Steve G.

Keaton Agonistes

In Civil Liberties, Constitutional Rights, Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics, Media, Politics on September 8, 2008 at 7:45 pm

I am not an activist, and by many definitions, I’m not much of a libertarian, either.  I have an essentially libertarian outlook — “freedom’s just another word for get the f— out of my face,” as a Bureaucrash poster puts it — but I’m more interested in expanding personal and economic freedom than in reducing government.  I know the two go hand-in-hand, but the point is, no one would call me a purist.  (If I ever get around to finishing my book on my political outlook, ya’ll can read it and then disown me.)

I know very few Libertarians in person, having been only briefly active eight or nine years ago, and then having come back just half a year ago.  I know a lot of you online, though, and I’m happy to say there are few Libertarians I don’t like, and most seem to like me well enough.  I don’t count myself as a member of any faction.  I’m in an odd situation in that I find myself often with the “reformers” on ideology but not at all on tactics, and I find myself with the “radicals” on issue focus and internal LP politics.  I backed Dr. Ruwart for the presidential nomination this year even though her ideas are very different from mine, because I think she has the right focus and right approach toward selling our heterodox ideology.

But again, I am not an activist.  This is in part because of my other commitments and in part because it would conflict with my profession, but really, a lot of it is that I just don’t wanna.  That’s selfish of me, I know, but I’m not going to lie about it to folks I like and respect.  I’m too much of a misanthrope to go out petitioning or to try to run a local party.  I would make a pretty crappy candidate, too.  (If I ever do run for office, I’m sure that will come back to haunt me, but just tell Future Me that it’s as true for him and he should stick to the background.)  I have never been an LP convention delegate, and I’m only a lowly sustaining member.  This is all a long-winded way of saying nobody really needs to care about what I think.

But if you do care, what I think is that the LP is going insane.  If not for the fact that I’ve just returned and I’m sensitive to (completely fair) charges of being politically flaky, I’d consider heading back out the door again.  I do not support Bob Barr for president, though I am glad he is in the party; I hope he will stay.  I think his political evolution is basically sincere, and I give him credit for being honest about where he stands, rather than pretending to be more libertarian than he is.  But he’s not the guy for me.  I like Wayne Allyn Root more than a lot of folks in the LP seem to — he has a libertarian outlook on life, if not a truly libertarian political perspective.  I was quite impressed — and personally touched — that he issued a statement denouncing the imposition of first-ever regulations on homeschooling in the District of Columbia after I contacted him and asked him to say something.  (For those who don’t know, the Roots homeschool their children, and if Dakota Root’s remarks at the LP convention are any indicator, they do so quite successfully.)  But Root’s recent insinuations about Barack Obama’s college days, and other odd statements, make it hard for me to support him, either.

But this was just one ticket, I thought, and after November we could move on — hopefully richer for the media attention Barr and Root had received.  I still think that’s true, but after following the misadventures of the Libertarian National Committee over the weekend, I see the problem runs much deeper than the nomination of an unpalatable national ticket.  I only know what Angela Keaton, Chuck Moulton, and a few others have been able to report, so I do not want to make any assumptions, but it seems like the LNC used a large amount of its valuable meeting time to try to censure and censor an elected representative of dues-paying party members.  If what I have read is correct, the LNC did not decide to prevent Ms. Keaton from liveblogging the meeting in the first place — which would have arguably been a reasonable action, though I wouldn’t have voted for it if I was on the LNC — but instead tried to silence her after she wrote things they did not like.  The two things are very different — the difference between a politician refusing to grant an interview and using his pull to censor criticism after the fact.

So, what do we do?  There is the newly revived Boston Tea Party.  I participated in the BTP’s online convention in June, but then stopped being active because I was not sure I could fully endorse the party’s agenda.  I have worked out this conflict for myself and rejoined this weekend after the LNC hullabaloo.  I am staying with the LP as well, and will keep paying dues for now.  As I said elsewhere on LFV, I am hedging my bets.  (Neither the LP nor the BTP is on my D.C. ballot, so I will either write in the BTP ticket or someone else.  I may write in Dr. Phillies.)

But factionalism troubles me.  As you may know, I write for Independent Political Report, where I get a front-line view of the many socialist and communist parties in the U.S. today.  When it is suggested they work together, they angrily state that each has a irreconcilably different perspective.  There’s some truth to that.  But more often, these parties ruptured years ago over issues of internal politics and personal conflicts.  The LP took quite a hit along these lines in 1983, and I worry another split would be fatal.  The Libertarian vote base is small enough as it is.  I really do not want to see the Libertarian Party, Libertarian Freedom Party, Freedom Libertarian Party, Free Libertarian Party, Party for Freedom and Libertarianism, etc. etc., each drawing a couple thousand votes in each national election from now until the statists blow up the world.

I think the best thing to do is to elect a true reform slate at the next LP convention — one based not on reforming the party’s policies but its internal workings, one that wants openness and transparency in national operations.  Failing that, decentralization and the formation of a network of state and regional parties may be more effective than the current structure.

I have gone on too long here, but if you are still reading: While I am not an activist, there are ways I want to help.  I would be interested in assisting any credible Libertarian media enterprise as a writer and editor — what I do for a career — as well as taking part in Libertarian broadcasting and media.  If you think I can help, please contact me at peter [at] peterorvetti [dot] com or here.

  1. I think it would be great to see you help organize a BTP in DC. The bostontea.us site shows a DC group on Facebook with 9 members. Do you know if DC requires registration and identifiable electors for write-in candidates? Some states have this requirement. Might be handy to get that all together before the election.

    Are there any candidates in DC who agree with the Boston Tea Party’s platform? If so, it would be a good guess that some of them are LP candidates. One way to help both groups is to have your party affiliate in DC endorse candidates who favor smaller government.

    On another thread, and on his blog, Steve Newton calls for an umbrella organization, he calls Libertarian Alliance, which would withdraw the support of their several states affiliates from the LP but continue to operate as LP at the state level. Doing so would be an approach certain to create confrontation on the issue of who owns the name LP, in each of the states.

    Another path forward would be for some state affiliates to disaffiliate with the LP and become Boston Tea Party affiliates. There has been rumor of this happening in several cases.

    I’m not really sure which hits the party loyalists harder. But, one can be sure that much rancor shall be generated no matter what strategies are pursued.

  2. Peter Orvetti is an idiot.

    (I’m just saying that because it seems inappropriate for me to say that and he claimed many posts ago that he’d be writing lots of “Peter Orvetti is an idiot” posts and asked us to call him that.)

    Peter, in my opinion, the LP is very decentralized. All of this banter on the blogs about what the LNC has done or is doing hardly makes a difference to what we’re doing here in Texas and that applies to most states.

    States can largely do whatever they want and sometimes the National LP does things that help the states. Occasionally it does something destructive that hurts particular states but that’s rare despite all of the drama you can find on blogs.

    Take a look at the Libertarian Party of Texas: http://lptexas.org/

    Check out the
    press releases: http://lptexas.org/officialreleases.shtml
    candidates: http://lptexas.org/candidates.shtml
    news coverage: http://lptexas.org/news.shtml

    If you’re not an activist and you read lots of blogs, I can understand you would get the impression that the LNC matters significantly, but it really doesn’t. If you want to be an activist in your state or county or city, there’s not much to stop you unless you let someone with an email account influence you too much.

  3. If what I have read is correct, the LNC did not decide to prevent Ms. Keaton from liveblogging the meeting in the first place — which would have arguably been a reasonable action, though I wouldn’t have voted for it if I was on the LNC — but instead tried to silence her after she wrote things they did not like.

    Actually they did complain repeatedly about her live blogging, and I strongly suspect it figured prominently in Saturday’s long executive sessions (though that is just speculation on my part).

    I don’t think stopping her liveblogging would have been a reasonable action at all. It’s an open meeting and both the gallery and the LNC have every right to report on it.

  4. So, then, why waste time complaining about it? And why make an issue of her blogging in very general terms about executive session issues? It seems to me that members of the LNC should be expected to report to the members about the work done there.

    Clearly, she was repeatedly attacked for bothering to express her opinions. I think the LNC in general has behaved badly, and those who voted to remove Angela from the room were out of line.

  5. Very thoughtful post, Peter.

  6. I don’t think stopping her liveblogging would have been a reasonable action at all. It’s an open meeting and both the gallery and the LNC have every right to report on it.

    I agree. However, a reasonable case can be made that a member of the gallery would be more suited to do live reporting, since a member of the LNC should presumably be paying attention to the meeting itself to the extent of not missing votes or voting the wrong way by accident. Both participating in the meeting as a member and live reporting are time and attention consuming tasks. It is certainly likely that one would distract from the other.

    Also, as I understand it, the resolution about destroying tapes after the minutes are published does not pertain to recordings made by members of the audience. As far as I know, they are still allowed, and I hope party members will videotape the public portion of future meetings. Perhaps we can make those tapes into youtubes and post them here. In fact, I think it would be a good idea.

  7. RE: The Growing Legend of George Squyres

    Peter Orvetti wrote: “Failing that, decentralization and the formation of a network of state and regional parties may be more effective than the current structure.”

    I have been fired and blackballed by Sean Haugh, who apparently only needs to call a State libertarian party, in order to prevent me from working there. I was just told by Joe Cobb that George Squyres told the AZ LP that I am “not to be hired” (on a commission basis!) to gather voter registrations in Arizona.

    Wow!

    The LP wants to limit who can do work for them, that very few people are willing to do (or capable of doing)!

    Since I’d be working on a commission basis, that must mean that I’m a
    1) falsifier of voter registrations (hmm, nope, never done that!)
    2) A heroin addict (nope, no problems like that in my life!)
    3) a violent felon (nope, no felonies ever committed by me!)
    4) totally un-libertarian (nope, I’m more libertarian than Sean Haugh, George Squyres, Shane Cory, Scott Kohlhaas, Russel Verney will ever be. Of course, it’s not really fair to include RV in that group, since he never was a libertarian, and his only claim to fame is that “Republican-Lite” Ross Perot once gave him $50,000,000 to run his presidential campaign)

    What else would cause a State libertarian party (one with money that is looking for hired activists) to not hire someone to do voter registrations for them (on a commission basis!)? …Especially someone who had previously done large numbers of libertarian registrations for that same State Party!

    …So much for “decentralization” or “integrity”. I guess the title of authority that Sean Haugh and friends wield is worth more than a track record of measurable work that I have completed, handed in, and been paid for. Of course, if titles of authority mean more to these people than freedom, then that would make them authoritarians, not libertarians.

    When I was leaving Arizona after having done voter registrations for them for several months, (often in rural areas that noone else would go to), I was asked _not_ to leave. I stated that I could not afford to continue working on LP voter regs, so long as there was a prohibition on gathering them at Universities.

    (Prior to 2005, I had gone to AZ with my brother, and there was no prohibition on gathering the voter registrations at Universities. We had both gathered around 25-50 registrations per day, sometimes more, at the universities. This is without trying innovative tactics, like associating the party with a particular issue, and without setting up tables. If you do these latter things, you occasionally will be harrassed by the University, or kicked out, but can sometimes gather much larger numbers of registrations.)

    Over the past few days week I was considering giving Arizona another try. (Some of their ideas are good there, and I believe I could actually make “hard registrations” work for me, even with a prohibition on working at the large State Universities.)

    Tonight, as a matter of courtesy, I called up George Squyres, and left a message on his machine, letting him know I was considering coming back to AZ and doing voter regs for them.

    Squyres, being the man that he is did not talk to the AZ LP meeting behind my back and tell them that I am “not to be hired”. Nope! That would have been spineless, and lowdown and backstabbing.

    Instead he called me up and told me that Sean Haugh had told him not to hire me, and asked me what the problem was.

    …Oh, no, wait. He did just tell the AZ LP not to hire me, because Sean Haugh has “prohibited me from working in any state for the LP, ever again, for all of eternity”.

    This prohibition is in place as long as Sean Haugh remains employed by the LP.

    Good luck to any political party that treats its activists like this lasting for more than one or two election cycles.

    The Constitution Party has alread hired many of our best activists this election cycle.

    Perhaps only a small, minor party can retain honest people. Perhaps honest, uncorrupted people will simply steer clear of large organizations. Perhaps as the LP grows, it will simply become a “stupid-man’s Republican Party”.

    Initially, I didn’t want to believe that this was true.

    Now, I feel sorry for Wayne Root, who seems to have joined the Libertarian Party just as is was becoming one more “power party”.

    Being that the LP has not paid me for the work I did in WV, and that the “thank yous” that I have received from the LP State Parties that I worked for in 2004 mean nothing to the current LP, perhaps I should simply start my own political party.

    My political party would look a lot like the LP platform of 1994.

    I would not allow any of the parties’ by-laws to be changed. It would simply be a party that was created honest, open, and transparent, and would stay that way until its dissolution.

    I am thinking of calling it the Wyoming Freedom Party.

    It could have been called the Wyoming Libertarian Party, but then it would have run the risk of becoming corrupted by the National LP’s lack of oversight and lack of accountability.

    Apparently, my beloved Libertarian Party has become the Party of fraud.

    Even the Democrat and Republican Parties rarely descend to the level of corruption I have witnessed from Sean Haugh and friends over the last few weeks. They at least have the common sense to usually honor their contracts, and not engage in open fraud and slander.

    Probably because they’ve figured out that politics is the refuge of the liar and the scoundrel, and that people are not to be trusted.

    I’m glad that at least the Libertarian Party was able to teach me that lesson.

    Too bad that’s all they currently have to offer.

    And thanks a lot for the knife in my back, Mr. Squyres. It contrasts well with this white shirt I’m wearing. It appears that Wes Benedict was right about you.

    George, you will continue to get messages from me asking you to be a man and stand behind your slander of me to the AZ LP exec committee, until I am answered. If you have a personal problem with me and my work, you can always feel free to defend that issue in a three way phone call with myself and someone who is objective and unbiased, (like Joe Cobb). If Sean Haugh has a problem with me or my work, then you can always ignore him (since he’s an idiot who couldn’t direct his way out of a wet paper bag, and has cost LP donors thousands of extra dollars in the 2008 election cycle –and possibly one or two states of 2008 ballot access), and judge me solely on my actual track record, not my fabricated track record.

    My advice to people who are frustrated with the LP:

    1) Join the Wyoming Free State Project, and move to Wyoming. (I would have said Alaska, but AK has too many Federally-employed workers, and an expert agent provacateur acting as the LP AK State Chair.)
    2) Create a Political Party that is very decentralized, and that places libertarians on State election ballots, and that typically endorses the LP National candidate. Run people as independents, selling the individual and his message, rather than blind trust in a political party.
    3) Place pro-freedom initiatives on the ballot in WY, such as the FIJA, explained here: http://www.fija.org and here: http://www.davekopel.com/CJ/fija.htm and briefly: As law, FIJA would require trial judges to resume their former practice of informing and instructing jurors to judge both the law and the facts in every civil, criminal and fiscal court case.

    There would have to be such a rout of the National LP in order to regain a semblance of decency that it is no longer worth supporting them.

    Recently, I and a few other longtime LP petitioners came up with a plan to put the LP on the ballot as a major party in every state, so that we could run full statewide slates instead of running our presidential candidates as “independents”. This could be done for pennies on the dollar compared to what the current inferior job(running 2 top of ticket candidates as “independent candidates”, instead of a full slate of candidates as “Libertarian Party” candidates) is being done. Is there any interest at National?

    Nope.

    National seems to only have an interest in keeping their felons, con men, and fraud artists employed.

    I have so many examples of this, it is staggering. The illegal order that Sean Haugh gave to burn valid LP petitions should seriously be looked at as the tip of the iceberg.

    His level of incompetence is so great that most people’s reaction upon encountering it is to simply believe that it can’t be true, and that they must not have the full story.

    Well, the sooner everyone opens their eyes, the better.

    This guy, and all those who support him, are bad news.

    BIGTIME bad news.

    If anyone wants the LP to succeed, they should give me a phone call, and we can talk about what it would take for the LP to succeed, long term.

    Jake Witmer, cell: 907-250-5503.

    If anyone wants to defend themselves or their reputations, I will be happy to open myself to their comments on any radio show that allows me to answer my critics.

    Thus far, my critics have chosen the safety of darkness, and the safety in talking behind my back.

    Let’s see if there’s a radio show willing to shed a little sunlight on the subject. (And when I say “radio show”, I do not mean Eric “Master Shake” Dondero’s blog talk radio show, I mean a show where the host is able to reference objective reality.)

    Don’t get me wrong, I’m not really expecting there to be a large market for truth in the LP. Although I’d like to be proven wrong, it appears that the LP will simply continue to defraud and slander those who actually are libertarians, in the hopes that the un-libertarian mercenaries will do more to promote the party than actual LP members will.

    After what I’ve seen this election cycle, it appears to me that the vultures who were circling the LP for the longest time finally have their cancer-ridden carcass.

    Perhaps if the LP convention nominates an actual libertarian (like Wayne Root) in 2012, the LP will come back into existence.

    Good questions to ask at the LP national convention would be:
    1) Do you think that jurors should be informed before all trials that they have a right to acquit based on disagreement with the law?
    2) Do you think that “voir dire” pre-trial jury questioning should be done away with?
    3) Do you think that this should be a major campaign issue during our candidate’s presidency?
    4) If you were serving on a jury, and the only crime that a person was being charged with was _a_nonviolent_victimless_crime_ would you vote “guilty” or “not guilty”? Why?

    Question #4 is relevant to preventing complete non-libertarians (like Russell Verney) from entering the Party leadership and corrupting it.

    A big part of the problem with the current LP is that Verney is not a Libertarian, and has no integrity. If he were a libertarian, he might know something about how a ballot access drive has to be run, in order to be successful (you don’t hand it off to incompetent and unproven subordinates, and then disengage from it). If he were a libertarian, he might have integrity enough to step in and make a payment to someone his subordinates were defrauding or delaying payment to (Bill Redpath occasionally did this during the 2004 petition drive and before. It comes with any title of responsibility).

    Before 2008, I did business by oral contract with the LP.

    After 2008 noone in their right minds will do that, unless they want to work for free.

    If the LP’s members and leadership don’t have a problem with that, then they are slime, and will not have any libertarian impact on politics, whatsoever.

    -Jake Witmer

    jcwitmer@hotmail.com

    cell: 907-250-5503 –I stand by everything I have said here. If anyone wants a clarification of any point here, then please call me and you will get it.

  8. Jake:

    Executive summary would help tremendously.

  9. Is there a running public list somewhere of all the petitioners that have been blackballed by the LP and for what alleged reason?

  10. Jake Witmer: Fired and blacklisted by Haugh for responding to a defamatory email from Shane Cory (after I was the only LP petitioner who went to WV, to try to save ballot access for the LP there). Shane Cory had CCed Bill Redpath, Sean Haugh, Robert Kraus, Russell Verney, and a few other people. When I responded to this email, I CCed all of those people. I did this after having been hired by Scott Kohlhaas to go to CT for the LP. Kohlhaas was allegedly Haugh’s subordinate at the time (while doing all of Sean’s actual work for him, since Sean is 100% incompetent), so Haugh firing me put me in the awkward position of not knowing if I was hired or fired, since neither he nor kohlhaas would answer my calls after I got Haugh’s email. Details available on request. 907-250-5503 (Haugh had previously responded like an offended soccer mom when I very generally criticized the LP’s lack of capitalization on the Wesley Snipes tax case. Apparently, he identifies himself with the LP “do-nothing” camp.)

    Andy Jacobs: the LP petitioner with the highest average daily signature counts in the nation. Fired by Haugh after he refused to remain silent about being defrauded by Scott Kohlhaas in NE in 2006. After having his payment delayed for a year (and paying the other petitioners similarly defrauded out of his own pocket), the LNC covered Scott Kohlhaas’s debt, and retained him as a (very expensive and over-rated) contract employee. Andy was put into the awkward position of signing a statement that forbid him to speak about his defrauding (which he signed under duress), or risk never being paid by anyone (this was seriously the threat that was made!). As leverage used to force Andy to sign, other petitioners were threatened with not being paid if Andy refused to sign (thus making Andy’s coerced signature legally non-binding).

    Paulie Cannoli: defrauded (never paid) on the NE drive by Scott Kohlhaas in 2006, and blacklisted by Kohlhaas and Haugh. Also made whole on everything except the interest he was owed by the LNC. Ask him for the details since he blogs here.

    Gary Fincher: Longtime activist who always worked on an oral contract. Defrauded many times, for many reasons. In NM, the NM party attempted to not pay him for voter registrations he did that lacked SSNs, after they told him that the SSNs were not required. Fincher filled in random numbers for the SSNs, and then handed them in anyway, in order to get around being defrauded. Since then, he has been blacklisted, even though upon examination, the LP (under Dasbach) sided with Fincher and paid him for the registrations that were counted as valid. The problem was initially caused by Joe Knight siding with the NM Sec of State in investigating the Finchers because they “registered too many libertarians”. Typical bullshit caused by weak-minded “Libertarians” agreeing with the state over their own activists out of simple fear. Fincher was later fired and blacklisted for calling up a woman who registered to vote with Fincher, when he called her to put a piece of info that she had forgotten onto her registration. The woman got frightened that her identity was being stolen and called the police to investigate Fincher where he was working. The cops vindicated Fincher, but the whole thing blew up on him anyway after the local LP was called. Fincher was also defrauded by Scott Kohlhaas in NE in 2006. Kohlhaas remains a salaried employee of the National LP. Kohlhaas is one of the highest paid petition drive coordinators retained by the National LP, because he actually does (very expensive) work himself (Scott Kohlhaas performs 100% of Sean Haugh’s job, but would prefer not to have the attention that a loud title such as “Political Director” attracts).

    Mark Pickens: Mark Pickens was briefly fired and blacklisted, and then re-hired by Haugh, when Haugh’s allegations against him were proven baseless. (It was alleged that Mark was allowing Gary Fincher to turn in petition signatures to him, in order to be paid for them. When it turned out that Fincher was on the other side of the country, Haugh was forced to either look like the nutjob he is, or rehire Pickens.) …In all fairness, Haugh is probably not the one responsible for doing all the erratic blacklisting, since he is not smart enough to get much done on his own, and there appears to be a structure and a purpose to the blacklisting. It is all the people who have made enemies of Kohlhaas and his longtime buddy, Eric Dondero. Eric Dondero hates all libertarians who are actual libertarians. He tries to smear them as anarchists, since he’s a partisan “Republican”. Kohlhaas is systematically trying to destroy anyone who knows that Andy Jacobs is speaking the truth about him online. It is simply Scott using Sean as a tool to protect his racket (of dramatically overcharging LP donors for ballot access work of a fairly decent quality.)

    =================
    If your name belongs on the above list, email it to me, jcwitmer@hotmail.com , along with a brief summary of how you were treated by the new regime that thinks it’s OK to arbitrarily and without evidence “fire and blacklist” LP members / activist petitioners from doing vital LP work.

    Haugh, Cory, Kohlhaas, Verney, etc… Have also pissed off and alienated a few other petitioners, none of whom are philosophical libertarian activists (and who thus are not on this board). Those people simply got ripped off, and vanished into the night, like Kohlhaas, Cory, and Haugh’s conception of “good petitioners”.

    “Good petitioners” don’t complain when they get ripped off! They go to a hostpital and die of diabetes-caused bone infections! …Maybe Fincher will finally be a good petitioner in their opinions, since he’s in that situation, partly because he couldn’t get medical care after being ripped off by them in NE, and was too proud to accept medical welfare.

    Interestingly, Bill Redpath sympathized to me that Kohlhaas has been a longtime activist in the LP, and that he couldn’t “just fire him” (or Haugh).

    I guess Fincher doesn’t deserve that same recognition, even though he’s the guy who trained Kohlhaas how to part Libertarian voters from their D and R partisan registration labels.

    Who will Arizona hire now that I’m blacklisted? …I’m really curious! Probably Kohlhaas. After all, he will need the work after this, and Sean Haugh doesn’t have a problem with him (and the AZ LP will be more ‘desperate’ by then).

    Interestingly, if Kohlhaas goes to AZ to do voter registrations, he will gather them all at the Universities, even if there is a prohibition on his doing so (…because he doesn’t give a shit about local LPs being effective).

    Allegedly, the AZ LP doesn’t want “soft registrations” (registrations from college kids that move away after 4 years). Hard registrations are difficult though, so if they require zero “soft registrations” they will not likely find anyone capable of doing the work they desire, and will be less of a force in politics than they are now.

    I hope that adds to your understanding Chuck. Feel free to call me for clarification. The problem with posts and stories like this is that they are full of so many supporting details that they quickly become tedious and boring to anyone who wants the truth.

    It’s a lot of BS to wade through.

    Thanks for caring,

    Jake Witmer
    907-250-5503

  11. https://lastfreevoice.wordpress.com/2008/08/08/80107-signatures-two-hotties-and-mismanagement-of-the-insane-professional-lp-petitioners/

    The above link is probably the best place for details on the issue. I include my last post here at that link as well.

    Thanks again,

    Jake Witmer

  12. Mr. Benedict is probably advocating the correct approach.
    Build your state organization and ignore, to the extent possible, the national org. If even 1% of voters are libertarians, then there is no reason virtually every county in the U.S. should not have an active group of at least 5 libertarians.

  13. Wes,

    I’m all for inappropriate comments between friends, though apparently that’s enough to get one censured by the LNC. Alas.

    I agree that the real action is at the state level, and the big successes are in well-run states like Texas, N.C., and a few others. I guess what I’m suggesting is more of a loose-confederation approach — maybe with no national office at all, with state party chairs electing a few “national” officers from their own for national convention planning purposes, etc. This may not work, or even be advisable — I’m just spitballin’.

  14. The proposal to elect a reform slate has been around for a long time, and has regularly failed. The party’s conservative wing is happy where it is. The party’s radical wing — I believe the post election analysis will show that trying to build anything on the radical wing is pointless.

  15. […] the election is over, I hope to help re-establish the LP of the District of Columbia. As I’ve noted elsewhere, I am not a leader — I’ve discovered throughout my career that I’m bad at running […]

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: