Steve G.

BTP fraud exposed

In Libertarian on June 17, 2008 at 12:36 pm

As previously noted, the Boston Tea Party’s online nomination convention was interrupted by someone who made multiple accounts on the same IP, and fraudulently voted.

Thanks to LFV’s own Vortex of Freedom, the “whodunit” has been solved. It turned out to be an attempt to alter the results of the convention by some folks in a forum at a site called ourcampaigns.com. More specifically, it was done by a self-described “libertarian socialist” who goes by the name “Rice Beckons“, who is listed on that site as a Democrat and wants to one day run for local office. According to her blog (and as seems apparent from her photo) “Rice Beckons” is a vile little girl, not yet old enough to vote but apparently old enough to commit a felony or two.

Her original plan was to cast all of the fraudulent votes for Robert Milnes, in an attempt to humiliate him. The plan was then changed to cast the fraudulent votes for NOTA.

Lest those incriminating posts disappear down the memory hole, I am reproducing them after the “more” mark.

D:1989 RBH ( 25.6779 points) June 10, 2008 04:50am

And we’ll see if the BTP manages to coexist long enough to hold their convention. And if the party actually bothers to get ballot access anywhere (such as in Louisiana)


D:2109 Rice Beckons ( 269.3113 points) June 10, 2008 08:57am

LOL…

Milnes is just nutty enough to run here.


D:2064 TX DEM ( 216.1336 points) June 13, 2008 10:37pm

This is a breakoff of the Libertarian Party because it was not libertarian enough, right?


D:1989 RBH ( 25.6779 points) June 13, 2008 11:20pm

Well, it could be considered that in some senses (and they have a nice tea-ish color too)

Here’s their platform/program

Program of the Boston Tea Party
Adopted in Convention, August 21st, 2006

1. The Boston Tea Party calls for a complete and unconditional withdrawal of US troops from, and a cessation of US military operations against or within, Iraq.

2. The Boston Tea Party supports repeal of the USA PATRIOT Act.

3. The Boston Tea Party calls for an end to the federal prohibition of marijuana and hemp.

4. The Boston Tea Party calls for the immediate repeal of the REAL ID Act and any and all National ID plans.

5. The Boston Tea Party calls for legislation adopting an annual, regularized increase in the personal exemption to the federal income tax of $1,000 or more, and the additional application of said personal exemption to all FICA/Social Security taxes paid by employees and employers.


D:1989 RBH ( 25.6779 points) June 14, 2008 03:23pm

Ballot Access News says:

The Boston Tea Party was formed in 2006 by Libertarians who were unhappy that the national Libertarian Party platform had been shrunk down so much by the national convention that year.

D:1989 RBH ( 25.6779 points) June 16, 2008 12:19am

[Link]

The Boston Tea Party’s online convention has begun the balloting process for determining its presidential and vice-presidential nominees. For president, Charles Jay and Robert Milnes are running. For vice president, there are three candidates: Todd Andrew Barnett, Chris Bennett, and Thomas Knapp. Voters are allowed to choose “None of the Above” for both offices. The party is using “approval voting,” which means electors can vote for more than one candidate.

Voting started at 9:00 p.m. Eastern on Sunday, and will remain open until 9:00 p.m. on Monday.


D:2109 Rice Beckons ( 269.3113 points) June 16, 2008 01:31am

I just voted for CJ Jay, but as my…er…persona created specifically for that website.

And el oh well, Milnes is getting beat in a landslide for this. Maybe he should just retire from politics and continue to be the weirdo that he already is.


D:2064 TX DEM ( 216.1336 points) June 16, 2008 01:41am

I just voted for none of the above.


D:2109 Rice Beckons ( 269.3113 points) June 16, 2008 01:47am

I think we should all register accounts and try to get Milnes as their nominee, just because they appear to be getting on a ballot or two and it’d be interesting to see Milnes’…uh…shenanigans on the campaign trail.


D:2064 TX DEM ( 216.1336 points) June 16, 2008 01:49am

or none of the above for the hilarious awkwardness that would ensue.


D:2109 Rice Beckons ( 269.3113 points) June 16, 2008 01:51am

Agreed. I just switched to that, myself.


D:2064 TX DEM ( 216.1336 points) June 16, 2008 01:56am

good man, if none of the above wins, I can’t wait for the hilarious “turns out we don’t need ballot access after all” blog entries and then the Boston tea party and those epic fail memes will go hand in hand.


D:2109 Rice Beckons ( 269.3113 points) June 16, 2008 02:02am

My fake persona on there is “Herb Damell”. I wanted to be an actual BTP person, but I’ll go along with None of the Above.😛

Damell’s actually a Libertarian-oriented persona I created for an online government simulator who ended up running for President. Funnily enough, his avatar was Bob Barr before Barr ran for President.

Maybe Maditude should’ve been in this Boston Tea Party primary thingy.


D:410 Joshua L. ( 1398.9385 points) June 16, 2008 11:09am

They stopped new registrations because of fraudulent votes.


D:2064 TX DEM ( 216.1336 points) June 16, 2008 11:10am

that sounds pretty unlibertarian to me


D:1989 RBH ( 25.6779 points) June 16, 2008 12:33pm

Yeah TX Dem, why can’t they just accept geniuses like you trying to sabotage their party?


D:2064 TX DEM ( 216.1336 points) June 16, 2008 12:36pm

If they are holding an online nomination, they have already sabotaged themselves.


D:1989 RBH ( 25.6779 points) June 16, 2008 12:48pm

You didn’t create those 12 accounts, did you?


D:2109 Rice Beckons ( 269.3113 points) June 16, 2008 12:58pm

I have no idea of who did it.

*cough*

Nope. None at all. *shuffles away, mumbling incoherently*


D:2064 TX DEM ( 216.1336 points) June 16, 2008 12:59pm

the 12 accounts deleted all came from Milwaukee IPs… Do we have any members from Milwaukee…


D:2109 Rice Beckons ( 269.3113 points) June 16, 2008 01:01pm

Well, would you look at the time!


D:1989 RBH ( 25.6779 points) June 16, 2008 01:01pm


D:2109 Rice Beckons ( 269.3113 points) June 16, 2008 01:03pm

Wow. It looks like that activity this morning which I have no connection with whatsoever caused a bit of a commotion on the site. I guess that’s what happens when you have a convention involving voting online.

TX DEM: If they are holding an online nomination, they have already sabotaged themselves.

Indeed.


D:2109 Rice Beckons ( 269.3113 points) June 16, 2008 01:12pm

I wonder how their voting’s going to end up now. I presume “CJ” Jay’s going to win.


D:478 Bob ( 625.9046 points) June 16, 2008 02:41pm

They know where you live, Socialist. If CJ Jay comes knocking at your door, don’t answer it.

D:2109 Rice Beckons ( 269.3113 points) June 16, 2008 02:53pm

True enough. I’ll be on the lookout.

Truth be told, if this primary had been for a few other parties, I might not have bothered with stuffing the box for fear of who might come to my house.

Now that I mention it, why hasn’t a certain bald man from Arkansas who I could see going to random houses ever run for President?


D:478 Bob ( 625.9046 points) June 16, 2008 02:56pm

I assume because he isn’t 35 yet. I’m sure he will in a few years, though.


D:2362 Matty ( 173.8765 points) June 16, 2008 03:05pm

It appears that Rice Beckons has been banned by party leaders:

Dear fellow Boston Tea Party members,

For obvious reasons, the integrity of the nomination process must be protected, including from ME … so I’m going to give you as much information as possible.

The following accounts had their votes canceled, and the accounts deleted:

Herb Damell
Bob Wainwright
Jim Castorella
Andy Bender
Jim Hargrove
Pete Marcaul
Shreveport Fairfield
Marcia Ferguson
Emerson Hopewellian
Dirk Carper
My One Dream
Johnny Chassideaux

[Link]


LBT:6157 Maditude ( -13.3051 points) June 16, 2008 03:08pm
Rice Beckons:

Damell’s actually a Libertarian-oriented persona I created for an online government simulator who ended up running for President. Funnily enough, his avatar was Bob Barr before Barr ran for President.

Maybe Maditude should’ve been in this Boston Tea Party primary thingy.

I have thought about it, but I decided to stay with the LP for the time being.

I would endorse a Jay/Knapp ticket.


D:2109 Rice Beckons ( 269.3113 points) June 16, 2008 03:08pm

Ah, okay.


D:1989 RBH ( 25.6779 points) June 16, 2008 03:13pm

I never pegged Emerson Hopewellian as a criminal


D:2109 Rice Beckons ( 269.3113 points) June 16, 2008 03:15pm

I blame all the sushi I ate last night for some of the weirder names, e.g. Emerson Hopewellian or Shreveport Fairfield, that were made up.


D:1989 RBH ( 25.6779 points) June 16, 2008 03:20pm

Why they allowed people to register and vote in the middle of the vote is beyond me.


I:215 User 215 ( 823.6573 points) June 17, 2008 05:04am

You are not a true OCer since you didn’t have Jeff Morris, Jarom Benson, Monster Duck, Karen Stephanski & Elaine Whatsherfacce vote.

  1. […] Comments Nexus on Boston Tea Party nominates Jay/Knapp ticketBTP fraud exposed « Last Free Voice on Boston Tea Party: Voting open for pres. and VPJason_Gatties on Boston Tea Party nominates […]

  2. She looks like Ellen Page, kinda.

  3. That is Ellen Page. The person who uses the picture is a 14 or 15 year old male.

  4. Ah, so it is not a vile girl, it is a vile boy.

    Who is Ellen Page?

  5. “The person who uses the picture is a 14- or 15- year old male.” Good, then I’ll feel less uptight about breaking both his kneecaps and amputating all ten fingers.

  6. I just don’t see the point of trying to humiliate Robert Milnes. It’s not like, figuratively speaking, the perch THAT GUY is on is so high that circumstances demand knocking him off of it.

  7. Thanks, Paulie. I don’t think I’ve seen any of her movies.

    Jim: Obviously, none of the libertarians here (including me) condone physical violence except in self-defense, so I really hope you are kidding about that.

    There are all kinds of things you can do to teach the little jerk a lesson he will not soon forget. You can file a criminal complaint with the feds and his local police department, complain to his ISP and get his internet connection pulled, complain to the site where he posted it so they will ban him, etc.

  8. Just curious: Is it actually a crime to misrepresent yourself in an online poll?

  9. Hiya, Peter. Yes, it is definitely a federal crime to misrepresent yourself in an online poll, especially if you know that the online poll is the official nominating convention of an FEC-registered political party. Off the top of my head I can think of multiple federal laws which criminalize what this kid did.

  10. […] integrity) to correct. As far as investigating its orgins, ElfNinosMom here at Last Free Voice got to the bottom of things before we […]

  11. The feds, huh? Funny how the hard-line libertarians are usually so adamant about how awful the federal government is. They’re constantly meddling with others’ affairs and laying down heavyhanded punishments for relatively trivial crimes that should be dealt with local authorities or not at all. I suppose they should only exist for the most egregious crimes, like when 15-year old boys write funny names into an online poll for a gadfly, internet-based political party.

    You guys are taking this way too seriously. Instead of whining and/or making threats of physical violence towards minors I suggest you approach this as a lesson learned and use it as a compelling reason to use a different voting method next time around. You should be thankful a young prankster found you before someone intent on really undermining your selection process did. You’re really asking for trouble when you conduct the affairs of a supposedly real-world political party via the web. I’d suggest holding an actual convention somewhere or, if that’s not an option, using snail mail ballots like other very small parties. If you absolutely, positively must select a candidate through the internet, do it through private email correspondence. You’re making yourselves pretty easy targets, fellas.

  12. Hello Bob,

    I have no dog in that fight and no vote either.

    However, libertarians oppose fraud, and recognize that one legitimate use of government is to protect individuals from fraud. That appears to be the case here, hence the calls for action involving authority.

    I’m terribly sorry that you seem to think interfering with a part of the democratic process is trivial and being taken “way too seriously.” I’m sure there are plenty of other people who are in the major parties who share that view.

  13. “Libertarians oppose fraud, and recognize that one legitimate use of government is to protect individuals from fraud.”

    Are you saying anarchists aren’t libertarians?

  14. “Are you saying anarchists aren’t libertarians?”

    Considering I never said word one about anarchists, that’s your conclusion and yours alone, and your attempt to change the subject again with a straw man (anarchists) irrelevant to the discussion (voting fraud).

    That dog doesn’t hunt.

  15. Michael, really?

    If “Libertarians…recognize that one legitimate use of government is to protect individuals from fraud”, then it HAS TO follow that government protection from fraud is legitimate, by your words. Since anarchists believe NO government is legitimate, you are NECESSARILY saying anarchists are not L.

    There is NO way around that conclusion, UNLESS you meant “Some Ls.”

    Care to rephrase?

    If this conclusion is incorrect in your mind, please lay out a counter interpretation.

  16. Michael, asking you what you meant by your statement is hardly “changing the subject”. If you don’t understand that an anarchist is someone who doesn’t think that government (i.e. the state) can ever be legitimate, then I withdraw the question.

  17. Personally, I am willing to accept any service from a non-coercive government. But then I’d swap out my solar panels for a good perpetual-motion machine, too, if one was convincingly demonstrated to me.

    I often tell people that if they present me with a government that accomplishes X good without coercion, I’d be very happy to welcome such a government.

    This gets people to consider whether the good they think can only be provided by the state *can* be provided without aggression – at which most people sigh and say some coercion is needed ‘for the greater good’. But at least the idea is planted in their minds that every GOOD they want from government comes at the cost of aggression.

    And, who knows? Someone may in fact someday present me with a state that is constructed to be completely non-coercive.

    It’s like the perpetual-motion machines people keep dreaming up. The concept *seems* to violate what we know about the world, but how interesting and useful it would be to find that we were wrong!

  18. susan, I too would love the option of non-coercive government functions that establish/keep the peace. and getting people thinking is grand.

    if the goal is to get people to think, I personally don’t think advocating unilateral disarmament accomplishes the goal. for most, unilateral disarmament might lead most to believe that Ls are disconnected from reality, which seems counterproductive. importantly, such a position is also misrepresentative, since I suspect most Ls do not advocate unilaterally disarming.

  19. Robert, the counter-interpretation is that you are reading in what is not there, period. Ditto Holtz, who doesn’t appear to like being called out on his straw men.

    Saying one thing about libertarians does not create a “has to follow” implied statement about anarchists. There is no connection whatsoever, and it is illogical to create one.

    Anything else is merely erroneously jumping to conclusions in your own minds.

  20. And none of that has anything to do with the topic at hand anyway, which is the BTP voting fraud issue.

  21. Michael, is it or is it not true that anarchists do not believe government is illegitimate?

    Yes, it’s not EXPLICITLY there, but it IS implicitly, by DIRECT logical inference. If A = B, and C is 2x A, then C is 2x B, too.

    If you believe it’s off point, write an essay. I’m truly interested in your full position.

  22. Mike said libertarians “recognize that one legitimate use of government is to protect individuals from fraud.”

    Anarchists obviously deny that there are any “legitimate uses of government”.

    It’s hardly a “straw man” to ask Mike if his statement was an attempt to define libertarians in a way that excludes anarchists.

    If Mike had said “all birds can fly”, he’d whine that it’s a “straw man” to ask him about penguins because he hadn’t mentioned them.

    Mike is embarrassed because he accidentally said that it would be libertarian of his anarchist buddies in the BTP to invoke the state’s protection against fraud. Mike doesn’t want to talk about this slip, so he angrily accuses us of “straw men” and “changing the subject”. Mike is allowed to introduce into the conversation his characterization of what libertarians believe, but nobody is allowed to ask Mike about that characterization.

  23. “I’m terribly sorry that you seem to think interfering with a part of the democratic process is trivial and being taken “way too seriously.””

    Let’s say that I decided that instead of leaving my money in a credit union or under the matress, I decided to leave it in a pile outside my home with a big sign that said, “PILE OF MONEY.” Okay, now that’s basically the same thing that the BTP did with their online voting.

    Now then, would you be surprised if someone stole my money? If I continued to leave my money outside, should the police continue to waste resources trying to figure out who stole it? Would it be reasonable for someone to laugh at me for my foolishness? It’s like an appeal for a paternalistic gov’t to take care of you.

    And I do think you can have a gov’t without coercion, but you’d have to preserve a reasonable amount of freedom of movement and maybe be organized in a sort of federation…well there’s more to it than that, but I mainly wanted to respond to Mr. Seeback.

  24. Johnny, if that’s your real name (and I doubt it with such a lame moniker), I have only two responses to you.

    1) YAWN.
    2) Happy New Year, if that’s possible.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: