman, and some presidential candidates to come speak. We are also going to be inviting media personalities and notable Americans who have said they might help support and effort like ours.

    We are also going to be voting on language of the Whig website areas like Where We Stand and What We Believe. We are going to be looking at the posts and votes of those who have posted comments during the past year to see if we want to incorporate them into the website text. There will also be Whig Bylaws and Constitution issues we will vote on.

    We are going to be live streaming the convention and also set up for secure voting for delegates who cannot attend the convention. The plan though is to have around 100 or so delegates attend the convention. Our goal is for this convention to be a big “here we are and we are working for America” event. We want this convention to really announce the Modern Whig Party and show America what we are about. This is key as we work for 2012 and also for 2014, 2016 and beyond. The plan is for Whig donations to pay for lodging for the delegates, supplies and food. We also hope to be able to subsidize or pay for delegate travel. Any money left over will go to party development.

    ALL OF THIS DEPENDS ON YOU. WE MUST USE OUR WILL TO SUCCEED ALONG WITH ACTION AND DONATIONS

    There are no big money interests behind the operation of the Modern Whigs at any state or national level. Our existence , support, and success relies totally on your actions and donations, thank you to those who act and those who act and donate, your support is greatly appreciated, respected, and noted.

    More information on how you and all of us can help will be coming in the next few days. The future of our growth to better serve America relies on the will within each of us. We must continue to work, fight, and will our effort forward not for ourselves, but for ourselves, our family, friends, communities and our entire nation.

    Delegate Selection and Apportionment

    The delegates to the National Convention will form the Whig National Council which is the highest authority of the Modern Whig Party. Per the current Whig bylaws each state and Washington D.C. are eligible to select their own delegates under their own rules. The only rules that each state must adhere by are

    They are not to select more than the number of delegates they are allowed to the national convention per the Whig national bylaws.
    The second rule is that each delegate must be at least 18 years of age and a registered voter in their state. It is up to the states to enforce and confirm this in a manner they see fit.
    Each state’s delegation must be reported to the national chairman by no less than two weeks prior to the start of the convention.
    Any state delegate attending the physical convention must let the national chairman confirm that they are attending no later than two weeks before the start of the national convention.
    Each active state chapter’s selection of delegates is to be overseen by the state chair or leading officer. The state chair or leading officer serves as the head of the respective state delegation. If your state does not have an active chapter or state committee then please email andrewevans@modernwhig.orgif you are interested in serving as a delegate.

    Per the Whig the below chart is the max number of delegates. The formula for national delegates is based off of the following:

    Two delegates=state chair and second highest ranking state officer
    Each state then will be eligible to have delegates equal to half of their number of U.S. House of Representatives public officials, rounded to the next whole number. The number of U.S. Representatives is as of January 2012.
    Any former national chair
    3 veteran’s delegates selected at the convention by the delegates.
    National Executive Committee members if not already a delegate
    6 Alabama 3 Montana

    3 Alaska 4 Nebraska

    6 Arizona 4 Nevada

    4 Arkansas 4 New Hampshire

    29 California 9 New Jersey

    6 Colorado 4 New Mexico

    5 Connecticut 17 New York

    3 Delaware 9 North Carolina

    15 Florida 3 North Dakota

    9 Georgia 11 Ohio

    3 Hawaii 5 Oklahoma

    3 Idaho 5 Oregon

    12 Illinois 12 Pennsylvania

    7 Indiana 3 Rhode Island

    5 Iowa 5 South Carolina

    4 Kansas 3 South Dakota

    5 Kentucky 7 Tennessee

    6 Louisiana 18 Texas

    3 Maine 4 Utah

    6 Maryland 3 Vermont

    7 Massachusetts 8 Virginia

    10 Michigan 7 Washington

    6 Minnesota 4 West Virginia

    4 Mississippi 6 Wisconsin

    7 Missouri 3 Wyoming

    Washington D.C. 3

    Additional Veterans Delegates voted at convention 3

    Former National Chairs 2

    Maximum Grand Total of Delegates=341

    If any member wishes to receive a copy of the national constitution and bylaws then please email a request to andrewevans@modernwhig.org. This email serves as the official call to convention per the Whig national bylaws.//

  176. Matt Cholko

    To the extent that there is a focus on the “monied” types, the LP is making a serious mistake.

    If white males can see value in libertarianism it seems like a no brainer that both minorities and lower income people will see even more value in it. After all, our terrible government is run (largely) by rich white guys to benefit rich white guys. Poor and working class folks, and minorities, are victims of government bullshit to a much greater extent than us white males. Why have we failed so miserably to sell libertarianism to them?

    Just to be clear, I am in the business of selling libertarianism just as much as anyone else. I have failed miserably too. I’m not trying to point fingers at anyone in particular. All of us are responsible for this.

  177. LP.ORG survey

    About convention sites

    I, George Phillies, have had forwarded to me a message, supposedly from Mark Hinkle, explaining why LA is a lousy convention site. All Libertarians need to read it, because he got this one right. I insert a comment:

    “Shouldn’t every member of the LNC care what our members and donors think about such an important decision as the site of the 2016 convention?

    Isn’t their input important? They are, after all, our customers and members. We’re suppose to represent them.

    But, how can we represent them if we don’t know what they think?

    And since we have not one, but two, survey options available to us, it seems very prudent to survey our members, especially on important issues such as a convention site.

    I think surveys of our membership regarding our Platform and Bylaws has been most beneficial.

    I would be more than happy to send out a survey before a recommendation was made by the COC, but there wasn’t even the customary time allowed to seek co-sponsors from the entire LNC and/or make suggestions to modify the motion before it was submitted for a mail ballot. There seems to be some urgency by some folks to avoid hearing feedback from our members.

    Why is that?

    And, as you know, the situation regarding LA was in flux after the city-wide situation killed our original date.

    It was just before 7 PM on 3/21 that we got the word that LA on May 10-16 was confirmed as not available to us. And the COC held it’s tele-conference less than 24 hours later where it made it’s recommendation. That’s a fairly short window in which to formulate a survey and put it up on the web.

    If in my haste to get some input from our members, I incorrectly used the wrong dates and/or omitted details not known to me, I’m sorry. I’ll strive to do better on the next survey.

    When I saw the notice from you that the LA and Jacksonville room rates were $116 and not $119, I tried to change the text before it went out, but it was too late. Staff had already left for the day.

    I’ll ask staff to make those edits as soon as possible. However, does anyone really think that $3 difference will change anyone’s response?

    I can also ask them to note that LA and Jacksonville are offering the same rate 3 days before and after the convention and 5 days before/after for the Rosen Centre.

    I only put in Orlando because that’s the only one that I was aware of. Linda Kamp of the Rosen Centre mention it in her presentation and I don’t recall the other folks mentioning it. My oversight.

    Again, does anything think survey responses are going to be altered significantly because of these facts?

    And yes, there are a slew of other additional incentives, but in my judgement they are not significant. We could include every detail, but then no one would take the time to read them all and respond to the survey.

    For example, we could include the parking rate: $0 for self parking at the Rosen Centre, $28 for valet in LA (self parking is not available in hotel), and $0 for Jacksonville.

    PHILLIES COMMENT: A site with only valet Parking is TOTALLY WORTHLESS if you are trying to sue it to run a Presidential campaign, which will be happening in 2016.

    We could mention the room tax rates, but than again, would favor the Rosen Centre over the other two choices.

    We could mention the 20% discount off of 2016 catering prices, but again that would favor the Rosen Centre over the other two choices.

    We could mention the 25% attrition allowance, but that would favor the Jacksonville and Orlando hotels over the LA hotel.

    We could mention the F&B minimums, but again that would favor Jacksonville & Orlando over LA.

    We could mention AV discounts, but again that would favor Jacksonville and Orlando over LA.

    We could mention discounted room rates for staff, but again that would favor Orlando over the other two choices.

    We could mention 15 upgrades to suites at group rates, but again, that would favor Orlando over the other two choices.

    Hmm, there seems to be a pattern developing here.

    I do have some initial results as of 9 PM EST, but that’s only from 338 individuals.

    I think we should let it run for at leas a day or two before posting any interim results.

    As I recall with the last survey regarding the presidential candidates information up on our web page, the percentage results stayed pretty firm after the first 24 hours.

    LNC members are free to vote anytime, but I would think knowing the results of the survey might be helpful, especially to those on the fence.

    Yours in liberty………………..Mark Hinkle, LNC Chair

  178. LP.ORG survey

    Go SPIEL CHEQUER:

    PHILLIES COMMENT: A site with only valet Parking is TOTALLY WORTHLESS if you are trying to USE it to run a Presidential campaign, which will be happening in 2016.

  179. paulie

    TINSTAAFL!

    You’re right.

    People who want to pay for lunches, dinners and breakfasts with speakers should pay for those.

    Those who don’t, shouldn’t.

  180. paulie

    To the extent that there is a focus on the “monied” types, the LP is making a serious mistake.

    If white males can see value in libertarianism it seems like a no brainer that both minorities and lower income people will see even more value in it. After all, our terrible government is run (largely) by rich white guys to benefit rich white guys. Poor and working class folks, and minorities, are victims of government bullshit to a much greater extent than us white males. Why have we failed so miserably to sell libertarianism to them?

    I don’t know how many times I have pointed that out over the years.

    Just to be clear, I am in the business of selling libertarianism just as much as anyone else. I have failed miserably too. I’m not trying to point fingers at anyone in particular. All of us are responsible for this.

    I don’t have a harder time selling libertarianism to any particular audience. As far as making anyone join and actually get involved though, they will encounter a group of people that are socially and demographically unlike them, and attitudes that are negative and/or dismissive from other libertarians that I introduce them to, and so on. To make a long story short, I am pissing in the wind when I try to bring in a lot of people into the LP even if they respond positively to the basic ideas, unless they fit the mold of the LP as it already is. Very unfortunate.

    We need a lot of different kinds of people. Too many LPers chase them off, maybe some on purpose but probably most without even realizing it or wanting that to happen.

  181. paulie

    Why have we failed so miserably to sell libertarianism to them?

    Why indeed? Ron Paul is doing it big time, and somehow I don’t think it’s because he is a Republican or because of his views on abortion, immigration or gay marriage.

  182. Fix the LNC -- the New Path plan

    and for news on what they are currently doing read GoldUSAGroup.com and Liberty For America magazine.

    Changing the LNC for the better:

    Here we turn to a different question, namely how the LNC should organize in order to do its work. Perhaps also buried here is some discussion of how not to organize, at least if you want results.

    Actually, this Step’s changes start happening before any of the other changes. To fix our Party, we first have to fix how it goes about its business. However, if we’d started with Parliamentary Procedure rather than Quick Fixes, Real Politics, Fund Raising, and Member Acquisition, most of you would have chucked the New Path book into the nearest wastebasket. Or hauled it out to the firing range for some well-deserved target practice. So the last actually shall be first. The deeds in this last section really must start happening before anything else can.

    If we want to have an effective LNC, we need to suppress the Roberts cult that tries to replace substantive discussion with hairsplitting centered on what should be entirely procedural rules. The Summer 2005 Policy Manual was 41 pages of narrow columns and large type. The December 2009 Policy manual is 56 pages of wide columns and small type. The cancer has since metastasized.

    We once had a Policy Manual that was simply an ordered set of operational motions passed by the LNC. We now have a bloated Policy Manual riddled with footnotes to Roberts, complete with the claim that if the LNC Secretary modifies the manual, and if the LNC does not reject the changes, the changes are binding. We need a Policy Manual that reflects LNC Policy, not a Policy Manual that reflects mind games of a few Committee members.

    How do we get from here to there? An important answer is the leadership provided by whoever is chairing the meeting. Our face-to-face LNC meetings are extremely time-constrained. Parliamentary games that draw matters out so that real business cannot be transacted are unacceptable. Claims that the majority cannot proceed with substantive business without supermajority votes are unacceptable. A competent chair will keep LNC meetings on track so they may advance our march to the Libertarian future of peace, freedom, and opportunity.

    Having made clear that the LNC is here to do real work, how do we get that work done? Face-to-face meetings are very short. There are only 17 or so LNC members, and at present only a half-dozen staff members. What should we do?

    Fortunately, we have our own history to draw upon. We have the period of the 1990s, when the party was growing and becoming more active, and the last decade, when our party entered its death spiral.

    Learning about our party’s organization and management two decades ago is not as easy as it sounds. Once upon a time, our party’s archives were readily available on the LP.ORG
    web site. They’re not there any more. Fortunately, New Path Regional Representative candidate Jake Porter found places where some of those minutes were available, and has made them available on his web site at http://libertarianstrategymonthly.com/news/libertarian-archives

    As representative examples of how the LNC functioned when the party was advancing, consider minutes from two decades ago. It’s very different than the LNC today. LNC Members spent their time talking about the serious business of the party and the work they had actually done.

    For Summer 1991, a typical meeting had reports from:

    Executive Committee
    Headquarters
    Membership Committee
    Affiliate Parties Committee.
    Affiliate Campaigns Subcommittee
    Audit
    Management Committee
    Outreach Committee
    Convention Oversight Committee
    Advertising/Publications Review Committee
    Convention Committee
    Appointments Bylaws and Rules Committee
    Media Relations Committee
    Internal Education Committee
    Program Committee
    LP News
    Legal Action Committee
    Budget

    These were real with multiple members. As can be seen from their reports, they were actually doing substantial work between meetings.

    If we look back another decade, to the minutes for December 4 and 5 1982, we find

    Budget Committee
    Finance Committee
    1983 Fund-Raising Goal
    Mailing List Committee
    National Convention Oversight Committee
    Advertising and Publications Review Committee
    Advertising and Publication Subcommittee
    Internal Education Committee

    and

    “Discussion of need to form a “young libertarian party” campus-type
    unit: Walter moved that the Libertarian National Committee create a temporary “Campus Libertarian” Committee and name an interim Chairman.

    “The Chairman, and such others as he/she may appoint, will investigate the need for a permanent CL unit and report his or her findings at the March 12-13 meeting in San Mateo. After discussion Walter’s motion passed. Evers moved that the committee be Scott Olmsted, Kathleen Richman and Jay Hilgartner with Olmsted at Chair. Evers motion passed.”

    Look forward to 2010. What do you find? A convention committee. A publications review committee.

    Furthermore, once upon a time the LNC actually spent considerable time in days gone by on the substantive conduct of its operations, as witness the following motion by Karen Allard as passed by the LNC by 1991:

    Allard moved:
    Whereas contributors above a designated amount are promised a lifetime membership, and
    Whereas the LP is thereby obligated to provide certain benefits over the Member’s or organization’s lifetime whichever is less, and
    Whereas these benefits constitute a long-term liability on the part of the Party,
    Therefore be it resolved that the LP fund this long-term liability according to the following terms:
    1. That ninety percent (90%) of all designated Life Memberships be deposited into a Perpetual Trust in the name of the LNC.
    2. That ninety percent (90%) of the earnings on said Trust be distributed to the General Fund each quarter.
    3. That the Fund be administered by a Board of Trustees comprised of three Trustees, each serving for a six year term.
    4. That, whether in case of end of term, resignation, or other vacancy, the Chair of the LNC shall appoint the Trustees and the appointment shall be ratified by two thirds (2/3) vote of the LNC during the next regularly scheduled meeting.
    5. That the terms of office of each Trustee be staggered in such a manner that one Trustee is appointed every two years.
    6. That the Senior Trustee shall preside over meetings of the Board of Trustees.
    7. That a Trustee may be removed from office by two thirds (2/3) vote of the LNC, but only by cause related to management of the Fund.
    Upon adoption of this resolution the Chair shall be charged with nominating one Trustee for a two (2) year term, one Trustee for a (4) year term, and one Trustee for a six (6) year term. The announcement of nomination shall be at least thirty (30) days in advance of the next regularly scheduled meeting.

    That’s how a serious LNC protects the moneys entrusted to it by the members. Well, that was how a serious LNC in days gone by protected the moneys entrusted to it by its life members. Those moneys are now gone.

    The modern alternative to an active, LNC supervising a growing party is the modern LNC, a group whose leading coalition talks of setting goals for its staff. There is an old joke about a navy with more Admirals than ships. For the 18 members of the LNC, there are a half-dozen ill-paid staff members to do the work. Underlying this image of a National Committee that does no work is the so-called Carver Governance model.

    The Carver model was created to handle an entirely different state of affairs, namely a non-expert board running an expert facility. For example, you might have a community hospital whose governing board was the spouses of the community good and great donors who support the hospital. The medical staff is first rate, but the board includes people who believe in chiropractic, acupuncture, and Mayan astrology.

    How can such a board make a positive contribution rather than getting in the way? It can set goals ‘eliminate preventable childhood diseases in our community’ rather than trying to decide between ‘inoculate all children against whooping cough’ and ‘sacrifice a white bull to Apollo’.

    The Carver model refers to the exact opposite of our situation. Our Libertarian Party has on its board and among its volunteers attorneys, IT experts, MBAs,…all the expertise we would like to have and are far too poor to hire. In fact, given the incredible quality of the available volunteers, even if we had the money, we would do better to spend the money on outreach and use our volunteers to do the work.

    Unsurprisingly, when you try to apply a governance model in an environment in which it is inappropriate, you get bad results. Our membership as of 2010 is down 60%. Income as of 2010 is down more than 70%. Donations are at levels last seen nearly two decades ago.

    It’s time to do things differently. It’s time to go forward to the past. We should return to the governance structure that put our Party on the road to continued growth.

    Having said that, how should the LNC be organized to do work? On one hand, the LNC is clearly a “small committee” in the usually-unimportant sense of Roberts’. It is certainly too small to do the work of our national party, even if every LNC member was a full-time volunteer. On the other hand, the LNC is large enough that it starts to become inefficient if every member wants to discuss every topic.

    The solution is working groups. We could call them ‘committees’, except most Libertarians know well the phrase ‘Committees–the substitute for work’. We could say ‘subcommittees’, but those sound like they are all without exception composed only of LNC members, which in many cases misses the point of having the group.

    A working group should contain a few LNC members, enough to keep the group on course and keep it in touch with the LNC, and volunteers, people who are delighted to give their time to our National Party. Each working group should have an area of responsibility, recognition and support, and a budget as appropriate.

    What working groups do we need?

    The Libertarian Association of Massachusetts has a set of working groups that reference well the activities you would expect of a state or national party. A few phrasings would change for a national party. For example, the Local Organization Working Group would become the State and Affinity Affiliates Working Group. We paraphrase here from the LAMA Bylaws at LPMass.org as to what LAMA does:

    Working groups are composed of a few Committee members plus volunteers. The permanent working groups are Local Organization, Elections, Political Action, Newsletter, Web Support, Outreach, Membership, Fundraising, Convention, Budget and Finance, and Audit and Compensation.

    What do these groups do?
    The Local Organization Working Group helps local and topical libertarian organizations. It encourages libertarians to act as local organizers, helps them to organize local and topical groups, and supplies them with information on potential group members. It supports, assists, and publicizes local and topical groups and advises them on possible activities. It develops resources to benefit local and topical groups.

    The Elections Working Group helps libertarians win elections. It recruits and trains candidates and volunteers, supports ballot access drives, assists candidates with publications, fundraising, and Get Out The Vote efforts, and collects and distributes useful information to candidates. It works to maintain the honesty of the election process.

    The Political Action Working Group supports substantive political activities, other than electioneering for elective office. It assists with Referenda and Public Policy Questions, and aids OPH booths, rallies, demonstrations, protests, letter writing campaigns, litigation, and peaceful petitions for redress of grievances.

    The Newsletter Working Group helps the Editor edit and publish the Newsletter.

    The Web Support Working Group operates or supports Liberty for Massachusetts Web and Wiki Pages, if any. It seeks to operate State Committee email lists, including a periodical announcements list, a moderated Activists list, and an unmoderated General list.

    The Outreach Working Group strives to inform the public about the libertarian direction. It develops and supports publicity and advertising drives, prepares press releases, responds to press inquiries, assists members with letter-writing drives, and produces and distributes outreach material.

    The Membership Working Group recruits and retains LPMA Members. It contacts new members to welcome them. It contacts inquirers and invites them to join. It encourages social events, public lectures, and other activities for prospective and current Members. It contacts persons who have ceased to be Members to determine why they left and to invite them to renew.

    The Fund Raising Working Group raises money for the State Committee and its Working Groups, PACs, and 527 and other organizations. It cultivates individual donors, and conducts periodic large scale fund raising campaigns. It is scrupulous in promising donors how their money will be spent, and prompt and accurate in reporting to them and to the membership on how their money was actually spent.

    The Convention Working Group organizes and conducts the LPMA’s Annual State Convention.

    The Budget and Finance Working Group monitors the Party’s funds and proposes an annual budget.

    The Audit and Compensation Working Group annually and in addition on request of the State Committee reviews the State Committee’s financial records, and the financial records of the Working Groups, to ensure that they are complete, accurate, and properly reported to the Membership. It determines if moneys have been received and spent in accord with LPMA By-Laws, State Committee actions, legal requirements, and fundamental ethical standards. It reports to the Membership and to the State Committee on irregularities, deficiencies, and deviations, and their causes, and recommends corrective measures.

    To these, one might add an Internal Education Working Group and an
    Operations/Back Office Working Group.

    Now you’ve read how the New Path proposes to fix the LNC. We propose to replace parliamentary mumbo-jumbo with serious business. We propose to replace vague discussions of goals with concrete actions. We propose to replace the fleet with far more Admirals than ships with a Committee that does real work.

  183. Matt Cholko

    Mary Ruwart called me yesterday, asking my opinion of Lee Wrights and raising money for him. One piece of news came out of our conversation – Lee Wrights is considering running for VP if Johnson gets the POTUS nomination. Mary said she is pushing him to do so.

  184. Ctomp

    For what it’s worth…

    Yesterday, I attended the LP Presidential debate at the Heartland Convention in Kansas City. Of the 7 confirmed candidates, only three showed.

    Jim Burns played the fiery curmudgeon firing off rapid answers, sometimes facetiously.

    Lee Wrights was very strong. He’s developed an interesting laid-back style and answered the questions in a fashion to make most radicals proud. Sometimes, he was a bit too brief, but always on target. He got my vote in the straw poll.

    Of the three, Gary Johnson sounded the most scripted. He came off as very earnest and pragmatic, but got passionate a few times. The fair tax issue received a quite bit of time. Wrights gave good rebuttal on the subject, but Johnson defended his view, if not convincely then consistently. Though I disagree with him on the fair tax, I have to admit he is no flip-flopper.

    It was worth the time see it in person, though I have watched several of the debates online. Yesterday, I got the impression that Johnson is getting better about speaking directly to libertarians and now seems more prepared to address some concerns that individuals may have with his ideas.

    Regardless, my choice for Wrights did not change. As Matt intimated, I hope that he does manage to be placed on the ticket.

    One final thing…. Johnson admitted that he views this race as a precursor to a second run at the nomination in 2016. Perhaps he has said this publicly before and I missed it, but this was the first I heard him express it. Have any of you heard him mention this before?

  185. Steven Wilson

    The reason Root recruited him was to create a path.

    Root wants full-time pundit status by 2014. He has not run for any office away from President. I can’t imagine as a Libertarian, Johnson would step down from this run as President in 2012 to run as a VP in 2016.

    Root has stated that his media appearances grow in number and reach every month. So he has a strategy. So does Johnson.

    My take on it, sequels sometimes suck.

    If Johnson does poorly this time around making an argument for another try will be a problem. The LNC is making itself irrelevant. Stronger state chairs are showing themselves.

    If the party structure or personnel is different in 2016, a second Johnson run might actually hurt the national party.

    Focus on

    1. Vote percentage difference from 2008 for LP
    2. Johnson matching fund attempt
    3. Ron Paul nation transfer
    4. LNC Chair race in 2014
    5. Building fund part two
    6. Residual from Top Two format

  186. Michael H. Wilson

    re 289. I heard of the Carver Governance model some 10 or 15 years ago in the Oregon LP and knowing who I heard it from and who he partners with it is another part of the disease that is contaminating this party.

  187. Darryl W. Perry

    On Saturday March 24 the Tennessee Libertarian Party held a straw poll, which was won by Lee Wrights with 50% of the vote, this is notable because this is the first straw poll (as far as I know) where Wrights has come out ahead of Gary Johnson (25%), where both were included.

  188. March Liberty for America

    As covered in the latest Liberty for America
    http://libertyforamerica.com/201203.pdf

    LNC To Charge Delegates to Vote!
    The Secret Saratoga Project
    Oregon Lawsuits Advance
    Johnson Sued for Fraud
    Hinkle Supports Listing Republican Candidates on LP.org
    Bergland to Speak at NatCon
    Hinkle: LNCC Sent ‘Fraudulent’ Letter
    Root Apparently Responds to Hinkle
    Mattson Claims Hinkle Approved Letter
    LP-Illinois Chair Critiques LNC
    California ExComm on Johnson
    LSLA Rejects Listing State Chairs
    LNC Keeps Two Sets of Books
    Platform Survey Committee Altered
    LNC In Action
    LNC Votes to Fund Saratoga Project? Or Perhaps Not
    NatCon Organizer Disses MA Party
    Johnson Fundraising Implodes

  189. paulie

    Ctomp,

    Thanks for the report.

    One final thing…. Johnson admitted that he views this race as a precursor to a second run at the nomination in 2016. Perhaps he has said this publicly before and I missed it, but this was the first I heard him express it. Have any of you heard him mention this before?

    First I’ve heard of it. Interesting if true.

  190. paulie

    The reason Root recruited him was to create a path.

    Root was one of many people recruiting Johnson. If Johnson wants to run in 2016 it will not be up to Root whether he does or not.

    . I can’t imagine as a Libertarian, Johnson would step down from this run as President in 2012 to run as a VP in 2016.

    That depends on who runs in 2016. I don’t see him as running as e.g. Root’s VP. But what if the Republican Party collapses and Rand Paul is the LP Presidential candidate in 2016? Doesn’t seem plausible now, but I can see something weird like that happening.

  191. Jose C

    In George Phillies’ newsletter Liberty For America an article discusses the practice of Republican candidates being listed on the LP website. The article states in part (Mark Hinkle’s response) to the charge made:

    . . . The LNC response received from National Chair Hinkle was:
    “George,
    After Massachusetts has ballot access, you can start worry-ing about other states. In the meantime, I suggest you start working on getting the Massachusetts big enough to get on the ballot. If you need the LNC’s help to get ballot status, just let us know. Otherwise, please fix your problems in your own home state before worrying about your neighbors.
    Yours in liberty………………….Mark Hinkle, LNC Chair” . . .

  192. George Phillies

    However, Hinkle did not know what he was talking about. You have been able to run as “Libertarian” in Massachusetts in every partisan election for several decades now.

  193. Submitted!

    Brad Ploeger’s petition, which has apparently met both of the alternative signature requirements, has been submitted to the Judicial Committee.

  194. Precede with Caution, via Lake

    NEW YORK (AP) — Mitt Romney says President Barack Obama blocked construction of the Keystone XL oil pipeline as a gift to environmentalists.

    Newt Gingrich calls Obama “President Algae” for supporting research on biofuels. And Rick Santorum says Obama’s environmental views constitute a “phony theology” that prioritizes the earth over people.

    The leading Republican presidential hopefuls have cast Obama as environmental extremist whose policies have put him out of touch with the needs of ordinary Americans.

    It’s a characterization that may resonate with GOP primary voters, but it has surprised environmental activists, many of whom say they are let down by Obama’s record on their issues.

    “The environmental movement has been at odds with Barack Obama for much of his three years in the White House,” said Bill McKibben, founder of the environmental group 350.org.

  195. paulie

    @304 Why does Roy Moore get to run again when he was removed for judicial misconduct last time he was elected to the same position?

    @305 If JC upholds floor fee we will try to get people added as delegates from the floor. Look for credential committee and parliamentary procedure challenges, standing counts, various parliamentary procedures, dueling Roberts Rules of Order experts, etc and so on. A good time will be had by some.

  196. LibertarianGirl

    George , reading LFA now , very interesting some of those posts , particularly what Stewart Flood had to say regarding project Saratoga… can someone point me to the proper thread here so I can read the whole thing…

  197. Jose C

    @ 305, 306,308 We have to find a way to kill it (the floor fee) so that the idea of a floor fee stays dead forever never to rise from the dead and never to grow like Cancer or spread like a communicable disease such as Polio to cause damage, death, and destruction.

  198. Brian Holtz

    LG@305, I’m hoping JudCom can process the appeal expeditiously. The gating factors are likely to be 1) the process for validating the endorsers and 2) the 7 days that LNC has to respond.

    If a majority of the initially-credentialed delegates want to seat delegates who haven’t paid the fee, I believe they can do that simply by amending the credentials report before they adopt it, per p.615 of Robert’s. I’m not sure where George got his 7/8 number @308.

  199. Paulie

    DWP 313 correct; I also agree with Jose @314 and with Brian @315 that I hope JC will rule quickly.

  200. Jill Pyeatt

    LG, BH, Paulie, DWP, GP: I hope the decision is fairly soon, also. It’s a little hard to proceed with planning any alternative events for the $94 group until we know for sure that there will be a $94 group.

    Of course, if there isn’t a $94 group, there will be no need for alternative activities!

  201. George Phillies

    @308 7/8: Having sat through a long vote to seat someone from California (Starchild, I think) in another state’s delegation, that being the required vote. I believe this was added in or after 2002, based on delegate disapproval for the Carpetbaggers for Eli. Perhaps the rule went away at some point.

  202. Brian Holtz

    Ah yes, it’s Bylaw 11.5.e: “By seven-eighths vote, the Convention may approve additional delegates and alternates whose names and addresses are submitted to the Credentials Committee during the Convention.”

    The 7/8 threshold seems designed to prevent a less-than-7/8 majority from stacking the convention in order to change the SoP. Thus it’s a little odd that a simple majority could arbitrarily modify the first Credentials Committee report, but that seems to be the default rule under Robert’s.

  203. Thomas L. Knapp

    @327,

    Interesting that Ogle prefers to express the vote totals in separate pool percentages rather than as raw numbers.

    In Missouri’s presidential preference primary, Ogle, who was the only candidate on the Libertarian ballot, got 483 votes (“uncommitted” got 431).

    Johnson, who was no longer running as a Republican, and who was listed against nine other candidates and “uncommitted” on the GOP ballot, got 536 votes.

  204. Darryl W Perry

    There will be a nominating convention this weekend. Voting will begin approx 7pm Friday night and last as many rounds (using approval voting and multi-ballot run-off until a candidate or NOTA gets a majority of the vote) as needed to choose a nominee. Each round of balloting is 24 hours.

  205. Jill Pyeatt

    DWP @ 319: I do agree that having alternative events is a great idea. I’m stretched so thin as it is for time, though, that I wouldn’t be able to pull anything together. I can help, but I wouldn’t be able to head up planning. Hmmm. Maybe I can write an article here asking for people to come forward, and form a committee.

  206. Precede with Caution, via Lake

    [Washington Post story on Sunday] guessed there were “several thousand” people in the intermittent rain.

    But Paul Fidalgo of the Center for Inquiry told the Post, “We have the numbers to be taken seriously. … We’re not just a tiny fringe group.”

    It’s interesting that our secular, religion-mocking media mostly skipped over this rally as one steps around a ranting homeless person.

    The networks were missing, as were the Associated Press, The New York Times and others. Perhaps they didn’t think an atheist protest this explicit was worth getting behind.

    Their kind of secular, religion-mocking rally was 2010′s Jon Stewart-Stephen Colbert “Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear.”

    The pre-rally publicity was too ridiculous to believe. At National Public Radio — yes, they are interested — Barbara Bradley Hagerty explained the rally was “not to tweak the faithful. It’s to encourage closeted atheists to take heart.”

    How NPR-thoughtful. Atheist blogger Hemant Mehta complained, “Every time you hear the word atheist in the media, you know, there’s always an adjective before it. It’s always angry atheist, militant atheist, staunch atheist.

    It’s never happy, smiling atheist.” There are also dumb atheists who don’t know “happy” is also an adjective.

  207. Darryl W. Perry

    When all of the results are combined:
    Santorum, Rick (REP) 139,272 42.66%
    Obama, Barack (DEM) 64,435 19.74%
    Romney, Mitt (REP) 63,882 19.57%
    Paul, Ron (REP) 30,647 9.39%
    Uncommitted (REP) 9,853 3.02%
    Uncommitted (DEM) 4,582 1.40%
    Perry, Rick (REP) 2,456 0.75%
    Cain, Herman (REP) 2,306 0.71%
    Terry, Randall (DEM) 1,998 0.61%
    Bachmann, Michele (REP) 1,680 0.51%
    Huntsman, Jon (REP) 1,044 0.32%
    Wolfe, John (DEM) 1,000 0.31%
    Richardson, Darcy G. (DEM) 873 0.27%
    Johnson, Gary (REP) 536 0.16%
    Ogle, III, James Orland (LIB) 483 0.15%
    Uncommitted (CST) 451 0.14%
    Uncommitted (LIB) 431 0.13%
    Meehan, Michael J. (REP) 356 0.11%
    Drummond, Keith (REP) 153 0.05%

  208. bruuno

    Heard Buddy Roemer was going to name his running mate son. Anyone hear any rumors as to who it might be?

  209. Ctomp

    Straw poll results for the Heartland Libertarian conference in KC on March 24: Johnson- 38, Wrights- 15. No other candidate received more than one vote.

  210. Darryl W. Perry

    http://hammeroftruth.com/2012/defending-stand-your-ground-laws-opposing-the-provocation-of-an-attack-to-defend-yourself/
    http://www.freepatriot-press.com/2012/03/defending-stand-your-ground-laws.html
    Also carried at iNewp.com and will be picked up by two small newspapers outside of San Antonio

    As someone who believes in the right to self-defense, I support the existence of “Stand Your Ground” laws and believe that every person has the right to defend themselves wherever they have a right to be. I draw the line at instigating or provoking someone to attack so that you can then “defend” yourself and/or using unwarranted or excessive force to defend yourself; as it seems may have been the case with Zimmerman, who admittedly followed Trayvon Martin before an altercation that lead to Martin’s death.

  211. $90 million is nonsense

    The scoundrels who are claim that a Johnson campaign will get us $90 million for 2016 are lying.

    He’d have to get over 5% of the vote, which is absurd. You’d need a brain the size of a brazil but to believe that, which is why of dinosaurical character has fallen for it.

    Also, the amount small parties get is shrunk by their vote percentage. Start by dropping a zero from the number.

    By the way, the House has voted to repeal Presidential campaign funding.

  212. Darryl W. Perry

    Even IF Johnson got over 5% of the vote, the LP wouldn’t get $90 million; it would be closer to $10million. Again, that’s assuming Johnson actually gets over 5%!

  213. Jill Stein, Green Party, via Lake

    “Stand Up for Main Street” is on April 29, 2012, at the Writers Guild Theater in Beverly Hills, a quaint little borough tucked away in the outskirts of Los Angeles, California, which I have on good authority is known for its swimmin’ pools and movie stars.

    April 29 is just one month from today. It will be here before you know it.

    Get all the details about “Stand Up for Main Street” and order your tickets today, before they sell out.

    http://www.citizen.org/stand-up-for-main-street

    Don’t miss out on all the fun. Reserve your seats now!

    photograph of Robert Weissman
    Robert Weissman’s signature
    Robert Weissman
    President, Public Citizen

    P.S. We’re sending this to Public Citizen supporters and activists across the country.

    Of course, most of you don’t live in the Los Angeles area.

    But you can still help make this year’s edition of “Stand Up for Main Street” a smash by forwarding this invitation to anyone you know in California. Thanks!

  214. Jill Stein, Green Party, via Lake

    Join us at Together Boston

    Captain James O’Keefe will be speaking at Together Boston’s Patently Stupid panel.

    The panel will be at noon, April 4th at the Together Center at 579a Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02139.

    Also, on Saturday, April 7th, from 11am to 5pm, we will have a table at Together Boston’s expo, The Get Together.

    We could use your help with tabling and the like.

    Please contact us at info@masspirates.org if you can volunteer.

  215. paulie

    Johnson is quite unlikely to get 5% unless maybe he gets a very wealthy and generous running mate. Even then it’s a long shot.

    In the BTP poll Jim Duensing is leading. Since he wants to do ballot access all volunteer, I wish him luck with that endeavor.

  216. paulie

    I voted for JWS because my sense was that he has a more realistic understanding of ballot access, but Jim is at least an actual libertarian activist, and has set up and handled media interviews in the past among other things. I’m sure he will represent the party a lot better than the aborted Briscoe candidacy did.

    I hope my cynicism about the ballot access effort is unfounded.

  217. Thomas L. Knapp

    Paulie@348,

    Duensing would represent the BTP more than Briscoe did — she didn’t appear to be about to do anything of significance — but that’s not the same as representing the BTP better than Briscoe did.

    In Briscoe’s fantasy world, she had graduated from college and ran a successful business. Both claims at least had some basis in reality (she had attended the college, and there was in fact a business registered in her name).

    Duensing’s fantasy world seems to have diverged completely from the real one, beyond any likelihood of return, on 09/12/01. And he seems more inclined to publicly rave about the goblins of his imagination than Briscoe did.

    Duensing representing the BTP as its presidential candidate would be a disaster for freedom. The up side is that it would be a very small disaster for freedom, due both to the party’s own small size and low profile and the practical handicaps his own complete dissociation from reality imposes on him.

  218. LibertarianGirl

    I think its hilarious……..good luck getting him to stay on anything representing a real issue people care about . expect every campaign speech to be prefaced by “what is buiding 7″….anyways he’s def the most entertaining , it WONT be boring thats for sure

  219. Thomas L. Knapp

    At the moment, though, Duensing is not running the majority required to be nominated

    Total votes by candidate (including combos):

    Duensing: 9
    Smith: 6
    Milnes: 2
    Waymire: 1
    NOTA: 4

    I do hope that any BTP members following this thread will get over to bostontea.us to end the farce. NOTA on the first ballot is the best outcome; the second-best outcome is NOTA on any number of ballots.

  220. George Phillies

    @354 Building 7 is the location of the Lesser Dome. Everyone knows that. [MIT alum in-group joke.]

    @355 I agree. Two bad candidates in one year would indeed be unfortunate for the BTP.

  221. paulie

    Duensing’s fantasy world seems to have diverged completely from the real one, beyond any likelihood of return, on 09/12/01.

    I thought that was Dondero.

    Milnes: 2

    He got a second vote? I am impressed.

  222. paulie

    who writes Mark Hinkle’s press releases that show up on LP.org?

    Team effort. Wes Benedict and Art DiBianca were writing a lot of it. I imagine Carla Howell writes a lot of it now.

  223. William Saturn

    BTP Round II Update:

    Jim Duensing (7 votes)
    Robert Milnes (5 votes)
    John Wayne Smith (5 votes)
    NOTA (4 votes)

  224. paulie

    You know, it occurs to me, maybe this would be a good day to change my vote to Milnes.

    It will be pretty funny if he actually wins.

  225. William Saturn

    He’s currently in second place.

    Duensing (10 votes)
    Milnes (7 votes)
    Smith (6 votes)
    NOTA (4 votes)

  226. paulie

    I think you may be looking at the wrong round.

    http://www.bostontea.us/2012President-round2

    Presidential nomination round 2
    By: southernpatriot
    Jim Duensing (only)
    27% (6 votes)
    John Wayne Smith (only)
    18% (4 votes)
    Robert Milnes (only)
    23% (5 votes)
    Jim Duensing and John Wayne Smith
    9% (2 votes)
    Jim Duensing and Robert Milnes
    5% (1 vote)
    Jim Duensing and NOTA
    5% (1 vote)
    John Wayne Smith and Robert Milnes
    0% (0 votes)
    John Wayne Smith and NOTA
    0% (0 votes)
    Robert Milnes and NOTA
    5% (1 vote)
    Jim Duensing, John Wayne Smith and Robert Milnes
    0% (0 votes)
    Jim Duensing, John Wayne Smith and NOTA
    0% (0 votes)
    Jim Duensing, Robert Milnes and NOTA
    0% (0 votes)
    John Wayne Smith, Robert Milnes and NOTA
    0% (0 votes)
    Jim Duensing, John Wayne Smith, Robert Milnes and NOTA
    0% (0 votes)
    NOTA (only)
    9% (2 votes)
    Total votes: 22

Leave a Reply