Steve G.

Posts Tagged ‘Angela Keaton’

Georgia LP passes resolution against LNC’s proposed Keaton suspension

In Activism, Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics 2008, Politics, Protest on December 2, 2008 at 12:09 am

The following is a Resolution passed by the Libertarian Party of Georgia this evening, with regard to the LNC’s Resolution of Discipline regarding LNC At-Large Representative Angela Keaton:

Resolved, the Libertarian Party of Georgia expresses its deep disappointment with the Libertarian National Committee in its continued activities regarding Angela Keaton and it neglect of its proper Party duties, and expresses a desire that the LNC get back on proper course for the LP by actually working for the growth of the Party and advancing public policy in a libertarian direction, instead of engaging in self-destructive, alienating, embarrassing, and pointless internal squabbles.

You can read about the LNC’s Resolution of Discipline here, including a PDF of the actual Resolution.

Call to Arms: Resolution of Discipline against Angela Keaton

In Activism, Boston Tea Party, Crazy Claims, Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics 2008, Lies and the lying liars who tell them, Politics, Protest on December 1, 2008 at 10:15 pm

The charges against Angela Keaton have finally been disclosed (well, leaked, LOL) and Stewart Flood is behind them.  He wrote it, and he plans to present it on Saturday.

Grab your popcorn, folks, because this one is a doozy.  Strangely, it reflects far more upon Stewart than it does on Angela.  After reading it over, it’s my opinion that Stewie needs both a humor implant, and a life.  It must have taken him forever to dig up all this crap on Ms. Keaton, and most of it obviously was just a joke on her part, an exaggeration on his part, and/or taken completely out of context.  The rest I’ll have to check into, but as far as I’m concerned, just glancing over it based upon what I have seen, the charges are a joke.

Of particular interest is the allegation that Ms. Keaton provided material support to another political party (assumably the BTP).  What exactly was Bob Barr doing, both when he sat on the LNC and was the LP’s presidential candidate, while his PAC contributed thousands to Republican candidates, if not providing material support to another party?  Why wasn’t he brought up on disciplinary charges? 

The resolution is to suspend her, but the suspension will be rescinded if she submits a written apology to millions of people within seven days, on about 20 differerent alleged “offenses”, to be published in LP News.  This is clearly in my opinion nothing but an attempt to humiliate her, given the very weird nature of the charges, and force her to bend to the demands of the reformers.  

So, here’s your assignment, LFV contributors and readers.  Dig up all the dirt you can on every single person she has allegedly harmed, according to the resolution.  I know there’s a lot out there, because I have received a lot of it over time.  I’m talking everything, from Stewart allegedly claiming to have been a Unabomber suspect, to men on the LNC calling Angela a “fucking bitch”.  Post it in comments.  

Here’s the “Resolution of Discipline”:  resolution-of-discipline-for-angela-keaton

Beatin’ Keaton

In Libertarian Party-US on December 1, 2008 at 5:29 pm

It seems the fate of elected Libertarian National Committee member Angela Keaton is the main event on the LNC agenda this weekend.  Perhaps the LNC, meeting a month after the Libertarian Party ticket receieved 0.4% of the national popular vote, elected zero senators, zero members of Congress, and zero governors, when an incumbent president and vice president may be guilty of war crimes, and when an incoming president has the potential to become a latter-day Franklin Delano Roosevelt, feels there is nothing more pressing to be discussing.

I cannot speak to the charges against Ms. Keaton, because, at least from what information I have seen, no one knows what they are.  Even in a court system many Libertarians decry, defendants are told what they are being asked to defend themselves against.  The LNC seems set on Guantanamo-style prosecution.  Maybe 9/11 really did change everything.

I have never met Ms. Keaton (nor anyone on the current LNC, except for a brief introduction to Dr. Mary Ruwart years ago), but we have had many friendly exchanges online and I consider her a friend.  Because of that, even if I did know what was alleged against her, I might have a hard time being objective about it.  It does seem to me that the months-long public discussion over her fate has been intended to pressure her into resigning.  If I were her, I would probably do so — not because it’s the right thing to do, but because I have the intestinal fortitude of a particularly nervous kitten.  I am prone to hyper-sensitivity and to take slights personally, which is part of why I am not running for LNC or any other office.  Ms. Keaton, thankfully, is made of sterner stuff.  I hope she will not resign, and in fact will continue her run for the 2012 presidential nomination, even if — or especially if — removed from the LNC.

According to Dr. George Phillies, Bob Barr headed a political action committee that contributed money to non-Libertarian candidates who faced Libertarian rivals during Barr’s tenure on the LNC.  I do not believe Mr. Barr was suspended or removed for these actions.  Therefore, I hope when the LNC considers whatever allegations are raised against Ms. Keaton, it will use this precedent as a low bar.  Is anything she may have done worse than actively working against the Libertarian Party’s candidates while on the LNC?

LNC hires parliamentarian in Keaton removal bid

In Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics 2008, Politics on December 1, 2008 at 12:37 am

The LNC has hired a parliamentarian to help in its seemingly neverending quest to remove At-Large Representative Angela Keaton.  The report in question (see below) states that there is no provision in the Bylaws for removing an LNC member, as there is only a provision for suspending LNC members.  Then, it makes the leap of logic that a suspension (which is by definition temporary) will turn into a removal (which is by definition permanent) should Angela not appeal to the Judiciary Committee, or should her appeal be denied.

That is incorrect.  If there is no provision for removing an LNC member in the Bylaws, then she cannot be removed.  She can only be suspended.  Furthermore, a loss at the Judicial Committee level would mean only that the suspension had been upheld, and not that she had been removed.

While this may seem like nitpicking, since the term of suspension could technically be for the rest of her LNC term, it is not.  There is a huge difference between a suspension and a removal.  It is the difference between being suspended from school for three days, and being expelled from school.  It is the difference between showing up at work drunk and being told to go home and sleep it off without pay, and being fired for it.  There are many real-world examples of the significant difference between suspension and removal.  

In this case, there is yet another significant difference, and that is whether someone else will be permanently appointed to her position on the LNC, and whether that person would change the balance of power on the LNC.  

The report also states that the LNC needs 12 votes to suspend her.  Are there enough LNC members willing to vote against her for her to actually be suspended?  Perhaps, perhaps not.

Here is the document.  opinion-removal-lnc-at-large-1

Now, for a poll.

The LNC shows its true agenda

In Boston Tea Party, Censorship, Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics 2008, Politics, Protest on November 27, 2008 at 12:19 am

The Agenda for the December LNC meeting – which looks like someone has quite an agenda indeed – has listed 30 minutes for “Discipline of Angela Keaton”.

How strangely interesting that Angela Keaton was unaware of this item until the agenda was released. Quite the contrary, in fact, since she was under the impression that the “discipline” discussed at the last meeting was now moot.

There are several theories floating around about that agenda item, and one of them is that Angela is being disciplined for wearing a Boston Tea Party t-shirt. It appears that at least one LNC member snooped around her Facebook until he found the allegedly incriminating photo.  Why on earth would someone do that, unless they had a predetermined agenda?

Problem is, though I had seen the picture numerous times, to the point that I knew exactly which photo was in question even before I saw it, even I didn’t know it was Angela in the t-shirt, since the photo doesn’t show her head or face.  Honestly, I thought it was Miche modeling the t-shirt.  That being the case, how could it possibly be a breach of duty even if, arguendo, it is Angela?

The other theory is that during the last LNC meeting, Angela was given ten days to apologize, but she has not done so; and as a result, rather than the item being moot, it is being revisited.  I did not believe then that the LNC acted professionally or with the best interests of the LP at heart in their behavior during the last LNC meeting, and I still do not believe they acted appropriately.  

One thing is abundantly clear, and must not be forgotten: Angela Keaton is a two-term elected member of the Libertarian National Committee. She is the most active LNC member by far with regard to keeping the membership apprised of party actions and business.  As such, she is irreplaceable.  To even attempt to remove her yet again, will cause irreparable damage to the morale of many libertarians at a time when the LP can hardly afford to spread ill will.  

Last but certainly not least, this silly vendetta makes the LP look grossly unprofessional to those who are outside looking in.  We don’t see the major parties comporting themselves in this manner regarding strictly internal questions, because they know how damaging it would be not only to their personal reputations, but the reputation of the party they represent.  The LP doesn’t have a built-in constituency like the GOP and the Democrats.  The LP cannot afford behavior which makes them look like they’re coming apart at the seams from the inside, yet that’s exactly how this appears.

It is one thing when libertarians fuss and fight with each other.  It is something altogether different when the elected governing body is engaging in that behavior.

This is not how such internal problems – assuming it is a problem at all, and in my opinion it is not – should be handled.  Furthermore, I don’t understand why 30 minutes is being set aside for the LNC to publicly humiliate an elected representative, while far less time is set aside for far more substantive matters.

Frankly, I am disappointed.  I was under the mistaken impression that the LNC is comprised of adults. Instead they appear to be perpetually in kindergarten, where they put people in “time out” for alleged offenses, then keep badgering them until they apologize even when they don’t believe they did anything wrong.

Seriously, LNC, is badgering Angela Keaton worth 30 minutes of your meeting time, when your presidential candidate fell so far short of his pre-nomination promises that the end result was nothing short of humiliating? Is it worth it to burn up that time when you should be discussing the fact that your presidential candidate gave money to Republicans running against Libertarian candidates? Is it worth it so you don’t have to discuss your VP candidate’s racist comments in Reason Magazine?  Is it worth it to burn up that time when the LP is, financially speaking, the rough equivalent of the Titanic?  Or is burning up time the whole point, since “disciplining” Angela Keaton will eat up time more enlighteningly spent analyzing and discussing what went so terribly wrong with the Libertarian Party this election season, and what part the LNC played in that failure?

The LNC already ate up a great deal of its only pre-election meeting with “disciplining” Angela Keaton, when they had far more important things to discuss; and perhaps if they had spent their time doing what it is that they were elected to do, the election would have fared far better. How long is this vindictive agenda against Ms. Keaton going to continue? Why wasn’t this discussed on the LNC talk list, rather than dragged out into full public view? There is really only one possible reason for that, and that reason is to publicly humiliate Angela Keaton.

Why should anyone take the LNC seriously, when they repeatedly waste precious quarterly meeting time trying to remove an elected LNC member, rather than discussing the important issues which affect the party as a whole?  I find the LNC’s behavior on this subject to be extremely distasteful, and downright embarrassing.  

Nevertheless, Angela Keaton has every right to appear at that meeting fully prepared to refute the charges against her.  However, that will prove difficult since she has not been formally apprised of the specific charges against her, nor has she been apprised of the identity of her accuser(s).  

What kind of kangaroo court does the LNC plan to hold in San Diego?  Again, it disgusts me, as it should disgust all libertarians.  It is an act of aggression against a woman elected by the membership, through its delegates.  This is not Ms. Keaton’s first term, so it’s not as if they didn’t know exactly who they were electing, or why they were electing her.  Ms. Keaton was elected to do exactly what she has done to get her into this predicament, which is to represent the voiceless within the LP through whatever means necessary.  That was the will of the membership.  Now, she is paying a heady price, and to what end?  What does the LNC stand to gain from her departure?  That is a question best posed to the LNC member behind the agenda item in question, as well as for any other LNC member who supports this action.

One thing is for sure.  This insistence by the LNC to continue its vendetta against Ms. Keaton will only harm the Libertarian Party, its members, and the libertarian movement as a whole.  Longtime respected libertarian activists are rebelling already; and without the activists, the LP may as well not even exist.

For the above reasons, I respectfully suggest that those who keep pushing this anti-Keaton agenda should be the ones disciplined, for openly engaging in a public vendetta against a fellow elected representative, thus causing serious harm to the party they are duty-bound to protect.

Keaton/Shinghal to seek presidency in 2012

In Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Politics, Presidential Candidates on November 11, 2008 at 11:25 pm

Gawd (sorry-was home in NOLA all last week), I didn’t want to do this but the timing may be perfect and I want to show that I can be as opportunistic as Barr/Root.

I’d like to officially announce the Keaton/Shinghal 2012 ticket. We already have some support on our Facebook page and we have BIG fundraising plans. The unofficial plan is called ‘Stripping across Texas’ but we’re not like most strippers; we know we’ll have neither diploma nor presidency in the end and we don’t plan to sell it that way. With that plan in place alone, we guarandamntee that we can out raise Barr/Root by at least $100k. 

Now, I know that y’all might be worried about qualifications. Well, I haven’t any except the abilities to balance a checkbook, drink like a fish and well, never mind. Let’s just say that of all the men in my past I only count on 3 not voting for me. Keaton has a Masters in Poli-Sci and a law degree. (That’s why she’s the top of the ticket- that and Knapp came to our room in Denver and found her awake before I.) As far as media goes I think that perhapsreason might do us a solid and cover us in a non-judgmental way. Angela does have some rather racy pics on the web and , I have the support of many from the cult of Ron Paul. (Disclosure crap makes me admit that I’m part of that cult…)

There are 3 things about Keaton/Shinghal 2012 that set us apart from many others who might seek your delegate vote. They are: 3) We’re both married to reputable men who are fastidious about their standings in the eyes of their peers and government. In other words, there will be nothing of substance to block our run in the eyes of the state. 2) We’ve no small children- retarded or otherwise- to occupy our thoughts on the campaign trail. 1) We’re fucking Libertarians and we can make the most hostile people friendly in a face to face because we follow the guiding light of our political philosophy and all religions and that’s the Golden Rule.

George Phillies: “In Support of Angela Keaton, Part 4”

In George Phillies, Libertarian, Libertarian Convention, Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics, Libertarian Politics 2008, Politics, Presidential Candidates, Protest on October 17, 2008 at 10:16 pm

The following was written by George Phillies, and is posted with permission of the author.

In Defense of Angela Keaton, Part 4

In a prior post, I reminded readers that the Libertarian National Committee had voted to ask Angela Keaton to resign. They then considered a motion to expel Keaton from the LNC. It is inescapable that Keaton will soon need a coherent defense against the forthcoming motion of expulsion. In this and following messages, I offer such a defense.

In the prior post, I proposed that Keaton’s acts were far less serious than the acts of Bob Barr, who while on the LNC had through his PAC supported Republican Federal candidates.Here I turn to actions of National Chair William Redpath. When Redpath was not penalized for his acts, it is transparently unjust to penalize Keaton.

Acts of William Redpath.

1) Redpath is and was the Chief Executive Officer of the Libertarian National Committee. As such, under LNC Bylaws Article 7, Section 4 “The Chair is the chief executive officer of the Party with full authority to direct its business and affairs…subject to express National Committee policies and directives…”

In accord with its authority Under Article 8 of the Bylaws, the LNC has voted a series of policies. These National Committee policies from the current LNC Policy Manual, are listed in part below as Appendix A. The next several articles will examine what are in my opinion failures to follow these requirements, failures for which Redpath has not been sanctioned, leading to the conclusion that Keaton should not be sanctioned for her less serious actions.

We first turn to Policy Manual


B. The Chair serves as chief executive officer of the Party, reporting to the LNC, and in that capacity:

1. is responsible, along with the LNC, for ensuring the direction and management of activities, affairs, properties, and funds of the Party is consistent with the Party Bylaws and LNC policies;…

The most important of these bylaws statements is of course the Statement of Principles, eschewing the use of theft and fraud for political gain.

I begin with what is in my opinion an attempted use of theft and fraud, broadly defined as intended by the original authors of the statement of principles, for political gain, by the LNC, an attempt that in my opinion could not be continuing if Redpath had discharged his duties under B1. However, Redpath has not been sanctioned for what appear to me to be his failures here, so Keaton should also not be sanctioned.

I refer to the LNC lawsuit attempting to steal my ballot status in New Hampshire.

1. In my opinion there can be no reasonable doubt that this is an LNC action, even though the LNC is not yet named as a plaintiff in the suit.

First, the non-local attorney in the suit represented himself to me as having the LNC as his client. Furthermore, I am assured by eyewitnesses at an LPNH meeting after the suit was filed that LPNH state committee members did not know who the non-local attorney was, and, if this is true, it is scarcely credible that he was retained by LPNH. Also, the LPNH vote to adhere to the suit reads

From: Brendan Kelly
Date: Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 2:59 PM
To: Seth Cohn,, “Sandy C. Pierre”, Faith Cook, Avens O’Brien

At about 2:00 PM Aug.27th 2008 I’m calling a meeting of the LPNH E.C. for the purpose of addressing the question of our joining with national LP in their substitution suit. This meeting will be open until 2:00 PM on Aug. 28th 2008 or until an unbeatable up or down vote with a quorum has been reached.All internet response should be sent by reply all.

I Brendan Kelly as chairman call this meeting to order. I’d like to make a motion that the LPNH join the LP substitution law suit to be filed as plaintiff’s. Do I have a second.

That is a motion purely and entirely to join ‘the national LP’ suit. No attorney, presented with this motion, could have added LPNH as a plaintiff, as has been done, unless this was a national LP suit.

2. Point 15 of the LNC suit as filed reads

15: Upon information and belief, anticipating that he might win the nomination but have insufficient time to obtain the 3,000 valid nomination papers required for access to the New Hampshire ballot, Phillies caused the requisite number of nominating papers to be circulated and filed on his behalf prior to the convention.

These claims are false. Presenting them was an act of fraud in the sense of the statement of principles, though perhaps not as a matter of law. The National Chair was not sanctioned for allowing this act of fraud to go forward, and therefore Keaton should not be sanctioned for her alleged acts, which were clearly less serious.

Why are the claims false? In Spring, 2007, LPNH staged a nominating convention. You can read about it in the LPNH newsletter Libertarian Lines, Volume 32, Issue 3

I didn’t attend the convention, but my campaign Treasurer Carol McMahon did. Liberty Lines page 1, bottom, “Nominations” says in part “The main item for the convention was candidate nominations for President down to Executive Council. We made nominations for each of these offices…In the end, our final list of nominees were: President: George Phillies,” Having identified me as a candidate, Liberty Lines then twice says “please start collecting petitions for our candidates.”

It was the LPNH State Convention that asked its volunteers to collect signatures for me. The claim that I caused nominating papers to be circulated and filed is a baldfaced lie. However, our National Chair has not been sanctioned for allowing these false claims to go forward, and therefore Angela Keaton should also not be sanctioned for less serious acts.

3. Point 21 of the LNC lawsuit claims “The plaintiffs have sought to substitute the Barr candidacy for the Phillies candidacy and to have Barr listed on the November ballot as the sole Libertarian candidate for President.” Point 22 claims in part “The Secretary of State has refused to permit such substitution…”

These claims are also false. Presenting them was an act of fraud in the sense of the statement of principles. The National Chair was not sanctioned by the LNC for allowing these false claims to go forward, and therefore Keaton should not be sanctioned for her alleged acts, which were clearly less serious.

Why are these claims false? First, Barr is already on the ballot, and therefore the proposed change is not “substitution”; it is my removal from the ballot. Furthermore, at no time prior to the LPNH ExComm vote to join the lawsuit did the LPNH ExComm vote to ask Secretary Gardner for anything of the kind.

4. Point 23 of the LPNH lawsuit claims that failure “to list Barr on the Libertarian ballot as the sole Libertarian Party candidate for President” would “unduly burdens their rights to cast their votes effectively” and “to associate for the advancement of political beliefs”.

The claim that you cannot vote effectively because someone else is on the ballot is absurd on its face. In fact, if this suit were to succeed, the right of attendees of the LPNH State Convention, not to mention my petitioners and supporters, to associate for the advancement of their political beliefs, would be stolen. This taking would be an act of theft in the sense of the statement of principles, if perhaps not in the legal sense. The National Chair was not sanctioned by the LNC for allowing this attempted theft of freedom of association to go forward, and therefore Keaton should not be sanctioned for her alleged acts, which were clearly less serious.

You may correctly assume that I could go on at great length about this suit, but I think I have made my point.

We’ll return in Part 5 to other LNC member acts whose actions were more serious than Ms. Keaton’s.

Appendix A. Segments from the LNC Policy Manual.

I first quote from the Policy Manual as to the duties charged by LNC vote to the LNC Chair:



A. The Chair serves as the presiding officer of the LNC and of all National Conventions and, in that capacity:

1. guides the deliberations and activities of the LNC according to Party Bylaws, convenes an LNC meeting according to the Party Bylaws, serves as a full voting member of the LNC and serves as a nonvoting member of all committees appointed by the LNC;

2. guides the deliberations and activities of National Conventions according to the Party Bylaws and adopted Convention Rules.

B. The Chair serves as chief executive officer of the Party, reporting to the LNC, and in that capacity:

1. is responsible, along with the LNC, for ensuring the direction and management of activities, affairs, properties, and funds of the Party is consistent with the Party Bylaws and LNC policies;…

C. The Chair represents and serves as the chief spokesman of the Party as appropriate, including: representing the Party to the public, including the business community, media, other political and educational organizations, government agencies, and elected officials;

not to mention



Article VII.1.C.2 The selection of articles, their layout and the graphics for LP News, the relative amount of space assigned to articles, advertisements, Party announcements, and regular features shall be the responsibility of the Chair except as detailed in this Policy Statement.

The exception for the LP News Editor makes clear that the responsibility of the Editor is for production, so that VII.1.A. 2. provides

Final responsibility for the production of LP News must rest with one person: the Editor. It is the responsibility of the Editor to produce the best possible publication within the guidelines of these policies.

Among the LNC policies that the Chair is responsible for carrying out are


Party resources shall not be used to provide information or services for any candidate for public office prior to the nomination unless: (a) such information or services are available and announced on an equal basis to all Libertarians who have declared they are seeking that nomination, (b) such information or services are generally available and announced to all party members, or (c) the service or candidate has been approved by the state chair.


Party resources shall not be used to provide information or services for any candidate for party office unless: (a) such information or services are available and announced on an equal basis to all Libertarians who have declared they are seeking that office, or (b) such information or service(s) are generally available and announced all party members.




A. Employees are bound by the Bylaws and the policies adopted by the LNC. A statement to this effect shall be included in all employment agreements and contracts between the Party and its employees.

D. Except as otherwise noted in this Policy Manual, no employee of the Party shall:

1. endorse, support, or contribute any money,

2. use his or her title or position, or

3. work as a volunteer, employee, or contractor

to aid (1) any candidate for public office prior to nomination, or (2) any candidate for Party office.

George Phillies: In defense of Angela Keaton, Part 3

In Corruption, Iraq War, Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics, Libertarian Politics 2008, Personal Responsibility, Politics, Presidential Candidates, Protest, Republican, Torture, War on October 6, 2008 at 9:17 am

The following was written by George Phillies, and is reproduced with permission.

In a prior post, I reminded readers that the Libertarian National Committee had voted to ask Angela Keaton to resign. They then considered a motion to expel Keaton from the LNC. It is inescapable that Keaton will soon need a coherent defense against the forthcoming motion of expulsion. In this and following messages, I offer such a defense. [With thanks to Elfninosmom for some text that I am borrowing.]

In the prior post, I proposed that Keaton’s acts were far less serious than the acts of Bob Barr, who while on the LNC had through his PAC supported Republican Federal candidates. However, the LNC did not subject Barr to any penalty. When Barr was not penalized for far more serious acts, it is transparently unjust to penalize Keaton.

Of course, for this defense to be valid, there is one key question:

Did Barr’s PAC actually support real Republicans?

Search the Bob Barr Leadership Fund filings for the current Congressional cycle. A list of Republicans running for Congress as incumbents and supported by Barr’s PAC includes the names Gingrey, Ros-Lehtinen, Flake, Hayes, Hensarling, Kingston, Pryce, Rehberg, Jones, and Shays. Barr’s PAC also supported incumbent Republican Senators, including Chambliss, Specter, Coleman, Craig, Graham, Hagel, Sessions, Smith, and Sununu.

Yes, that is the same Sununu who is running against my good friend Libertarian Ken Blevens for U.S. Senate in New Hampshire.

Every one of these Republicans was elected from a state with an organized Libertarian Party. A loyal Libertarian would want every one of those Republicans to face a Libertarian Party opponent. A loyal
Libertarian would never have dreamed of supporting Republicans, all of whom would hopefully have Libertarian opponents.

In fact, while Bob Barr sat on the LNC, Barr through his PAC supported every Republican I named above, yet faced no penalty from the LNC for his acts.

One might try to argue that some of these Republicans turned out not to have Libertarian opponents. If they had no Libertarian opponents, you might try to argue that support for the Republican made no difference, because the support did not cause a Libertarian to lose.

In 2007, you couldn’t predict which Republicans would not have Libertarian opponents.

Besides, when you donate to a candidate, your money counts twice. It counts once for that candidate. It counts again for the candidate’s party. When Bob Barr through his PAC donated to Republican candidates, he was strengthening his Republican Party, at the expense of our Libertarian Party.

The LNC did not respond to Barr’s actions by imposing any penalty, so therefore it would be unjust for the LNC to impose a more serious penalty on Keaton when her deed was less severe.

Finally, you might seek to argue that those Republican Congressmen were libertarians in disguise, flying a false flag to enhance their chances of election. Such a claim is devoid of merit.

Nine of those ten Congressman opposed leaving Iraq. Nine of ten supported military kangaroo courts. Eight of the ten voted to give Federal Courts jurisdiction over the Terry Schiavo case, voted to support warrantless wiretaps on your telephone, and voted to pervert the Constitution to install a ban on burning the flag. Torture is supported by a majority of these Congressmen.

These Congressmen were in no sense Libertarians. See Appendix B for more detail.

Every Senator I list as being supported by the Barr PAC voted to allow warrantless wiretaps and monitors of virtually every form of communication in America. Every Senator listed voted to reauthorize the Patriot Act. Every Senator listed voted for a Constitutional Amendment to ban flag burning. Eight of the nine voted to fund the war. Seven of nine voted against an antiwar withdrawal motion. Six of nine voted to advance a constitutional amendment blocking gay marriage.

These Senators were in no sense Libertarians. See Appendix C for more detail.

However, the LNC did not take punitive action in Barr’s case, so therefore it would be unjust for the LNC to take punitive action in Keaton’s less serious case.

APPENDIX A. Here, name by name, are the Congressmen Barr supported and a table showing their individual votes on some critical issues

Flake 1 2 3 4
Gingrey 1 2 3 4 5 6
Hayes 2 3 4 5 6
Hensarling 1 2 3 4 5 6
Jones 5 6
Kingston 1 2 3 4 5 6
Pryce 1 2 3 5 6
Rehberg 1 2 3 4 5 6
Ros-Lehtinen 1 2 3 5 6
Shays 1 2 3

(1) Vote 836: S 1927: The bill gives U.S. spy agencies expanded power to eavesdrop on foreign suspects without a court order. Civil liberties and privacy advocates argue the bill jeopardizes the Fourth Amendment privacy rights and allows for the warrantless monitoring of virtually any form of communication originating in the United States.

(2) 7/12/07 Vote 624: H R 2956: This bill would require the president to begin reducing the number of U.S. troops serving in Iraq 120 days after its enactment and would require most troops to be withdrawn by April 1, 2008.

(3) 9/29/06 Vote 508: S 3930: Military Commissions Act

(4) 12/14/05 Vote 630: H R 2863: Supported a ban on cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of detainees held by U.S. forces

(5) 6/22/05 Vote 296: H J RES 10: This vote approved the proposal of a Constitutional amendment to ban the desecration of the American flag.

(6) 3/21/05 Vote 90: S 686: Gave federal courts jurisdiction in the Terri Schiavo dispute.

APPENDIX B: Here are Senators the Barr PAC supported with a table showing individual votes.

Chambliss 1 2 3 4 5 6
Coleman 1 3 4 5 6
Craig 1 2 3 4 5 6
Graham 1 2 3 4 5 6
Hagel 1 2 4 6
Sessions 1 2 3 4 5 6
Smith 1 2 4 5 6
Specter 1 2 3 4 6
Sununu 1 2 3 4 6

(1) Vote 309: S 1927: This amendment to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 passed 60-28 on August 3. Civil liberties and privacy advocates argue the bill jeopardizes the Fourth Amendment privacy rights and allows for the warrantless monitoring of virtually any form of communication originating in the United States.

(2) 5/24/07 Vote 181: On the Motion: Fund the war. This $120 billion dollar package was passed in the Senate by an 80-14 vote on May 24.

(3) 3/29/07 Vote 126: H R 1591: This $122 billion war spending bill calls for combat troops to begin withdrawing from Iraq this summer.

(4) 6/27/06 Vote 189: S J RES 12: This vote would have given Senate approval to a proposed constitutional amendment that would give Congress the authority to ban “desecration of the American flag”.

(5) 6/7/06 Vote 163: On the Cloture Motion: A Senate cloture vote on the gay marriage amendment failed, effectively killing the amendment.

(6) 3/2/06 Vote 29: H R 3199: Reauthorized a slightly modified version of the 2001 USA Patriot Act.

The Barr is closed, the W.A.R. is over

In Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics, Politics on September 13, 2008 at 3:06 pm

Unless some major uproar takes place between now and 51 days from now — and in Libertarian politics it seems there has been a major uproar every 20 minutes or so for the past week and a half — I do not plan to comment publicly any further on the LP’s Bob Barr/Wayne Allyn Root ticket until at least Election Day. I have made up my mind about the ticket, and to engage in further carping would be counterproductive. This is not to say the efforts of those in the LP who are working to replace Barr are “carping”; just that since I have no official role, my own input will not help anyone much.

For those who wish to see Barr off the ballot and a more palatable candidate inserted, I wish you luck. For those who have decided to continue to back Barr despite all the hullaballoo, I wish you luck as well. In the end, this presidential campaign is about expanding the libertarian cause, and I hope any sincere effort at doing so will be fruitful.

Despite my fears last weekend that I might not be long for the LP, I have actually become more committed to it over the past few days. I see a lot of good folks trying their best to deal with difficult realities, and to work through genuine differences on approach and philosophy. So I will be sticking around, and after 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 the show, though I am a fine lieutenant. I again offer my help to any credible libertarian effort that could use it.

While I am sticking with the LP, I also have worked through my concerns about the Boston Tea Party and gotten involved with it as well. (I expect to vote for the BTP’s Charles Jay/Thomas Knapp ticket in November, though I always reserve the right to change my mind right up until I cast my wasted vote.) I do not see the LP and BTP as competitors but as complements. I do not feel the need to restrict myself to one favorite food, favorite film, or even favorite religion, so why should I feel bound to support only one political party? The goal is the expansion of freedom, not the triumph of a faction. I am favorably disposed to Dr. George Phillies‘s new Liberty For America organization as well.

I admit to early skepticism about the BTP. When I thought about it, the only reasons were that it was tiny and new, and the LP was long established. But those who first heard about the “Livingroom Party” in December 1971 must have found it tiny and new as well, and I expect more than a few felt sheepish about casting their votes for John Hospers, on the ballot in two states. Is that much different from Charles Jay in 2008, on the ballot in at least four?

It was perhaps fate that led me to start reading “Radicals For Capitalism” by Brian Doherty (a.k.a. Mr. Angela Keaton) this week. As a reasonably bright fellow who has a hard time getting his head around theory and philosophy, I am finding it very helpful in understanding the philosophical roots of what we, and I, believe. So until the election, I will stick to my studies (and to my IPR reporting and LFV commenting), and leave the LP political battles to the warriors.

Robert’s Rules And a Plea to Angela

In Libertarian Party-US on September 10, 2008 at 11:50 am
Brian Miller wrote:
An individual sitting on the body cannot be ‘removed from the room’ unless he or she is also removed from the body through a 2/3 vote. […]  LNC has one of two options — it can pass a resolution condemning Ms. Keaton (which she has full right to debate and participate within, including a vote, as a sitting member). Or, it can vote on expulsion, which requires a 2/3 vote of the committee. It may not ‘kinda expel’ a member.
RRONR pp. 626-628 discusses “Breaches of order by members in a meeting.”  It says in part:
A motion offered in a case of this kind can propose that the offender be required to make an apology, that he be censured, that he be required to leave the hall during the remainder of the meeting or until he is prepared to apologize, that his rights of membership be suspended for a time, or that he be expelled from the organization. The offending member can, by majority vote, be required to leave the hall during the consideration of his penalty, but he should be allowed to present his defense briefly first.
It’s arguably a breach of order to divulge information from an executive session in near-real-time (i.e. before the weekend’s meeting ends, and more executive sessions are possible).  The LNC Policy Manual excerpts at make it clear just how serious the LNC is about confidentiality of such sessions.
Miller also wrote:
As a finalist in the Northeastern Parliamentary Debate Society for several years in the mid and late 1990s, and a semifinalist in the world competition, I am quite familiar with Roberts’ Rules. […] RR is not a difficult book. It’s about 90 pages long. Read the damn book and get to know it.
RRONR is 704 pages long.
Lots of people involved in this contretemps are shooting themselves in the foot, but as Chuck Moulton says, that doesn’t necessarily mean they are breaking a rule in some actionable way.  Libertarians, of all people, should know that not all ill-advised actions are (or should be) against the rules.
I don’t like Angela allegedly breaking executive session confidentially about contract discussions, but I tend to like the idea of LNC members live-blogging their meetings.  LP convention delegates are grownups who can decide for themselves whether to keep Angela on the LNC, and whether her commendable dedication to transparency outweighs public comments like this (at :

they need to put more effort into those displays if they want to be taken seriously. Not by me of course. I gave up months ago. The LP is hopeless.

Angela, please issue the narrowest and most succinct apology you can muster for this alleged breach of executive session confidentiality, and then stay on the LNC.  The LNC needs to keep hearing you speak for your constituents, and all of us members need to keep hearing your reports on what the LNC does.  If you want to give up on the LP, that’s fine, but those of us who haven’t given up think it would only hurt the Party if you accept the martyrdom that was offered to you.

A message from Angela Keaton

In Civil Liberties, Constitutional Rights, Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Politics on September 8, 2008 at 2:54 pm


After my first night of more than four hours of sleep, I have a little, a wee little, clarity. I’m also more objective now that I have a little distance and some protein. In the meantime, I have agreed to nothing but to listen and contemplate the advice of others.

That said, I have much fondness and appreciation for all of you. Each of you should do what is best for your activism. You were included on this thread because you are champions of anything peaceful. I will be fine. We should be laughing. Our detractors are clowns. As I am fond of saying, getting kicked out of the LP is like fired from a titty bar. It doesn’t go on your permanent record. No one in the outside world cares.

Mush over, now back to matters at hand:

Everyone needs to take a step back and evaluate the whys as much as the what. We are in an ideological and structural meltdown. While it is fun to speculate which mommy issues M Carling might be laboring under or what went so wrong in Aaron Starr’s potty training, this is about whether we are part of the libertarian movement or merely an adjunct to the GOP death machine.

We will never have peace from those who wage war. When my support is coming from unexpected places like Admiral Colley who said he wanted a resolution like Hogarth’s since Atlanta, we need to be reminded what is at stake. Among my high crimes is my refusal to raise money for a ticket which includes a mildly repentant war monger, initials Wayne Root.

As to the events of yesterday:

Have not been able to keep up with volume of emails and blog post generated by the LNC meeting. Everyone has a version of events, usually self interested or representing a collective concern. Particularly among those who are now eyeing what may be empty seats on the LNC. No plans to respond to every claim of “factual error” since the level of posturing and feigning “fairness” is getting silly even with my taste for the absurd. People can see that for what it is. Further, I was not allowed to see the last set of proceedings so I have nothing to go on but my impressions of the credibility of those reporting. Still quite unclear about much of it.

After the meeting adjourned, agreed to listen to Ruwart, Hawkridge, Wrights and Fox in a private lunch yesterday. They have certain concerns, not the least of which is losing my vote on the LNC. This is serious since Haugh (who has been very fair to me) pointed out that if I leave, Mattson is likely my replacement. That weighs heavily on me. Mattson is a conservative with all the baggage that term carries as suggested by Rockwell’s brilliant speech at the Rally for the Republic. (I’m dropping the term “Christian Right.” It’s offensive to our many libertarian Christian brethren.)

While this is not confirmed, Mattson is the sixth place finisher and I am the “weak link.” It would be nearly impossible to knock Ruwart off the LNC without a mass exodus from the LP. If I’m gone, they have gotten rid of one pesky anarchist without alienating authentic libertarians who will hold their noses and vote for the ticket.

Now, I will only be allowed to stay if I tender an apology on the narrow action of writing about Carling and Redpath’s statements during the executive session with a promise that I never reveal anything said in executive session again. I violated a rule that I think is unjust. I don’t know how sincere I can be but if Wrights, Ruwart and Hawkridge need me in a plan to return the party to the movement, I will consider taking one for the “libertarian wing of the Libertarian Party.” Besides, as party stalwarts like Gene Hawkridge and Ernie Hancock have said, the best one can do is object to executive session before the session and on the record.

Also, Hawkridge asked that I write a detailed but non inflammatory statement about the various forms of harassment sexual and bullying from Carling and Starr. Need to run this by Doherty, my mother and our lawyer first.

Now for the “shocker.” Cory has a very different version of his conversation with Carling as well as his take on charges by Starr and Carling that Cory and the Barr campaign have not cooperated with the LP. There is a dispute between what is the former Root campaign and the Barr camp over donor lists and access. I’m merely a prop in this drama. Very likely, Cory and I will speak man to man this week in DC. If he did not make those statements to Carling, Cory is the one who deserves the apology from me for not extending the courtesy of at least asking him whether he made such statements.

Meanwhile, don’t let the minor differences amongst us to divide us. Sullentrup has not only slandered Knapp repeatedly but is actively encouraging a schism. Don’t allow such a little man a great victory.



CALL TO ARMS: LNC at it again, voting on whether to ask Angela Keaton to resign

In Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics 2008, Politics on September 7, 2008 at 12:50 pm

This is a follow up to Angela’s liveblog for today, as well as the statement re Cory.

The LNC has removed Angela Keaton from the room, and are voting on whether to ask her to resign.

I have spoken with Angela, and she has stated that she will not resign.

This is the second day in a row that the LNC has attempted to remove this elected representative from the LNC.

Twitter updates from Angela Keaton:

Sitting in exile with Gene Hawkridge. Will I be excommunicated? You get better due process when three rabbis or the holy see meet.
14 minutes ago from web

Then it got really WEIRD…the Barr campaign sent message to Redpath to request to keep me on the LNC.
5 minutes ago from web


Lee Wrights and I spoke in the hall.

He asked me to that if the offer is made for me to apologize to do it b/c he needs me.

Shane Cory sent me a text telling me not to step down.


Updates from Twitter:

Meeting adjourned. Told by Redpath after the fact that the motion was that body should ask me to resign. That’s all. 9 minutes ago from web

Have no idea what the wording is or how anyone voted. Stewart Flood is out of my life. 8 minutes ago from web


From Twitter:

Knapp: please report. My hotmail is done. I may owe Cory an apology. He may never have said those things. Curious. 21 minutes ago from web

Cory scapegoats Angela Keaton to get out of entering into contract between LNC and Barr campaign

In Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics, Libertarian Politics 2008, Lies and the lying liars who tell them, Politics, Presidential Candidates on September 7, 2008 at 10:08 am

The following is part of Angela Keaton’s Day Two liveblog of the LNC meeting. However, due to its importance, it rates a post of its own.

Then it got weird.

I left an executive session. I had no idea this was coming.

Said in ExSession. I’m within my rights to reveal this:

We don’t have a contract b/t the Barr Camp and LNC b/c….Cory asserted to both Carling and Redpath that
they were afraid that someone would reveal data. I didn’t know what the hell they were talking about until
it was further explained that Cory was afraid that I would misuse “data.”

Why this is ExSession? No idea. To Redpath’s credit, he, Ruwart and several other believed that this was an excuse. That I am a scape goat.

Well, doesn’t that beat all?


(Later message from Angela)

Kafka? Oh for the love of G-d! I’m about to be censured for blogging about the accusations against me.

I’ve been kicked out of the room b/c I blogged about the Cory accusations against me.

Oh, Afghanistan Res passed easily! While I sat in exile along in the hallway, the Admiral took his bags to the airport. “Hang in there,” he smiled.

UPDATE: The LNC is taking a vote on whether to ask Angela Keaton to resign.
From Twitter:

I was allowed back into make a brief defense. They are now going to vote to ask me to resign.

Angela Keaton: Day 2 LNC meeting liveblog

In Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics, Libertarian Politics 2008, Politics on September 7, 2008 at 10:03 am

This is Day Two of LNC member Angela Keaton’s liveblog of LNC meeting. You can see Day One here.

Same disclaimer applies as yesterday. If you want a goddamn transcription, make it yourself.

These are my words and mine alone. –Keaton

8:10am Agenda

Carling on Audit
Boring monotone. Explains the audit co purpose. They are happy with …/Wilcock (sp?)

Asked Kraus to negotiate K. Saved 1k. Reviewed by staff.

Starr: What is cost per year? 11k for 2008 plus 2k for midyear review.

Redpath: Any sort of mang report w/ comments, will there be one issued?

Carling: yes. Unlike last audit, “big thumbs up.”

Report from Barr/Root Campaign

Carling: Obv media is doing great for Campaign. Barr is getting more and better and root is getting better than our past Pres. Fund Raising is sig better than past campaigns, but not nearly as good as the media coverage. Several people have vol to make calls including Root, Carling. Promised by Shane Cory a list of names. Did not get it. Told by Cory that Carling was not needed since they had “plenty of money.” (Carling quoting Cory.) Claims that Root, Bruce Cohen and others received similar treatment.

Redpath: That is contrary to what Cory said.

Flood: That’s not what Russ (Verney) told me.

Starr: Is there any particular agreement with the Barr/Root campaign and us?

Redpath: There is not. Spoken to Cory several times. Better with me to talk to Shane. There seems to be no interest in such.

Lark: Seemed to remember in Denver such was agreed upon. Need to flesh out.
Was this an “F-U”?

Carling: It was polite.

Redpath: if we explore it further, we have to go Ex Sess

Wrights: I want to hear it.

Lark: not subject guests to ExSess again until later

Jingozian: Why is there is no mention of Libertarian party on signs, bump sticks, website, carries more
recogn than the name Barr. Link it to something to some clout.

Carling:would have to get back to you.

Redpath: Wants answer to that question ASAP.
Asks Carling to call Cory.

Sullentrup: my sign says both Barr and Lib.

Wrights: It is a concern for website but not as important stickers/signs.
Everyone knows Obama is a dem. If we are running the campaign to mirror big two…

Starr: Agreement with Wrights.
Typically pols will put on signs and website that which get them votes.
Will focus on name and party where party will not help.

Jingozian: Now most americans don’t like two parties, they would find LP a pleasant alt.

Starr: The premise is that they would be more happy with us.

Redpath: Verney wanted to run campaign that would appeal to independents. We can stand to benefit by appealing to independents. 3% to retain ba status. If we get 3% we would get ba in many places.


Ruwart: LNC vote for law suit.
First heard of it when Phillies told me about it. Haugh reported it to last term but not new. Should we be voting for entering lawsuits? Always potential for backlash. I would like opp to discuss any lawsuit in any case where I am a plaintiff.

Dixon: The co should vote unless it is urgent and EC then can vote on it. Aware in Tx that
Obama/McCain lawsuit over missed deadline.

Starr: 2 issues. Question of size. If it is the equiv of small claims, no reason. Budget line item,
do I use cts to change public policy? (Starr’s voice like Carling’s is lower than usual. Can barely hear.)

Lark: Tech speak
Policy manual that the very requirement of budget and spending is part of the Co. LNC should vote.
Anytime LP takes legal action, at least EC.

Dixon: How many lawsuits per year? Do we need to stream line?

Kraus: report from Hall.

Hall: We pay for some law suits where we are not the plaintiff (LP Ohio, example)

Dixon: how many?
Hall: 2 suits.

Starr: Should Lark work on resolution for next meeting on law suits?
(This is quite manipulative–AK)

Jingozian: Wait, Wrights is waiting to say something.

Wrights: The issue is not money. My butt is on the line. Trying to help, but there is anticipated suit. I had to get this info from a member while I sit on the board. What does our name go on?

Redpath: I want to apologize to anyone who did not know and if I contributed to it. I deal with it everyday. I apologize for any problems that caused. It is controversial for some people but not for me. There is one ticket for the LP coast to coast. I would do the same if it were Mary Ruwart or Daniel Imperato.

Is there is a move to extend for 5?

Starr: bring it back to next meeting.

Open LNC list.

Can’t type this b/c it is my issue.

Starr, Karlin and Flood don’t want it.

Dixon wants to know if list can be divided b/t that is ExSess and other discuss.

Starr thinks that people won’t use the list b/c years ago someone used to forward the list.
No one will keep open discussion.

Wrights: we have two lists in NC. Read only one list. Everything on EC list is read only for any
member who wants it. Chair uses other list for confidential.

Karlin: everything should be treated confidential b/c accidents with scroll down lines one too many.

Hawkridge: blogs, members would be friendlier if they knew what was going on. It is a meeting.

Dixon: Does everyone use NC exclusive list because…?

Haugh: I have resentment b/c secret list was were my overthrow as NCED was plotted.

Hinkle: Basic problem. Perception of closeness and not enough information. If there is a perception
by members, we need each LNC member to solve that one on one to let members know what is going on. Solution in search of a problem. Two lists will not solve.

Starr: Would like to move on to next item of business.

Dixon/Hawkridge objection.

Move to extend.

Lark: Torn. I try to keep everyone informed. been both at large and regional. Too easy to make accidents. List is really for biz. Not sure how large a problem.

Dixon: Hinkle has it right. Self regulating. Regions can remove non-open members. At Large should not be reelected.

Starr: No win. We either don’t disclose or members don’t really understand the issues so you spend all your time justifying. People just bash you.

Folks, you are not going to get an open list. Your only solution is to stop reelecting the same people to the LNC. You elected these people. You are responsible.–AK

Flood: someone started meet up list to communicate with regions. These meeting would be much longer if we did not have the ability

Kraus: This would be an absolute burden for staff. You would have to pay to have someone do this. Who would stay in that job for more than a week?

Wrights: to Kraus, you are making something more complicated than it needs to be.

Tom Stevens.

Hawkridge: T.S. Member of Jud. Co. Stevens wants to funnel votes. He has no party loyalty. Was member of BTP. Hawkridge explains Stevens camp history.
Would like to ask him to resign?

(I don’t care about this issue. Some old kook is party hopping to from one fake party to another including this one. It’s just the LP, folks. Just the LP.–AK)

Starr has RR objection. Two types of offenses. One in meeting, one out of meeting.
In order to discipline, you have to give notice, have them show up….this motion out of order.

Debate b/t Wrights and Redpath over whether Carling can speak on the narrow parl issue.

Wrights make heroic stance by demanding that RR quotes come WITH citations.
Someone asks if the LNC even can remove someone from Jud. Co.

Starr suddenly decides that asking someone to resign is a big deal (unless you are me of course. These people are movement bottom feeders.)

Lark says it makes him queasy. Take it up in December.

Wrights: Jud. Co is indy committee which is elected by delegates. We have no ability other than ask (Hall nods head.)

Redpath: Why make a decision when we can punt? (That’s leadership, boys.)

Sullentrup: Send him a letter to find if he is a member of another party.

Postponed. Starr is beginning to run rough shod over Redpath.

End of tape.


Starr wrote a “shut Keaton up” motion. It’s not actually going as far as he thought. Wrights and I don’t want any part of it.

Dixon, Hinkle, Fox, Jingozian, Hawkridge, Sink-Burris think it is either a.) overbroad, 2.) already addressed in RR, 3.) other ways of handling this.


Bylaws Results

latham, karlan, moulton, h. scott, redpath, sarwark, oates, starr, bennett, hawkridge and manske


Kafka? Oh for the love of G-d! I’m about to be censured for blogging about the accusations against me.

I’ve been kicked out of the room b/c I blogged about the Cory accusations against me.

Oh, Afghanistan Res passed easily! While I sat in exile along in the hallway, the Admiral took his bags to the airport. “Hang in there,” he smiled.


I was allowed back into make a brief defense. They are now going to vote to ask me to resign.


Angela Keaton updates

In Civil Liberties, Constitutional Rights, Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Politics on September 6, 2008 at 6:56 pm

Ok folks, I need to sign off, but you can follow Ms. Keaton’s live updates at I’m told you do not need to sign up for Twitter in order to view the page.

CALL TO ARMS: LNC trying to censure Angela Keaton for writing on blogs

In Activism, Constitutional Rights, Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics 2008, Politics on September 6, 2008 at 5:46 pm

I just received a call from Angela Keaton, and the LNC is attempting as I write this to censure her for writing on the blogs.

I heard their bullying of her for myself, with my own two ears (well, one ear, it was on the phone).  They clearly didn’t want me to hear what was going on, but as she openly pointed out to them, she needs to protect herself.

Why should the LNC care what Angela Keaton does, unless of course they really are hiding something as many have suggested?

If Angela Keaton is censured for exercising her First Amendment rights in the so-called “Party of Principle”, the LP should be censured by its members.  No money, no support for the Gestapo organization that it has become.

I will keep readers updated.

Angela Keaton liveblog from LNC meeting

In Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics, Libertarian Politics 2008, Politics, Presidential Candidates, War on September 6, 2008 at 12:47 pm

Angela Keaton is At-Large Representative to the Libertarian National Committee, and one of LFV’s favorite Libertarians. The following was written by Angela Keaton during the LNC meeting, and is reproduced here with her permission. Per her request, no changes will been made unless I see a spelling error. Readers will need to refresh the page to see updates.

Pre-show live drama:

Rachel calls me. I missed my wake up call so I can’t eat the wheat based junk that the LP serves. She wants me to come down ASAP. Rumor is that Dan Karlan wants to move to censure me over my work for

Then for what ever reason, not. Stewart has some other idea. My setting up for live blogging has already made for snide and nervous comments. Austin Petersen is going to tape the meeting.

After some comment Robert Kraus makes about Sullentrup, duct tape and me. I loudly comment that Brad Spangler is my twitter buddy. (I’ll cut Ferguson some slack but Keaton don’t like the Sullentrup play with the actual libertarians of LPMO.)

Announcing that I work for Antiwar is like Jolie and Pitt announcing they are fucking. Both pretentious and obvious.

Stewart will try to play both ends. What is it about me that makes Scott Lieberman and Bill Hall nervously twitter about me? Maybe they’ve never seen a part-asian or or something.


The hand out is “electronic communications decorum.” (aka the anti-Keaton resolution, well not “the” anti-Keaton resolution, there will be many.)

Haugh and I discuss a Caucus with Mr. Wrights. None of yr business.

Kraus and I engage in assorted smart assery and cynicsm.

New staff piece of ass, Casey. Dark, young and easy prey for a cougar like myself.

Guests include two members of the “Snowbird” Caucus: Audrey Capozzi, Vicki Kirkland, and Audrey’s son Bob.

Chair of LPMaryland Bob Johnston (?), Party stalwart Gene Hawkridge, Jeff Dimit, the stunning blonde alt Heather Scott.

M Carling, Alicia Mattson are also here but we only cover the stars.

Donny Ferguson is here as well. I felt him up once when I was drunk. Reform Caucus people are so uptight.

The Admiral keeps staying hello. Must be the dress. Tomorrow, BTP tank top and thong…no I’ll will be wearing pants.

Meeting begins: Jingo introduces Ro Wilson’s “we better audit the hell out of the campaign” Kraus notes that that is required by law. Lee Wrights is a smart ass and one of my favorite patriots.

Conflict of interest: Lee makes some very funny comments about working ISIL but says that Dr. Mary and Dr. Jim have no influence over him. As if?

Since Karlan is about to make a fool of himself. I announce that I’m still married to Cato/Reason/and 5 other main player Golden Boy Brian Doherty and a professional toady for the Garris machine (, webmaster LRC) but it is silly and if you don’t know that you are not keeping up with the movement.

Carling wants five minutes for Audit Co.

Dr. Mary wants to vote on the issue of voting to sue. You all know what this about.

Mark Hinkle wants to discuss list rental. Starr jumps “Executive Session! Executive Session!”

Rachel moves Nolan statement to December meeting. Good, then Nolan can be there in San Diego.

The “Doctah” Stevens controversy is being moved all over the place.

The meat of the meeting is about to begin.

It is revealed that M Carling is the official link between the campaign and the LNC. We promote people well beyond their level of competence as a rule in the LP.

Aaron Starr raises fit over Hogarth/Dixon Afghan Resolution. Doesn’t work. Since I’m a moron,I asked for division. Sullentrup: Do you still want division? Your side won.

Sullentrup: Let the record reflect that Keaton wants to multiply, not divide.

Redpath has been doing more radio and tv. We discover that he worked for NBC in the 80s and went to many Letterman tapings. That does improve my image of Redpath. Those were the good days of that show. He went to his first NASCAR race on July 5th. Redpath keeps on saying it was interesting. Sounds traumatized to me.

Redpath has made the rounds at several events. Met Rex Bell and Eric Shansberg. Fred Smith at CEI (yes, another place where Doherty worked. I could spend all day listing marital conflicts.) Redpath was in LA July to Beverly Hills Hotel for Team Grandparent. Odd since Redpath has no material issue. Art Linkletter is still lucid. Sort of. Social Security Reform.

(Damn I forgot to tell them I was at the MPP Playboy event. That was were Rachel Mills talked me into getting the grotto. I’m an idiot. Still hoping the pics don’t surface.)

Redpath did a German radio interview….I can no longer keep track but Redpath is going on like a Rick Steve’s travel log. Wright and Starr start mocking him. (“What’s your favorite color?”)

Ok, enough with the chair’s report.


Treasurer’s Report:

Will scan. Starr claims that they will be 100,000 in THE BLACK. He then goes on to say that fund raising goes down in the year after the election.

Dixon asks about money spent on NASCAR and Rally for America. He says it is way over budget. Why was so much money spent? Kraus said it was for outreach. Starr says there are two theories on a budget.

Aaron, baby, spins. Pat ain’t buying.

Pat: Unless you really have an authorization, you really don’t have a budget.

Robert Kraus: Stuff happens. Stop micro managing. Raise money where you need to do it.

Pat: Budget should be annual.

Dr. Jim: Do you think that the LNC needs to be better informed on these matters?

Pat: Why do we over spend?

Julie starts combing over the budget. She ain’t screwing around either. Julie’s pretty hot. I love a women who grills the staff and officers about rent.

Aaron gives Redpath props for running up his FEC limit. Got to give Redpath that. He puts his money where his mouth is.

Rach starts asking Aaron some tech questions about different kinds of rent.

(Brian Miller calls me. Dude, can’t type and speak at the same time.)

Kraus is bitching about the copier lease.

My last quarter of Xanax is kicking in. I’m not going to be a bitch. Just type. You can all draw your own conclusions when you read the minutes.


Sullentrup moves to eliminate the policy that we video tape the meeting.

Meeting stops. Austin is trying to reload the tape.

Aaron Starr believes that if the secretary needs to record meetings if he needs it but if he does not need it, we shouldn’t.

Dixon: very much in favor of having meetings recorded (either tape or video) so people can hear or see them. He would rather guests just bring their own equipment taking a DIY approach.

Sink-Burris thinks that legally it is bad idea (per Rutherford) to have anything other than minutes recorded as the GOP/DNC could use material against us.

Ruwart: Distressing that people don’t want this open if for no other reason than we all remember these things differently.

Wrights: We all remember things differently but notes Sullentrup is the best secretary we ever had. In what has to be the weirdest moment ever, Sullentrup kisses Wrights. Room breaks down. Redpath asks members from refraining from PDAs.

Starr than says that all meeting should be recorded by destroyed after the minutes are approved. Starr suggests that would be acceptable if the true motive is to only have good minutes. He then makes legal argument. (NOTE: Starr is neither a JD or a member of the bar.)

Kraus: costs of tape, plus staff member is too much. He doesn’t want to be responsible at meetings for tending to this.

Vote on Starr’s sub motion. Sub motion 9-5. Starr’s motion is now on the table.

Now: A No vote keeps policy as it is,

Starr, Colley, Karlan, Flood, Dixon, Sink-Burris, Hinkle, Jingozian vote to destroy records as soon as the minutes are approved. It passes.


EXECUTIVE SESSION, be back in a few.


During Exec Session, Wright and I take a cig break to discuss questions the Wall family and LPTN leaders have about Mattson, Carling and LNCC.

Haugh joins us. He hates wearing a suit and thinks we need to speed up our ExSessions so they don’t go off topic. (He’s right. They need to be very narrow.)

Quick: Dead guy gave us money. More than FEC allows. Sue to claim that dead people cannot be corrupted.

Patriot Alan Gura of the Heller Case (frm. IJ intern in his law school days) will on the cheap challenge the Fascist State on this issue. We are discussing on to whether to move forward.

Gura is offering to wave certain fees and cap others so the costs are about 15K. If the suit drags on for several years, he might charge UP TO an extra $7500 (Make sure you actually read the minutes b/c it is harder to type and keep track. Sullentrup may be a closet Republican but he does do something quite difficult very very well.)

(Note to Starchild: It is highly unlikely to challenge guests if they wish to live blog or tape no matter how much people may not approve.)

Dixon, Lark, Redpath and others are trying not to make a messy on the fly motion. Tabled so it doesn’t sound pulled out of the collective LNC ass.


Staff Report by Kraus

I going to try to be fair to all concerned.These are not direct quotes.

1.) Acting ED report:

— refund reports re: pay pal. PP has some unusual security issues so check treas reports. They reversed some charges.

— Julie asked about Alexis. She’s in Latin America but will return to LPHQ.

2.) Davis on PR. Davis’ girlfriend is adorable. They are planning to marry December 27th. One LNC member suggests marriage is always a bad idea.

— He’s been in Atlanta the past two months assisting Barr campaign. These are roughly his words: LP proper ceased to be of interest to the campaign once the nominee was chosen. He thought he would just go there and work. It’s given him about 800 contacts including Lou Dobbs. He is very hopeful that he can make good use of this.

Congressman Barr has been so prolific in media. Membership is higher. (notice graphs in notes.)

Davis is still excited about the very nice article Redpath got in Playboy. Mrs. Hawkridge notes that some prefer Hustler.

He thinks that everyone is sick of two party politics.

Dr. Jim wants to know what is up with LP News. Kraus wants to go to a digest size. There have been problems. Audrey Mullins (isn’t she from the Barr campaign or was?) is going to edit this month’s paper. Rachel asks Andrew about what he can do to pr the FEC/BCRA. Andrew thinks he can blast it everywhere and get 15K very quickly. Dr. Mary asks about the amount of resources going to the Barr camp instead of the state candidates. Andrew says the states should handle their own but he adds that he does send press releases and he blogs about state campaigns like Munger. He can do more if you send him material.

He can’t send press lists to every candidate since it would take forever to filter it for each area but he can send something to the state chairs and the state chairs lists.

Jingo wants the OR lists. “We have 6 exciting candidates.” Karlan wants Andrew to discuss some of this at the LSLA.

3.) Louis Calise

— She won’t read whole report to keep it short. She would like to hire someone to help with major donations. Hired guy Casey (still can’t get his last name.) from San Diego State.

— House appeals. Holding strong with high ave gift. Post office mailings and returns are slow. P.O. problems but this is common with non-prof mail.

— Select in mailing lapsed donors to make sure we have a good reason to. Not to bug them.

— Prospecting did not do very well and costs money on the back end but can work out.

— (can’t here. Louise is trying to get through this quickly.)

— Telemarketing should begin in 2009.

— She really wants BOD members to raise money. She knows it is hard but she will work with any board member. She asks if you call people to let the office know so we can thank them from the office and track who made the solicitation.

— Hand out ASKING by Jerold Panas.

Apologize if did not get all of Andrew and Louise’s statements.

Pat Dixon wants to know if the RP prospecting list petition to AL did well. No. He wants to know if the RP lists are worth trying again. Did we approach them about the lists?

Kraus: we have gone to brokers to ask for more RP lists. Some people have very expensive lists. Dixon says but they gave so much money. Kraus notes that in many cases the same people gave over and over again…

Austin is changing the tape. Geez, this is hard.


The very sexy Austin Petersen:

He’s going very fast but this is what I could catch: civil liberties and appeals to anti-corporatism get volunteers going. States were there is are strong volunteers in isolated areas should start meet ups. He also has them call talk radio. He’s working on DC org. He also have some graphs. He is also out in other organization (MPP, Reason, etc.) in his spare time to build up networks.

He’s representing us at various events. He said that 70% of people that came by the Rally booth will vote for Barr, 15% are Mises Institute, Anti-state anarchists who will not support the ticket and 15% for Baldwin.

He also using a technique to talk to Obama supporters. (“I used to support Obama but I am against war.” “I used to support Obama but I support civil liberties.”)

He has produced three videos for the party including one on Denver, an antiwar vid and a humor one for vol recruitment.

Set backs, he could not get vols to do Barr/Root petitioners in DC. He also had trouble dealing with Heller’s constituents.

He will be working on other videos.

Questions: Dr. Jim “What is an activist?”
Austin: letter writing, etc.

Dr. Jim wants central calendar or repository of liberty related events so we can push our speakers, wrangle invites. Can you do that?

Pat: What is the Heller mess?

Austin: An RP worker that Heller wanted to run. Bradley Jansen is the person in question. What people might have wanted was to piggy back off of Barr’s petitioners instead of getting their own. (Might not be a good idea to publish the rest.)

Moving on…

Jingozian has some media suggestions for Austin. (Folks should try to make use of Jingozian before he gets sick of us.)

I gave Austin my critiques of the booth. will forward them to George Donnelly but it simply it is very important to have a better frankly pretty display. It is worth the money to have an easy to assemble very attractive banner, pics, books and stickers. It is also important to be ecumenical in one’s libertarian approach at events that are freedom movement but not specifically libertarian.

Wright asked if Barr gave any money for the booth. Austin and Robert explained that the Campaign for Liberty would not take Barr money for ideological reasons. Austin thinks that the staffers are too tied to the CP and hence not friendly. Redpath asks why: We don’t believe in G-d (Wrights,) Homosexuality and gambling (Peterson), Choice (Hawkridge.)

A very worn down Sean Haugh:

“I would not wish Ballot Access even on those who wrote the laws.”


Pat Dixon wrote up a motion.

It passed.

Counsel’s report: Bill Hall (open session)

Any questions?

Dr. Jim: Status of Maine. Was at ME picnic.

Bill H: No, missed deadline.

BH would like to discuss in ExSession Fincher case, FEC comply, some convention committee report.

Dr. Jim: Let’s rejiggle to guests are shuffled in and out.

Campus Report, Regions, Barr/Root campaign, etc. will be up next.


Lark College Org report.

Will be speaking at Longhorn Libs (UT). Rumor that Dixon and Lark will play with Jimmy Vaugh. Lock up your daughters.


Written reports by regional reps. Redpath asks are there any questions or oral reports?

Stewart Flood uses bribes to get people to respond. (He’s been driving me crazy with the alligator pics. Yes, there was an alligator under the car. We got it.)

Meanwhile, Will Allen Buckley be in the debates. Looks like LPGA might pull it off. Very exciting.
LP Alabama will submit petitions shortly, will be able get Barr/Root campaign.


Lieberman/Hinkle. Had some trouble getting their state chair (CA) to respond so no news but Holtz applied for some seat that he got automatically. Somewhere in Palo Alto Hills some statists are really going to be very sorry…or bored. Actually, I support Holtz driving statist crazy.


Fox–Jesse Ventura is endorsing Krazy Kevin Barrett. Good for him. There are two law suits going on in IL which can really change things.

Lots of good things have happened to read the report. (Everyone is blowing through the material right now so I’m struggling to keep up.)


Rachel is up. All states in Region 7 have Ballot Access. Thank Haugh and Kolhaas for all their help.


The Admiral Colley is on Convention Report. Bob Sullentrup, Rach, Stewart, the admiral, Pat are the new committee. Admiral apologizes for not getting this off the ground just yet. Look like 4th o’ July in 2010. They want to do something East Coast this time.

Yes, Mattson did the electronic survey. (What is this women’s official position? She shows up more than a yeast infection in my pants after a week with Starchild.)

Charleston, Austin came in much lower. (Please ask the admiral about the ranking b/c I already forgot.)

LAST Place—cruise ship! (Wrights and I laugh. Dirty looks prevail.)

1000 people responded.

I never get these surveys. Jingo didn’t get one either.

The Admiral gives up what is actually an ideal handout. It has all the different convention sites with figures. Very nicely done.

Admiral: The statists do fantasy land conventions. We pay for ours. Efficient but not fancy. He will still get one from the DC hotel as well. Not all hotels responded.

Pittsburgh: They treated us really well. They really want our business.

Give Colley this. He made damn sure he got all the details. Pittsburgh Hilton will comp all sorts of things including some hosp suites. Tried to get cont break and buffets deal. Parking is $20 though. Downtown area.

Jingo: How important is the availabilty of local volunteers?

The Admiral: Not the intent to saddle the vols with a big project but it’s a big load on the staff. Mentions Portland mess.

BetteRose and Michelle formed a corp and did a really great job in Denver and actually came in the black. Run by pros is probably best.

Aaron: Biz meeting is Friday and Saturday which is a prob since Monday is day off.

The Admiral: Memorial Day was not available.

Sent Sullentrup to St. Louis. Group rate is a little more expensive, but light rail and parking is much cheaper. Historical site. Under the street and hotel is where the actual convention hall. Each hotel has different model for big events. These are not the final contractual numbers. These can all be renegotiated.

Cleveland: 4-7 July which would allow Monday to be used as meeting day but meeting on Tuesday too. Comps have food and bev minimum. A/v kind of in house. Rapid transit train, parking $23 a day
Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

Costs and locations are important as well as the ability for the hotels to be able to keep to the committed rate.

Dr. Jim: Have you been given guidance from the LNC?

Redpath: Don’t really want event on the same holiday weekend every time. Rotate it. Afraid that we are going lose people if they are not closer to a weekend.

The Admiral: styled this as a 2.5 day event.

Redpath really wants it on Fri/s/S to keep delegates.

The Admiral wants input from the LNC.

Dr. Mary: No on 4th July b/c of campaigning by our candidates as well as petitioning. Earlier convention allows sigs up early. NH was having prob b/c of that.

Redpath: It doesn’t matter as much as people think. It is just tough to do it in NH no matter once.

Fox: Local libs do parades, etc 4th.

Starr: Can we do odd years? It gives pres candidate more time to campaign.

Dixon: This can complicate electors and delegates. Geoff Neale wrote memo about date change in 06. Pat will send it out.

Hawkridge: the 4th of July That’s my wedding anniversary. (Even my cold heart finds that romantic.)
What about Prez day? The Admiral: Not in Buffeo

Wrights: There are going to be conflicts no matter when we have it.

Starr asks for time extension. 20 more.

Calm down, the Admiral says, we don’t have to decide today. He wants more input from folks. He wants the priority list and goals.

Dr. Jim asks what are the goals and benchmarks?

Sean: Have it as late as possible. Legal reasons, substitution cases, etc. He thinks that odd year is capitulation. He notes that Ruwart and Barr got in the race late so he doesn’t see it as a prob. Both GOP/DNC have their convention late.

The Admiral: Yeah, but the GOP/DNC have circuses not conventions. We are having a meeting.

The cruise. Note that meals are all included. “6000 calories whether you want them or not.”

Oh god, Mattson is up.

Mattson says that concern that it appears to be to expensive. She hands out more detail. They are really trying to push this.

Hawkridge: people don’t have Ids, fall off the boat, no drop in locally, how the hell do get press on there. (All good questions btw.)

Keaton: Does this dock somewhere where the sex trade and drug laws are more liberal? That would make it more appealing to me.

Wrights: Can we even check this out?

Starr: OH HOLY HELL, he starts reading from Robert’s Rules to address the question of drop ins. How the hell did I work for this guy with out beating the living shit out of him? Wrights and others commence with eyerolling.

The Admiral cuts Starr off. G-d bless our service men.

Jingo: We are in a recession, foreclosures, this doesn’t look good.

Redpath: I like craps as much as the next guy….but…

The Admiral: I don’t want to pay someone to take me to sea…

Hinkle: We are a membership group. We should do what the members want. They want DC, they got DC.

Dr. Lark: if you want a cruise, do it as a seminar for a different LNC event

Starr: one of our main goals should to not lose money on these things.

Redpath wants to know what each of the members thinks. Starr gets pissy. Starr is over ruled.

Folks have all different ideas but Hinkle, Wrights, Ruwart, Jingo and Keaton go with the members’ choice.

I’m feeling for Dixon b/c Austin would the best convention ever. Hippie rednecks, good pot, homosexuals, freaks and Wes Benedict.

Lark has no strong pref. Sullentrup of course wants St. Louis. (It does have Knapp and Spangler and that’s good enough for me.)

The Admiral is taking a very liberal laid back approach.

Starr starts again on the damn cruise. Dude, unless I can take mushrooms and fondle Shinghal in the hot tub, no dice.

Redpath and Wrights had enough. Coffee time.

Angela Keaton’s report from Rally for the Republic

In Activism, Civil Liberties, Iraq War, Law Enforcement, Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics, Libertarian Politics 2008, Police State, Politics, Protest, War on September 5, 2008 at 10:28 am

The following was written by LNC member and Development Director Angela Keaton, and was provided to LFV by the author.  Thanks, Angela!

While stationed for at an alternative to the GOP’s convention, I stayed at the Hotel Saloon, Minneapolis’ only gay motel. I highly recommend it and both the Saloon Bar and Pi, the lesbian bar. Didn’t make it to the Gay 90s a few blocks down but some Ron Paul supporters received some acceptable adult gay entertainment there.

The butch who owned Pi said it is acceptable to support Ron Paul just as long as you call him Ron Paul and not “Dr. Paul, cuz that’s creepy.”

The police and secret service were in full force. Pumped up on Starbucks, I foolishly challenged two police officers and two secret service agents much to the amusement of former Outright ex com member Mike Nelson. They were complaining about the presence of “anarchists” in their fair city. I asked if they had ever met an anarchist. “You just did, here’s my card.”

The LP had a presence there but unlike some of the published pictures, it was mostly staffed by two volunteers (Rich Paul and another man whose name I did not get.) The Barr workers and LP staff were nowhere to be found save when I bumped into too attractive to be a libertarian Austin Petersen.

Frankly, the booth was unremarkable bordering on unprofessional. The fact that the LP paid twice the price that paid for such a sloppy display is why it was the right thing for me to discontinue raising money for the LNC.

People noticed the lack of quality and it reflected poorly. Image does matter. The bags were nice though.

An donor was also staying at the Hotel Saloon for the Ron Paul event. He’s a Catholic lay leader and rebukes religious people who would vote for a mass murderer just to avoid gay marriage. Something that those who attended the “other” event should reflect upon.

Keaton, an anarchist, no hyphen

Last chance to submit agenda items for September LNC meeting

In Activism, Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics 2008 on August 28, 2008 at 4:41 pm

The next LNC meeting is in Washington DC on September 6-7.

LNC At-Large Representative Angela Keaton asks that members please make it a point to attend. It is the first and last meeting before the general election.

Anyone who would like their LNC representative to place an item on the agenda must submit those items ASAP to Bill Redpath ( wredpath at his dot com ) with the words AGENDA ITEM in the subject line.

LNC Smackdown!

In Crazy Claims, Entertainment, George Phillies, Humor, Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics 2008, Politics, Presidential Candidates, Shine on you crazy diamond on August 23, 2008 at 2:03 am

Sorry, couldn’t resist that headline after LNC Treasurer Aaron Starr (in LFV comments) made a reference to libertarian “bloodsports”. 😉

The following are comments left on the latest LFV exclusive regarding George Phillies having been contacted by an outside attorney, about a potential lawsuit brewing for New Hampshire.

Aaron Starr, LNC Treasurer:

This might be interesting if it were accurate.

However, the LNC has been informed on more than one occasion concerning the potential opportunity for a lawsuit in New Hampshire to establish for our party the permanent right for candidate substitution, so that we will not have this problem again in the future.

No lawsuit has been filed yet.

On May 22nd, during the LNC pre-convention meeting in Denver, staff presented in its report the possibility of our needing to sue in New Hampshire.

The report is included in the minutes. Members of the LNC board members who are purported to not know anything about this received copies of these minutes and voted for their approval.

In addition, in a cursory search of e-mails to the entire LNC, I was able to find a ballot access update dated June 29th that further discussed the legal situation in New Hampshire. There are probably other updates, should I care to look for them.

In the case of Bill Hall, our legal counsel, the LNC has been updated by him as recently as today as to the status of this potential litigation. Of course, attorney-client privilege issues prevent me from sharing the contents of this communique with anyone else.

Aaron Starr
Libertarian National Committee

Professor George Phillies, qualified NH LP presidential candidate and probable defendant in said not-yet-filed lawsuit:

Starr’s claims about the suit are disingenuous. There are indeed representations in the LNC Minutes and other places about discussing litigation as a possible alternative path in New Hampshire. There is no indication that an attorney had been retained or was going to be retained.

That’s entirely different from having an attorney, not Bill Hall, telephone interested parties to make statements rather more positive than discussing alternatives.

As an analogy, as late as 1936 the War Department updated its plans for war with Canada, a fact that Congress could have determined. South Park notwithstanding, telling Congress this minor fact did not constitute asking Congress to approve war with Canada.

There is no representation in those statements to the LNC about actually spending money to pay the attorney in question, seeking the LNC’s approval to spend money or discuss litigation with interested parties, or having the attorney discuss with affected parties while representing himself as the LNC’s attorney, which he assuredly would not have done if he had not been retained, whether for pay or pro bono.

I should point out that the sort of phone call that I heard might or might not already have led other interested parties to retain their own counsel.

As to whether the LNC is paying him for something, well, the most recent LNC FEC filing shows a large sum of money going in his direction, so there is no question that the LNC has already actually spent money, without notifying the LNC itself that that money is actually being spent.

Angela Keaton, LNC At-Large Representative:

A.) What is the proper LNC procedure in the initiation of a lawsuit? Does a mention of the possibility of such in a staff report released between LNC meetings constitute proper notice to the board? Do Haugh and Kraus have the authority to initiate a law suit without putting it to a vote of the entire LNC? If Redpath has the sole authority, what is the fiduciary duty with regard to financial priorities during severe shortfalls?

B.) Is the suit a political payback stemming from a confrontation between Carling/Karlan/Sundwall and Macia and Phillies/McMahon at the LPNY ‘07 convention? Did that confrontation result as of Carling overstepping what was agreed upon by members of the LNC? Is it a relevant fact that M Carling proposed to strip George Phillies of his life membership at the July ‘07 LNC meeting? Is it a relevant fact that Aaron Starr proposed an affiliate agreement which singled out LPNH for a daunting level of control by the LNC? (Starr lated withdrew after I made the case that it would lead to infighting and bitterness. Who knew?) What does the ExCom of LPNH want?

C.) What is the responsibility of the Barr/Root campaign for handling ballot access? Is it a mis characterization to state that LPNH has no ballot access when the drop dead date was August 6th and the signature validity is known? A mis characterization that there is no LP ballot access if Phillies/Bennett ticket has made the ballot? Does it matter if both are on the ballot? Does it make any difference who is on the ballot as long as the libertarian label is on it?

Get back to me via email (angela at angelakeaton com) if any of you have serious answers so I don’t have to wade through this most worthless thread.

Angela Keaton
At Large Rep
Libertarian National Committee

I have to respectfully disagree with Ms. Keaton. The thread covered everything any redblooded libertarian could ever want to discuss …. from whether state parties overrule the national party on ballot access issues, to whether a qualified candidate must bow out for the nominee in a state which does not allow substitution, to necrophiliac fellatio, and everything in between. We even had self-described “Libertarian Republican” Eric Dondero calling out to his preferred diety, during a profanity-filled rant in which he threatened to come through the computer and rip LFV Contributor GE Smith’s head off. Now, ripping off heads is what I call a “bloodsport”, though of course making threats on LFV is never, ever acceptable, nor is it ever tolerated.

What do you think, folks? Anyone want to have a little weekend fun, and lay some bets on any of the players? Starr vs Phillies? Keaton vs Starr? Hogarth vs Phillies? Dondero vs GE? ElfNinosMom vs Dondero? Place your bets here!