Okay, folks, here we are again: the start of a new month! This is a month where kids are out of school and many people go on vacation–but IPR will still be here for you to keep abreast of happenings in the third world–er, I mean the world of third parties. This thread is for YOU to post anything you think IPR readers might like to go. Hopefully, it will have something to do with third parties or independents, but we won’t be picky on this thread. Maybe you’ll find something to share that simply made you laugh.
Anyway, we like to start these threads with a video, and here is my chosen one for this month:
(I was alive in 1965! Were you?)
Their presidential candidate Rev. Bud Green
http://www.ibtimes.com/who-rev-bud-green-meet-man-responsible-brooklyn-bridge-white-flags-1644990
http://reverendbudgreen.com/
https://www.facebook.com/RevBudGreen
https://www.google.com/search?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&q=Rev.+Budd+Green&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#channel=fs&q=%22Rev.+Bud+Green%22
https://twitter.com/RevBudGreen
http://heavy.com/news/2014/07/reverend-bud-green-jerry-springer-brooklyn-bridge-nyc-info/
https://www.youtube.com/user/Reverendbudgreen
People Opposing Tyranny has claimed responsibility for the Brooklyn Bridge flag incident. Does anyone have information about them? They allegedly have a candidate for president.
http://benswann.com/update-new-pot-party-in-new-york-takes-responsibility-for-white-flags-on-brooklyn-bridge/
http://reason.com/blog/2014/07/29/no-child-left-outside-another-mom-arrest
http://reason.com/blog/2014/07/29/house-version-of-bill-to-make-it-harder
http://reason.com/reasontv/2014/07/29/drug-war-4th-amendment-anal-searches
http://reason.com/blog/2014/07/30/huge-scandal-at-fbi-dubious-forensic-evi
http://reason.com/blog/2014/07/30/corrections-officers-threaten-to-arrest
http://reason.com/blog/2014/07/30/when-a-cop-knocks-on-the-window-just-dri
http://reason.com/blog/2014/07/30/arrested-6-crazy-cops-who-stole-money-so
Larken Rose on Police Accountability
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHBV8zN2TeM
The attacks against ballot access by the Republicans and the Democrats against ballot access for minor party and independent candidates, as well as their attacks against the initiative, referendum, and recall process, would make a good documentary.
http://libertycrier.com/stand-empire-violence/
I recently published this for any who are interested.
http://bayoustatesocialist.wordpress.com/2014/07/30/a-diagnosis-and-prescription-for-americas-economic-crisis/
Thanks!
BTW I think this will be up your alley…
http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2014/07/how-to-be-a-bleeding-heart-libertarian-about-race/
Probably not so much from the title, but I think you’ll like the article, at least as far as the mental challenges it poses, if not the conclusions.
It’s done by making specifications in customize>widgets>sidebar and then clicking the down arrow to the right of each listed widget.
Interesting. I’ll have to check that out.
It’s specific to articles in a category, but I suppose it could be made specific to an article if that is the only article in a category.
Hmmm.
So it’s specific to the article?
I did not know that was an option.
Yes. It should get more exposure on here.
As for the sidebars, I am experimenting with different sidebars. I have an IPR sidebar for stories that relate to IPR as well as sidebars for other things (including one for Milnes).
Well, if it’s a story there it may as well be one here so it can be discussed as a story here. Might make good comment fodder.
I corresponded with him via e-mail. He agreed for me to post it but to make mention that it was a comment.
Hmm. Interesting that you have IPR posts and comments and nothing else syndicated in the sidebar there. I did not realize Andy wanted that published as an article yet. I guess I could cross-post that here.
Double update:
1. On Saturn’s Repository (update to banner in progress), I wrote an article about Phil Davison’s 20/20 appearance, discussing some of the high points of the segment. http://saturnsrepository.wordpress.com/2014/07/27/phil-davison-appears-on-2020/
2. On The Saturnalian, I posted an editorial about the “Libertarian Zone” from frequent IPR commenter Andy. http://thesaturnalian.wordpress.com/2014/07/27/andy-of-ipr-the-libertarian-zone/
Libertarian Party
Posted by Jeffrey Bathe · 6 hours ago
“Last Gasp of the Cronyist Republican Party.” #CutGovernmentAdvanceFreedom
http://www.ballot-access.org/2014/07/illinois-republican-party-hires-students-to-go-door-to-door-interviewing-voters-who-signed-libertarian-statewide-petition/
Religion can influence politics:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/07/28/1317272/-Well-well-Satanists-to-use-Hobby-Lobby-to-block-pro-life-propaganda
I quote only the parts that the original author quoted as fair use.
In a statement, the Satanic Temple said that it will use the Supreme Court’s recent Hobby Lobby decision to exempt its believers from state-mandated informed consent laws that require women considering abortions to read pro-life material.
Informed consent or “right to know” laws state that women seeking elective abortions be provided with information about alternatives to the procedure, often couched in language that attempts to personify the fetus. According to the Guttmacher Institute, 35 states currently have informed consent laws, and of those, 33 require that the woman be told the gestational age of the fetus.
In some states, that information consists of pro-life propaganda that links abortion to a higher incidence of breast and ovarian cancers, or discusses “post-abortion syndrome,” a mental condition not recognized by any major medical or psychiatric organization.
Because the Satanic Temple bases its belief “regarding personal health…on the best scientific understanding of the world, regardless of the religious or political beliefs of others,” it claims that state-mandated information with no basis in scientific fact violates its religious beliefs.
The Satanic Temple set up a website where women seeking an abortion can print out a letter for her healthcare provider explaining why she is exempt from informed consent mandates.
The letter reads that “[a]ll women who share our deeply held belief that their personal choices should be made with access to the best available information, undiluted by biased or false information, are free to seek protection with this exemption whether they are members of the Satanic Temple or not.”
Awesome!
Actually almost 80. And a hundred years since the Harrison Narcotics Act, which, much as with alcohol and marijuana, no less so with heroin, cocaine, amphetamines and other outlawed drugs
It’s the same problem no matter what the substance.
Amen! And all its other bans on recreational, medicinal and sacramental substances too.
LP Wins Enormously
NY Times calls for marijuana legalization
from the Sunday 7/27/2014 NY Times Editorial pages
Repeal Prohibition, Again
By THE EDITORIAL BOARD
It took 13 years for the United States to come to its senses and end Prohibition, 13 years in which people kept drinking, otherwise law-abiding citizens became criminals and crime syndicates arose and flourished. It has been more than 40 years since Congress passed the current ban on marijuana, inflicting great harm on society just to prohibit a substance far less dangerous than alcohol.
The federal government should repeal the ban on marijuana.
Via FB:
Joe Kopsick 6:34pm Jul 23
“Left-libertarianism, in the form that I care about, advocates (for moral, economic, and perhaps sociological reasons) workers’ self-management and non-hierarchical organizations, opposition to all forms of social oppression, support for confiscation of illegitimate property, class analysis, and in some ways stricter and in some ways looser property norms—besides all the issues that overlap between standard libertarians and some radical leftists, like opposition to all wars, prison abolition, opposition to borders, and opposition to surveillance. If someone thinks those aren’t distinct from the views of your average right-libertarian, Constitutionalist, small government conservative, or Tea Party Republican, I just don’t know what to say.” – Grayson English
Here’s the segment of 20/20 that featured Phil Davison. It shows emotional politicians with a great deal of passion for politics. Third party candidates take note. If you want your point to be heard, LET IT BE HEARD!
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/video/us-senator-punches-fellow-senator-head-24724731
The article does a good job of explaining why it is hard to qualify initiatives there. I disagree that the recent legal changes were necessary or good.
For those doing petitioning here’s an article out of Montana where no citizens petition will be on the ballot since 1992. http://missoulian.com/news/local/absentee-voting-signature-gathering-laws-complicate-initiative-efforts-in-montana/article_49ef61dc-151a-11e4-a2e4-001a4bcf887a.html Any Comments? Most people start too late and don’t have enough volunteers to get the signatures to place their issues on the ballot.
Not having money is no excuse for not admitting liability for owing the rest of the pay that was promised. At best it is an excuse for a delay in pay, which should then be paid with a hefty interest payment, but really if Ken ran out of money he should have called it off earlier.
paulie
July 26, 2014 at 2:40 pm
“Yes, that’s a shame. At first they offered an unrealistically low pay rate, then promised to pay a slightly more acceptable rate but then paid only a fraction of what they promised and did not admit that they owed the remainder, claiming that was all the money they had. I should say he instead of they since Ken Krawchuk was apparently paying it personally rather than the party itself.”
I realize how messed up the LPPA has been for a few years but this debacle does nothing to make one feel like helping. Just a major disappointment. The back up plan is destined to fail as well according to Richard Winger. I think they would have been better off to blame the sorry state of affairs on Stevens and regroup before trying a ballot drive with no chance of success. The only silver lining I see is the party looks so weak and helpless that the Republicans may ignore them in 2016 and not challenge their petition. What a great consolation!
“NewFederalist
July 26, 2014 at 2:27 pm
It appears the LP of PA will not get on the ballot this election cycle even though the signature requirement is the lowest since 1970. What a terrible shame! No opposition to the socialist-fascist duopoly will be offered it would seem. Bummer!”
This is only because the LP of PA is not well organized. The LP of PA is still recovering from a few years of dysfunction.
Yes, that’s a shame. At first they offered an unrealistically low pay rate, then promised to pay a slightly more acceptable rate but then paid only a fraction of what they promised and did not admit that they owed the remainder, claiming that was all the money they had. I should say he instead of they since Ken Krawchuk was apparently paying it personally rather than the party itself.
It appears the LP of PA will not get on the ballot this election cycle even though the signature requirement is the lowest since 1970. What a terrible shame! No opposition to the socialist-fascist duopoly will be offered it would seem. Bummer!
Be sure to tune in to 20/20 tonight on ABC. Phil Davison has notified me that he will be a guest.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEdRde6jew0
That was likely a big part of it. But it could also be that he is out of step with his party’s mainstream and just generally washed up. After all, he didn’t end up in a district that was almost entirely Linder’s old district by accident; someone, or quite a few people, must have not liked him very much for the lines to end up having been drawn that way. To put it another way, his man-crush on Newt Gingrich is unrequited.
“I think [Bob Barr] got crushed in his last Republican primary too, long before he ever went LP.”
He got beat by about 2-1, but that doesn’t seem to have been a function of his politics, etc. so much as the fact that his district got dismantled/amalgamated in redistricting and he ended up against another Republican incumbent (John Linder, one of the architects of the “Fair” Tax) in a new district that was almost entirely Linder’s old district.
http://www.libertychat.com/2014/07/government-making-black-markets-dangerous-humanly-possible/
Pretty sure Andy is reading these comments, but I’ll alert him just in case.
Paulie, Thanks, it was about his bumperstickers. Oddly enough, I know a Guy.. 🙂 Thanks..
Yes, I know. By last Republican primary I am referring to the last time he lost in a Republican primary. I think that was 2002, IIRC.
The primary was today.
Is that what happened? I think he got crushed in his last Republican primary too, long before he ever went LP.
Double turncoat Bob Barr was smashed in his Congressional primary.
State Senator Barry Loudermilk crushed Barr, 66-34.
It’s good to see that Republicans understand why party loyalty matters when choosing a candidate. Perhaps someday our National Convention delegates will do the same.
I’ll ask him if he wants to give it out, or he can tell you himself. He reads these comments and I can also give him your contact info. Or you can contact me, I know about the same jobs he does.
BTW if anyone is interested that can get to Nevada now or is already there, there is a legalize marijuana petition being circulated.
Well, My Part time work wrapped quick, Broke my leg.
Paulie, can you email me Andy’s contact info? Can’t find it, as Admin you have it here I think, or from before, either is OK.
When I’m well enough, would like to see if there is something as important again.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/101342970#.
Battle over police pensions in US cities takes ugly turn
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-01/police-chief-s-204-000-pension-shows-how-cities-crashed.html
http://www.publicceo.com/2013/12/bankrupt-san-bernardino-police-get-second-1-million-raise/
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/21/us/politics/san-bernardino-battles-calpers-pension-demands.html
Hmmm…tough call:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zsKD22Lin4
https://www.aclu.org/blog/tag/police-brutality
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/seven-reasons-police-brutality-is-systematic-not-anecdotal/
http://pdxintelligencer.com/portland-police-union-president-tearfully-defends-police-brutality-amidst-federal-investigation/
http://tokyotom.freecapitalists.org/?s=limited
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=b7JADq4tTsc
Libertycrier.com comments:
This is a pretty good rant against the police state and we need more like it from prominent figures in the mainstream media.
Unfortunately, towards the end, Bill Maher tries to claim the Democrats are the only people who care about the issue.
Of course we know nothing could be further than the truth.
Republicans and Tea Party types have been railing against the police state for a long time now, possibly even before the Democrats.
But who cares?
Anyone who tries to make the police state a partisan issue hasn’t done much research and can only succeed at dividing the American people.
Ultimately, what Bill Maher is trying to do is use the deaths of the elderly, the mentally ill, the mentally handicapped, those in wheelchairs, children, dogs and all the others who suffer under the police state, for political gain. What kind of person does this kind of thing?
So, kudos to Bill Maher for talking about the very important issue of the militarized police state, and shame on Bill Maher for trying to pretend that this is a partisan issue that gives Democrats the moral high ground.
The truth is no one has the moral high ground and everyone suffers under the police state.
So, let’s forget the blame game and just try to solve the problem.
Read more at http://libertycrier.com/bill-maher-rails-militarized-police-state/
Also at Libertycrier:
http://libertycrier.com/like-dogs-ill-shoot-thing-foia-request-reveals-officers-premeditated-murder-dog/
http://libertycrier.com/criminalization-homelessness-rise-u-s-cities/
One exception is Ben & Jerry’s, which is a branch of the Unilever Corporation (somewhere around # 120 on the Fortune 500 list). Ben & Jerry’s is openly political–and uses its corporation to promote politics. Perhaps THE MOST HYPOCRITICAL CORPORATE WEBSITE THAT WILL EVER EXIST IS THIS WEBSITE: http://www.benjerry.com/values/issues-we-care-about/get-the-dough-out-of-politics . The “value” in dollars to the political “anti-corporate-spending-on-political-campaigns” cause is difficult to estimate. But this website is A MAJOR CORPORATE CONTRIBUTION to a political cause.
I previously used IPR.com to call for a boycott of Ben & Jerry’s based on this hypocrisy alone. No one seems to have listened to me. (Ben & Jerry’s is too “cool” and “hip” to a lot of grass-roots activists (including Libertarian activists) to boycott, I guess.) Nonetheless, I myself will never buy another Ben & Jerry’s product until the corporation stops trying to repeal the First Amendment.
By the way, it is something of a myth that the major Fortune 500 corporations are donating large amounts of money to political campaigns. Most of them donate nothing or almost nothing. Of course their wealthiest shareholders and perhaps some of their officers may contribute. But the whole hysteria regarding “unlimited” spending by America’s largest corporations on politics is mostly mythical.
Roger Roots said: ” ALL CAMPAIGN FINANCE REGUALTIONS infringe on freedom of speech and press!”
I’d favor some campaign finance restrictions, such as, I don’t think that government employees should be able to donate to political campaigns, or even be able to vote at all for that matter. Certainly government employee unions should not be able to donate to political campaigns, and for that matter, government employees never should have been allowed to unionize in the first place.
I also think that government contractors should not be able to donate to political campaigns.
Really, there is no reason for corporations to donate to political campaigns either. Corporations are legal fictions. If the shareholders of the corporation want to donate to a political campaign, let them make that decision on their own as to whether or not they as individuals would like to donate to a campaign.
Corporations who receive any taxpayer funding, including those who open their shares to be purchased by government entities (such as the example I gave about the California State Employees Pension (CALPERS) owning shares of Walmart), or who have received land via eminent domain, ought to be prohibited from taking part in politics.
People who are on welfare should not be able to vote or donate to political campaigns either. It ought to be, get a welfare check, forfeit your right to vote or to donate to political campaigns.
If the only people who voted or donated to political campaigns were those who don’t have their hands in the government trough, we’d have a lot more freedom in this country right now. What we have now is essentially large/wealthy groups that have a conflict of interest (as in they are somehow feeding at the government trough, and/or are somehow being protected from competition by the government) paying out large bribes to politicians in the form of campaign contributions (as well as other ways of bribing them, such as with lucrative business deals, jobs, speaking engagements, etc…), and then once elected, the politicians who received the bribes keep whatever racket the special interest groups are in place, and work to expand them.
No, you could go to court with papers signed by the others to litigate in their names, or as part of a class-action. The only major distinction between this arrangement and personhood is the possession of assets outside the ownership of the shareholders – which means the protection of those assets in court.
You will find that your local Catholic church is the property of the local bishop (or the like) in corporation sole, or some similar legal devisement. Your local Church of some other faiths may be the property of the people who are the members, using a definition remarkably similar except for the wording to the sustaining membership of the Libertarian Party.
Joshua:
As I understand it, you are proposing something similar to my ideal: that “a group of individuals would come together and jointly own the property” and then would themselves “charter” out corporate shares–holding the corporate charters in their own filing cabinets. Of course this actually happens all the time. But wouldn’t this still entail going to court as a “legal person” in order to litigate claims for or against or on behalf of the corporate shareholders?
The answer is the same on all three. Either a group of individuals can come together, jointly own the property, and then offer memberships or shares for a specified price, or ask for donations, or whatever – or it can be treated as a partnership. If the “Catholic Church” wanted to sue over an alleged violation of the freedom of religion, it would be called a class action lawsuit. Those exist, and they work fine.
No, failing to make churches into people does not violate the individual right to freedom of religion.
Then you agree with the Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United? Citizens United was a nonprofit corporation who’s video “Hillary: The Movie,” was censored and banned by the F.E.C. The government argued before the Supreme Court that it had such power to ban books and videos if even a single sentence recommended the election or defeat of a politician. Thank God the Supreme Court ruled against the FEC in that case. And, Paulie, I’m glad you agree.
The real problem with the Citizens United ruling is that it did not go far enough. ALL CAMPAIGN FINANCE REGUALTIONS infringe on freedom of speech and press!
I don’t see why organizations would not be able to exist, or have free speech and press rights, or for that matter sue. They may be corporations at present, but they don’t necessarily have to be, or what a corporation means could be redefined quite a bit. I do believe professional associations, nonprofits and religious bodies already have boards of directors. How else would they function, and why would that be an imposition from government?
Back on the subject of corporations. For those of you who claim to seek to ban corporations from having any rights, including owning property, suing in court, etc., and who claim to believe that only individuals should ever be recognized as legal persons: How would you deal with the following problems (in your proposed fantasy world):
(1) Religions such as the Catholic Church, the Lutheran Church, etc. (almost all of which are corporations.) Would you require that all 500 million members of the Catholic Church separately sign as “partners” onto all deed documents, contracts, etc.? How would the Catholic Church’s members, er.,…”partners” sue in Court—say, to challenge a government anti-Catholic decree? And wouldn’t your impositions violate freedom of religion? Or is the freedom of religion just an individual right that can be practiced by people in the privacy of their own individual homes or individually-owned churches?
(2) Professional Associations. The American Historical Society, etc. Would they also be deprived of entity personhood? Would each member need to agree to contracts, etc. Or would you require that every professional association have a “board of directors” to perform such duties. And if so, wouldn’t this be an imposition by the state–and not at all libertarian?
(3) Nonprofits. The NAACP. The ACLU. etc. You would deprive these organizations of any rights of free speech and press?
Thanks 🙂
Nice seeing Libertarians getting back to fighting all concentrations of power! Good stuff Paulie!
Government Trolls Stalk the Internet
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUhnd9XpOak
I wonder how many of these people have posted at IPR over the years.
The Worst Trolls on the Internet are the Government Trolls
http://www.thedailysheeple.com/the-worst-trolls-on-the-internet-are-the-government-trolls_072014
Jed, while we don’t know if the man in your story is a cop or not, it reminds me of a recent story of cops abusing their authority seemingly for sexual gratification: http://dailycaller.com/2014/07/09/manassas-city-police-want-to-take-a-picture-of-teens-privates/
The police as we know them would not exist in my Libertarian Zone concept. The police do more harm than good.
Could be entrapment. But then again if it was maybe they would be smarter than to admit they are police. Or maybe it’s entrapment, but the cop figured you would think they wouldn’t say they are a cop if it was entrapment. Or maybe it wasn’t entrapment at all, it was just someone trying to get laid who happens to be a cop. Or maybe they are not even a cop, just pretending to be a cop because it is part of their fantasy.
In any case, I would say best to avoid cops or anyone pretending to be cops when choosing sex partners. If things end up badly, or threaten to, they can mess with you in ways that civilians can’t. Plus cops tend to be abusive more than the average person. Best to stay clear of that drama even if it is not entrapment, which it certainly could be,
Convo I just had via DM on Twitter. This must be one of those “civil servants” Jim Gray is so proud of.
—
Cop: Hey what do you do? I work in law enforcement and live in Los Angeles -via http://justunfollow.com/?r=dm
Me: I’m unemployed, but I do a good deal of political activism that keeps me busy.
Cop: How do you support yourself? Where do you live?
Me: Right now I’m living with my Dad. Looking for work but for now I’m getting by.
Cop: Where’s your Dad’s home. How old are you?
Me: Not telling you were I live dude lol. I’m 27.
Cop: Just wanted to know if you wanted to earn some $$$
Me: Depends on what you want me to do.
Cop: Top me
Me: I’m not stupid. Money for sex is illegal, and you work in law enforcement.
Cop: Who said anything about $4sex?
Cop: You are being paid for your time we spend together
Cop: What happens is just our free choice
Me: Again, I’m not stupid. You cops pull this shit all the time. I’m not interested.
Cop: Ok no problem.
Cop: Bye
—
I have the entire conversation saved via screenshots, though I will not post them here as his avatar is sexually explicit. Assuming he was telling the truth about working in law enforcement, this is unethical behavior at best, entrapment at worse.
Thanks. Haven’t re-read it yet but I will.
I changed it.
Your linked post refers to her as a little girl. She is not. Little girls are not responsible for their actions. Adult women are. Legally, a 19 year old is an adult woman, not a little girl. Your statement, while it may be meant to be a judgement of her irresponsibility, perhaps unintentionally absolves her of the responsibility she deserves for her choices.
And?
WS, she is not a little girl. At 19 she is an adult and should be responsible for her actions as well as her communications.
I read more about 19 year old Kendall Jones after seeing a posting about her African killing spree on the Prohibition Party Facebook page. The administrator there was making a lame statement attacking someone who wished pornographic images of the girl would be released. It was ridiculous that the administrator would care more about comments someone made than the senseless “trophy hunting” by Jones. I brought it to the administrator’s attention that the 2012 Prohibition Party platform provides for the “respectable use” of nature. Jones’s actions were anything but. I felt compelled to write about this topic and did so in the link below.
http://saturnsrepository.wordpress.com/2014/07/18/girl-disgraces-nature-on-african-hunting-trip/
I thought one of the existing presidential threads might be better, but this one is fine since it’s probably more convenient to find.
I may be being too defensive here. It seemed awkward when Geoff felt the need to explain, justify and elucidate every decision at length while I was on LNC, so maybe I am exhibiting the same tendency here.
Paulie,
I’m trying to figure out how your longer version is different from what I said. The topic was irrelevant to the thread that it was in and you asked that it be discussed somewhere else. Didn’t mean it as a putdown or anything, I was just explaining why I brought it up here instead of there.
Or they will claim it is a corporate entity. I’ve had that happen many times.
I said that a thread about a state LP candidate in 2014 is not the best place to discuss presidential prospects for 2016, when we have other threads still open for comment on that exact subject. But if the open thread works better for you, have at it.
He has a position on taxes. He believes they should be radically simplified and much lower than at present. But having had those real world governing experiences, he also knows that no proposal gets passed exactly as proposed.
Don’t get me wrong. Gary and I disagree on any number of things, including the idea that the fraudulent “fair” tax is any kind of good starting point for a conversation on what to do about devolving the tax collection monstrosity gradually. We also disagree about noncontractual limited liability, the idea that monopoly government is inevitable and necessary, currently practiced prison “privatization,” and other subjects we have yet to discuss. I just don’t think his actual positions should be exaggerated or distorted, regardless of whether I agree with them or not.
They absolutely are. Let’s set aside things like the bailouts of the corporations that are “too big to fail,” the corporate welfare, or the other things I have mentioned previously.
We can even set aside, e.g., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price%E2%80%93Anderson_Nuclear_Industries_Indemnity_Act
Let’s take something simple at the small corporation level.
Granted this is second hand, but please let me know if you believe the story is untrue and I’ll try to track it down to the original source.
A friend of a friend allegedly had her book altered by her publisher, putting words in her mouth in the published book that actually went out.
When she threatened to sue, the publisher either threatened to, or actually did close the corporation that was the publishing house and started a new one, essentially continuing business as usual with no consequences.
No liability for what she did.
But even if that story is BS, there are countless examples of corporations being unaccountable; just see the links I posted yesterday and take some actual time to read them.
“”BTW, government entities also claim to be private corporations when it suits them. As petitioners, we have run across everything from state universities and community colleges to civic auditoriums, city parks, city transit systems, DMVs to downtown streets in areas with foot traffic where we had security guards and cops tell us they were private corporations and not government entities at all, as they plainly are.”
I’ve had numerous government bureaucrats/employees tell me that I can’t gather petition signatures at some place because the DMV, public library, Post Office, public college, etc…, is “private property.” I’ve asked them who owns it, and they generally will not answer, although a few times I’ve gotten answers like, the library board of trustees, the county tax collector, the city government, the state government, the federal government, etc…
I have no problem with that. Where I have a problem is when those contracts make people who are not party to the contract limited in some ways, such as their ability to pursue those who have caused them harm.
http://www.infowars.com/video-new-york-man-who-broke-up-street-fight-choked-to-death-by-police/
More of the police officers who Jim Gray thinks we should all respect, admire.
Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports Exposed
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6H3_S59DO18
Joshua Katz
July 18, 2014 at 2:05 pm
said: “Andy, I have no idea why you’re complaining to me about corporations where government is a major shareholder. I don’t think we should have government, for starters.”
I was not “complaining” to you. I was posting information about the government Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports to spread information, particularly to Libertarians who do not know that a large percentage of the stock market is owned by government entities. The government owns, or co-owns, all kinds of things that you would not expect them to own or co-own.
Andy has addressed the fact that “they’ve been around for a long time.” And yes, corporate personhood gives advantages not available to partnerships – that’s the point. No, an unincorporated entity does not act as a legal entity for legal purposes and does not shield its owners from liability. If we form a Wednesday night poker game, and during that game, we run outside and break some windows, the poker game is not held liable, and the ability to sue for damages is not limited to the amount of money in the till.
Andy, I have no idea why you’re complaining to me about corporations where government is a major shareholder. I don’t think we should have government, for starters.
Quoth Paulie, in another thread where he dismissed the topic as irrelevant and asked that it be moved:
“[Gary Johnson] supports a radically simplified and lower tax system that gets rid of most or all of the current federal taxes and replaces them with a single tax. He is using the ‘fair’ tax as a starting point to discuss what exactly that system should be, but is not necessarily committed to specific features of that plan such as the ‘prebate’ or the ‘revenue neutral’ rate.”
So what you’re saying is that after two terms as a governor, two presidential primary campaigns, one general election presidential campaign and the at least informal start of a 2016 presidential campaign, he still doesn’t actually have a position on taxes?
I detect a recurring theme among corporation haters that corporations are somehow unaccountable or immune from accountability. I don’t understand this. Corporations are sued all the time, fined, go bankrupt. (My Roth IRA recently had two of its investments declare bankruptcy, sending the share prices to below ten cents per share; my bad). Owners of corporate stock are TAXED TWICE for the same investment. First the corporation pays 35% tax every year on all profits, then the shareowner gets taxed a second time for any profits he makes from the corporation as an individual.
America is now suffering greatly because it has THE HIGHEST CORPORATE TAX IN THE WORLD. Many corporations are seeking to leave the U.S. or at least transfer their headquarters to other countries. (The reason Daimler-Chrysler is not called Chrysler-Daimler is because the company deliberately merged with a German corporation and declared its new headquarters to be in Germany TO AVOID THE HIGH U.S. CORPORATE TAX RATES!)
By the way, Overlawyered.com has a good discussion of just how stupid the attacks on corporate personhood really are. http://overlawyered.com/2014/07/corporate-personhood/ . Corporate personhood has been around (and was already old) in Roman times.
Paulie:
Well said, and I don’t disagree with any of your points. But the corporate form itself is not to blame for government’s desire to take over and control them. The best approach is to “privatize” corporations. Instead of being “chartered” and approved by government officers (with all founding and disclosure documents on file in state offices), corporate documents (which, in the broad sense, are simply contracts between share owners) should be like trust documents (ditto), on file in PRIVATE file cabinets. The government should be unaware of the structure, the ownership, or even the existence of such corporations until the corporations decide or need to reveal themselves (such as for litigation purposes).
It’s a “pubic-private partnership.” Basically the economic system of fascism.
BTW, government entities also claim to be private corporations when it suits them. As petitioners, we have run across everything from state universities and community colleges to civic auditoriums, city parks, city transit systems, DMVs to downtown streets in areas with foot traffic where we had security guards and cops tell us they were private corporations and not government entities at all, as they plainly are. Recently I read about a police SWAT team that is claiming to be a private corporation to thwart a public records law.
For their part, nominally private corporations have been bailed out by government, subsidized by government welfare, insured by government, fattened with government contracts, had big chunks of their stock purchased by government entities, received land giveaways from government, used government eminent domain to steal land from people and small businesses, used government cops as security guards, used government welfare to replace benefits for their employees, and on and on and on.
The line between public and private corporations is increasingly blurred.
Naturally, there is no freedom of expression in these hybrid “public-private” civic spaces that are increasingly replacing the traditional town square. Nor, to get back to the original point of the discussion (IIRC) is there a right to be armed for self-defense and the mutual defense of others. There’s only the “right” to obey, consume, conform, reproduce and watch TV.
Government Will Not Save You From Corporations
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCAIj3YJUmg
The CAFR Swindle – The Biggest Game In Town
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pRPBKJQnyU
“Joshua Katz
July 17, 2014 at 8:12 pm
Property of corporations is the property of shareholders.”
What if the government is a major shareholder in a corporation? How private is a corporation if say 40% or 50% or 60% or more of its stock is owned by government entities?
See the links I posted earlier.
It might be said that all of us are constantly creating institutions that could—in a proper case—be considered “legal persons” for some purposes. A wednesday-night poker game, for example, could become such an institution in a proper situation. It could survive its founders, for example, create a nuisance, be sued, or maybe even sue. Eventually, the weekly poker game itself—as an institution—could have recognized rights. There is nothing radical or bizarre about this. Again, think of rock bands like Grand Funk Railroad, Jefferson Airplane, etc. I believe each of them have had members leave and claim simultaneously to “own” the bands and the names–sometimes while touring in different versions simultaneously. The only way to resolve conflicts arising from such situations is to recognize the bands themselves as legal persons. Again, for SOME, but not all, purposes.
I will write even more boldly. Western history in the past thousand years has slowly developed away from feudalism toward more market liberalization. Although there is currently great wealth disparity in the U.S. (and the West generally), it is nothing compared to the situation of five hundred years ago. Members of the British House of Lords were at one time carried to Parliament by their serfs on large hand-held carriages. The Spanish Conquistadors were also carried from place to place on the backs of their slaves and servants. The growth of the corporate model has allowed more poor people to be investors, profiteers and property owners.
The stuff about partnerships is all well and good. But corporations offer other advantages, such as the fungability (and disposability) of shares. A share in a corporation can be sold, bought, traded, etc. without getting the permission of the (non-transfering) partners. Corporations can also survive after all the original shareholders die–unlike partnerships, which are quite difficult to transfer.
Honestly, I don’t understand the irrational hatred for corporations. It is as if the very word is a perjorative to some people. This is especially true of people from the “left,” but I know many who travel in “conservative,” “constitutionalist,” and “patriot” circles who harbor similar hatred for the term.
Certainly people should be able to form business partnerships. They should remain responsible for what the business does, however.
Property of corporations is the property of shareholders. Shareholders, as people, can agree to pool their resources – the rest of us call it a partnership. There’s no reason you can’t have large partnerships. What you should not do is pretend that there is an existing entity created by pooling your resources, and that this entity is responsible for the use of that property.
Shareholders and managers should be able to be sued for their actions. They should be able to sue for actionable defenses.
Thanks, but please keep discussions of which candidates are or are not “functional” on the FFF thread.
I was just reading about how the LP in West Virginia has a functional candidate for US Senate, a former state delgate. Good deal.
That depends on what you mean by corporations.
In what ways do you distinguish corporations from other kinds of businesses for the purpose of your questions?
For those of you who claim to oppose “corporate personhood,” I have some questions:
(1) In your fantasyworld, after you abolish corporate personhood, could corporations still exist?
(2) If corporations could still exist, could they sue? Be sued? Own property? Hire or fire? Be taxed? (These might all be trick questions, as they are descriptive of corporate personhood itself; at least in the way I see it.)
(3) If you succeed in abolishing “all rights” under the Constitution of corporations, would that mean that any government official could simply take or destroy corporate property at will? Or would all corporate property revert to each corporation’s shareholders? Wouldn’t such a mandate require forced auctions by the government? Or would you prefer that all corporate property simply become the government’s?
Just a few questions off the top of my head.
http://www.davidhousholder.com/bush-bamas-bipartisan-bungling/
A post above seemed to claim that corporate personhood is not an advantage for corporations. I find this is to be untenable. Corporate personhood provides a shield for bad behavior by creating a legal ‘person’ who is acting, thus protecting the assets of the human who is acting – as Mises reminded us, only humans can act. It’s a good thing he didn’t call his book People Action.
http://peoplestribune.org/pt-news/2014/05/conned-big-business-funded-californias-shift-top-two-primaries/
Empahsis added.
Thanks, I already found that one in the course of refreshing my memory on the subject just now. But that did not go nearly so far in establishing corporate personhood as the decisions from the 1880s did.
Not necessarily.
Insurance for small share owners might become common, for example, and insurers would replace regulators in making sure that industrial and commercial enterprises don’t externalize costs and risks while internalizing profits.
We might also see a move away from large-scale enterprises, which may be more economically plausible given emerging technologies, and more in line with a move away from large scale, top-down hierarchies in all aspects of social organization (communication, politics, religion, and so on).
As far as I know it dates back to court rulings in the 1880s, but let me know if you find something older.
The first U.S. SUPREME COURT case recognizing corporations as legal persons was in 1819. (Dartmouth College v. [something]). If one were to overturn corporate personhood, one would overturn MILLIONS of court cases. And the rich would truly control almost everything, as only the richest individuals would be able to own large manufacturing operations, large-scale media outlets, etc.
http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2011/08/libertarian-anticapitalism/
http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2011/03/embracing-markets-opposing-capitalism/
http://erdman31.com/2014/04/01/libertarian-left-free-market-anti-capitalism-the-unknown-ideal/
http://distributism.blogspot.com/2007/09/libertarianism-and-distributism.html
http://distro.libertarianleft.org/tag/free-market-anti-capitalism/
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/libertarian-left/
http://c4ss.org/content/3202
Exactly. And see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood
http://www.gangsofamerica.com/read.html
http://www.thecorporation.com/
http://www.corpwatch.org/
http://www.corporatewatch.org.uk/
http://reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate-personhood/
“I should study up on this, but I think the concept of ‘corporate personhood’ is centuries old.”
Just because something is old it does not make it good. Monarchies are centuries old as well. So is theft and murder.
Establishment interests support top one-in-the-guise-of-two because it clears the field of anti-establishent competition.
http://www.ballot-access.org/2012/11/proponents-of-arizona-top-two-primary-initiative-raised-1343540-through-october-25-2012/
I doubt it. I know nothing in common law that allows individuals to cause harm to others and then escape individual consequences by re-formatting their organization.
As far as I know it dates back to court rulings in the 1880s, but let me know if you find something older.
I was unaware of Walmart’s support for “top two” initiatives. I’d like to know more about this. (Especially why, if it is indeed true.) The other points against Walmart and Target (especially Walmart) are all well established. But bashing such large corporations inevitably leads to bashing the corporate form itself; and that business model should be defended by people who love liberty.
The corporate form is an innovation that mostly liberates and very rarely subjigates. As far as Paulie’s question about the development “non-contractual limited liability,” for corporations, I believe much of this arose from common law (undoubtedly supported by a statute here or there). I should study up on this, but I think the concept of “corporate personhood” is centuries old.
Almost any institution we create (including a church, a weekly poker game, a business partnership or a rock band) could become a legal entity of its own IN A PROPER SITUATION. Think of how classic rock bands are always battlefields of conflict and litigation among their members. In some cases, a rock band may continue even after its original members die off or leave. (I think “Lynnard Skynnard” is still touring even though its current form has at most ONE original member left.) Several classic bands have splintered off into two or more bands that tour simultaneously under the original name, while suing each other for the right to use the name.
All of this necessitates that courts (or conflict resolvers) treat THE ENTITY itself apart from its owners, founders or members IN SOME–BUT NOT ALL–SITUATIONS. I view the contemporary movement to strip corporations of “all constitutional rights” as quite childish, near-sighted and ultimately very dangerous. When the New York Times sought to publish the Pentagon Papers in the 1970s, the U.S. Justice Department sought to censor “The New York Times,” not its shareholders, editors, etc. The Supreme Court upheld the CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT of the New York Times to publish the Pentagon Papers—AS A CORPORATION. Imagine if the case had gone the other way on grounds that “corporations have no constitutional rights.” Such an outcome would have been literally gutted the First Amendment.
I bet they probably had something to do with the one in California and the upcoming one in Oregon as well.
Walmart has spent over 50 million dollars and four years creating and working to make the Marketplace fairness Act law. It is MALWARE for online business.
You can get more information at:wwwinternetsalestaxfordummies.com
It will require all online users to prevent this!
I was just doing some reading up on Walmart lobbying the government, and I just found out something for which I did not know Walmart had lobbied. I already knew that Walmart had lobbied in favor of food stamps (note that Walmart is one of the biggest profiteers from Food Stamps), and I knew that they had lobbied for more corporate welfare, but here is something that I did not know. Walmart has been lobbying in favor of getting an internet sales tax passed. Yes, that’s right, Walmart wants items that are sold online to be taxed. This is your “free market” company for you (sarcasm intended).
Oh, and another political cause which Walmart donated money to is trying to get Top Two Primary passed in Arizona. This initiative was fortunately voted down, but if it would have passed it would have made it so most minor party and independent candidates were not on general election ballots.
Walmart Subsidy Watch is a good site to find out just some of the handouts that Walmart has received from government entities over the years. I said just some, because Walmart has received so many “goodies” from the government over the years that it is more than they have been able to document.
http://www.walmartsubsidywatch.org/
Latest from Saturn’s Repository:
http://saturnsrepository.wordpress.com/2014/07/15/underexposed-supreme-court-decision-strikes-at-anti-free-speech-law/
Analysis of last month’s McCullen v. Coakley Supreme Court decision; a victory for Free Speech.
http://reclaimdemocracy.org/independent_business_walmart_eminent_domain/
Wal-Mart, the Abuse of Eminent Domain and Corporate Welfare
By Stacy Mitchell
Published December 2003
Typical of shopping centers built decades ago, Alameda Square in Denver is a cheap, single-story strip of stores. It’s ugly and rundown. But that does not deter shoppers. Mostly Asian Americans, shoppers come from miles around to patronize more than a dozen locally-owned Asian businesses, including two grocery stores, two restaurants, a hair salon, a clothing shop, a jeweler and a bakery.
On a weekday afternoon, the parking lot buzzes with activity. Inside Pacific Ocean International Supermarket, the dingy exterior gives way to bright lights, shelves stocked with canned bamboo shoots and dried fish and aisles of shoppers.
Most of Alameda Square’s businesses are profitable. Together they generate about $125,000 a year in sales tax revenue. But if the city of Denver has its way, these small businesses will be evicted to make way for a Wal-Mart super-center. The city’s Urban Renewal Authority has threatened condemnation if the property owners refuse to sell and has offered Wal-Mart $10 million in public subsidies. That’s right: Tax dollars would go to one of the country’s most profitable and powerful corporations.
Because they lease their spaces, the storekeepers will receive little compensation. The city has offered to help them find new locations, but it is unlikely they will end up together, which has been key to their success as a regional destination for Asian shoppers. Some, like Kings Land Chinese restaurant, which books weddings months in advance, are already losing business.
As big chains like Wal-Mart have grown and multiplied over the last decade, tens of thousands of independent businesses have closed. Most people assume that local retailers are being beaten fair-and-square by companies that offer consumers a better deal.
But as Alameda Square vividly illustrates, consumer choices are not all that’s driving the growth of corporate chains. Public policy plays a major role.
Wal-Mart leads the pack in attracting subsidies, this year collecting $10 million in Denver; $500,000 in Dallas; $36.7 million in Scottsdale, Ariz., (as part of a shopping center that includes Lowe’s); $9 million in Bartlesville, Okla.; and $17 million in Lewiston, Maine.
Local officials argue these big stores warrant subsidies because of the jobs and tax revenue they generate. But in most cases the big boxes do more harm than good.
Chris Nevitt, director of the Front Range Economic Strategy Center, one of several groups in Colorado fighting Denver’s plan for Alameda Square, points out that nearby grocery stores and competing businesses will lose sales to Wal-Mart.
“As these businesses shrink or close, hundreds of jobs will be lost, many of which provide higher wages and better benefits than Wal-Mart,’ he argues. Moreover, under the terms of the subsidy, Denver will not see a dime of new revenue until 2016.
Rarely are tax dollars given to local retaiiers. For them, it’s sink or swim in a sea of giant, subsidized competitors. When asked how Scottsdale’s small businesses were to survive the arrival of Wal-Mart and Lowe’s — slated to receive the second largest corporate subsidy in Arizona history — city councilor Ned O’Hearn declared, “That’s urban dynamics. This is private enterprise. This is competition.”
Yet taxpayers pick up the tab for corporate chains by bridging the difference between what their workers earn and what they need to survive. Half of Wal-Mart’s employees qualify for food stamps. Many rely on other forms of public assistance. Washington state reports that Wal-Mart workers are the single largest group of users in its low-income health care program.
Some cities have gone so far as to condemn property owned by small businesses in order to turn it over to chain store developers. Last month, Wheat Ridge, Colo., designated property owned by three independent businesses as blighted. The three enterprises—a multi-generation, family-owned automotive repair shop, a billiards hall, and a kitchen cabinet business—will be booted for a Walgreens drugstore. The developer has also been given $500,000 in public subsidies.
Tax policy, too, is riddled with loopholes that benefit chain stores. As the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has documented, about half the states allow national chains to avoid state income taxes by transferring profits earned locally to tax-free states such as Delaware. Small businesses, meanwhile, pay state income taxes on every penny of their earnings.
All of this adds up to a startlingly tilted playing field, a rigged system that can hardly be characterized as free enterprise. Our hometown businesses deserve better.
“Again, there’s more, but my point is that while they are nominally private, they are heavily intertwined with government.”
Sounds like fascism to me.
I’ve also go a real problem with corporations like Walmart, Target, etc…, accepting land in eminent domain, getting handed fat corporate welfare checks from the government, hiring lobbyists to lobby for more government and for government hand outs (yes, Walmart does this), and having a large percentage of their stock owned by government entities, but then claiming to be “private” and using that as an excuse to restrict the 1st and 2nd amendment rights of those who enter “their” parking lots.
Around the country I’ve seen cops just hanging out in front of Walmarts, Targets, etc…, while they are on the clock, basically acting as security guards for these stores.
Off the top of my head, not an exhaustive list:
*Large retail business sometimes locate on govenment owned land. They may or may not be charged for it.
*They often receive corporate welfare.
*They sometimes abuse eminent domain to have government steal land on their behalf from less well-off/well-connected land owners.
*Some of them such as Walmart have been shown to deliberatetely encourage their employees to get on government welfare in lieu of benefits.
*The combined weight of government taxes and regulations crushes upstart competition, keeping large corporate entities safely on top of the heap.
*Police frequently act as security guards for large retailers – either on duty while drawing their government pay or off-duty using their government equipment (cars, uniforms etc) to create the illusion they are on duty.
*Large retailers often collect rent from government to host e.g. post offices or sometimes other government offices such as DMVs.
Again, there’s more, but my point is that while they are nominally private, they are heavily intertwined with government.
Roger
That’s OK, I’ve never demanded that anyone agree with me all the time. I could be wrong, or maybe you are. I’ve certainly been wrong before, and from what you have told me about yourself so have you.
You do seem to be aware of some history on this that I am not, regarding history of corporations that were not involved with state charters. Did they have non-contractual limited liability and if so, who granted it and who enforced it? If you can point me to some good resources on that I would appreciate it. Keep in mind comments with more than one link will get held up by the automated spam filter, but I will approve them when I see them.
I should note that non-contractual limited liability and corporate stock ownership are only two of quite a few ways in which large corporations are merged with government.
“”I tend to agree with Wes Wagner’s position (stated very near the top) that although Target, as a private entity, has every right to seek to keep gun-carrying customers off their property, such position almost certainly makes Target’s customers less safe and that perhaps Target should be avoided or even boycotted.”
I totally disagree. Target is NOT a private entity. If they were a private entity they would not have so much of their stock owned by government, and they would not receive any land via eminent domain, which they do. Eminent domain is for public use.
I feel a need to respond to a comment stream from way up top regarding a claim that corporations are “creatures of the state,” and that because Target stock is owned by such “government” entities as the California pension fund, Target stores are not really private property. Thus, goes such reasoning, Target, Inc.’s decision to tell gun owners to please not carry inside Target stores is violative of the right to bear arms. I tend to agree with Wes Wagner’s position (stated very near the top) that although Target, as a private entity, has every right to seek to keep gun-carrying customers off their property, such position almost certainly makes Target’s customers less safe and that perhaps Target should be avoided or even boycotted.
The following chain of discussion (by very intellectual guys) echoes some recurring claims that need rebuttal. Although corporations in our contemporary sense are “creatures of the state” on account of being “chartered” by various secretaries-of-state and being forced to disclose and report certain information and finances, THIS ARRANGEMENT IS FOR THE CONVENIENCE OF THE STATE. Corporations DO NOT NEED TO BE ‘CREATURES OF THE STATE’ and in fact could function perfectly well (better, really) without such state constrictions. Corporate papers could be like trust papers–on file with law firms, financial institutions, etc. It is for the convenience of the state that modern corporations are made to file with state offices; this arrangement allows the state to more easily control and tax corporations.
The corporate form is thousands of years old and has been traced to India from at least 800 B.C., Viking-era Norway and many other ancient societies. It is a business model for the little guy, as it allows the poor to pool resources and compete with the rich.
The claim that because some state pension fund managers who seek to invest funds in stocks or bonds that will return a decent return choose to invest such funds in a particular corporation’s stock DOES NOT TRANSFORM SUCH CORPORATIONS INTO “GOVERNMENT-OWNED” businesses in any rational or traditional sense. Sorry Andy and Paulie but I disagree with you.
George and Joe from a few days ago:
Thanks!
Nice picture, paulie.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlY9C6pzxKc
George Phillies @ July 11, 2014 at 7:16 pm
“Dear July 11, 2014 at 4:44 pm: Delete the terminal “this” when you click on the link.”
I fixed the link.
Joe
Amen to that AR! It really is a great “community”. If the internet disappeared tomorrow, I’d probably miss IPR the most.
Dear July 11, 2014 at 4:44 pm: Delete the terminal “this” when you click on the link. George
AR/CT… what a great comment! You hit the nail right on the head. I am a hell of a lot older than most posters here but I find this to be a great community and you have always been part of that. I wish Chris the best in his journey to enlightenment and hope he doesn’t go too far off the rails and end up in serious trouble. Hatred is never a good route to travel. I truly hope he gets clear on that.
I want to comment about the recent situation with Chris. As many of you may remember, as Catholic Trotskyist between about 2008 and 2011, first at Third Party Watch and then here, I made some pretty outrageous comments. I was just a few years older than Chris and going through some difficulties in my life, some of which would surprise most people if they knew my real identity. I used politics as a way to understand the world and relieve stress, and especially took an interest in politics outside the mainstream. Yet I didn’t quite fit into any of the alternative ideologies either. I was also under a variety of different influences that contradicted each other. It may be hard to understand, but trolling at IPR actually worked well as a way to deal with my frustrations. I’m glad that I only let a couple people know my real name and avoided any interest in racism; for these reason chris’s situation is much more difficult. I want to say that Paulie and others here at IPR were more than patient with me, and they are being more than patient with Chris. That’s one of the things I appreciate about this community, and I’m glad it’s still a part of our ethic here, no matter what other changes happen, even though I disagree with a couple of things like Milnes’s banning. Despite everything, we have a great community here both politically and personally here at IPR, and we should never forget that.
Mark, the link doesn’t work.
>Front page of Columbus Dispatch 5 July 2014.
>http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2014/07/05/libertarian-candidate-puts-gop-on-edge.html
This will be a fun race to watch.
Steve–I wondered what happened to Michael. Very unusual for one of us to become Democrat; the opposite (in my case 30 yrs ago) is far more common.
I tried a few seach terms on the 225k+ comments we have and both the personal attacks on petitioners and the racist stuff all began in 2009, but it appears you are correct – the racial stuff seems to have started a few months later. It may be that some earlier racist comments got deleted.
Try not reading his comments.
As far as Avens’ article about arguing on the Internet, that’s a constant challenge for me to behave, too. We’ll see how I handle the new appearance of Grundmann who, despite it being OVER A YEAR since I’ve engaged in any converstation with him, managed to throw a libelous zinger today.
http://reason.com/blog/2014/07/10/64-percent-of-millennials-favor-a-free-m
I’d have to go back to the early posts, you may be right.
Paul said: ” I don’t know if his racism, which seems to be the one main constant between his personnae other than extreme hostility towards me personally and anyone closely associated with me, is genuine or just something that he is using to troll and be disruptive.”
The IPR Troll or Trolls have not always had racism as a part of their attacks. The original anonymous attacks were strictly aimed at petition circulators who were actually Libertarians. The racism angle came later.
Just thought of it on the spot. I was also thinking pit bull. I used to be a very violent, angry kid, much worse than Chris. I still have an instinct to jump down people’s throats and always act like I’m under attack, or be on the attack. I have made a lot of progress in mellowing out over the years but the demons haven’t gone away entirely.
Highly unlikely. Chris is just a troubled yoot, with family issues, social adjustment problems and perhaps some hormonal imbalance and/or self-esteem issues. He deals with it by using substances, possibly to excess – he’s mentioned cannabis, LSD, ecstasy and who knows what else. He is clearly consumed by anger. He latches on to various extreme political movements because he needs something to belong to and give him purpose and because they identify targets for him to focus his anger on. Fascism seems to be serving those inner needs better for him than libertarianism did. He may become a communist or a straight edge anti-drug crusader next. Whatever it will be, he’ll still be angry.
“Vernon” is, I think, something more sinister. His previous incarnations show signs that he may have the ability to intercept communications – maybe a computer hacker (more technically a “cracker” in hacker lingo), government spy, and/or someone who infiltrates the LP and has a lot of specific knowledge about people. He adjusts his posting style and online persona from one incarnation to the next, but leaves enough clues that it is the same person or team of people working closely together. He always uses IP anonymizers and/or spoofing, and frequently changes online handles. I don’t know if his racism, which seems to be the one main constant between his personnae other than extreme hostility towards me personally and anyone closely associated with me, is genuine or just something that he is using to troll and be disruptive.
I’ve met Chris and see no reason to believe he is anything other than exactly who and what he says he is, nor any reason to believe he would have a “handler” such as “Vernon.”
There are a lot of confused and troubled young people out there, including many that latch on to racism as an anchor in a world which confuses and angers them, and although the racist movement is notoriously very thoroughly riddled with infiltrators and informants, there is no reason to suspect that these young folks who turn to racism and fascism as Chris has all have “handlers.”
Is that your pet name for it these days? 😀
(jk Paulie — couldn’t resist the college humor)
Avens is wise as well as beautiful and intelligent. I wish I could be that well behaved in internet debates. I try, but my inner piranha is a difficult beast to contain.
Here’s an excellent article by a friend here in Los Angeles. Number 3 is my mantra. I can’t emphasize this enough.
Good article, Avens!
http://thoughtsonliberty.com/how-to-have-an-productive-internet-debate
I’ve got to wonder if “Vernon” is Krzysztof Lesiak, or if “Vernon” is Krzysztof Lesiak ‘s handler.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mRnB2QQAZ8
Great points made by Krzysztof Lesiak in this thread!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnDZUzt-IFw
http://wconger.liberty.me/2014/06/30/why-are-libertarians-so-friggin-depressing/
Percentage of Americans on Welfare Hits Record High
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/hhs-report-percentage-americans-welfare-hits-recorded-high
Alicia Mattson has voted no on that same motion.
Norm Olsen has now voted yes on the email transparency motion.
Actually the latest demographic trend by well off young people is to move increasingly back into the cities for the first time in several generations. But yeah, a lot of people commonly identified as being white did move to the suburbs in recent decades. It was mostly based on economics.
This has a lot to do with government policies sch as the drug war first and foremost, the prison-industrial complex, the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow, government schools and government housing…naturally the crime created by the profits caused by prohibition causes people who can afford to do so to move out of the war zones.
Take some time to read up on what Polish, Russian, Jewish, and Italian immigrant neighborhoods were like in the US a century ago. Or Irish ones a half century before that.
Some do, some don’t. Personally I prefer a diverse environment and am hardly alone in that, but I have no problem with other people’s differing preferences as long as everyone is free to make their own choices.
Hardly. Race is a pseudoscientific concept and a social construct. It is not borne out by genetic studies.
You mean you don’t agree with the label?
Let’s see:
* You give thumbs up to the KKK and the Aryan Brotherhood
* You approvingly post songs by neo-nazi bands like Skrewdriver
* Your recent cover photos include a white power bandana, a confederate flag (you are not from anywhere near the former CSA), a burning Star of David, and the like
* You post crude anti-semitic cartoons
* You write “fuck the jews” and “kikes have always been the mortal enemies of the Polish people” and much more of this
* You believe race is “extremely important” and hate so-called interracial relationships and marriages
If that is not racist, then what exactly is racist?
Oh, I don’t know. I haven’t done a survey, but I run into people who agree with me when I discuss issues with random people all the time.
Really? Because if you actually believe what you claim to believe you must wish much worse than mere homelessness on me.
You want homogeneous nations everywhere, free of the influence of THUH JOOOZZZ, correct?
You also strongly oppose Israel and zionism, am I also correct?
OK then. Where exactly do you think Jews should go? What is your final solution to the “Jewish problem”?
If you want to really be honest, then go ahead and be honest here. Do you want to do to every individual Jew what your recent facebook cover photo did to the Star of David – set on fire?
http://www.nobeliefs.com/Tripoli.htm
OK here goes:
A good place to start : http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Anti-racist_is_a_codeword_for_anti-white
I don’t usually cite the SPLC, given the poor quality of many of their articles, but they seem to have done a pretty good job with this one: http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2013/fall/Following-the-White-Rabbit
First video response;
http://youtu.be/XNA3YMmC9zM
Second video response:
http://youtu.be/HCPg1KYkOOQ
Racists are sneaky statists:
http://youtu.be/FG6VMfrf16I
A rather thorough non-video fisking: http://www.revleft.com/vb/anti-racism-codeword-t183621/index.html
And another: http://genocidalracetraitor.blogspot.com/2013/08/contemporary-white-nationalism-and.html
This one is good: http://anti-racistcanada.blogspot.ca/2011/07/boneheads-are-so-cute-when-they-think.html
http://christianpoliticalparty.com/america-is-a-christian-nation/
Paulie is right. Latent schizophrenia was the insane belief that Marxism-Leninism could be defeated.
It did. Excessive obsession with freedom was a real psychiatric diagnosis in the USSR. I know people who were committed to mental hospitals for that.
Collectivism is collectivism…whether fascist or commie, it makes little difference in practice.
I sold it to whoever had money or in the case of girls sex to trade for it. Didn’t matter the so-called race of any of them.
Yeah, selling drugs was far from the worst thing I did back then.
I will agree to a debate with Krzysztof over the merits of Nationalism. If he accepts, I prefer it take place on a clean thread and that the rules of Graham’s Hierarchy of Disagreement be observed.
Since when does being a libertarian mean you have to have a lot of money?
I might add that a LOT of Libertarians try to keep their income below a taxable level to keep from being responsible for war taxes.
PEACE
I’m sure he has a long list of activities and beliefs that he considers a mental disorder, but I don’t wish to hear it.
“”Anarchism is a disease and a mental disorder.”
So wanting to live as a free human being is a mental disorder. This sounds like it came straight out of the Joseph Stalin playbook.
“paulie
July 8, 2014 at 12:51 pm
My jewcommie friends?”
I’ve known Paul for several years, and I’m not aware of him having any “Jew commie friends.”
“”paulie
July 8, 2014 at 11:32 am
‘Someone would step up if Bill and Richard tragically passed on.’
There’s a learning curve involved. Anticipating the need to learn and being prepared is better than on the job training with states failing left and right as a lesson of what not to do.”
Paul and I already know more than anyone else in the LP about executing petition drives.
Richard Winger would be more difficult to replace, due to his vast knowledge about election law and court rulings.
“Krzysztof Lesiak
July 8, 2014 at 11:26 am
Paulie,
Well guess what. I wasn’t the one who sold cocaine to poor black kids and assisted in ruining their lives.”
Nobody forces anyone to take drugs. There’s concept called personal responsibility.
Are stores that sell alcohol or prescription drugs responsible for the people who abuse these things, or are the individuals who abuse them responsible for their own actions? I hold individuals responsible for their own actions.
My jewcommie friends? ROFL. You should have tried being Jewish in Soviet Russia. Given that is impossible, try a bit of education from some sources other than the crap you have been reading. Stalin rounded up and murdered hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of Jews, and there was plenty of anti-semitism in the USSR when I was a kid, although far less violent by that time…there were still plenty of Jews being sent to gulags. This record of anti-Jewish discrimination by the Sovet authorities is why my family and me among many others were considered refugees when we left the USSR. Again, your newfound strain of collectivism has a lot more in common with the ruling ideology of the Slav-dominated USSR than you realize.
As for posting about what’s going on in your life, no need to be sorry for that. Honesty is the best policy.
Fauver article approved and posted. I’m off, but will fisk your silly video meme and your ignorance of the root causes of why different parts of Chicago are the way they are later.
Later, hater.
Bad judgement was posting shit from my life that perhaps doesn’t need to be all publicized.
Politics, I don’t regret posting. Life’s too short too not seek and share the truth.
My people in the USSR? We were occupied by your Jewcommie friends, lol, until 1989 officially, and unofficially until the present day.
Also I don’t wish homelessness on you or anyone. I remember when I would sleep on park benches, at Wal Mart, and in the laundry rooms of apartment buildings. Paradoxically, there was no concrete, justifiable reason for me to do this. I guess it’ll be included in my upcoming book – The Adventures of a Rugged Polish Pothead, release date TBD.
Hey William Saturn, here you go. “Vernon” is too chickenshit to debate you but you can have at it with Chris here. Let’s see what you two got. I need to get my homeless ass to work before I actually become homeless again for real.
I have never claimed I was an angel, much less when I was a kid. I’ve done lots of bad things in my life; that’s hardly a secret.
I’ve never been to prison. Plenty of county jails, but mostly overnights and never more than a few weeks at a time.
In what ways is the claim inaccurate?
Since when does being a libertarian mean you have to have a lot of money?
As for my earning abilities, I eat out every meal (often at expensive restaurants), drink craft beer regularly, and my housing costs as much a week as many people’s does for the month, as does my food bill. My “homeless” ass pretty much never sleeps outside unless I’m camping in the woods by choice. I have investments in the mid-five figure range and I had four years of my life when I made over a million a year (granted I was very young, engaged in businesses both legal and illegal, blew all my money and burned out at a very young age). Also a couple of years in the petition business when I legally made very low six figures and a couple more when I came close to that. Yes, I love to travel and have chosen a career that lets me do it full time. And yes, I see no point in keeping a house or apartment that I would rarely get to see; been there, done that. That’s a little (OK, a lot) different from truly being homeless. I’ve done that too, many years ago. Come back and talk some shit when you have had all those life experiences.
If I wanted to focus on making a lot of money, I could probably do it again; I have done it in the past so why not? I have different priorities in life – an unquenchable thirst for justice above all else. Not that I don’t care about money at all but it’s not at the top of my list. And none of that contradicts libertarianism, which you apparently never understood after all.
I don’t see that as an insult. Libertarians sat on the left in the French Parliament where our political terms left and right originated. So yeah, I have a leftist mentality. In the original sense.
I’m neither an atheist nor do I hate religion. Never have been either of those. You seem to think you know a lot about me that just happens to be completely wrong.
“The Jews” are individuals, just like members of every other ethnicity and faith. Your new collectivist ideology fails to take that into account. And stop pretending you are only talking about follower of Judaism when you bloviate about “the jooz” – you are talking about the Jewish ethnicity and ancestry as well. Your hook nose cartoons are prime example. Hitler and Stalin did not give a shit what religion anyone was when they killed millions of Jews, including many members of my family. Be proud of your new found intellectual tradition, own it; it ain’t about prayers and holy books or anything else that is a choice people make.
BTW who said “the jooz” are off topic? Not me.
As far as I am concerned too. Did I claim otherwise? No.
Whole different kind of anarchists. And I bet who they are attacking are a bunch of white power racist fascists hiding behind the skirts of patriotism as a fig leaf.
Wrong on all counts.
I consider that to be animal abuse, but opinions differ. Is that a big issue where you come from?
Well, yeah, it would be. Luckily I don’t believe anything even remotely close to that.
Much like in the 1930s, and it won’t end any better this time either.
Your fellow collectivists – the ones who ruled the USSR back when I lived there – certainly thought so. You have more in common with them than you realize. Maybe that will be your next wild ideological leap?
I think we would not just survive but truly thrive as we can’t even now begin to imagine if all of those were based purely on mutually voluntary interactions between free people. I know that the more collectivism is imposed, the worse people survive and the more people don’t survive at all for very long.
Would you be more specific? What parts of the crap that you posted on FB do you not actually believe? Or was the bad judgement limited to finally being honest about your true beliefs in public?
I respect the decision.
Yes looking back I suppose there’s a lot of crazy shit that I’ve made public over the World Wide Web. I guess I understand where everybody’s coming from.
The people whom you label as “racists”, including myself, are way more common then your brand of anarchists. People naturally segregate. People naturally associate with people who are similiar to themselves, including based on race. In Chicago the white people live in the suburbs, including Mt. Prospect where I’m based, almost 90% white. The white part of town is crime-free, filled with good schools, and a friendly, peaceful community. The Mexican ghetto is the exact oppposite. Keep in mind I like Mexican people (they’re a hell lot better than all these morbidly obese, materialistic, greedy, spiteful, ignorant lazy Americans, definitively) but the facts are what they are.
Then you have the blacks in the South Side. It’s white Chicago’s official nickname has seemingly become “Chiraq.” Over the Independence Day weekend there were over forty shootings in this city.
People segregate based on race. People are naturally born racial realists. To deny the existence of race is to deny basic science itself.
Peace out homie.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXrnzOrZmmw
There’s a learning curve involved. Anticipating the need to learn and being prepared is better than on the job training with states failing left and right as a lesson of what not to do.
Yes, that was my whole point. Bill and Richard seem to be dead set against that, though. They need to let off the grip a little.
That’s true. More current members should learn more about it instead of just assuming Bill will always be around to take care of it. And he’s not the only current member who knows a lot about ballot access. I happen to be another one and there are some others.
Cloud was just on LNC this past term. Sharon Harris is still actively involved, but I don’t know if she qualified as leadership back then. Hinkle and Wiener were both members in the 70s (dunno about leadership). And so on. I think Bill got involved in the LP in the 1980s; if he was part of leadership in the 1970s that is news to me.
With all that said, I will concede that you are right in the fact that I have been irresponsible on Facebook, to say the least. Lot of bad judgement.
Chris, I’m the one who wrote to Warren and asked that your writing privileges be suspended. You’re going through something, which hopefully is within a norm for a smart kid trying to grow up, but you aren’t showing the maturity to be a writer here.
Paulie,
Well guess what. I wasn’t the one who sold cocaine to poor black kids and assisted in ruining their lives. I wasn’t the one who committed petition fraud and rightfully spent time in prison for it. I’m also not a homeless travelling Gypsy 😉 Someone who claims to be a libertarian yet can barely afford to make enough dough to survive independently at the age of 42 – THOSE are teh signs of what may be a psychological disorder. It’s certainly a leftist mentality.The fact that you were taken seriously by the Libertarian Party and became a member of their national committee shows what a joke they are.
Also you’re an atheist who supposedly hates religion, but the Jews are off-topic, eh?
As far as the entire world is concerned, it is YOUR Anarchist ideology that is extreme. Anarchists are the one who attack all the patriotic Poles who come out to the annual Independence Day March in Warsaw on November 11th. Anarchists are the ones who want no social order, no laws, no morals, no unity, strength, guidance, leadership – they just want total chaos and also the ability to fuck goats if they so please. That’s a pretty ridiculous ideology IMO.
Nationalism is dominating in Europe. Anarchism is a disease and a mental disorder. Do you really think our complex human civilization could survive if we just abolished every government, institution, law, courthouse, prison, public airport, transportation system etc? Of course we wouldn’t lol.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MkRuV0aCcI
The graveyards are full of indispensable people. Someone would step up if Bill and Richard tragically passed on. That’s not to say they shouldn’t have capable lieutenants working toward that day. Bill Redpath has probably forgotten more about ballot access than most current members know. He’s also an example, perhaps the singular example, of an LP member who has been actively involved for 35 years. If any of the leadership from the 70s is still active, it’s news to me. Bill’s dedication is to be admired and honored.
Actually Chris, check your email.
And check the ebonics, it looks as ridiculous as the confederate flags on your Chicagoland/Polish kid facebook page. I double dog dare you to go to the majority black neighborhoods in Chicago and talk about some “niggaz, yo” along with your new white power fascist bullshit. Try to sell some drugs while you are down there while you are at it too. Make sure to put it on youtube.
But yeah, when you post “fuck the jews” and crude anti-semitic cartoons and thumbs up to Aryan Brotherhood and the Ku Klux Klan and “fuck libertarians” and videos by neo-nazi bands like Skrewdriver all over your facebook why are you surprised that the Jewish, Libertarian owner of this website took you down a notch? I happen to be motly Jewish ancestry and Libertarian myself, and I’m surprised he even let you remain a contributor at all or ask you to explain yourself as he did.
Given that you claimed to be a libertarian for a year or two you should already know that “Libertarian, open, uncensored marketplace of ideas” does not now nor has ever meant that private property owners lose freedom of non-association or don’t have the right to deny white power punks the “right” to burn crosses and spray paint swastikas on their property. Property rights and freedom of association trumps freedom of expression, unless you are an anarcho-nihilist, and we are not.
As for hypocrisy, why is a self-avowed fascist like you have now become whining about restrictions of freedom of expression? If the groups you back came to power they would restrict freedom of expression not just on private property but everywhere. Give me a break. Fascists and commies only whine about freedom of expression until they get to be in a position to take it away from others.
As I wrote Warren:
As to your Fauver article I’ll take a look and approve it almost certainly.
Check it, yo. My jigga Warren R be waitin to hear from yo white powa punk ass on the email, son. Word to yo momma.
Krzysztof, your choice to call us “niggaz” when the English launguage has millions of non-offensive words to use might be part of the problem.
One of ya’ll niggaz took me down a notch on IPR contributor status. I submitted a new Fauver piece and it says pending review. Beforehand it’d be published straight away.
Libertarian, open, uncensored marketplace of ideas at its finest 🙂
That calculation is thrown off when you have different parts of the same petition drive paid by different entities. The portion of expenses submitted to each may not necessarily be proportional.
My point exactly. When I was asked to be on the ballot access committee the idea was to start coming up with one. I was then asked (pretty much told, actually) not to be on the committee, and nothing to address this very important point was ever done. I am renewing my offer, now that the LNC has a somewhat different composition. We’ll see if it goes anywhere.
Maybe, maybe not. Neither you nor I have tried to simultaneously qualify a dozen or more states, or to do it while having a wife, a full time plus unrelated career and so on. I try to be a little more understanding of what other people are up against than you do. No one has perfect knowledge or abilities, but until and unless I am placed in the position of managing nationwide ballot access, how well I would handle it remains speculation. And I would have the advantage of doing it full time, with no family or other career taking up the vast bulk of my time. How well would I do trying to manage nationwide ballot access in my spare time while working full time at something else? Dunno, haven’t tried. Rather than overstating my case by blaming Bill for being less than perfect or assuming I could do better when I haven’t been in that position, I think it is more productive to focus on the fact that we can’t rely on one mortal human, no matter who he is or how good or bad he is at it, to have all the knowledge and responsibility for one of our most vital operations. At a minimum, we need backups in place and ready to go.
I can also understand why Bill may not want a committee of people with less experience than he has messing up ballot drive management. Managing ballot drives involves many on the spot moment to moment decisions, knowledge of particular people and how to handle them or to what extent they are reliable, and quckly shifting facts on the ground. A committee could certainly screw that up big time. But, there must be a way to have other people learn the ins and outs of ballot access management while allowing for the quickness and flexibility of decisions that only a solo manager can have. While Bill’s concerns with the committee idea are understandable from that standpoint, they should be taken in perspective.
I don’t want to categorically make the claim that Andy does that I know with any certainty that I could run national ballot acess better than Bill can, much less in my spare time as a volunteer. I will make the claim again that I believe I have something valuable to add to the equation. I don’t think it is helpful to make overstated boasts about my abilities or to blame others for not being perfect when I haven’t had to walk a mile in their shoes. Nor to expect a single volunteer who is trying to manage multiple petitioners on multiple drives in multiple states at the same time and at the same time fighting trench warfare on the LNC to get the funds needed to complete multiple projects successfully and in time against several people who want to use the money for other things or take so long to release the funds that it becomes too late to complete projects successfully, all around a work and family schedule, to always get it right. I do certainly share Andy’s extreme frustration with many specific decisions that have been made. But that is hardly to say that I would not also make mistakes and be frustrating to petitioners if I was managing.
I don’t think that grandiose speculation or virulent condemnation is the right approach. It is better to open the door slowly a bit at a time and test the waters. But I do believe that we need to start opening the door one way or another. Supposing even that Bill was perfect, and no one is, what if he suddenly dies? Bill himself made that point in an LNC meeting about a different topic…yet can’t seem to grasp that it applies to him as well.
The per signature calculation is based on dividing the dollars allegedly spend by the number of signatures allegedly collected. Whether the money was paid on a per signature basis, as gas money and meal tickets, or as health insurance is a separate issue. If you spend $10,000 and get 1000 signatures you were spending $10 per signature.
One regional representative raised another major issue where the yearly financial report was claimed to be false or materially misleading. I have yet to check if the report given to the delegates also had this feature.
One several occasions I have asked what the LNCs working plan was if Richard Winger and Bill Redpath were to be on the same pedestrian crosswalk and were run over by a bus, a fate I hope does not take place. There is no plan.
The numbers may be accurate. I just remembered that a chunk of Alabama pay went through GJ12 before they passed the ball back to LPHQ. ND 11-12 mostly went thru Pickens, not Jacobs, so would not be part of this equation. Given that different parts of the same drives were handled by entities other than LPHQ I am not sure if George’s per signature calculation would work out the same way if those were included. For example, if GJ12 only paid for sinatures and all the expenses from that batch were paid by HQ it would distort our “per signature rate” as George calculates it.
Andy said: “Managing multiple petitioners in multiple states while holding down a full time job and marriage and a number of other responsibilities can not be easy”
I’ve noticed this attitude from you before, Andy. With all due respect, do you have any experience of the time required to raise a family, keep a spouse reasonably happy and take care of a household? It sort of does take quite a bit of energy and time. I’m not complaining because I wouldn’t have things another way, but I thought I’d mention that, in my view, being busy with other obligations is very valid.
“Managing multiple petitioners in multiple states while holding down a full time job and marriage and a number of other responsibilities can not be easy”
This is all a bunch of bullshit excuses.
Managing multiple petitioners in multiple states while holding down a full time job and marriage and a number of other responsibilities can not be easy. I’d hate to even think about trying to do that. As for 50 states we would have had it in 2012 if not for SOS in two states pulling dirty tricks. In Oklahoma we had a deal struck with them to be on as AE, they lied to our lawyer’s face and said they would do it then double crossed us. Contrary to all established precedent the wishes of AE national were heeded over those of the state party. In Michigan the screw job was even more blatant and in multiple stages.
I screw up too sometimes. Let me know please who out there never makes mistakes.
I do want to say though that I could help a lot on the management side if allowed to do so. Not that I would be perfect or that Bill is, no one is. I have some experience that only a full time travelling petitioner can have, as much as Bill has volunteer petitioned (as have I btw) he has not had to rely on it for his livelihood so he does not have that perspective.
Regardless of how well or poorly I would manage, bottom line is we need to institutionalize knowledge and optimize practices. The LSLA panel with Bill, Mark Axinn and me was a step in that direction. However a lot more along those lines needs to be done and also unfortunately I was sick that day.
paulie
July 8, 2014 at 1:01 am
7,590 signatures for those 4 states is obviosuly wrong.
Alabama and ND were each more than that. Your corp had the entire deal on both states, other than the $1,200 that Emmett never returned for work that he was prepaid for and never did in ND.”
The only payment that went through said corp for North Dakota for 2012 was the $1,200 which Emmett failed to return to the LP, as in he basically stole it from the LP. The $1,200 was owed to myself, and 3 or 4 other people.
Most of the Alabama payments for 2012 did go through said corp, however, there were separate payments for Alabama made to Bob Lynch and to Eric Dondero (yes, Eric Dondero is frequently given LP work by Bill Redpath, even though Dondero is despised by most LP members).
Maybe the reference is to ND in 2013. My money was routed through Wes’s PAC on that job, it did not come from LPHQ at all. Wes was I believe back at HQ by that point but had not closed the PAC down yet. So if Andy was paid by HQ on that one, I was not even a subcontractor for his (not mine) WY (not AL) corporation for that job.
“paulie
July 8, 2014 at 12:54 am
To be fair Bill Redpath does know a lot about ballot access. But Bill is a busy guy with a full time job and he is just one man.”
He does not know as much about ballot access as people assume that he does.
The LP has not had 50 state plus DC ballot access since 2000 or 1996 (depending on how you want to count it), and multiple local candidates have needlessly failed to make the ballot as well in several states.
At least the note in the treasurers report for the 2014 pay in Alabama is more accurate.
7,590 signatures for those 4 states is obviosuly wrong.
Alabama and ND were each more than that. Your corp had the entire deal on both states, other than the $1,200 that Emmett never returned for work that he was prepaid for and never did in ND. Maryland would have been, I think, thousands more on top of that. WV was probably only a few hundred.
My pay was never separated out so where does that number come from? No idea.
To be fair Bill Redpath does know a lot about ballot access. But Bill is a busy guy with a full time job and he is just one man. It is beyond stupid for a national political party to make something as vital as ballot access dependent on one mortal human. What do we do when Bill can’t or won’t do it anymore?
Also no board member owned or owns the corporation and ND was completed before I was on LNC.
I don’t know where the figure of 7,590 signatures comes from either. I don’t know if tis figure is accurate or not or what data was used to arrive at this number. I’d have to check through my records to see if I could piece it together to find out how many signatures were gathered in these states during these time periods for the payments in question.
“Alabama limited liability company owned by Board member Ballot access petitioning services – gathering 7,590 signatures in Alabama, Maryland, North Dakota and West Virginia $30,523. Readers will note that the number is about $4 per signature.”
As Paul indicated, this is not accurate information. There is no Alabama LLC of which I’m aware that engaged in ballot access work, and the payments in question went to 11 petition circulators (differing amounts), and it included expense reimbursements for travel (gas, flight, bus), motels, and photocopying petitions.
Yep.
Hopefully the new LNC will take me up on my offer to serve on this committee and/or the two others I have once again volunteered for.
“Ironically, I was drummed off the Ballot Access Committee because I am a petition contractor, however as we see above Ms. Visek, the committee chair, has also been a petition contractor as well. The committee then changed its focus, which was supposed to have included institutionalizing ballot access management knowledge and optimizing practices, to solely the litigation and perhaps lobbying aspect of ballot access. It then proceeded to do nothing.”
The Ballot Access Committee quickly turned into a joke after Paul – who was the LNC member with the most knowledge about ballot access – was pushed off of the committee for a hypocritical reason that does not stand up to intellectual scrutiny.
Even more disturbing was that Starchild was the only LNC member to raise any objection to Paul being pushed off of the committee for no reason.
On the transparency motion, Guy McLendon has now voted aye.
George,
As always, thanks for the newsletter. I just read the whole issue and recommend others to do so as well.
One major nit, although it is not your fault:
You reproduce erroneous information which I had previously written LNC to correct and which has not been corrected.
Alabama limited liability company owned by Board member
Ballot access petitioning services gathering 7,590 signatures
in Alabama, Maryland, North Dakota and West Virginia
$30,523. Readers will note that the number is about $4 per
signature.
The corporation in question is a Wyoming corporation owned by non-board member Andrew Jacobs, and the sums reported above were the totals paid to Andy, myself and several other subcontractors through this corporation. Much of the pay was reimbursement for travel expenses, only some of it was pay per signature. In none of the states listed did the pay rate approach anywhere near $4 unless you count expense reimbursements as pay, except for the very short term emergency petitioning in WV. The North Dakota job ended before I was elected to the LNC.
Naturally, Ms. Visek’s pay was a lower “per signature” cost since she had no travel expenses (motels, gas between states) to reimburse, given that she petitioned only in Illinois where she lives full time. We were not paid at a higher rate than Dianna was, although the above may be taken to mean that we were.
Ironically, I was drummed off the Ballot Access Committee because I am a petition contractor, however as we see above Ms. Visek, the committee chair, has also been a petition contractor as well. The committee then changed its focus, which was supposed to have included institutionalizing ballot access management knowledge and optimizing practices, to solely the litigation and perhaps lobbying aspect of ballot access. It then proceeded to do nothing. I had plans to do actual work on the committee, which I was asked to join (not my idea) but no one wanted to work with me, it appears. I have renewed my offer to the new LNC to serve on this committee as well as Outreach and Affiliate Support, both of which I unsuccessfully offered to serve on last term.
A part of my talk at the LP Florida State Convention
And now I offer a second toast. 2500 years ago, given the choice between exile and death, Socrates chose death. He quailed before the thought of leaving his native country. Now, two and a half thousand years later, we have another man who was willing to flee his country, his family, his home, and the woman whom he loved, all to save his country from the imminent doom now threatening it. I offer a toast to that man, the greatest living American patriot, Edward Snowden.”
July 2014 Liberty for America Published
You can read it here
http://libertyforamerica.com/201407.pdf
Editorial — Your Vote Does Count Twice
Note to Subscribers
Welcome to Liberty for America
Important Information for Candidates
National Convention Meets — Good News
Wonderful Libertarian News
More Convention News
Oregon Controversy Grows
After-Action Report –De-Elect the LNC
Johnson Post-Election Campaign Spending
Stand Up for Liberty
Liberty for America
I would expect nothing less. Also, I don’t see getting the signatures as a problem for them.
Readers may be interested to note that the LNC Judicial Committee elected M Carling as chair by a 4-3 vote over Rob Power. Congratulations to both fo them for agreeing to be a candidate. The Sarwark motion apologizing to the Oregon state party, not to mention the vote to uphold Arvin Vohra’s parliamentary ruling that the resolution was in order, a vote that has already been made and is therefore already open for appeal, are likely to be appealed to the Judicial Committee.
Of course, the appeal needs 10% of the convention delegates, or 1% of the party’s sustaining members. That’s 40 or 150 signatures, choose one.
When the appeal is made, the Judicial committee may well issue a broad ruling rather than a narrow one.
With a broad ruling, there is vast room for mischief. For example, the Judicial Committee might decide that its action of last term was wrongly decided, and that the Reeves faction is our legitimate party in Oregon.
They also game the system in favor of their major corporate partners in a lot more ways than just the obvious ones.
Click on the link that I posted above from CALPERS and scroll through the list of CALPERS assets holdings. It is mind blowing.
What is even more mind blowing, is that this is just one government entity. Keep in mind all of the other state & local government pension funds, school districts, water districts, toll authorities, port authorities, state universities, etc…
Government entities own, or co-own, all kinds of things that most people would not expect them to own.
Andy is right. Corporate-government collusion runs a lot deeper even than most libertarians realize or begin to imagine. That is just the bare tip of the iceberg.
I just looked it up, and CALPERS, the California state employees pension fund, owns over 2 million shares of Target stock, which is worth over $143 million.
http://www.calpers.ca.gov/eip-docs/about/pubs/annual-investment-report-2013.pdf
Note that CALPERS is a government entity, which is funded through taxes. This is just one government entity that owns a stake in Target.
So Target, like many other corporations in this country, is in large part, a government operation.
@Pingback: Jacobs. It’s been mentioned on IPR many times, so it is not exactly a secret.
While it is sad to see all this money going to the Nationalist Socialists,
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/2014/07/06/conservative-group-americans-prosperity-targets-iowa/12262325/
there is a useful message here, namely that if you want people to give you money you need to show them that you will do something useful with it.
Libertarian nominee for Governor of Florida Adrian Wyllie joins Bay News 9 Anchor Al Ruechel and Adam Smith, Political Editor of the Tampa Bay Times on Political Connections, July 6, 2014.
http://youtu.be/RZ8rP-3MMUY
From LP of Texas:
July 4th, 2014
Dear Libertarian,
This Independence Day, we declare our independence from the broken two-party system!
In the past year, our dues-paying membership has grown by more than 50%. Our revenues have doubled. We’ve put 132 Libertarian candidates on ballots across Texas, more than any state in the country. We’ve hosted eight training sessions across the state and an outstanding state convention in Temple. Last week, our Texas delegation traveled to Columbus, Ohio, to represent us at the national convention.
Recent polls show that this year could be a record-breaking year for our statewide candidates. Texans are fed up with the Republicans and Democrats and we happily welcome our liberty-minded friends to find a new home with LPTexas.
Your support enables us to do this important work to stand up for your liberty and your independence year-round. Thank you so much for your continued support.
We wish you and yours
a safe and happy
Independence Day!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xz3CFD2pCXE
The Bozeman Daily Chronicle http://www.bozemandailychronicle.com/ in Montana has a US Senate poll on the right hand side of their website. The poll does mention Libertarian Roger Roots as a choice. If you like to vote for Libertarian Roger Roots just scroll down and vote. The US Senate race in Montana will be a high profile race according to most national people. Thanks for your vote.
Congrats Cody!
I see on Facebook that Cody Quirk got married yesterday. Congratulations to him and his wife!
http://c4ss.org/content/28949
Hobby Lobby — A Question of Agency
Kevin Carson | July 3rd, 2014
Excerpt:
In the case of the wage relationship, we live in an economy where the state has systematically shifted bargaining power to the employers of labor and owners of capital, at the expense of those selling their labor power. The state enforces artificial property rights that make land and capital artificially expensive and scarce for workers, and thereby turns the labor market into a buyer’s market where workers compete for jobs rather than the reverse. Through licensing, zoning and housing codes, the state criminalizes low-capital, low-overhead self-employment and comfortable subsistence (like self-built, vernacular and unconventional housing) — thereby forcing workers into dependence on the wage relationship in exactly the way Enclosure did in England.
In the case of healthcare, the underlying legal regime that made the Hobby Lobby case possible was a vast, interlocking constellation of power that included the regulatory state, insurance corporations, the professional licensing cartels (including the requirement that some medications be prescribed only by licensed physicians), the patent-based pharmaceutical cartel, and utterly corrupt bureaucratic corporate hospital chains.
Obamacare itself merely touches the finance side of healthcare — basically guaranteeing revenues and profits to the existing institutional healthcare delivery monopolies through a combination of mandates and subsidies — while leaving the institutional economic power and price markups on the delivery side untouched. It cements the control of these interlocking, bureaucratic, authoritarian — and in many cases evil — institutions over our lives, and legally compels us to consume their services on whatever terms they see fit to offer. But it uses tax money to help us feed the corporate coffers if we can’t afford to pay for the monopoly services on our own.
Absent all these restrictions, open-source manufacturers could produce currently patented drugs at about 5% of the price, consumer co-ops could pool their purchasing power to buy medicine in bulk the way they now do with food, and anyone could just walk in and buy contraceptives (much cheaper) without a note from their doctor.
If all these forms of monopoly and privilege were abolished, no one would be dependent on corporate employers for opportunities to engage in productive labor and transform their skills and effort into access to the necessities of life. And no one would depend on an unholy alliance of the state, insurance corporations, drug companies and professional licensing cartels for contraception or any other form of healthcare.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jw1FwkFHx3o
Libertarian Candidate for FL Governor Adrian Wyllie issues ultimatum to Florida Press Association
http://libertarian2014.com/2014/07/05/wyllie-issues-ultimatum-to-florida-press-association/
Front page of Columbus Dispatch 5 July 2014.
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2014/07/05/libertarian-candidate-puts-gop-on-edge.html
This will be a fun race to watch.
PEACE
Stormcloudsgathering is back with another great video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNcbsB1Pizg
“Wes Wagner
July 2, 2014 at 11:18 am
While I respect the right of Target to set policies for their private property, I also disagree with the decision they have made”
I do not consider Target to be legitimate private property. First off, Target is a corporation, which means that it is a state created legal fiction. Second of all, Target has received tax payer funding (aka-“corporate welfare”), and a lot of Target stock is actually owned by various government entities (see government Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports for more details). A lot of Targets are built on land which was seized through eminent domain, and eminent domain is supposed to be for public use. Finally, there are multiple court rulings that say that when a property is open to the public to come and go, that the managers or owners of said property have to respect constitutionally recognized rights.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmVAWKfJ4Go
“Thomas Ravenel is in full petition gathering mode. I can’t find if he’s even remotely close to making the ballot, which he has two weeks to do. I’m hearing a generally negative reaction from people in South Carolina, though.”
We already have a Libertarian candidate on the ballot, so adding someone who is a (very, very, very small) l libertarian is a waste of space on the ballot.
He’s doing this to try to bump the ratings of his reality TV show. That’s all he’s up to.
While I respect the right of Target to set policies for their private property, I also disagree with the decision they have made.
I therefor have asked my wife, and I will personally do so as well, to boycott Target and refuse to shop at their establishment anymore.
Paper and kind requests do not stop people who are mentally ill on black box warning psychotropic medications from deciding to use your location as a shooting gallery.
This is a poor decision that puts profits ahead of the safety of human lives — and I will respond in the only moral manner available to me.
You are dead to me Target.
http://abullseyeview.com/2014/07/target-addresses-firearms-in-stores/?utm_content=bufferade29&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
Thomas Ravenel is in full petition gathering mode. I can’t find if he’s even remotely close to making the ballot, which he has two weeks to do. I’m hearing a generally negative reaction from people in South Carolina, though.
Well, I DIDN’T miss 1965, but I wish I had;:
……Lyndon B. Johnson, absolutely the WORST President this nation has ever had; was inaugurated and on January 4 – proclaimed his “Great Society” during his State of the Union Address.
…… 3,500 United States Marines arrive in South Vietnam, becoming the first American combat troops in Vietnam.
……April 28 – U.S. troops are sent to the Dominican Republic by President Johnson, “for the stated purpose of protecting U.S. citizens and preventing an alleged Communist takeover of the country”, thus thwarting the possibility of “another Cuba”.
…..July 28 – President Johnson announces his order to increase the number of United States troops in South Vietnam from 75,000 to 125,000, and to double the number of men drafted per month from 17,000 to 35,000.
Sweet indy hip-hop video which some of you may not have seen yet…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Se0CxTvWnYo
I just missed 1965.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=C2ydVHVGW5U