Petitions of Denver Libertarian National Convention delegates and sustaining members against the removal of Lee Wrights from the LNC

We received the following email at contact.ipr@gmail.com from George Phillies, as well as a similar email from Rachel Hawkridge:

A caucus of concerned Libertarians has launched a petition drive to the Libertarian Party Judicial Committee, asking that the Judicial Committee overturn fraudulent claims by part of the LNC that Lee Wrights has ceased to be an LNC member. There are two petitions. One is for anyone who is a sustaining member. The other is for anyone who attended the 2008 National Convention as a delegate.

Petitions are at:

http://www.petitiononline.com/LPsust/petition.html for sustaining members (current dues payers and life members) and http://www.petitiononline.com/08dlgts/petition.html for those who were delegates to the 2008 Libertarian National Convention in Denver. Sustaining members who were delegates can sign both.

They read as follows:


If you sign the paper petition, please return it to the circulator or mail it to Rachel Hawkridge, 10522 Lake City Way NE #C-103, Seattle, WA 98125

Petition To The Judicial Committee To Overturn Actions Of The Libertarian National Committee Falsely Claiming To Have Removed R. Lee Wrights From The Libertarian National Committee.

I am a Sustaining Member of the Libertarian Party. Pursuant to Article 8, Section 5, I find that the attempted removal of R. Lee Wrights, At-Large Member of the Libertarian National Committee, from the National Committee, without a 2/3 vote of the National Committee, contravenes Bylaws Article 8, Section 5. I affirm his position as an At-Large Representative and ask, per Article 8, Section 12, that the Judicial Committee overturn this attempted removal and direct that Wrights be recognized as an At-Large Member of the National Committee.


If you sign the paper petition, please return it to the circulator or mail it to Rachel Hawkridge, 10522 Lake City Way NE #C-103, Seattle, WA 98125

Petition To The Judicial Committee To Overturn Actions Of The
Libertarian National Committee Falsely Claiming To Have Removed R.
Lee Wrights From The Libertarian National Committee.

I was a Delegate to the Libertarian Party 2008 National Convention. Pursuant to Article 8, Section 5, I find that the attempted removal of R. Lee Wrights, At-Large Member of the Libertarian National Committee, from the National Committee, without a 2/3 vote of the National Committee, contravenes Bylaws Article 8, Section 5. I affirm his position as an At-Large Representative and ask, per Article 8, Section 12, that the Judicial Committee overturn this attempted removal and direct that Wrights be recognized as an At-Large Member of the National Committee.


Posted by Paulie

Background:

LNC Memo: Wrights Was Not Member When Elected

Removal of Lee Wrights from Libertarian National Committee appealed to Judicial Committee

Applicants Sought For LNC Vacancy

More

188 thoughts on “Petitions of Denver Libertarian National Convention delegates and sustaining members against the removal of Lee Wrights from the LNC

  1. paulie Post author

    paulie // Apr 23, 2009 at 3:58 pm

    Sustaining members

    9. Rob Latham
    8. Paul Frankel
    7. Darryl W. Perry
    6. Erik Geib
    5. Debra Payne-Dedmon
    4. Larry Nicholas
    3. Morey Straus
    2. George Phillies
    1. Rachel Hawkridge
    74 paulie // Apr 23, 2009 at 4:00 pm

    Denver Delegates:
    34. Michael R. Edelstein CA
    33. Thomas Hill N.C.
    32. Glenn Jacobs Tennessee
    31. Rob Latham Utah
    30. Tom Ruks NH
    29. Steve LaBianca Florida
    28. Christiana Mayer Oregon
    27. Steve Kubby CA
    26. Michelle Shinghal TX
    25. Raymond James Duensing Jr. Sin City Nevada
    24. Raymond James Duensing Jr. Sin City Nevada
    23. Kelly Wall TN
    22. Michael Acree CA
    21. Tony Wall TN
    20. Paul Frankel Alabama
    19. Gene Hawkridge Washington State
    18. Less Antman California
    17. John Schultz Missouri
    16. Larry Nicholas Washington
    15. Debra Payne-Dedmon Nevada
    14. Dodge Landesman New York
    13. Glenn Nielsen Missouri
    12. Christopher Maden California
    11. Harland Harrison California
    10. Angela Keaton California
    9. James Lesczynski New York
    8. Carolyn Marbry California
    7. Richard Winger California
    6. Michael Seebeck California
    5. Brian Miller Pennsylvania
    4. George Phillies Massachusetts
    3. Morey Straus NH
    2. line voided
    1. Thomas L. Knapp Missouri

  2. paulie Post author

    There will be more. In fact there already are…

    36. Jill Stone CA
    35. James Perry Reef Massachusetts

  3. Andy

    Is there a petition to support the removal of Lee Wrights from the LNC? That’s the one I’d sign.

    Wrights is a liar, a two-faced backstabber, and a hotheaded JACKASS. He doesn’t really bring anything of value to the table. He’ just a blowhard who shows up at meetings and gets himself in positions and then does little to nothing of value once in those positions.

    Lee Wrights should not only be off of the LNC, he should never hold any position at all at any level in the party, nor should he ever be a candidate for any office, nor should he hold any position on any campaign. The guy is unstable. He may spout Libertarian rhetoric but so what, there are plenty of people who can do that and who are NOT worthless ASSHOLES like Wrights is.

    The best thing that Lee Wrights could do for the Libertarian Party is stay home. He could register as a Libertarian, send in his $25 per year (which apparently he’s got a difficult enough time doing that), and show up on election day to vote for Libertarian candidates, but that’s about it. Destructive personalities like Wrights are best kept in the closet.

  4. Andy

    The people who’ve signed the petition have obviously not been stabbed in the back by Wrights. If you people knew what all I know about him you wouldn’t have signed.

  5. Steven R Linnabary

    O/T: Mr Starr has been pretty active with his purges of hardcore activists. And I am surprised that he has the time. Has he provided the LNC with a timely Treasurers report? Ever?

    PEACE

  6. Andy

    I’m all in favor of hardcore activists. I’m actually one of the most hardcore Libertarian activists that you’ll find. A gauren-damn-tee you that I’ve done more for the Libertarian Party/Movement than Wrights has. I’m not a moderate either as I want to abolish as much government as possible (if it is possible to get rid of all of it I’m in favor of that).

    I don’t support Wrights because I know what an ASSHOLE he is. The guy has low intergrity and he’s unstable. The guy has obviously got a lot of y0u people fooled into believing that he’s more than he really is. If you people knew the truth about him you wouldn’t support him either.

  7. George Phillies

    Erik:

    10% of the delegates who registered at the convention
    1% of the sustaining members.

    That’s ca. 90 or fewer delegates
    ca. 160 members

    Those numbers are rounded up.

  8. mdh

    I’m #47 now for Denver delegates…

    That’s about 1/14th of the total delegates in attendance, if I recall correctly.

  9. George Phillies

    For a new memo from the LNC Treasurer, promptly and well ripped to shreds by a “Shane” who is familiar with FEC regulations, read the top Sean Haugh post at LibertyForAll.net

  10. Thomas L. Knapp

    Andy,

    We get it. You don’t like Lee Wrights. That’s not the issue.

    The issue is whether or not the Secretary, with the consent of the chair, is empowered to unilaterally remove LNC members who, in his opinion, become ineligible; or whether allegations of ineligibility are to be evaluated by the entire LNC as the bylaws require.

    Your personal dislike for Mr. Wrights notwithstanding, you should be able to understand these facts and act accordingly instead of trying to turn the whole thing into a stage for yet another rendition of the Andy Superiority Dance and Two-Minute Hate.

  11. Denver Delegate

    The Deform Caucus (Starr, Redpath, Jingozian,* Sullentrup, Colley,* Mattson , Sink-Burris, Flood, Karlan … with M Carling waiting in the wings to fill the seat Redpath and Sullentrup have declared vacated) hold a likely majority on the LNC regarding L’Affair Wrights.

    The remaining LNC members (Dixon, Ruwart, Ryan, Hinkle, Lark, Fox, Hawkridge), some of whom support the position that Wrights’ membership on the LNC can be suspended only with a two-thirds vote of the LNC, are probably outnumbered by the Deform Caucus (unless Jingozian and Colley break ranks).

    The Deform Caucus is pursuing a strategy like that shown in “Survivor,” where the members of the more numerous tribe begin voting off the members of the less numerous tribe … before cannibalizing each other.

    To recap: The Deform Caucus cannot muster the two-thirds vote to suspend Wrights’ LNC membership. However, it can muster a majority to prevent the (re)appointment of Wrights to the LNC, and appoint a member from its own faction to the LNC as an At-Large member.

    The Deform Caucus will declare any action by or petition to the Judicial Committee regarding L’Affair Wrights null and void because its members will argue that the National Committee made no “decision” to remove Wrights from his At-Large seat (as required by Article 8, Section 12) … the vacancy happened “automatically” because of the lapse in Wrights’ dues.

    *Unclear where Jingozian and Colley fall on this question, but they’ve usually lined up with Starr et al on most contested and recorded LNC roll call votes.

  12. Denver Delegate

    Delegate numbers from Denver convention per the minutes:

    Friday morning: 363 + 9 alternates

    Friday afternoon: 518 + 12 alternates

    Saturday morning: 562 + 10 alternates

    Saturday afternoon: 628 + 7 alternates

    Sunday morning: 638 + 7 alternates

    Monday morning: 535 + 8 alternates

    Taking 10 percent of the highest number, one of the petitions needs the signatures of 65 Denver delegates to be considered by the Judicial Committee (but the Deform Caucus will argue that the Judicial Committee does not have jurisdiction because no LNC “decision” has been made regarding … L’Affair Wrights!).

  13. paulie Post author

    Sustaining Members

    19. Amelia Halgren
    18. Jake Porter
    17. Chuck Moulton
    16. Lonnie Holcomb
    15. Rob Power
    14. Lawrence Baird
    13. Anne Ragsdale
    12. Ray Duensing
    11. Beth Duensing
    10. Raymond James Duensing Jr.
    9. Rob Latham
    8. Paul Frankel
    7. Darryl W. Perry
    6. Erik Geib
    5. Debra Payne-Dedmon
    4. Larry Nicholas
    3. Morey Straus
    2. George Phillies
    1. Rachel Hawkridge

  14. paulie Post author

    Denver Delegates

    53. Deborah A. Bottomlee TN
    52. Carolyn J McMahon Massachusetts
    51. Jeff Duensing Indiana
    50. Chris Edes New York
    49. William P. McMillen New York
    48. Starchild California
    47. Matt D. Harris West Virginia
    46. Jake Porter Iowa
    45. Less Antman California
    44. Chuck Moulton California
    43. Mo Kiah Tennessee Delegate / 2008 LP Convention
    42. Ron Moore New York
    41. line voided
    40. Ray Duensing NV
    39. Beth Duensing Nevada
    38. Dylan McDonnell Utah
    37. Rachel Hawkridge Washington
    36. Jill Stone CA
    35. James Perry Reef Massachusetts
    34. Michael R. Edelstein CA
    33. Thomas Hill N.C.
    32. Glenn Jacobs Tennessee
    31. Rob Latham Utah
    30. Tom Ruks NH
    29. Steve LaBianca Florida
    28. Christiana Mayer Oregon
    27. Steve Kubby CA
    26. Michelle Shinghal TX
    25. Raymond James Duensing Jr. Sin City Nevada
    24. Raymond James Duensing Jr. Sin City Nevada
    23. Kelly Wall TN
    22. Michael Acree CA
    21. Tony Wall TN
    20. Paul Frankel Alabama
    19. Gene Hawkridge Washington State
    18. Less Antman California
    17. John Schultz Missouri
    16. Larry Nicholas Washington
    15. Debra Payne-Dedmon Nevada
    14. Dodge Landesman New York
    13. Glenn Nielsen Missouri
    12. Christopher Maden California
    11. Harland Harrison California
    10. Angela Keaton California
    9. James Lesczynski New York
    8. Carolyn Marbry California
    7. Richard Winger California
    6. Michael Seebeck California
    5. Brian Miller Pennsylvania
    4. George Phillies Massachusetts
    3. Morey Straus NH
    3. Morey Straus NH
    2. line voided
    1. Thomas L. Knapp Missouri

  15. George Phillies

    There is a slight difficulty with the delegates as reported, namely people who left early and told the concentration that they were leaving are subtracted from the next day count. That’s why the Monday AM count is small. Unfortunately, there are also some of those people who left before Saturday and before Sunday. You are absolutely right that 10% of the largest of these numbers is a mandatory minimum, but you really need more.

    I think I was told, I believe by someone who should have known, that the actual count of people who had been there *at some time* as delegates was 818. When I last looked the highest number was 52, but of those two are duplicates and one is a blank line.

    Note that the other petition is for *any sustaining member*. That includes most delegates, by the way.

  16. mdh

    I believe the total number of registered delegates (which is what counts, if I recall correctly), is somewhere in the high 700’s or low 800’s.

  17. paulie Post author

    Do we actually have to have the 10%? I think we’ll get it, but:

    My understanding was that the Judicial Committee was already taking this on anyway?

  18. Thomas L. Knapp

    Paulie,

    Here’s where it starts getting technical.

    In order for Lee to appeal to the Judicial Committee as one individual person, he would have to be a committee member who has been suspended by a vote of the LNC.

    The cabal claims that he has not been suspended, but rather constructively resigned by being late with his dues.

    The Judicial Committee might interpret him as having been suspended, just without due process, and take the case … and the cabal might then assert that since they claim it wasn’t a suspension, the Judicial Committee doesn’t have the authority to take the case.

    However, 10% of the last convention’s delegates, or 1% of the sustaining membership, can appeal any “action” of the LNC.

    The cabal is going to have a much bigger problem trying to tell 10% of the last convention’s delegates, or 1% of the party’s sustaining membership, that what we call an action isn’t an action, than it would have trying to tell Lee Wrights that the action wasn’t a suspension.

  19. Andy

    “paulie // Apr 23, 2009 at 9:12 pm

    Thanks!

    I’ll see about getting some signatures on it in Tennessee on Saturday.”

    Why the fuck would you get signatures on a petition for a guy who has fucked petitioners over? FUCK LEE WRIGHTS!!!!!!

  20. Tony Wall

    652 delegates were credentialed just before the first ballot for president was cast. That is the highest number of delegates credentialed in Denver 2008. 66 valid delegates is the magic number.

  21. paulie Post author

    Andy,

    See above; the signatures are for the process.

    The LNC should follow its own rules set down in the bylaws about removing members for cause.

    In this case, those rules were not followed.

  22. paulie Post author

    Delegates

    61. Fred Mangels CA
    60. René A. Ruiz Massachusetts
    59. Arthur Torrey MA (Delegation Chair)
    58. Richard Schwarz Pennsylvania
    57. John Wayne Smith Florida
    56. J.R. Enfield Tennessee
    55. Seth Cohn NH
    54. Staci Henegar Florida
    53. Deborah A. Bottomlee TN
    52. Carolyn J McMahon Massachusetts
    51. Jeff Duensing Indiana
    50. Chris Edes New York
    49. William P. McMillen New York
    48. Starchild California
    47. Matt D. Harris West Virginia
    46. Jake Porter Iowa
    45. Less Antman California
    44. Chuck Moulton California
    43. Mo Kiah Tennessee Delegate / 2008 LP Convention
    42. Ron Moore New York
    41. line voided
    40. Ray Duensing NV
    39. Beth Duensing Nevada
    38. Dylan McDonnell Utah
    37. Rachel Hawkridge Washington
    36. Jill Stone CA
    35. James Perry Reef Massachusetts
    34. Michael R. Edelstein CA
    33. Thomas Hill N.C.
    32. Glenn Jacobs Tennessee
    31. Rob Latham Utah
    30. Tom Ruks NH
    29. Steve LaBianca Florida
    28. Christiana Mayer Oregon
    27. Steve Kubby CA
    26. Michelle Shinghal TX
    25. Raymond James Duensing Jr. Sin City Nevada
    24. Raymond James Duensing Jr. Sin City Nevada
    23. Kelly Wall TN
    22. Michael Acree CA
    21. Tony Wall TN
    20. Paul Frankel Alabama
    19. Gene Hawkridge Washington State
    18. Less Antman California
    17. John Schultz Missouri
    16. Larry Nicholas Washington
    15. Debra Payne-Dedmon Nevada
    14. Dodge Landesman New York
    13. Glenn Nielsen Missouri
    12. Christopher Maden California
    11. Harland Harrison California
    10. Angela Keaton California
    9. James Lesczynski New York
    8. Carolyn Marbry California
    7. Richard Winger California
    6. Michael Seebeck California
    5. Brian Miller Pennsylvania
    4. George Phillies Massachusetts
    3. Morey Straus NH
    2. line voided
    1. Thomas L. Knapp Missouri

  23. Andy

    “paulie // Apr 23, 2009 at 7:20 pm

    Andy,

    Tom is correct. It is about the process, not about what you think of Lee Wrights personally.”

    Tom is not correct. Lee Wrights didn’t give a flying fuck about any processes, honesty, or fairness when he stabbed me in the back and screwed me over, SO HE CAN GO FUCK HIMSELF!!!!!

    These tears for Lee Wrights make me want to puke. This guy is a FRAUD, a LIAR, a TWO-FACED BACKSTABBER, and an ASSHOLE.

    Perhaps you people are the type that have to get bitten by a snake before you realize that it is dangerous. Lee Wrights is a low down snake-in-the-grass. I found out the hard way that this guy can’t be trusted.

    I can tell you people for a FACT that Lee Wrights’ ASSHOLE personality caused ballot access drives in North Carolina to drag on longer than necessary and that cost more than necessary. This guy made decisions that SQUANDERED donor’s money, yet he is being hailed as some kind of hero because most people are ignorant of this fact.

    The fact that there are so many Libertarians that are so easily duped by worthless ASSHOLES like Wrights is an example of why this party doesn’t get anywhere.

  24. Andy

    “paulie // Apr 23, 2009 at 10:06 pm

    Andy,

    See above; the signatures are for the process.

    The LNC should follow its own rules set down in the bylaws about removing members for cause.

    In this case, those rules were not followed.”

    Wrights DOESN’T REALLY GIVE A FUCK ABOUT PROCESSES OR FAIRNESS OR HONESTY. The guy is a FRAUD SO TO HELL WITH HIM!!!!

  25. mdh

    Andy, I don’t care who Mr. Wrights is or isn’t. It doesn’t require me placing any trust in him to support the idea that the JC should hear this case. The fact is that the LP bylaws are somewhat ambiguous. When the law is ambiguous, the judicial system creates case law through judgments which can then be applied in the future. The same ought to be the case here.

    It’s simply a matter of wanting an issue dealt with in the appropriate manner so as to limit the amount of damage that that issue can do to the LP. My LP. Your LP. Our LP. Not just one LNC member who happens to be involved in this specific situation.

    These petitions aren’t just for Mr. Wrights. They are for everyone who comes after him.

  26. paulie Post author

    Andy, again, it’s about the process.

    Even if Wrights did not give a flying leap about any process, he should still get due process.

    I’d sign this petition for Sean Haugh if he was in the position that Wrights is in. I’d sign it for Aaron Starr or Bob Sullentrup, if the shoe was on the other foot.

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/grigg/grigg-w91.html

    …. a refrain similar to that put in the mouth of Sir Thomas More in “A Man for All Seasons” after his son-in-law William Roper urged a similar clear-cutting approach to the law.

    More, suspected of disloyalty by King Henry VIII, is approached in his home by Richard Rich,* a contemptible opportunist known to be a royal spy. Rich fishes for a bribe, baiting More with the implied threat of blackmail, only to be rebuked and sent away. As Rich leaves, More is urged by his family to place him under arrest.

    When More points out that Rich hadn’t committed a crime, and that even “the Devil himself” is entitled to the protection of the law, Roper angrily exclaims that he would “cut down every law in England” to get to the Devil.

    “And when the last law was down and the devil turned round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat?” More inquired. “This country’s planted thick with laws from coast to coast – man’s laws, and not God’s – and if you cut them down – and you are just the man to do it – do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes – I’d give the Devil benefit of the law for my own safety’s sake.”

  27. Andy

    Lee Wrights is not really a Libertarian anyway. Why? Because he initaites fraud against people. The fact that he initiated fraud against myself and others means that he’s not a libertarian and therefore is not fit to be on the LNC.

    Wrights can spout all of the rhetoric he wants, but in the way he conducts himself he’s no libertarian.

  28. Andy

    “paulie // Apr 23, 2009 at 10:17 pm

    Andy, again, it’s about the process.

    Even if Wrights did not give a flying leap about any process, he should still get due process.

    I’d sign this petition for Sean Haugh if he was in the position that Wrights is in. I’d sign it for Aaron Starr or Bob Sullentrup, if the shoe was on the other foot. ”

    Lee Wrights being on the LNC in the first place is fraudulent. Wrights proved to me that he is an initiates fraud so therefore he should NEVER have been on the LNC in the first place. The guy is a PHONEY.

  29. paulie Post author

    Andy,

    The delegates voted for Wrights. He should not be removed unless there is a 2/3 voted of the LNC to remove him.

    Sustaining members:

    25. David A. Brady
    24. Richard Schwarz
    23. Gene Hawkridge
    22. Sean Haugh
    21. Starchild
    20. Matt D. Harris
    19. Amelia Halgren
    18. Jake Porter
    17. Chuck Moulton
    16. Lonnie Holcomb
    15. Rob Power
    14. Lawrence Baird
    13. Anne Ragsdale
    12. Ray Duensing
    11. Beth Duensing
    10. Raymond James Duensing Jr.
    9. Rob Latham
    8. Paul Frankel
    7. Darryl W. Perry
    6. Erik Geib
    5. Debra Payne-Dedmon
    4. Larry Nicholas
    3. Morey Straus
    2. George Phillies
    1. Rachel Hawkridge

  30. Andy

    “mdh // Apr 23, 2009 at 10:15 pm

    Andy, I don’t care who Mr. Wrights is or isn’t. It doesn’t require me placing any trust in him to support the idea that the JC should hear this case. ”

    When Wrights screwed me over there was no trial. He just did it and there were no reprecussions. Wrights LIED to me on the phone and LIED behind my back and then LIED right to my face. I never got any justice, so FUCK HIM!!!!

  31. Andy

    It seems to me that there are some real double standards in this party. The people who show up at meetings, kiss people’s asses, and get themselves into positions (even if they accomplish little or nothing in those positions) seem to get treated with a “kid gloves” approach, but if you are somebody who only shows up at meetings once in a while, never seeks a title, but does a LOT of work (and this applies to both volunteer work and paid work), you can get screwed over, hardly anyone cares, and the people who screwed you over get away with it, even if it is blatantly obvious that they initiated the screwjob and that the screwjob was bad for the party as a whole.

    It seems that the moral of the story here is that the average Libertarian is more concerned with ass kissing and having a title next to your name than they are with fairness or getting positive results.

    No wonder this party doesn’t get anywhere.

  32. Tad

    “When Wrights screwed me over there was no trial. He just did it and there were no reprecussions. Wrights LIED to me on the phone and LIED behind my back and then LIED right to my face. I never got any justice, so FUCK HIM!!!!”

    Your personal opinion about Mr. Wrights is clearly skewing your vision for what should happen. Regardless of your personal opinions for the man, there is a process in place for a reason.

  33. Andy

    “paulie // Apr 23, 2009 at 10:21 pm

    Andy,

    The delegates voted for Wrights. He should not be removed unless there is a 2/3 voted of the LNC to remove him. ”

    Oh bullshit. That’s like saying that a majority of the voters voted for Bill Clinton, so therefore he shouldn’t have been impeached. That’s like saying a majority of the voters voted for Grey Davis so therefore he shouldn’t have been recalled.

    I gaurentee you that the delegates who voted for Lee Wrights don’t know what I know about him. Many of them barely know him or have only seen him at conventions. Some of them have probably talked to him at conventions, but they were never in a position to get stabbed in the back by him like I was. If anyone who voted for him had been stabbed in the back by him like I was they would not have voted for him.

  34. Andy

    “Your personal opinion about Mr. Wrights is clearly skewing your vision for what should happen. Regardless of your personal opinions for the man, there is a process in place for a reason.”

    Wrights DID NOT GIVE A SHIT about any sense of fairness or honesty in his dealings with me, so TO HELL WITH HIM!!!

  35. paulie Post author

    That’s like saying that a majority of the voters voted for Bill Clinton, so therefore he shouldn’t have been impeached.

    No, the 2/3 requirement is the equivalent of impeachment in this case.

  36. mdh

    Andy, there’re processes in place for “impeachment”, too. If you feel that that should happen, then work towards those ends. That isn’t what happened here, though. If a 2/3rds vote went down and he was removed, this would be a much different story.

  37. Andy

    It is real easy for you people to sit back and stick your fingers in your ears and believe that Lee Wrights is more than he really is because he showed up at some meetings and spouted some Libertarian rhetoric. You didn’t have the guy act like he was your friend, then turn on you only to back up Sean Haugh’s insane ramblings, then when you tried to patch things up with him, pretend to be your friend again, only to stab you in the back and spread lies about you behind your back years later, and then when you spoke to him again in person (he didn’t know that I knew that he had stabbed me in the back and talked shit about me behind my back) act like nothing was wrong at first, up until I pointed out to him that I knew that he trashed talked me behind my back, and then he became irrate and started yelling like a maniac and threatened to have me removed from the National Convention even AFTER I informed him that I was a delegate who was supporting Mary Ruwart which was the candidate for whom he was working, and for Wrights to then make up yet another LIE about me which he told to a person who witnessed part of this confrontation.

    I’ve got ZERO respect for Wrights.

    This was further proven when fellow lying asshole buddy, Sean Haugh, posted an article on Lee Wrights’ website where he posted a bunch of distorions and outright fabrications about myself and Gary Fincher. There is a comments section for each article on the site and every post that was put up to refute Sean Haugh’s lies & distortions was taken down by Wrights. Richard Winger and Steve Dasbach tried to set the record straight about some of the comments Haugh directed at Gary and they even emailed Wrights about this yet Wrights continued to refuse to allow any refutations of Haugh’s lies & distortions to be posted. Now one can say that it is Wrights’ website, but still, the fact that he allowed a hatchet job to be posted and would not allow any rebuttals to the hatchet job to be posted shows that he’s got low integrity.

  38. Andy

    “mdh // Apr 23, 2009 at 10:40 pm

    Andy, there’re processes in place for “impeachment”, too. If you feel that that should happen, then work towards those ends. That isn’t what happened here, though. If a 2/3rds vote went down and he was removed, this would be a much different story.”

    There was no vote or fair trial when Wrights screwed me over. I recieved no justice. I just got screwed over and that was it. So to hell with Wrights.

  39. mdh

    Andy, could you detail what formal channels you pursued in order to get justice for yourself after what occurred?

    Nothing in your story as posted above leads me to believe that you actually pursued any such thing. If you had, we would’ve looked at the facts involved and lots of people might have supported you in whatever processes you chose.

    Right now, Mr. Wrights is pursuing the JudComm as a way to deal with the issues he’s been presented with. We’re supporting him in that process.

  40. Andy

    I think that the moral of the story here is that in the Libertarian Party, all one has to do is show up at some meetings, spout some rhetoric, kiss some rear ends, and get a title next to your name (it doesn’t matter if you actually accomplish anything productive or how effective you are), and then you’ve got carte blanche to do whatever you want. You can lie, cheat, steal, behave like a jackass, be a general screw up, etc… and nobody cares because all they are really concerned about is having their ass kissed and being enamoured with titles next to people’s names.

  41. mdh

    Rocky, Andy is a good guy and a dedicated activist, he’s just a bit “loud” on the internet. 🙂

  42. tab

    “You can lie, cheat, steal, behave like a jackass, be a general screw up, etc… and nobody cares because all they are really concerned about is having their ass kissed and being enamoured with titles next to people’s names.”

    Again, your gripe is personal and has no relevance to this situation. While your opinions may be justified (I don’t know whether it is or not), it does not mean the removal of Wrights was correct according to the process that is currently in place.

  43. Andy

    “Rocky Eades // Apr 23, 2009 at 10:57 pm

    @ #8 – Andy writes: “…he[Wrights}’s unstable.”

    Pot –> black?”

    Rocky, you don’t know about which you are speaking. Lee Wrights personally cost me several thousand dollars. He also cussed me out over the phone after I went to him over a dispute with Sean Haugh (which Haugh initiated). Wrights wasn’t even interested in any facts, all he was interested in was rubber stamping anything that Sean Haugh said (no matter how little merit it lacked). I didn’t yell or say anything rude to Wrights (at the time I made the mistake of thinking that he was a friend) and he started screaming and cursing and then hung up on me. I later made the effort to contact him to try to patch things up and he pretended to be a friend again. Then a few years later he stabbed me in the back behind my back and lied about me. I got confirmation from Bob Ritchie of the North Carolina LP as well as Libertarian Party Chairman Bill Redpath that Wrights trash talked me behind my back (and remember, the last two times I spoke to Wrights before this he acted like he was my buddy), and I can assure you that his trash talking about me was a bunch of lies. Bill Redpath didn’t know all of the details behind the distortions from Wrights but even he knew that one of the things that Wrights said was outlandish on its face. I approached Wrights at the National Convention in Denver and when I first approached him I acted like I didn’t know what he had done to me behind my back. Wrights was friendly at first, up until I informed him that I knew what he had done behind my back. I didn’t scream or anthing like that, I just told him in a matter-of-factly manner that I knew what he had done to me behind my back. After this Wrights became irrate as he started screaming like a maniac, going so far as to threatened to have me thrown out of the convention (as if he were the dictator of the convention; if anything, he should have been thrown out of the convention), and then he ran away rather than have a rational discussion. Wrights then made up another LIE about me which he told to somebody who witnessed the end of our confrontation.

    I’ve got ZERO respect for somebody like this. If he had done the same thing to you then you’d have an easier time understanding.

  44. Andy

    “Again, your gripe is personal and has no relevance to this situation.”

    It is not really just a personal gripe. The situations where Wrights screwed me over involved ballot access petition drives in North Carolina in 2001 and then again in 2007. Him screwing me over cost the party money and dragged on the petition drives for longer than necessary which held back ballot access in other states. The LP of NC petition drive for ballot status in 2008 dragged on way longer than it should have and this helped to set the stage for the ballot access failures that happened in 2008. Wrights is partially responsible for this.

    “While your opinions may be justified (I don’t know whether it is or not), it does not mean the removal of Wrights was correct according to the process that is currently in place.”

    Wrights didn’t give a shit about any process or fairness or justice when it came to me. I NEVER got any justice. So I DON’T GIVE A FLYING FUCK ABOUT WRIGHTS!

  45. Andy

    “mdh // Apr 23, 2009 at 10:59 pm

    Rocky, Andy is a good guy and a dedicated activist, he’s just a bit “loud” on the internet. ”

    Thanks. The only reason that I’m being “loud” here is because I got stabbed in the back and screwed over by this guy.

  46. Thomas L. Knapp

    OK, Andy … despite numerous on my attempts to appeal to your sense of reason, you’ve insisted on making this personal. Fine, it’s personal now.

    I will never, ever, ever donate another dollar to, or in any way support, a ballot access drive which does not, as a prior condition, exclude you as a prospective petitioner hire and forbid the use of you in a sub-contracting or any other paid capacity by those whom it does hire.

    I will go out of my way to discourage anyone and everyone I know from ever donating another dollar to, or in any way supporting, any ballot access drive which does not, as a prior condition, exclude you as a prospective petitioner hire and forbid the use of you in a sub-contracting or any other paid capacity by those whom it does hire.

    Personal enough for you?

  47. Gregg Jocoy

    First, wow…glad that I’m on the outside looking in on this one. I have myself been screwed over, in my opinion, by some of my party’s “leaders”, but I always believed, as I do now, that my party’s principles are too vital to the planet’s future to let my individual feelings keep me from pursuing a Green path.

    Secondly, I must wonder where the South Carolina Libertarians are. We do have what appears to be something of an active LP here, although many seem more in the mold of Paulistas, but they run active campaigns for state and local level offices, write articles, and have brought suit at least once to push out state’s Election Commission to follow the state’s electoral laws. Why is it that I don’t see them ever represented here, or in this case, in the petitions?

  48. R. Lee Wrights

    I am glad to see Andy here once again demonstrating exactly why we had to fire him here in NC back in 2001. We actually did him a favor and got him out of the state before the police were called on him again for harrassing people that refused to sign petitions. It seems anyone that refused to sign were enemies of freedom and worthy of his venom. You see, the Internet is not the only place Mr. Jacobs is loud. The truth evades him at every turn, his logic twisted by years of anger and spite. It is not surprising at all to see him latching on with his buddies of the national committee who have tolerated his childish antics for far too long.

    To Mr. Jacobs, I wish you peace some day and leave you with this:

    “Resentment is like taking poison and waiting for the other person to die.”

    – Malachy McCourt

  49. Catholic Trotskyist

    I agree Greg, I’m glad I’m on the outside of this fight. Maybe it’s better for the Catholic Trotskyist Party to remain with just one person, the way it is now.
    A helpful note though, and I’m neutral on this situation, but look at the delegates petition carefully, on numbers 25 and 24, why was Raymond James Duensing Jr, allowed to sign twice? Also, since signature 2 is voided, this means that you have to subtract 2 from the number of signatures there are. Of course, as there are many professional petitioners on this site, I’m sure this was already caught, but if it’s not, I’m sure this will be used by someone as a technicality and make another LP soap opera episode.

  50. Michael H. Wilson

    Lee makes an excellent point. Andy if you act this way on the net I can only assume you act this way at other times.

  51. mdh

    The delegates petition has also been signed by over 10% of active state chairs at this time, as well – WV, TN, FL, NV, and MO. Interesting statistic.

  52. Tomcat

    I’m just wondering if the Rob Latham on the petition is the same Rob Latham who shoots pistol competitions. Is it wrong to think that first? 😉

    Regardless of how anyone feels about Mr. Wrights, who I know nothing about personally, it’s imperative that the correct processes be followed. I’ve been the victim when they’re not, and I’ve been routinely amused to see the same happen to others who failed to stand up for what was right. It’s important, even if you feel Mr. Wrights should be removed, that everything go through the correct channels. If nothing else, you can say “see, we did everything correct and this was the decision”. If nothing else, it defuses future attacks.

  53. Dave Brady

    Ok Andy, so you were “wronged” by Lee and you don’t support this petition. Great you made your point. All this back and forth is high school stuff. The three “leaders” that started this mess are also like high school kids too; start a fight and sit back and laugh.

    “Leaders would have said this is what we did because …. and we know a lot my disagree but … but no we get leaders that make it personal and sit back and say nothing.

    This is why I support the petition. If the leadership refuses to address the issue then we have to force them to.

  54. Rick M

    The “legal” verification box at https://www.lp.org/contribute says the following:

    By checking this box “I acknowledge that contributions from corporations and foreign nationals are prohibited. I also acknowledge that this contribution is made on a personal credit or debit card for which I have the legal obligation to pay, and is made neither on a corporate or business entity card nor on the card of another.”

    I recall similar wording on Ron Pauls 2008 site and the DNC site says “The funds I am donating are not being provided to me by another person or entity for the purpose of making this contribution.”

    One can only conclude that unless Mr. Haugh has recently married Mr. Wrights, in which case they might have a checking account for which Mr. Haugh and Mr. Wrights have a joint “legal obligation to pay,” that it certainly appears that Sean (knowingly) violated the intent of the FEC regulation (as a Libertarian I am not much for following the rules or paying my taxes, but please remember it was the FEC that put the Reformed Party out of business so it is best to adhere to the rules as much as possible until we can change them).

    Therefor, Mr. Starr’s actions in returning the funds donated by Mr. Haugh, appear appropriate since he must do so once he is “aware” that the LNC received funds contributed by one individual (who does not have a shared obligation) in the name of another or on behalf of another.

    So folks, please let us move on and concentrate on getting more people, from all sides of the spectrum, into the LP at all levels, so we can save this country. In other words stop fighting amoung ourselves and let’s forcus our attention on where it really belongs!

    In Liberty,

    Rick M, TX

    PS – I also believe Mr. Wrights was removed because of Bylaws art. 8.4 and not 8.5 therefor the JC would not have authority over this.

  55. paulie Post author

    Tom,

    I will never, ever, ever donate another dollar to, or in any way support, a ballot access drive which does not, as a prior condition, exclude you as a prospective petitioner hire and forbid the use of you in a sub-contracting or any other paid capacity by those whom it does hire.

    I will go out of my way to discourage anyone and everyone I know from ever donating another dollar to, or in any way supporting, any ballot access drive which does not, as a prior condition, exclude you as a prospective petitioner hire and forbid the use of you in a sub-contracting or any other paid capacity by those whom it does hire.

    That will hurt me more than it will hurt Andy.

  56. Tomcat

    While Mr. Wrights might not have been a sustaining member at the time of his election to the LNC, shouldn’t that still have to go through the 2/3 vote with evidence presented to verify this fact?

    As for diverting attention, how can we expect to rectify the problems in this country and make it a just place to live if we spurn justice within our own party?

  57. paulie Post author

    I am glad to see Andy here once again demonstrating exactly why we had to fire him here in NC back in 2001. We actually did him a favor and got him out of the state before the police were called on him again for harrassing people that refused to sign petitions. It seems anyone that refused to sign were enemies of freedom and worthy of his venom. You see, the Internet is not the only place Mr. Jacobs is loud.

    I’ve worked with Andy side by side literally thousands of times. He does not harass people who don’t sign petitions, he thanks them for their time and asks the next person. Everyone and anyone who does much in the way of petitioning has been harassed by police, usually without any justification, many, many times.

  58. paulie Post author

    on numbers 25 and 24, why was Raymond James Duensing Jr, allowed to sign twice? Also, since signature 2 is voided, this means that you have to subtract 2 from the number of signatures there are. Of course, as there are many professional petitioners on this site, I’m sure this was already caught, but if it’s not, I’m sure this will be used by someone as a technicality and make another LP soap opera episode.

    Yes, and line 41.

    But luckily, this is not a Massachusetts state government petition, so it does not invalidate the whole page of signatures.

  59. paulie Post author

    Lee makes an excellent point. Andy if you act this way on the net I can only assume you act this way at other times

    That would be an incorrect assumption. But I can see why it would seem that way if you only know Andy on the internet.

  60. paulie Post author

    It’s important, even if you feel Mr. Wrights should be removed, that everything go through the correct channels. If nothing else, you can say “see, we did everything correct and this was the decision”. If nothing else, it defuses future attacks.

    Exactly.

  61. George Phillies

    I propose that if there was a question of his membership at time of election, it had to be raised in a timely way prior to the vote, so that he or a fellow libertarian could have paid the dues that were allegedly missing, or so that the delegates could have made an informed choice among the eligible candidates.

    If the Treasurer and Secretary are claiming it is currently their duty to do what they allege — in violation of our bylaws — to have done, then it was *equally* their duty to perform their task at the time of the national convention, for example, by supplying the Chair with an accurate and complete list of Sustaining members so that he could rule whether nominations were in order. Their failure to have done so at Denver in 2008, when they are now claiming that they have a duty and responsibility to act as they have acted, must by the evidence they themselves have supplied be viewed as demonstration of a lack of diligence and competence in the execution of what they claim are their duties, at a level justifying their immediate removal from office.

    Mind you, if you had asked me in 2008 if I thought that what was done was a task of the Secretary, I would have said “no”, but once the Secretary has claimed it is his responsibility, he is responsible for the test of history as to whether or not he has performed it. Based on the testimony of the Treasurer in several memos, he and the Treasurer failed in their responsibilities, and

    are hoist by their own petard.

    A similar charge could be levied against the Chair.

  62. George Phillies

    With respect to the list, depending on the software used to upload the list you will see one or two blank lines, one alternatively appearing as a duplicate. Less Antman also appears to be there twice. The James Reef listed as a member of the Massachusetts delegation was to my personal knowledge at the time of the convention using the name James Casarjian-Perry, and was a member of the Massachusetts delegation. The more serious uncertainty is the total number of delegates who actually registered, not the largest number present at a time; I believe that number is slightly over 800.

  63. Beth

    George,
    I have a copy of the final delegate list and it totals 1082. All were not registered and I was told in May that the names of registered delegates would not be released.

    With the number of delegates signing the petition within the first 24 hours I don’t believe reaching 10% will be difficult no matter what delegate count is used.

  64. paulie Post author

    Delegates at this time

    74. Paul Langford Colorado
    73. Mike A. Bozarth Missouri
    72. Donald Silberger New York
    71. Thomas M. Sipos California
    70. Ed MARSH Tennessee
    69. Sam Sloan New York
    68. Audrey Capozzi LPNY
    67. Brian Irving North Carolina
    66. Vicki Kirkland Florida
    65. Karl Dickey Florida
    64. Michael J. Rollins Rhode Island
    63. Christopher S. Thrasher North Carolina
    62. Vincent Marcus Utah
    61. Fred Mangels CA
    60. René A. Ruiz Massachusetts
    59. Arthur Torrey MA (Delegation Chair)
    58. Richard Schwarz Pennsylvania
    57. John Wayne Smith Florida
    56. J.R. Enfield Tennessee
    55. Seth Cohn NH
    54. Staci Henegar Florida
    53. Deborah A. Bottomlee TN
    52. Carolyn J McMahon Massachusetts
    51. Jeff Duensing Indiana
    50. Chris Edes New York
    49. William P. McMillen New York
    48. Starchild California
    47. Matt D. Harris West Virginia
    46. Jake Porter Iowa
    45. Less Antman California
    44. Chuck Moulton California
    43. Mo Kiah Tennessee Delegate / 2008 LP Convention
    42. Ron Moore New York
    41. line voided
    40. Ray Duensing NV
    39. Beth Duensing Nevada
    38. Dylan McDonnell Utah
    37. Rachel Hawkridge Washington
    36. Jill Stone CA
    35. James Perry Reef Massachusetts
    34. Michael R. Edelstein CA
    33. Thomas Hill N.C.
    32. Glenn Jacobs Tennessee
    31. Rob Latham Utah
    30. Tom Ruks NH
    29. Steve LaBianca Florida
    28. Christiana Mayer Oregon
    27. Steve Kubby CA
    26. Michelle Shinghal TX
    25. Raymond James Duensing Jr. Sin City Nevada
    24. Raymond James Duensing Jr. Sin City Nevada
    23. Kelly Wall TN
    22. Michael Acree CA
    21. Tony Wall TN
    20. Paul Frankel Alabama
    19. Gene Hawkridge Washington State
    18. Less Antman California
    17. John Schultz Missouri
    16. Larry Nicholas Washington
    15. Debra Payne-Dedmon Nevada
    14. Dodge Landesman New York
    13. Glenn Nielsen Missouri
    12. Christopher Maden California
    11. Harland Harrison California
    10. Angela Keaton California
    9. James Lesczynski New York
    8. Carolyn Marbry California
    7. Richard Winger California
    6. Michael Seebeck California
    5. Brian Miller Pennsylvania
    4. George Phillies Massachusetts
    3. Morey Straus NH
    2. line voided
    1. Thomas L. Knapp Missouri

    Total 74, minus two duplicates and two voided lines, =70

  65. Dave

    Again, I’m neither pro or anti Lee. I try not to be pro or anti person in general.

    Again leadership … Judicial can simply decide the interpretation of this article and action.

    Our leaders though are surely giving the impression of a witch hunt when we no sooner put one issue away and they came up with a new issue. Bill, Aaron and Bob get the leadership under control and lead.

    Leading is not throwing bombs every 90 days. I swear you three just live for conflict instead of taking on the national issues. I also just wonder if the three of you choose to keep up this strive because you fear failing at the national issues and you have no leadership, abilities or answers to bring the country back from the socialistic paths we’re facing.

    We need politically mind leadership not administrative assistants.

    STEP UP !!!!

  66. paulie Post author

    Sustaining members:

    42. Derek Pomery
    41. Ken Wyble LPNC Life Member
    40. Paul Langford
    39. David Colborne
    38. Patricia Lewis
    37. Steve LaBianca
    36. Richard K Moroney
    35. William Hamilton
    34. Ted Brown
    33. Tony Wall
    32. Bruce Majors
    31. Karl Dickey
    30. Michael Maness
    29. J. Constantino
    28. Vincent Marcus
    27. Gene Hawkridge
    26. Tad Britch
    25. David A. Brady
    24. Richard Schwarz
    23. Gene Hawkridge
    22. Sean Haugh
    21. Starchild
    20. Matt D. Harris
    19. Amelia Halgren
    18. Jake Porter
    17. Chuck Moulton
    16. Lonnie Holcomb
    15. Rob Power
    14. Lawrence Baird
    13. Anne Ragsdale
    12. Ray Duensing
    11. Beth Duensing
    10. Raymond James Duensing Jr.
    9. Rob Latham
    8. Paul Frankel
    7. Darryl W. Perry
    6. Erik Geib
    5. Debra Payne-Dedmon
    4. Larry Nicholas
    3. Morey Straus
    2. George Phillies
    1. Rachel Hawkridge

  67. paulie Post author

    http://ubuntuevangelist.typepad.com/idaho_libertarian_times/2009/04/the-lee-wrights-fiasco.html


    The Lee Wrights Fiasco
    Forward: by Lonnie Holcomb
    Something is afoot in the LNC & LPHQ
    After the notable expulsion Angela Keaton the LP then just 3 months later, has removed Lee Wrights after alleging he forgot to pay his dues, as a regular party member it would be understandable if I forgot & the LP didn’t call me. But Lee wasn’t rank & file, he was on the LNC, they knew how to get a hold of him, had they wanted to.
    —————————————————————————————
    By Rachel Hawkridge

    Once again, some of our National Committee is trying to expel a lifelong freedom fighter, dedicated activist, and Libertarian National Committee member.

    First, it was Angela Keaton – TWO valuable meetings were consumed with abusing her. Now the target is Lee Wrights. (If you haven’t heard – the posted eMails from Secretary and Chair to Lee are factually correct here http://bit.ly/zlKSh

    Within one hour, Lee was notified, and then his seat was offered up to the State Chairs list. Staff claims to have sent 2 snail mail notices, but Lee has moved recently. Meanwhile, other members receive eMail notifications that their memberships are about to lapse. And Lee’s eMail address and phone number haven’t changed in some time – both Staff and the Committee have those . . . they *were* on the LP Leadership page. By the time I got to the eMail that announced a vacancy (1 hour later), Lee’s name and picture had already been removed from the website.

    Lee has just revealed that the eMail address that HQ had in the database for him was one that he has never given to the LP, and hasn’t used for years. The office sent out a spreadsheet with contact information for the entire LNC, and my own eMail address was incorrect, despite the fact that my correct address was on the LP Leadership webpage(like Lee’s).

    It seems to point to a systematic purge. And sets a precedent – if some of the Committee don’t like you, no matter that you were elected by a majority at National Convention, that you have poured heart, soul, Time, Treasure and Sacred Honor into the movement, the party, the people – you can be picked off, expelled by someone who feels that they have the authority to decide.

    You, or your favorite activist, could be elected to LNC, dedicate vast amounts of Time, Treasure and Sacred Honor to Liberty, and then have staff either lose your contact information, or lose your dues check, or forget to change your renewal date, and open your eMail one day to find you’ve been expelled.

    If you are involved with the Libertarian Party, then please take a moment to write a fresh note (no forwards, please!), and send it to the LNC. Blind CC: your LP friends and acquaintances that feel the same way you do.

    Thanks for your support! :o)

    Outline your history with the LP; I’ve been a member of LPWA for 15 years, voted LP for 10 years before that, I was a delegate to Denver, Portland, etc; I’ve always considered myself a libertarian. I’ve been a candidate and got votes in my race. I’ve given money and many hours to LP over the last 15 years.

    I am sick and tired of the fighting, and I want it to stop. I’ll be ending my (contribution, involvement, support for, whatever) if you do not stop the attempts to purge valuable activists.

    I plan to be at Convention 2010 . . . and voting my values . . .

    Please keep your letters professional, respectful and credible. Personalize them say what is true for you.

    Send them to: chair@lp.org, rwsully@att.net, michael@resetamerica.com, starrcpa@pacbell.net, chair@lptexas.org, narwhal3@gmail.com, mary@ruwart.com, agmattson@gmail.com, TRLeap@aol.com, freeutahns@yahoo.com, mark@garlic.com, scott73@earthlink.net, rebecca.sinkburris@gmail.com, jaxonusa@msn.com, sff@ivo.net, Heatherscott01@hotmail.com, jwlark@virginia.edu, berlie@etzel.us, Dankarlan@earthlink.net, jfox1214@sbcglobal.net, jake@jakeporter.org, LPWA.com1@gmail.com, freedhwy@gmail.com

    If you can, consider coming to St. Louis for the July 2009 LNC meeting.

    We are now set up for you to make reservations for the next LNC Meeting July 18th and 19th in St. Louis.

    The hotel is the same as our convention hotel:

    Renaissance St. Louis Grand & Suites Hotel

    Toll-free: 1-800-397-1282

    Stacie.Adkisson@RenaissanceHotels.com

    Follow the links below to make your reservation. The reservation screen is on your right side and it will be pre-filled with our group discount code which is: lnclnca

    The hotel is $3.50 cent ride way from the airport via the Metrolink Subway. Transportation info is located here:

    http://www.marriott.com/hotels/maps/travel/stldt-renaissance-st-louis-grand-and-suites-hotel/

  68. Thomas L. Knapp

    CT,

    You write:

    “on numbers 25 and 24, why was Raymond James Duensing Jr, allowed to sign twice? Also, since signature 2 is voided, this means that you have to subtract 2 from the number of signatures there are.”

    When it says “line voided,” that means that I went in and deleted a signature because it was a duplicate or otherwise known to me to be invalid. Naturally, those voided lines won’t count as delegate signatures.

    Since I’m not constantly viewing the petition, since some duplicates may not be right next to each other, and since I’m not perfect, duplicates remain for awhile, but I intend to catch them all before claiming to the Judicial Committee that enough signatures are on file to make the appeal active.

    Regards,
    Tom

  69. Thomas L. Knapp

    Paulie,

    Yes, I know that others could be harmed by my decision to treat this as a personal matter with respect to Andy.

    That’s why I’ll almost certainly reconsider the decision at some future point.

    For now, though, I’m just giving Andy what he wants. He wants every issue to revolve entirely around his personal desire to get paid to gather petition signatures. I’m willing to accommodate that preference for him. He won’t like the outcome, though.

  70. paulie Post author

    He wants every issue to revolve entirely around his personal desire to get paid to gather petition signatures.

    Actually, no.

    He is a lot more financially comfortable than I am, has a car and a drivers license (neither of which I have), and does not have issues like I have with a lot of big petition companies and petition coordinators.

    Andy can very easily work year round without touching LP petitions, and can get around a whole lot better on his own wherever he goes.

    What Andy sees everything revolving around is cases where people have unfairly hurt his income, reputation, and honor. He will pursue those cases like a rabid dog on speed, even if it costs him much more in both money and reputation in the course of that pursuit.

    Thing is, he can afford it; I can’t.

    I don’t have much savings, I rely on a very small number of potential work partners to help me get around, and I have many more avenues for work cut off to me because I screwed up years ago. Some motels may not even give me a room now that my ID is further out of date.

    Andy can take off a year or more and not work at all if he wanted to do that; I am pretty much broke.

    So, I really don’t think he is saying anything out of greed, and any boycott will hurt me a lot worse.

    But on the other hand, if I pursued people who cost me money and reputation in that same way, given some of the people I used to deal with, I’d be long dead by now.

    I’ve had members of my own extended family cut me out of millions of dollars that I earned. I’ve had an ex who tried to kill me twice. I’ve been beaten and left for dead, and been left on the side of the road more times than I can count.

    Life is too short and too precious to focus on revenge. I just don’t have the time and energy for it.

    I’d like to focus on the future, not the past, and do what I can to make the world better. I wish everyone would look at things like that, but I can’t help that they don’t.

  71. Thomas L. Knapp

    Paulie,

    You write:

    “Actually, no.”

    Maybe not … but Andy wants this personal, remember? I’m now operating strictly on the basis of my own personal interactions with him and with others who have interacted with him.

    My interactions with him, to the best of my recollection, fall within one of two categories:

    – Andy ignoring whatever issue is at hand in favor of personally slamming people over issues of whether or not he got the job or payment he thought he should get n years ago; and

    – Andy denouncing as a “fool” anyone who doesn’t agree with him, despite the fact that he has yet to provide so much as a single piece of evidence to sustain the contention, that 9/11 was an “inside job.”

    Acting as my normal self, I wouldn’t take such things into account. I’d hire a petition coordinator and trust that coordinator to decide who’s best for the jobs.

    Andy doesn’t want that. He wants things to be personal. Therefore, I have to take those things into account, and evaluate him personally on the basis of what I know, what I’ve heard, and what I’ve seen.

    What do I know?

    I know that I’ve never seen a good word from him about anyone he’s worked for. Maybe he has good words to say about some people he’s worked for, but he hasn’t said them around me.

    So I have to assume that if I hire him, I’ll spend the rest of my life listening to him bitch and moan about what a mean SOB I am.

    Since I’m told (personally) that in at least one case he extorted double payment with his bitching and still didn’t stop the bitching, I have to assume that the bitching will be irremediable no matter how well I treat him.

    Since I’ve (personally) seen him publicly defend the forgery of information on petitions, as long as the purpose of the forgery is to make money for the forger, I have to assume that I can’t trust him not to forge petition information if doing so will make him money.

    I’ve (personally) worked with Lee Wrights on a day-to-day basis for eight years now, and haven’t ever caught him in even a little white lie. So when Lee refers to the firing of Andy having saved Andy from having the police called on him for harassment again, I have to conclude that the police have been called on Andy for harassment before.

    If Andy wants things to be personal, I can make them personal six days a week and twice on Sunday. If he doesn’t want things to be personal, he can stop making them personal.

  72. erastus

    I am a local LP executive committee member and Michigan LP member. So far I have not taken the plunge into the national party. This column, along with other stories I have heard, make me glad that I haven’t. What the hell am I supposed to take away from all this?

  73. paulie Post author

    I know that I’ve never seen a good word from him about anyone he’s worked for.

    He has had good things to say about plenty of people he has worked with. Of course, when things are smooth, there’s not much reason to talk about it, so I can see where you would get that impression.

    Since I’m told (personally) that in at least one case he extorted double payment with his bitching and still didn’t stop the bitching, I have to assume that the bitching will be irremediable no matter how well I treat him.

    There has been no such case. If you are talking about Nebraska, I was there, and that is a huge misrepresentation of what happened. Whoever told you this vile twisting of the facts is either extremely confused or straight up lied to you. If you are talking about something else, I have no idea what, and that would not be like Andy even slightly.

    As a matter of fact, Andy will go out of his way to make things up if he gets overpaid by one penny, and no, I am not exaggerating. Sometimes I think the pennies are more important to him than the dollars.

    Since I’ve (personally) seen him publicly defend the forgery of information on petitions

    He denies that Gary making up (“guessing”) SS numbers is forgery.

    I have to assume that I can’t trust him not to forge petition information if doing so will make him money.

    Andy is the most scrupulously honest petitioner I have ever known. He triple and quadruple checks to make sure the signer is a registered voter and has not moved or name changed since they last registered. He doesn’t even forge a signature if the signer meant to sign it and only printed their name but didn’t sign by mistake.

    He’s also forgone more lucrative petition drives to work on pro-liberty petitions, has gone way out of his way to help me and several other people I have known many times, and has spent a good deal of his own time and money copying and distributing libertarian literature.

    And by the way, he’s worked for me and with me, and I’ve worked for him, all many times.

    I’ve (personally) worked with Lee Wrights on a day-to-day basis for eight years now, and haven’t ever caught him in even a little white lie. So when Lee refers to the firing of Andy having saved Andy from having the police called on him for harassment again, I have to conclude that the police have been called on Andy for harassment before.

    Lee was not there for any of those police calls. We all get cops called on us all the time by people who don’t like the petitions, or misinterpret merely being asked to sign something as harassment.

    Gotta get outt a here. I don’t know when I will be online again. Call me in a few hours if you want the truth about Nebraska or anything else.

    415-690-6352

  74. paulie

    Quick clarification:

    If you are talking about Nebraska, I was there…

    In Nebraska, not just at the LNC meeting (and I was there too).

    We got ripped off for the vast majority of the money we were owed for Nebraska. It was not paid until almost a year later by LNC members (who were not liable for it).

    No interest was paid, although it had cost us all countless hours every single day for a year, caused us all real costs and opportunity costs, and even almost cost Gary his foot due to a chain of events that started with the Nebraska ripoff.

    The person who promised to pay us and didn’t paid himself for the fundraising for the whole job ahead of time, in violation of his contract that he was supposed to get 40% of what he raised every week, then stopped raising money or returning calls.

    The whole time, he was a contractor for LPHQ, and then later got hired to be ballot access coordinator for LPHQ.

    Oh yeah, Andy paid me for my signatures there, and then that added to what he was owed – for a year – this was not a loan, much less a zero interest loan, it was a massive screwjob, and if it had been an employment contract rather than an independent contract it would have been a slam dunk for triple damages and attorneys fees.

    Now I am running late to pack!

  75. Thomas L. Knapp

    Paulie,

    You’re right. I wasn’t there. I have to go on what I’ve seen and heard, and I have to weigh those things in light of multiple factors such as who I trust and how much I trust them.

    That’s what Andy wants, so that’s what Andy gets. If you have a problem with that, take it up with Andy.

  76. mdh

    I need to pack soon too. I’m not looking forward to the 7 hour drive (blech!) but I sure am looking forward to seeing Tony, JR, Glenn, and the rest of the TN gang again! 🙂

  77. Rachel H

    Rick M @60 says –
    “The “legal” verification box at https://www.lp.org/contribute says the following:

    By checking this box “I acknowledge that contributions from corporations and foreign nationals are prohibited. I also acknowledge that this contribution is made on a personal credit or debit card for which I have the legal obligation to pay, and is made neither on a corporate or business entity card nor on the card of another.”

    That was changed AFTER Lee was illicitly expelled. Per Mr. Starr’s memo.

    Of course, I can’t prove it to you, because despite assurances that it would we changed, the robots.txt files are eating the archives.

    Destroying our history. Burning books.

  78. susan Hogarth

    That was changed AFTER Lee was illicitly expelled. Per Mr. Starr’s memo.

    Google’s cache has the April 8 version, which reads:

    “* By checking this box I acknowledge that contributions from corporations and foreign nationals are prohibited.”

  79. Dave Brady

    Now that the leadership has now lied can they be brought up on charges. All the stuff we complain about the major parties the LNC leadership does. So how are they any different then Ds and Rs?

  80. Andy

    “I’ve (personally) worked with Lee Wrights on a day-to-day basis for eight years now, and haven’t ever caught him in even a little white lie. So when Lee refers to the firing of Andy having saved Andy from having the police called on him for harassment again, I have to conclude that the police have been called on Andy for harassment before.”

    This is a GODDAMN LIE from Lee Wrights!

    First of all, Lee Wrights was NEVER my “boss” nor did he ever “fire” me.

    What really happened was that Sean Haugh was the Executive Director of the North Carolina LP. I paid $327 for an airline ticket out of my own pocket to come in and work on a petition drive there in late 2000-early 2001. I gathered over 4,000 signatures in one month (which is very good by any standard). I did this without a car (which was left in California and since the drive paid chicken feed did not have a rental car). I never dealt with Sean Haugh in person. I only spoke to him on the phone, around 10 times or so.

    After working there for one month Sean Haugh called me up on the phone one morning and started screaming at me like a maniac. He said that he wanted to cut my pay down to .50 cents and yelled and cursed and said a bunch of BS. I could go into further details but it would take a while. For anyone who is interested I have the entire story written up in an email. I was pushed off of the petition drive for no legitimate reason by Sean Haugh.

    I called up Lee Wrights because when I was in Winston-Salem I had met Lee Wrights and acted seemed decent. I tried to explain to him what happened in an attempt to resolve the situation. During the course of the conversation I said to Lee, “Sean was acting pretty crazy on the phone. Is he on drugs or something?” After I asked Lee if Sean was under the influence of drugs Lee went BALLISTIC and started screaming at me like a maniac and then he hung up on me. This is what REALLY happened.

    I was bummed out about this because prior to this I had thought of Lee as being somewhat of a friend (even though I hadn’t known him very long). Since I was bummed out about this I called up Lee Wrights twice to try to patch things up with him. Lee had calmed down by then and acted like he was my buddy again during both of those phone conversations. In fact, Lee went so far as saying that he didn’t think that I had done anything wrong and that if was up to him that I could have continued working on the petition drive in North Carolina but that Sean was the Executive Director and he had made an Executive Decision and there was nothing that he could do about it. So after those two phone conversations, I had gone away with the impression that Lee Wrights and I were on good terms and that he was an honorable guy, inspite of his outburst on the phone after I asked if Sean Haugh’s crazy behavior was due to drug use (and this was in no way intended to be an endorsement of the drug war to which I am vehemently opposed).

    Now fastforward to 2007. I was asked to go petition in North Carolina for the Libertarian Party by Bill Redpath and by Scott Kohlhaas (this was before I had a falling out with Kohlhaas which he initiated by ripping us off). I asked to contact Bob Ritchie of the North Carolina LP to make arrangements to work there. At the time I was visiting family in Pennsylvania. I called up Bob Ritchie and made plans to go to North Carolina. The only pending detail was exactly how much money was going to be made available for motel reimbursements and whether or not my gas expense was going to be reimbursed. Bob Ritchie said that he was going to get back to me in one or two days.

    Paul was already working in North Carolina, but since Paul does not have a car he had to rely on walking and riding city buses, both of which are inefficient for petitioning. Paul was getting a motel reimbursement from the Libertarian Party. Since he was working without a car he was struggling to bring in 500 signatures in a week. I had already agreed to share a motel room with Paul and I said that Paul could ride with me to locations for petitioning. This would have boosted Paul’s production and it would have boosted production for the motel room for which the Libertarian Party was paying for Paul. If I had been there, that motel room which your Libertarian Party donor money was going to could have generated a good 1,500-2,000 signatures per week, maybe more, but since I was not there Paul was having a hard time getting even 500 signatures (I think he got less some weeks). So I was waiting to hear back from Bob Ritchie and I ended up not hearing from him for 2 weeks even though he was supposed to get back to me in one or two days. When I finally heard back from Bob Ritchie he said that he regretted to inform me that Sean Haugh and Lee Wrights had urged the ballot access committee to vote to prohibit me from petitioning in North Carolina (note that Lee Wrights was on the ballot access committe but that Haugh was not). Now I was not suprised about Haugh, but I was suprised about Wrights since he had acted like he was my buddy and was sympathic to me.

    This really ticked me off because during this time period I had TURNED DOWN other work offers in places like California and Oregon just so I could work on a Libertarian Party project. I sat there in Pennsylvania waiting to go to North Carolina for the LP and this cost me money in opportunity costs.

    My first inclination was to say, “FUCK THEM!” and just go down there and start working anyway (which is what I should have done). By this point the money for the North Carolina LP petition drive was coming from LP National, Bill Redpath and Scott Kohlhaas (and also Richard Winger for that matter in another conversation) had all asked me to go there, and Haugh and Wrights are a couple of PISS ANTS who contributed little or nothing to the petition drive anyway. However, I decided to call Bill Redpath about it and Bill said that he would call Haugh and Wrights to fix the situation. Bill called up Haugh and he actually managed to get Haugh to back down on his position. Then he called up Wrights but Wrights was such a stubborn JACKASS that he refused to back down, even though the money for the drive was from LP National and even though LP National wanted me there. The excuses that Wrights gave were absolutely ridiculous and Bill did not think that they had any merit. When Bill told me this about Wrights I was rather astounded since the last two times I had spoken with Wrights he acted like he was my buddy and my only problem with him was over asking him if Sean Haugh’s crazy behavior was due to him being under the influence of drugs. I told Bill that I was going to ignore what Wrights said and just go down there anyway and if Wrights didn’t like it that was his problem. Bill asked me to hold off because he didn’t want to deal with another outburst from Wrights so he said that he would call Wrights again to fix the situation. The only problem was that Bill was very busy at the time and then he had a family emergency and he had to go to Ohio (I think that his father died or something like that). All of this calling back and forth ate up more time and by this time another 2 or 3 weeks had passed, so by this point I said “TO HELL WITH NORTH CAROLINA!” and did not end up going. In retrospect, I should have gone and collected a bunch of signatures anyway just to spite Lee Wrights.

    His comments about the police is so stupid and pathetic and I was say STATIST that it is sad that I should even have to address this. The only thing that he could be refering to is an incident which occurred when I was petitioning in Greensboro at the Univeristy of North Carolina branch that is there. I was on that campus for a few days. I started out mainly getting signatures in front of the Student Union/Center until some jerk that worked there told me that I had to leave and go to the “Free Speech Zone” (which is a way on stiffling free speech). It turned out that the “Free Speech Zone” was in a part of the campus where there were very few people and it turned out that there was construction going on nearby this area which was loud. The much lower traffic and the noise from the construction would have really hurt my signature production, so instead of going there I went to the campus library. The library was pretty good, but not as good as the Student Union/Center, but I could still pull decent numbers there. I gathered signatures in front of that campus library for a few days until one day some jerkoff that didn’t like the Libertarian Party or free speech decided to call the cops on me. I had not done anything wrong and I was in no way impeding library traffic and I in fact had a good number of people sign the petition there. In fact, when the cops arrived they commented that they didn’t think that I was doing anything wrong but that they recieved a complaint so they had to escort me off of the campus. The cops suggested that I take it up with the campus later. I then went to this street that was near the university, I believe that it was called Tate Street, and gathered signatures there, but at the time the library was busier so my numbers went down. I was quite irritated about having my rights violated and I was thinking that perhaps there was some type of action that could be taken against the university if they continued to stiffle free speech. So there was a Kinkos nearby and I decided to go in there and call Lee Wrights to let him know what had happened to and ask him if he thought that we should proceed with legal action. Lee Wrights acted like he was sympathetic and he said that he’d look into it and that the university needed to be “set straight” on the issue of free speech. I never did end up getting the opportunity to try to resolve the situation because I ended up being sent to Raliegh shortly after this.

    It is REALLY PATHETIC for Lee Wrights to bring this incident up against me years later and to use it as an excuse for him mindlessly rubberstamping Sean Haugh’s crazy backstabbing actions.

    Anyone who has done any decent amount of petitioning KNOWS that there is an attack against free speech and petition rights in this country. EVERY petitioner that I know has had the police called on them. I know a lot of petitioners who’ve been arrested and put in jail for petitioning. I have never been arrested myself, but I have had the police called on multiple occassions and I’ve come close to being arrested on several of those occassions. This is NOT the fault of petitioners but rather the fault of living in a country where our freedoms are being taken away. If you wanted to blacklist every petitioner who has had the police called on them you would NOT be able to maintain enough petitioners necessary for achieving ballot status. Every expierenced petitioner that the Libertarian Party has utilized has had the police called on them.

    Ironically, there is this one mercenary petitioner that Sean Haugh loves and shows favoritism too that was handed the majority of the last petition drive in North Carolina (Note that they shut most petitioners out of working there so this person could gather most of the signatures and make most of the money and this is one of the big reasons that it took so long to finish the last LP petition drive in NC. Artificially slowing down that petition drive so one person could make the bulk of the money actually impeded ballot access in other states since North Carolina could have been wrapped up much earlier than it was.). I KNOW for a FACT that this mercenary petitioner has had the police called on him multiple times. I don’t hold this against this individual because that would be stupid and irrational (which is Lee Wrights’ territory). Once again, we live in a country where our freedom is under attack and petitioners are out there battling this stuff on the front lines, so of course petitioners are going to have the police called on them. This is something that happens to every person who does a lot of petitioning and anyone who is expierenced with the petition process KNOWS this. Isn’t it ironic that Wrights would use this as a justification for stabbing me in the back and screwing me over when the very person would was handed the bulk of the deal to petition in North Carolina has had MANY run ins with the police himself? The fact that Wrights would even say this illustrates what a JACKASS he is and it also shows that he doesn’t know what he is talking about when it comes to petition drives.

    Lee Wrights didn’t “save” anyone from anything. What he did was SCREW the Libertarian Party over by having that petition drive in North Carolina drag on much longer than necessary which not only held up ballot access in NC, it also held up ballot access in other states. He also SCREWED over Paul because Paul was put into a position where he had to work there without having anyone to ride around with and this meant that he did not gather as many signatures as he could have gathered had I been there with him. This also screwed over the Libertarian Party in another way, and that is that it meant that Libertarian Party donors paid for a motel room for Paul that was generating 500 or less signatures per week, when if I had been there that motel room could have easily generated 1,500-2,000 signatures per week, which would have been a more efficient use of donor’s money (perhaps Wrights doesn’t care about donor’s money since he doesn’t donate hardly anything to the party anyway). He also SCREWED me over because I ended up having a bunch of my time wasted waiting for the LP of North Carolina thing to start up and then to go there and work (at the request of Bill Redpath, Scott Kohlhaas, and Richard Winger), and then more of my time was wasted due to Lee Wrights having pulled this BACKSTABBING BULLSHIT. Remember, I had turned down other work options just because I wanted to work on a Libertarian Party project, you know, to help the party that I’ve been a member of since 1996, and this was the thanks that I got. Time is money, and I had my time WASTED due to this PETTY BACKSTABBING BULLSHIT from Wrights. My opportunity cost had to be at least $2,000-$3,000.

    Then Wrights had the GALL to pretend like nothing was wrong when I saw him at the National Convention in Denver. He didn’t know at first that I knew what he had done behind my back. So when I first started talking to him he acted friendly as if nothing had happened. Then when I informed him that I knew about what he had done behind my back his response was to go ballistic and start yelling like a maniac and run away while threatening to have me thrown out of the convention. Even though I had good reason to be pissed off at Wrights, when I approached him I didn’t not scream and yell. I said, “Hey Lee, long time no see.” and shook his hand. I did not let on at first that I knew that he had stabbed me in the back. It was Wrights who started yelling first after I brought up that I knew how he had betrayed me. Then, as if this was not bad enough, I found out from Jason Seagraves (who had witnessed the last few moments of this confrontation) that Wrights had told him something to justify his actions which was a TOTAL LIE that Lee Wrights must have fabricated on the spot.

    I do NOT appreciate somebody who lies about me, flys off the handle and starts yelling at me like a maniac, stabs me in the back, and causes me to lose money. I have ZERO respect for Lee Wrights.

    The TRUTH is that Lee Wrights doesn’t know what the fuck he is talking about when it comes to ballot access petitioning and he NEVER once came out and collected signatures with me. In fact, during the month that I worked there nobody from the North Carolina LP ever came out in the field and worked with me. I doubt that Lee Wrights himself gathered any signatures, and if he did gather any it likely wasn’t many. He’d probably suck as a petitioner.

    The ONLY reason that I ever had a problem with Lee Wrights in the first place is because Sean Haugh is a crazy asshole and Lee Wrights has got his head shoved up Sean Haugh’s ass.

    I have been a member of the Libertarian Party since 1996 and I started working as a petitioner in 2000. I’ve worked in 24 states plus Washington DC, and in half of these places I’ve worked there on multiple occassions. I have a stellar track record and my services are in demand. If the problem were really me then why is it that I’ve been able to work in so many places and have my services in demand (including having my services in demand by the same individuals & groups on multiple occassions)? The problem in North Carolina was because Sean Haugh is a crazy asshole and Lee Wrights is a crazy asshole who will irrationally do anything to cover up for / rubberstamp anything that Sean Haugh does.

  81. Dave Brady

    Andy, this issue is not about you and that was 8 years ago. OMG someone send him $327 and make him stop. AAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH

  82. Andy

    “paulie // Apr 24, 2009 at 12:41 pm

    ‘I know that I’ve never seen a good word from him about anyone he’s worked for.’

    He has had good things to say about plenty of people he has worked with. Of course, when things are smooth, there’s not much reason to talk about it, so I can see where you would get that impression.”

    How the FUCK does this ignorant ASSHOLE know this? He’s got no fucking idea where all I’ve worked and what all I’ve done.

    Here is EYEWITNESS testimony from Jim March of the Libertarian Party of Arizona about my work.

    “— On Sat, 3/7/09, Jim March wrote:

    From: Jim March
    Subject: Re: Andy Jacobs’ great work @ gun show
    To: deuchner@comcast.net, thatpetitionguy@yahoo.com
    Cc: dfn@alum.mit.edu
    Date: Saturday, March 7, 2009, 6:28 PM

    Andy absolutely kicks ass at this.I watched him take at least 20+ of these and I can tell you this is avery high-grade pile – existing voters who are already politically aware. I would be surprised if the failure rate crosses 20% and I suspect it will be much less…this is a grade-A primo stack of paper.Let me make a suggestion here: if it’s OK with him, I’d say pay him up-front for at least 2/3rds of these, and then when we get the”success rate feedback” forms from Pima’s Recorder, we then settle up accounts for any more. Upshot is, he won’t have to wait until the Recorder finishes for
    most of the money, BUT he’ll still in the end only be paid for those that are successful.I gave him eight sheets worth of the “voter name turn-in sheet” formsI developed for the Pima recorder’s office, and am also giving him the.PDF of the form and a dozen more such sheets tomorrow AM. Since I’mCCing him here I’ll include that as an attachment. (Note that it canbe printed in B&W and still work.)I’m also doing him a one-page flyer on “Election Observation and thePima LP”, I’m drafting it now.Look, this guy is SO much better at this than me it ain’t even funny.By far the most effective thing I can do is just make sure Andy is able to operate full-tilt, helping handle logistics, housing,documents, etc. If he needed me to walk his dang dog I’d do that :).This ONE guy just working the gun shows can net us all the registrations we need both Pima and *statewide*. It’s like
    watching Michaelangelo paint the Sistine Chapel :). Or more seriously, the dude could give the “Shamwow” guy on TV a run for his money :D.Jim”

    Here’s David Euchner of the Arizona LP on my validity.

    “your latest batch of regsThursday, April 23, 2009 8:37 AM
    From: “deuchner@comcast.net” Add sender to Contacts To: thatpetitionguy@yahoo.comCc: 1.jim.march@gmail.comThe Recorder’s office notified me yesterday that your latest batch of regs had been completed. 57 out of 61 were good. Of the other four, two did not provide proof of citizenship, one gave a business address & wrong tel #, and one was out of county. Still, 57 out of 61 is remarkable!

    How shall I get a check to you for $342.00, are you in town now or shall I mail it? Also, will you be at the gun show the weekend of May 2-3?

    Thanks again

    Dave”

    Here is long time Libertarian Mark Pickens (a guy who I have worked with on petition drives on multiple occassions) on my work.

    LP Registration DriveSunday, December 21, 2008 3:15 AM
    From: “Mark Pickens” Add sender to Contacts To: “Andy Jacobs”

    I haven’t forgotten about the LP registration drive, but I’ve been swamped with work at ISIL. That, and having no car, has me paralyzed.

    I would like to bring in Andy Jacobs. I’ve known him for years and have lived and worked with him for months at a stretch. He works long hours and is highly productive. He understands Libertarian philosophy and I’ve always seen him represent issues appropriately.

    I realize there’s been tension between him and Sean Haugh, but if you knew the full story you’d realize how severely Andy was provoked.

    I have always seen Andy behave professionally on the job.

    If he’s here, I’ll be able to get into the field myself – at least part of the time. Should I ask him to come?

    Mark Pickens”

    Man, it really pisses me off when a person who has never worked with me and doesn’t know what they are talking about runs off at the mouth and starts trash talking me. People who don’t know what they are talking about OUGHT TO KEEP THEIR FUCKING MOUTH SHUT!!!!!!!!

    You’ve got a HELL of a lot of NERVE trashing me and my work. SHUT THE FUCK UP BECA– USE YOU DON’T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  83. Andy

    “Dave Brady // Apr 24, 2009 at 8:17 pm

    Andy, this issue is not about you and that was 8 years ago. OMG someone send him $327 and make him stop. AAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH”

    My opportunity cost from 2007 (which was just 2 years ago) was far more than $327. I lost a few thousand dollars over stupid petty bullshit, and the donors lost money too over this shit due to that LP petition drive being done less efficiently and dragging on longer than necessary.

    “92 Dave Brady // Apr 24, 2009 at 8:19 pm

    I bet I offended someone 8 years ago too. I bet we all did.”

    My only “offense” was that I asked Lee Wrights if Sean Haugh’s crazy behavior was due to drug use. That’s a pretty common question to ask when somebody is behaving like a crazed asshole.

    This was back in 2001. My getting pushed off that drive by Haugh in 2001 for no legitimate reason (and Haugh can’t even remember the accusations he threw at me and has actually changed the story multiple times since then) also hurt the party because it slowed down that ballot access drive and signatures that I could have gotten had I remained there ended up being collected by a mercenary petition outfit that was hired later and got paid a higher rate (and also did a less effective job).

    How did any of this provide any justification for screwing me over again in 2007? Especially when the money in 2007 was coming from LP National who WANTED me to go to North Carolina and when Haugh and Wrights contributed little to nothing (probably nothing) to that petition drive.

    Another thing that ticks me off is that when I did work in North Carolina in 2001 I was highly productive in that I gathered over 4,000 signatures in a month, and I did this under adverse conditions (the weather sucked most of the time I was there) and without having a car with me. Ask anyone who is expierenced in petitions and they will tell you that this is impressive. In addition to being highly productive gathering petition signatures, I also did some VOLUNTEER Libertarian voter registrations (in other words, I was not getting paid for this, but I had voter registrations with me and I talked some people into registering to vote under the Libertarian Party banner), and I also SPENT $100 of my own money photocopying Libertarian Party flyers and pamplets to hand out to people who were interested.

    I did not have to go to North Carolina for the LP. I had a regular job in California at the time that I could have worked at and I had also been offered a to work on voter registrations for the Republican Party in California. I TURNED DOWN the Republican voter registration drive because I did not want to help the Republican Party, I instead wanted to help the Libertarian Party, even if it meant that I had to travel all the way to North Carolina (and note that I was in Southern California where the weather at the time was nicer than it was in North Carolina) and even if it meant that I had to pay $327 out of my own pocket (with no reimbursement) for a plane ticket to get there.

    Then what was the thanks that I got for turning down other work so I could help the LP, travelling to NC on my own dime, being highly productive gathering signatures, gathering some volunteer Libertarian registrations, and spending $100 out of my own pocket to photocopy Libertarian Party outreach material which I handed out while I was petitioning in NC?

    My thanks was that I got STABBED IN THE BACK by Sean Haugh, and then I got STABBED IN THE BACK again, the next time by Lee Wrights because he just went along with whatever Sean Haugh said without engaging in any rational thought.

    I’d be willing to bet money that if anyone here had gone through what I went through with these guys they’d be pissed off as well.

    TO HELL WITH HAUGH AND WRIGHTS!!!!!!!!!

  84. Andy

    “The only thing that he could be refering to is an incident which occurred when I was petitioning in Greensboro at the Univeristy of North Carolina branch that is there.”

    Oh, on a side note, I read on-line a few years later that the campus Libertarian Club at the University of North Carolina in Greensboro did a protest against the “Free Speech Zone” policy (and remember, “Free Speech Zones” are a way of HINDERING free speech) at that university and the police were called on them. So going by Lee Wrights’ statist “logic” I suppose that the students who were members of that campus Libertarian Club should have been prohibited from being in a campus Libertarian Club and from petitioning too for that matter.

    What Lee Wrights said is so stupid that he should be LAUGHED off of the LNC.

  85. Andy

    “paulie // Apr 24, 2009 at 12:51 pm

    Quick clarification:

    If you are talking about Nebraska, I was there…

    In Nebraska, not just at the LNC meeting (and I was there too).

    We got ripped off for the vast majority of the money we were owed for Nebraska. It was not paid until almost a year later by LNC members (who were not liable for it). ”

    Here are the LNC meeting minutes from the Pittsburg meeting which was held in July of 2007. Click the link and scroll down to pages 14 & 15 to read about the Great LP RIPOFF of Petitioners from Nebraska in 2006.

    http://www.lp.org/archives/lnc20070721.pdf

    We worked in Nebraska from October-November of 2006. Scott Kohlhaas (who lives in Alasaka and is on the LP National payroll) was the fundraiser and he is the one who asked us to go to Nebraska. He assured us that we’d get paid in full while we were there.

    I left Nebraska being owed a WHOPPING $10,000. I was owed $4,000, plus I paid two other petitioners, Mark and Paul, $6,000 OUT OF MY OWN POCKET becuase if I didn’t they were going to be broke. I was assured that I was going to get paid shortly by Scott Kohlhaas, so I paid them off thinking that I’d be fully reimbursed for it within a week.

    Gary was also in Nebraska and he left being owed $4,000.

    We kept being told that we were about to get paid and we got lulled into a false sense of security since it was Scott Kohlhaas and the Libertarian Party.

    We ended up not recieving the majority of the money that we were owed until 10-11 MONTHS after the work was done (and remember, we were SUPPOSED to get paid in full while we were doing the work as we went).

    We got promised a .50 cent per signature penalty bonus for having to wait so long to get paid by Scott Kohlhaas. In another conversation, Bill Redpath said that he was going to get Kohlhaas or the LNC to pay us “credit card style interest” due to the unreasonably long delay in getting paid.

    We NEVER recieved the .50 cent per signature penalty bonus or the “credit card style interest” that we had been promised due to the EXTREMELY LONG delay in getting paid we had to endure.

    Everyone who is reading this, I want you to think of what it would be like to go out and work for a few weeks with the promise that you are going to get paid each week as you go, and then not end up getting paid when you were promised the money, and then not recieve the majority of the money until 10-11 months after you did the work. Then imagine getting promised a late penalty/bonus and not getting it.

    Wouldn’t you be pissed off?

    Imagine all of the problems that this would cause in your life.

    It is for this reason that I also hold Scott Kohlhaas in low regard (and note that Sean Haugh is in league with Scott Kohlhaas).

  86. Andy

    “‘paulie // Apr 24, 2009 at 10:21 am

    Lee makes an excellent point. Andy if you act this way on the net I can only assume you act this way at other times.’

    That would be an incorrect assumption. But I can see why it would seem that way if you only know Andy on the internet.”

    You people should see the way that Lee Wrights acts in person, that is when he’s not at a meeting kissing people’s asses. However, even when he is at an LNC meeting he has to walk out of the room multiple times to regain his composure because he’s such a hothead. The guy has mental problems.

  87. Thomas L. Knapp

    Andy, paraphrased:

    “It’s all about me. It’s GOT to be all about me. ME, ME, ME and anyone who thinks that there might be an issue of any concern other than MEEEEEEEEEEEE is a liar, an idiot and a criminal.”

    Hey, like I said, fine — it’s all about you. And you lose.

  88. Thomas L. Knapp

    Lee Wrights just brought in a $25 contribution — Tamara just renewed her sustaining membership for the purpose of being eligible to sign the petition of appeal to the judicial committee.

    I’ll be sending my $25 in by money order tomorrow since Starr has apparently implemented the policy of reducing revenues by declining wholly legal payments made on behalf of another.

    So, this week Lee will have raised at least $50 for the LP, which comes to an annualized rate of $2600 per year. I wonder if that will make up for the money Starr is burning?

  89. Andy

    This double standard here really disgusts me. Haugh and Wrights scream and yell like a couple of JACKASSES and then show up at a meeting and kiss people’s asses so some people assume that they are good guys.

    I rarely show up at LP meetings (usually because I’m too busy doing other stuff, such as engaging in REAL WORLD political activism instead of circle jerking at a meeting) but then when I try to EXPOSE the few people in the LP who’ve screwed me over like Haugh, Wrights, and Kohlhaas, some people attack me for it. So I’m just supposed to bend over and take it for getting screwed over by Haugh, Wrights, and Kohlhaas. I’m supposed to sit back and pretend like they are good guys and everything is peachy keen.

    I KNOW what an irrational asshole Wrights REALLY is and it makes me want to puke seeing this undeserving individual get a seat on the LNC and then have people rally to his defense because he was too much of a LOSER to even send in the minimum $25 per year which is required to hold a seat on the LNC.

    Who gives a RAT’S ASS if Wrights is on the LNC? It is not like the guy has any talent or is some great political strategist. I’m a more valuable asset as a petitioner & ballot access consultant than Wrights is on the LNC. When I got fucked over I didn’t get a fair hearing, hell, I didn’t even recieve the penalty/bonus that I was promised for the pay being so late from that screwjob in Nebraska. So spare me the tears for Lee Wrights.

    I’ll put my 12 3/4 years as a Libertarian Party activist up against Lee Wrights any day. I KNOW damn well that I’ve done a hell of lot more than he has (even if you take all of the petition signatures that I got paid on out of the equation). If you want to say that Lee hasn’t been in the party as long (he told me when I was in North Carolina that he joined in 1998, but the records indicate that he did not donate until 2000) that’s fine, because I’ve still done more than he has during that time period (and if my paid petitioning work does get counted, then I blow him away even more).

    I saw the records of Wrights’ donations to the LP and while I know that not everyone is rich and that every little bit helps, Wrights donations are pretty pathetic. I’m not rich and I’ve donated more money than he has. From what I’ve read, Wrights also sucks as a fundraiser and in fact hasn’t raised or given JACK SQUAT in the LNC’s Give or Get program. Hell, I’ve raised more money as a volunteer for the LP than Wrights has.

    I’ve also spent a good bit of my own money photo copying Libertarian Party flyers and pamphlets to hand out to people as well as other pro-liberty material, including VHS tapes and DVD’s. I know that there are several people over the years who joined the LP because I recruited them.

    A few years ago I set up a deal that got the Libertarian Party national coverage in USA Today. I’ve also gotten the Libertarian Party coverage on two local TV news broadcasts as well as several talk radio shows.

  90. Andy

    “Thomas L. Knapp // Apr 24, 2009 at 10:18 pm

    Andy, paraphrased:

    “It’s all about me. It’s GOT to be all about me. ME, ME, ME and anyone who thinks that there might be an issue of any concern other than MEEEEEEEEEEEE is a liar, an idiot and a criminal.”

    Hey, like I said, fine — it’s all about you. And you lose.”

    No, it is not all about me, me, me. When I got screwed it adversely effected other people. For instance, Wrights stabbing me in the back in 2007 had a negative effect on Paul because it meant that he didn’t have anyone to ride around with in North Carolina, which meant that he got less signatures than he would have otherwise, which meant that he made less money than he would have otherwise. Also, more importantly,. times that I got screwed over it had a negative effect on the ENTIRE Libertarian Party as it meant that ballot access was done in a less efficient manner, which meant that more money got WASTED.

    Anyone who thinks taht this is all about me doesn’t understand the big picture.

  91. Andy

    “Thomas L. Knapp // Apr 24, 2009 at 10:21 pm

    Lee Wrights just brought in a $25 contribution — Tamara just renewed her sustaining membership for the purpose of being eligible to sign the petition of appeal to the judicial committee.

    I’ll be sending my $25 in by money order tomorrow since Starr has apparently implemented the policy of reducing revenues by declining wholly legal payments made on behalf of another.

    So, this week Lee will have raised at least $50 for the LP, which comes to an annualized rate of $2600 per year. I wonder if that will make up for the money Starr is burning?”

    The only thing is that I don’t see any way that this is going to annualize into $2,600 per year.

  92. Thomas L. Knapp

    Andy,

    $50 x 52 weeks = $2600

    As for the other:

    We can keep making this personal — which means you can keep hurting yourself with the multi-page screeds about how Lee Wrights is an asshole and keep losing money because I’m determined to give you what you want …

    … or you can get it through your head that this isn’t really about Lee Wrights, that he just happens to be the target of the moment, and that the real issue is whether or not an internal cabal is going to be allowed to take over the LNC by ignoring the bylaws.

  93. Rocky Eades

    @ #86 & #87 – Jezuss; it just keeps getting deeper and deeper! Can someone write a Facebook or other blog about this aspect of the corruption in this thing?

  94. G.E.

    Andy – Let’s say you’re right about Wrights. I have no reason to think that you’re not. That’s sort of beside the point here. Just because someone is an “asshole” in your words, doesn’t justify their illegal removal by a band of clowns. You should know better than that.

  95. Thomas L. Knapp

    Bob,

    I did not assert that Wrights would necessarily bring in $50 a week, every week, to the LNC just by being a target of the cabal.

    I merely asserted that what he brought in this week (that I know of) works out to an annualized rate of $2,600. That is true and correct.

    Of course, Tamara and I had discussed going ahead and returning to “sustaining member” status anyway … oddly enough, pursuant to a mention by Bob Sullentrup regarding Missouri’s position on the list of states by sustaining membership. It took the Wrights affair to push us over the edge to that, which I guess means that we could doubly credit Mr. Sullentrup with the fundraising.

  96. erastus

    Will you people stop and listen to yourselves? First of all, I posted once before in this tread, and you are so busy throwing accusations at each other that it was too much for you to even acknowledge me. As I said before, I am a party member, but only local and state. Over the past year I’ve considered joing national, but held out due to all the stories I heard from people that have been involved for years. Stories about lying and back-stabbing–kinda like this…

    Why should I even bother giving you my money??

    Tim Hart in Michigan

  97. John Famularo

    The paid petitioning process has been a source of strife within the LP since the beginning. I personally became involved in 1984 and swore off hiring or managing paid petitioners in 1988.

    The only reason the LP has to pay for signature gathering is that they don’t have enough committed volunteers and they keep running candidates for offices for which they are neither qualified nor competitive. Most if not all the races the LP should be contesting, require less than a few hundred signatures. Most of those signatures should be gathered by the candidate while walking his/her district.

  98. Thomas L. Knapp

    The latest message to the LNC list from the chair (below my signature) makes it abundantly clear that Mr. Redpath was a fully informed advance conspirator in the matter of the illicit attempted removal of R. Lee Wrights from the LNC, and that he is continuing to peddle the fiction that that removal was legal and remains effective.

    Mr. Redpath admist that he knew that Mr. Wrights’s dues were coming up, and that he intentionally avoided mentioning it to Mr. Wrights.

    Mr. Redpath asserts that the reason he avoided mentioning it to Mr. Wrights is that Mr. Wrights had been discourteous to him and therefore deserved no courtesy himself.

    There’s more than courtesy involved, however. There’s fiduciary duty, including the duty to not intentionally either commit violations of the bylaws one’s self, or to foster or countenance violations of the bylaws by the board or members thereof.

    We now know, per Mr. Redpath, that Mr. Starr, Mr. Redpath and Mr. Kraus were all aware in advance that Mr. Wrights’s dues were about to expire and said nothing to him.

    In other words, the three of them knew that a bylaws violation was about to occur, and intentionally allowed that violation to occur when any one of them could have prevented that violation with a simple phone call or email.

    Based on these now fully admitted facts of record, it’s now reasonable to ask whether the conspirators possibly committed overt acts in addition to their knowing, malicious and party-damaging omissions.

    Mr. Wrights did not receive his snail mail renewal notices. Up to this point, the logical and accepted explanation for that has been that he has moved about recently and his mail is not catching up with him quickly.

    Given the admission of the conspiracy to bring about his removal, another possible explanation comes to mind. Were those LP dues renewal notices lost in the mail … or were they never mailed in the first place?

    Mr. Redpath’s message identifies a conspirator (motive) who could probably have prevented those notices from being mailed (opportunity) — Mr. Kraus. I have no proof that this occurred, but the fact of his complicity in the plot does raise the possibility.

    Mr. Sullentrup’s role in the whole thing appears, on the basis of the chair’s message, to have come late in the game — he apparently didn’t participate in the conspiracy in advance, but simply issued the bylaws-violating “notice of vacancy” after the fact.

    The case is pretty airtight for removal of the chair and Mr. Starr from the LNC, and for the termination of Mr. Kraus’s employment at LPHQ. They conspired, by their own admission, to create a violation of the bylaws and to exploit that violation with further violations.

    Regards,
    Tom Knapp

    Message to the LNC list from William Redpath:

    —–
    Several fellow Libertarian National Committee (LNC) members have asked for an explanation of events leading to the recent loss of Lee Wrights’ eligibility to serve as a member of the LNC.

    Here is the story, as I know it.

    In November 2008, I was rereading the Bylaws and read Section 8, Article 4, which states, “A National Committee member shall be a sustaining member of the Party, and shall not be the candidate of any party except the Party or an affiliate.”

    I then called Aaron Starr about this, and asked him to ascertain whether all LNC members were sustaining members. I may have called Bob Sullentrup about this, as well, but I don’t recall for sure.

    Aaron contacted Robert Kraus at LPHQ, and it is my understanding that Robert produced a list for Aaron of LNC members and their sustaining membership expiration dates (unless that member was a life member).

    All LNC members were sustaining members, at that time, and Aaron so informed me.

    I never saw this list with expiration dates, but Aaron did. He noticed that several LNC members had expiration dates in early 2009, including Lee Wrights, who Aaron saw had an expiration date in April. Aaron tells me that he forgot about this list until Monday, April 6, on which day it dawned on him that this was about the time of Lee Wrights’ sustaining membership expiration.

    He called Robert Kraus that day and learned that Lee Wrights’ sustaining membership started on (I believe) April 8, 2008, and had not yet been renewed. Aaron called me on, I recall, the evening of Tuesday, April 7, and told me that Lee’s sustaining membership was about to expire. It is my understanding that Bob Sullentrup was not informed of Lee’s impending sustaining membership expiration until sometime on Wednesday, April 8.

    I waited a week after Lee’s expiration date to see if his sustaining membership renewal payment showed up in the mail. It did not. The Bylaws, in my opinion, plainly read that Lee was no longer eligible to serve on the LNC. The Bylaws don’t allow exceptions to this. Bob Sullentrup notified the Committee of the new vacancy. I directed Robert Kraus to remove Lee from the LNC Discuss List, and to remove him from the list of LNC members on lp.org.

    I have been asked why I didn’t pickup the phone and call or email Lee Wrights to notify him of the impending expiration of his sustaining membership, and the implication of that for his membership on the LNC.

    I was in a quandary about what to do. Part of me did think that that was the most prudent course of action for both the Party and the LNC. But, in the end, I could not bring myself to do it.

    First, it is not my job as Chairman to remind individual members to renew their sustaining memberships. So, for me to call Lee would have been a matter of courtesy. It was my judgment at that time that he did not deserve that, as he has shown a lack of courtesy through what at times has been egregiously rude behavior to his fellow members on this Committee, to LNC staff, and to me, particularly at the San Diego meeting and thereafter. (Although I am not on the APRC email list, I have been told he had behaved very uncivilly at times with his postings to that list.) For him to expect courtesy while treating others so badly is hypocritical.

    In particular, it is my understanding that Lee posted a commentary by Sean Haugh to libertyforall.net on the day after the San Diego meeting that other people have told me they thought was defamatory to me. I certainly thought it was, and, in my opinion, to the best of my knowledge, it was also defamatory to M Carling, former LNC member and current LP parliamentarian.

    Lee has told us that his failure to renew his sustaining membership before expiration was inadvertent. Maybe this is true, but based on the LNC’s financial donation records, it appears that each of the three times that Lee has been on the LNC, either he ran for election when he was not eligible to do so, or he lost eligibility to serve on the LNC after his election. There is a pattern here that should not be ignored.

    Lee has asserted to me that I am trying to “run the radicals off the LNC.” That is not so. My problem with Lee Wrights has only to do with his behavior.

    While I certainly admit that I am not an “LP Radical,” I have striven to be fair in my role as Chair, as that is an important quality to have in that position. As a part of that fairness, non-life members of this LNC should note that, as long as I am Chairman, I will not be reminding them in any manner to maintain their sustaining memberships. That will ultimately be their responsibility.

    I regret that what I consider a straightforward application of the Bylaws to Lee’s failure to remain eligible has caused this controversy. Also, I apologize for the delay in getting this information to you. You have every right to know what happened. In addition to my work and LP matters, I have been preparing for a professional examination in the near future and dealing with the impending death of a long-time friend.

    I know some of you think that I erred in not calling Lee as a courtesy to remind him about his expiring sustaining membership. Fair enough. I understand your position. If I had inadvertently failed to take care of a required task, I would want my colleagues to give me a heads-up, and I’d be hurt if they didn’t give me one.

    However, I hope you understand my position. I think Lee used up his ration of goodwill a long time ago. He has no right to complain about not receiving special courtesy when he fails to show basic courtesy to others.

    If you decide to reelect him to the LNC, I will treat him in exactly the same way as any other LNC member. If he decides to act with courtesy, he will certainly receive the same courtesy from me.

    Thank you very much.

    William Redpath
    LNC Chairman
    —–

  99. erastus

    Thanks for the info and perspective, John (#109). This stuff is all new to me. My initial reaction: why is such a small party paying people to do this? It makes no sense to me.
    Anyway, everyone should think about how this fighting looks to prospective party members. This is not helping the party.

  100. Thomas L. Knapp

    erastus,

    You write:

    “My initial reaction: why is such a small party paying people to do this?”

    Some party members and leaders believe that 50-state ballot access (or close) for the presidential campaign is a worthy goal.

    I’m not going to argue over whether they are correct in that belief or not, but …

    … there are some states in which the active LP is too small to provide the needed volunteers to successfully petition, and there are some states in which the petition requirements are too onerous for even a robust volunteer organization to meet.

    So, if the LP is going to seek 50-state ballot access (or close), it’s going to use paid petitioners.

    There are also cost-benefit calculations to be made by activists and donors.

    Let’s say there’s a guy who can afford to contribute $10k to the LP or take a month off his job to carry petitions around getting signatures, but not both. If his ability to collect signatures is such that more signatures could be gathered by a paid petitioner for, say, $5k, he’s doing the party a $5k favor by just writing that check instead of hitting the sidewalk with a clipboard.

  101. John Famularo

    Tom Knapp wrote,

    “Some party members and leaders believe that 50-state ballot access (or close) for the presidential campaign is a worthy goal.”

    Yes, that is the crux of the problem. It is mostly true of the majority of national convention delegates and therefore the party. They started out to run a presidential candidate (1972) and regardless of the lack of success, they will continue to devote most of their efforts to federal and statewide races they can not win or even be competitive.. For most national party members this is about “macho flash”, water cooler bragging rights and belonging to the only social club. There are of course sincere party builders and electoral office advocates that surface from time to time but they burn out and leave the party after a few years.

  102. Michael H. Wilson

    Time to split hairs.
    The bylaws read;
    “Only sustaining members shall be counted for delegate apportionment and National
    Committee representation. Only sustaining members shall be eligible to hold National
    Party office or be a candidate for President or Vice-President.”

    What do the bylaws define as an office? Since Lee is a Representative and not Chair, Vice-Chair, Secretary, or Treasurer and not specifically an officer can he be held to this standard?

  103. Susan Hogarth

    Re: national-level campaigns: John writes:

    For most national party members this is about “macho flash”, water cooler bragging rights and belonging to the only social club. There are of course sincere party builders…

    Consider the possibility that what you’re describing is more a sincere difference in strategic approach among people who ALL want to be ‘party builders’ than that ‘most’ people who happen to disagree with you are just attention-seeking poopyheads.

    Of course, this requires you to entertain the notion that what you think is obvious to everyone is, in fact, not obvious, which leads to the somewhat scary idea that you may, in fact, be the one who is wrong – and this is why I think people are so often ready to ascribe malice where simple honest disagreement is a better explanation.

    As an advocate of libertarian principles, I come across many people who think the use of coercion is the best way to advance society. I hardly think all of those people want what’s -worst- for society, so I conclude that they (or possibly I) are wrong on some point(s). It makes working with people so much pleasanter and more productive to proceed from this assumption.

    As an activist, how many time, John, has someone replied to a proposal you’ve made – such as cutting back government involvement in schools – with a totally inappropriate interpretation of your motive (e.g. “Why do you want children to be stupid?”)? Don’t you find such mis-characterization frustrating and insulting? Please think about this when describing so many of your fellow dedicated activists within the LP as desirous of ““macho flash”, water cooler bragging rights and belonging to the only social club”.

  104. Susan Hogarth

    Couldn’t resist:

    Just because someone is an “asshole” … doesn’t justify their illegal removal by a band of clowns.

    First they came for the assholes…

  105. Michael H. Wilson

    If I recall the bylaws correctly alternates may sit in for the regional reps when the regional person is not available, but apparently only the regional person must have kept their dues up to date. Is this correct? And if so does this suggest that there are two different standards once again?

  106. Michael H. Wilson

    If my job is to notify members that their dues have expired and I stand in a brick room and holler “Tom your dues have expired!” and Tom doesn’t hear me because he is miles away who’s at fault? Tom for not hearing me, or me for not adequately notifying Tom?

    p.s I am familiar with police incidents where the officer stands outside an says “police open up” or such wording in a whisper or low voice, then claims the home owner did not hear them so they had to busted the door down.

    Are we getting into the sort of nonsence?

  107. Bryan

    @ 53…

    Gregg, I doubt I can answer all your questions about South Carolina LP, and I know I can’t speak for all the members, but I can…give you my personal experiences/impressions.

    1. Very few South Carolina LP members post/comment here. Why??? I am not sure. but depending on where the petitions are being posted, or who is promoting them, SC members who would agree may never see them…I know I haven’t seen them in e-mail or on any of the various sites/blogs I routinely visit, except this one.

    2. Mr. Flood is the Rep. on the National for South Carolina. He is also one of the people being held as a conspirator in the events that have led to this dialog.

    Because he is the state rep, I can see why many SC members would give him the benefit of the doubt, if not agree with him. After all, he is not only the state rep, but active in the state…people know him…and some have disagreed with him, but in the end…I get the impression he speaks for them “in the big picture”. I have seen him in a meeting, and my impression was that he might use the rule book, but I don’t think he would intentionally break the rules…

    3. Like the rest of South Carolina (conservative) most (definitely not all) of the LP members I have met would be considered reformers. This would imply that many in SC are satisfied, or at least don’t disagree with the actions the National is taking. (Again, stressing that these are impressions made by seeing only the EC and observers “in action” at meetings, and the members/supporters I have met locally.)

    As for my opinion of the question at hand, I have never met Mr. Wrights, and am not aware of whether he has been doing a good job or not. So at this point my opinion is only at the “gut” reaction level. If I were still with the GP I would “stand aside”, as I can’t agree or disagree with the various arguments.

    As a “sustaining member”, I do to my understanding have a voice on one of the petitions. If it is really close to the minimum, I would lend my name to the petition out of respect of the other people who have commented here…and because I do believe in bylaws, rules and doing things by the book. On the other hand, if what National is doing is within the “rules”…I’m not going to lose sleep over it…

  108. John Famularo

    Susan Hogarth wrote.
    “Consider the possibility that what you’re describing is more a sincere difference in strategic approach”.

    I thought so from about 1983 to 1993. I had been a regional rep on the LNC and Pennsylvania state chair. When I was elected as national secretary in 1993 I began to realize that the LP had no real strategy, just a lot of tactics that had been around since 1974. When I began to push for a clear, concise exposition of the mission and the strategy to achieve that mission I found that everyone has a different idea of what the mission of the LP actually was. They didn’t even agree on the definition of libertarian. All they could agree on was that they wanted to “build the party”.

    I have concluded as I have stated above. I have no idea whether this applies to you personally, but I know it applies to most of the convention delegates I knew and have interviewed (many hundreds over a 20 year period) .

  109. Michael H. Wilson

    Much of what I have seen in the LP leads me to agree with much of what John says.

    There are a lot of people who want to be “King of the Mountain”, but few of those dare to lay out a plan to actually achieve success.

    In much the same fashion there are a lot of male members who are advocating a macho foreign policy, but most of that group have never worn a uniform.

  110. Michael H. Wilson

    Let me add to my comments above. This is not meant as a criticism of those who started this party, but over the years we should have developed some form of a plan to grow and do better than what we have.

    Even the Socialists of the mid 1900s had better plans than we presently have.

  111. Michael H. Wilson

    Maybe the JudComm should consider Jury Nullification as one of the tools in the tool box.

    If it works in criminal court why not ours?

  112. Mik Robertson

    Perhaps libertarians in general don’t believe in planning, centrally from the government or otherwise. Better planning on the part of At-large Representative Wrights could have prevented this whole episode.

    It would seem Mr. Wrights removed himself from the LNC, albeit inadvertently. Now that the situation has been remedied he could be reappointed to the position, if his past actions merit reappointment by the committee.

  113. Michael H. Wilson

    Mik in the businesses I have worked we have always set goals and develop a plan to meet those goals.

    Why can’t the LP do something similar?

  114. Mik Robertson

    Apparently it is too much fun to identify enemies and hatch conspiracy theories against fellow travelers. I agree more organizational planning would be a good thing.

  115. George Phillies

    @110

    It is amusing to note that there is now a circulated complaint from the LNC Secretary about your post, namely “I noticed no one bothered to post this at IPR since it’s anti-Wrights, and apparently nobody has the integrity to present both sides. How typical. ”
    Of course it had been posted. Sullentrup, says the forwarder of his message, thought the message should have been up sooner, namely

    “The Chair made this text public Friday evening. I think it sheds light on
    the Wrights issue you may have missed. ”

    While Liberty for All did receive the memo about when described, we are on a monthly publication schedule. Also, the memo we received was sent to the LNC-discuss list, which is not a public location, even if it does leak like the Titanic after she split in half, as witness the ehder block “From: William Redpath
    Date: Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 7:09 PM
    Subject: [Lnc-discuss] Lee Wrights
    To: LNC Discussion “

  116. Michael H. Wilson

    So it seems the big boys do read this list. Well pardon me for saying so but it is time to put this tempest behind us. Looks like there were errors on both sides. Close the books and move on.

    David Walker, former Comptroller of the U.S. has been talking and writing about the need to increase taxes to pay for the debt that the government has placed on us. This is an opportunity for the LP to make its pitch. Put the Wrights issue behind us and get on with business. Or do you wish to see your tax burden double?

  117. Ken Moellman

    In my opinion, a phone call to Wrights was the right thing to do.

    If anything, this mess points out that LP National’s membership renewal efforts are not very thorough. Not to those the staff under the bus; I know they’re busy, too.

    If Wrights was given proper notice that his membership was about to expire (within one month of expiration), and wasn’t going to renew his membership, after being asked one final time, then the LNC should take action.

    If Wrights does renew his membership, then anyone who doesn’t like to work with Wrights deals with the fact that the LP National delegation chose Wrights as a LNC Representative.

    Instead, we have a bunch of drama, which makes the party look stupid. I’m spending my time dealing with LNC personality conflicts, instead of working on websites or making phone calls to members. And since I personally like everyone involved, it puts me in a really crappy position.

    We spend too much time fighting ourselves, and not focusing on the real enemy.

    So, fix this mess, reinstate Wrights — either now, or at the next LNC meeting, provided he’s eligible to serve on the LNC, in accordance with the Bylaws, and let’s get on with it.

    If any member of the LNC, or the LP membership, doesn’t like any particular member of the LNC, then run against them in the next LNC election.

    Otherwise, STFU and let’s get on with it.

  118. Thomas L. Knapp

    “The big boys” certainly know about IPR.

    In his rant at the Missouri convention, Mr. Sullentrup attempted to explain justify the removal of Wrights from the LNC and specifically complained that the story was, or would be, twisted at IPR “by the same 30 people who always read and comment there.”

  119. Michael Seebeck

    Unfortunately for Sullentrup, those “same 30 people” are the ones who pay attention and know what’s going on, including the bullshit level.

  120. Michael H. Wilson

    May I suggest that y’all check out the may issue of Atlantic magazine. Simon Johnson, and econ prof at MIT, has an interesting article about the bankers and their coup. All the while the LP is at work on putting the FUNK back in dysfunction.

    MW; proud member GANG of 30

  121. mdh

    I was at the LPTN convention this weekend. Lee gave an awesome speech. Ernie Hancock video taped it, and hopefully we’ll have it online soon.

    I spent some time on Saturday morning talking to Lee, and I am extremely glad that he’s not giving up. These shenanigans need to be addressed by the JudComm quickly so that the party can move on.

  122. Pam

    Just in case anybody cares—Lee did NOT receive any mail from the Libertarian party at all in the last several months, telling him that it was time to renew. I just looked through his box of mail that he has not picked up, and there is NOTHING from the Libertarian party except a fund raising letter that he received a week after the big boys already had told him he was banished from the play ground. So they may want to explain the fact that no “snail mail” was ever sent to him to even remind him that it was time to renew his membership. What a bunch of jerks……
    Pam Brogren (Wrights)

  123. G.E.

    Andy: Get a clue, man. Even George W. Bush deserves a fair trial. You can’t be in favor of lawlessness just because it’s directed at people you don’t like. Or you can, but you’re not a libertarian in that case.

    FYI: Lee Wrights has dissed IPR and me personally. He’s connected with Sean Haugh, who played an integral role in the Mary Ruwart kiddy porn smear. I don’t even like the LP — it’s dead to me. But I still think Wrights is getting a raw deal, which is why I signed the petition. I’m deeply disappointed in my friend Andy.

  124. Chuck Moulton

    Bill Redpath wrote (quoted @110):

    I have been asked why I didn’t pickup the phone and call or email Lee Wrights to notify him of the impending expiration of his sustaining membership, and the implication of that for his membership on the LNC.

    I was in a quandary about what to do. Part of me did think that that was the most prudent course of action for both the Party and the LNC. But, in the end, I could not bring myself to do it.

    […] For him to expect courtesy while treating others so badly is hypocritical.

    The Chair should not just treat others as they treat him, but rather should act courteously even to people with whom he is frustrated. That’s part of the job.

    It seems pretty clear to me that this fiasco is a net negative to the LP that is driving down donations, alienating activists, and wasting the valuable time of everyone involved. Those reactions were entirely predictable and should have entered into the calculus of whether to avert this brouhaha by picking up the phone.

    I consider Bill a friend, I voted for Bill, and I supported Bill’s re-election. However, I am disappointed in how he has handled himself here.

    In my opinion this all boils down to RRONR page 233 lines 20-23: “any presiding officer will do well to bear in mind that no rules can take the place of tact and common sense on the part of the chairman.”

  125. Robert Capozzi

    Knapp 107,

    No, I beg to differ. It’s misleading to use the term “annualized” for one-time events. The term implies that a new trend has been established, and there’s no evidence that a new trend HAS BEEN established.

    Your math is correct. Your analysis is not. I once worked for a hedge fund, and SO wanted to promote our monthly rates of return as “annualized.” More educated MBAs schooled me on why that was analytically misrepresentative.

    I recall Dr. Phillies making the same mistake when he was analyzing the Barr campaign budget. I’d encourage all Ls to not use this inappropriate “annualization” methodology, as it’s not done in more sophisticated circles, FOR GOOD REASONS!

    btw, this sort of error is made by the media all the time. This weekend they were saying things like: “Obama’s approval rating was 67% 2 months ago, but it’s holding up now at 63%, down 4%.”

    Not correct. It’s down 4 percentage POINTS… big difference.

  126. Robert Capozzi

    Does anyone else find it interesting that L’Affaire Lee has created a schism among the “radicals.” Some “don’t like” Lee, and this thing has them airing their long-ago grievances with he and Haugh.

    These grievances seem very beside the point.

    This all leads me to believe that we need to hire Rodney King to serve as the LP’s professional mediator.

  127. Thomas L. Knapp

    Bob,

    I’m unaware of any “schism” among the “radicals,” at least over R. Lee Wrights.

    One “radical” — Andy — has a history of evaluating and arguing LNC matters entirely from a foundation of his personal complaints with those involved, rather than from a foundation of the relevant facts.

    That’s probably not going to change, and it’s probably going to cost him … but one person’s perpetual personal bitch-fest does not a “schism” make.

    In point of fact, the Starr/Redpath/Sullentrup rebellion against the bylaws seems to be bringing together “radicals,” including some who have a history of personal conflict with Wrights but who are now setting that history aside in favor of doing the right thing.

  128. John Famularo

    This whole thing brings up another problem I have with the LNC; their preoccupation with money. Of what value is money to the LP? The purchase of goods and services. Much of the money is spent on buying services that should be being supplied by volunteers. At least the volunteers should be credited with time spent on approved projects. As a former state and county chair for a number of terms, I know that I would much rather have a party member get 25 signatures than give me $25,. As a former LNC member I know haw much it costs to attend the LNC meetings. Why isn’t that significant enough to maintain “sustaining” membership?.

    Since the LNC determines what level of cash donations constitute “sustaining membership, what would prohibit a sleazy majority on the LNC to increase the dues requirement to $1,000 just before a convention in order to completely control the convention and the subsequent LNC?

    The LP needs a complete overhaul to get out of the rut it has been in since 1983.

  129. Thomas L. Knapp

    “Since the LNC determines what level of cash donations constitute ‘sustaining’ membership, what would prohibit a sleazy majority on the LNC to increase the dues requirement to $1,000 just before a convention in order to completely control the convention and the subsequent LNC?”

    There’s nothing to prevent the LNC from increasing dues to $1000.

    On the other hand, increasing dues to $1,000 just before a convention would not give them control of that convention.

    For one thing, “sustaining membership” in the national organization is not a requirement for serving as a delegate.

    For another, while the number of delegates each state gets is determined on the basis of the number of sustaining memberships in that state, it is determined by the end of the year prior to the convention, not immediately before it; and the delegates are selected by the state affiliate’s organization, not just by the sustaining national members in that state.

  130. George Phillies

    “Since the LNC determines what level of cash donations constitute ’sustaining’ membership, what would prohibit a sleazy majority on the LNC to increase the dues requirement to $1,000 just before a convention in order to completely control the convention and the subsequent LNC?”

    The certain knowledge that the LNC does not have a legal monopoly on being the national libertarian association? Inability to count up to a thousand? Common sense? There must be a reason out there some place.

  131. Michael Seebeck

    Tom @145:

    For one thing, “sustaining membership” in the national organization is not a requirement for serving as a delegate.

    It’s worth noting that M Carling submitted a proposal to the LPCA Bylaws Committee to change California’s delegate requirement to be *both* a national sustaining member and a state central committee (which violates the “either-or” provision in the national Bylaws, and could be grounds to disaffiliate!).

    However, the proposal was stricken from the report when this was pointed out (by me) and it never made it to the floor.

    One piece of the plan thwarted.

  132. Thomas L. Knapp

    Michael,

    Good work @147!

    I personally strongly suggest that those who are interested in being delegates to next year’s national convention either remain, or become before the end of 2009, sustaining national members.

    Doing so will reduce potential opportunities for skulduggery on the cabal’s part concerning the issue, and the payment of the minimum dues doesn’t really represent a lot of money, above and beyond administration costs associated with your membership, for the cabal to piss away or do Bad Things with.

  133. Andy

    “One ‘radical’ — Andy — has a history of evaluating and arguing LNC matters entirely from a foundation of his personal complaints with those involved, rather than from a foundation of the relevant facts.”

    Lee Wrights is not qualified to be on the LNC because he initiates fraud, caused donors money to be wasted, sabatoged ballot access by causing the ballot access drive in North Carolina to drag on way longer than necessary which held up ballot access in other states, covers up and makes excuses for all of the unethical, irrational, and incompetent actions of Sean Haugh, and he also sucks as a fundraiser and a political strategist.

    Don’t let the political rhetoric fool you. There are plenty of people in the Libertarian Party who can spout Libertarian rhetoric and who are far more competent and who have better personalities and more integrity than Lee Wrights.

  134. G.E.

    Andy favors the lawless expulsion of people he deems unworthy. That’s not libertarian; it’s Nazistic.

  135. Thomas L. Knapp

    GE,

    Well, yeah. The question has always been, and remains, “do the bylaws allow minority cabals to remove their opponents from the LNC at will, or is there a required process of removal requiring the support of 2/3 ofthe committee.”

    That said, I’m not sure I know anyone more competent than R. Lee Wrights, and I’m damn sure I don’t know anyone with more integrity than R. Lee Wrights.

    I’ve caught Andy in lies before — usually relating to his “inside job” explanation of 9/11. I’ve never caught Lee in a lie.

    I’ve seen Andy publicly support the initiation of force (specifically fraud in the form of forgery) before. I’ve never seen Lee do so.

    So, like I said, if Andy wants this to be personal, fine. In any contest of personal integrity with, Andy remains broken down at the starting line long after Lee has driven the victory lap, kissed the girl and taken the trophy home.

  136. Andy

    “G.E. // Apr 26, 2009 at 10:11 pm

    Andy: Get a clue, man. Even George W. Bush deserves a fair trial. You can’t be in favor of lawlessness just because it’s directed at people you don’t like. Or you can, but you’re not a libertarian in that case.

    FYI: Lee Wrights has dissed IPR and me personally. He’s connected with Sean Haugh, who played an integral role in the Mary Ruwart kiddy porn smear. I don’t even like the LP — it’s dead to me. But I still think Wrights is getting a raw deal, which is why I signed the petition. I’m deeply disappointed in my friend Andy.”

    GE, Wrights did NOT give me any fair trial. When I tried to talk to him after Sean Haugh screwed me over back in 2001 he didn’t even want to listen to any facts, and he in fact started yelling at me like a maniac and hung up on me after I asked him if Sean Haugh’s crazy behavior was due to him being under the influence of drugs.

    I talked to Wrights after that twice because I wanted to patch things up and after I got him to calm down he acted like he was my buddy in both of those conversations. Then a few years later the dirty low down two-faced weasel stabbed me in the back and lied about me, and then when I approached him at the National Convention he pretended that nothing was wrong because he didn’t know that I knew what he had done behind my back. If that isn’t a TWO-FACED WEASEL I don’t know what is.

    After I let him know that I knew that he had betrayed me and lied about me behind my back (and I did NOT yell when I informed him that I knew what he had done) he started to yell like a maniac and said that he was going to get me removed from the convention (even AFTER I told him that I was a delegate that was intending to vote for Ruwart) and then he ran away.

    Wrights EXPOSED himself to me as a lying snake in the grass. He INITIATED fraud against me.

    I was ASKED to go to North Carolina after helping to finish secure ballot status for the LP of Maryland. So I sat visiting family in Pennsylvania waiting for the LP ballot drive in North Carolina to start up again (note that it had been going on and off since November of 2004). I had work offers on ballot initiatives that I COULD HAVE (and SHOULD HAVE in retrospect) taken in California and Oregon, but no, like a SUCKER I wanted to work on a Libertarian Party project instead to help the party. So I got strung along waiting for the North Carolina thing to start up. I told Bill Redpath and Scott Kohlhaas (this was before I had the falling out wiht Kohlhaas as at the time I still thought that I Kohlhaas was about to pay me all of the money that I was owed for Nebraska) about the problem that I had with Sean Haugh and they said not to worry about it. I finally got word that the drive was going to restart and I was told that I should contact Bob Ritchie of the NC LP. I contacted Bob Ritchie and I was about to head down to NC but before I left Bob Ritchie said that he was going to get back to me in a day or two. Then TWO MORE WEEKS passed before I heard from him (and after I didn’t hear from him for a few days I started calling him to find out what was going on). When I finally heard from him he told me that Sean Haugh had urged Lee Wrights to get the ballot access committee to vote to block me from working there.

    Did I get a hearing? NO. Lee Wrights (who in the last two conversations I had with him a few years before this acted like he was my buddy) STABBED ME IN THE BACK just to satisfy Sean Haugh.

    Now I probably should have just gone down there and worked anyway. However, I decided to call up Bill Redpath because I wanted to stick it in the face of Haugh and Wrights that LP National WANTED me there (and note that the money for the drive was from LP National at this time).

    I had an email written up where I explained what happened when I was in North Carolina from late 2000-early 2001. I sent the email to Bill Redpath who said that he was going to read it before he called Haugh and Wrights. Then more time passed before he actually got Haugh on the phone and he actually got Haugh to back down on his position. Then when he got Wrights on the phone the STUBBORN JACKASS Wrights refused to back down and the excuses he gave to Redpath were completely absurd. When Redpath informed me of this I told him that I was going to ignore it and go there anyway but Redpath didn’t want to have to deal with another temper tantrum from Wrights so he asked me to hold off and said that he’d talk to Wrights again. Then another week or two passed and then had that family emergency in Ohio (where I think his father died) and by this point I decided to not bother with it anymore.

    All of this WASTED several weeks of my time. Time is money, and I LOST money because of this. You see, the way the petition business operates is that a project goes on generally for few weeks or a few months. If you want to make the most of it you work a lot of hours while the project is happening. So I work every day or almost every day while on a campaign. Then I make up for it by taking time off in between projects. I’ve generally been off for 1-6 weeks at a time, although there are a small handful of times when I took off longer than that. My intention at the time was to take off for 2-4 weeks and then get back to work. During this time there was a string of city referenda & intiatives that I could have worked on in California. There was one in Long Beach, then one in Los Angeles, and then one in Anahiem (then there was some other stuff). There were also some statewide initaitives in Orgegon, but I’ve heard some bad stuff about petitioning in Oregon and since it was winter the weather was much nicer in Southern California, so I’d have been more likely to go to California over Oregon (but I might have still gone to Oregon because I generally prefer statewides over city stuff). Regardless of whether I would have gone to California or Oregon, I was ASKED to go to North Carolina and I was told that the pay was going to be $1.50 plus motel expense. That’s a mediocre pay rate (not really good but not really bad), but money was not my main motivation for going. I was already in the eastern US (Pennsylvania) and I WANTED to work on a Libertarian Party project just to help the party, so I got SUCKERED into waiting around for it to start, which I was ensured that I’d be able to get to work on it soon. I figured that I’d enjoy working on the LP project in North Carolina more because I wanted to help the party, and I figured that if I headed to the West Coast that I’d be far away and I didn’t know when I’d be able to make it back.

    So what was my reward for wanting to help out the Libertarian Party in North Carolina and turning down other work options to do so? I GOT STABBED IN THE BACK (by Wrights), MY TIME GOT WASTED, AND I LOST MONEY.

    I SHOULD HAVE gone with my first instinct upon learning that Wrights had stabbed me in the back and IGNORED his blocking me from working and gone down there and worked anyway. In fact, I should have showed up some place where he was at with a big stack of signatures, waved them in his face, and told him to GO FUCK HIMSELF. He wouldn’t have been able to do a damn thing about it (the money was from LP National anyway). However, I went the diplomatic route instead and it only resulted in my time being wasted.

    The only other option that would have been good for me to take would have been to say “THE HELL WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA LP!” (because of Sean Haugh) and just said no when Redpath and Kohlhaas asked me to go there (note that Richard Winger had also asked me to go there in a conversation a few months before this).

    The bad thing was that I’d already missed one or two of the city petitions in California while I was being dicked around by the LP over the North Carolina thing.

    I do NOT appreciate having my time WASTED like that. If somebody ASKS me to go work a petition drive and I agree to it I don’t like some PISS ANTS (Haugh & Wrights) sabotaging me behind my back.

    What Wrights did to me was the initiation of fraud. I recieved NO TRIAL and NO JUSTICE. My time was WASTED (for no legitimate reason) and I LOST MONEY because of it.

    I said above that my opportunity cost was probably $2,000-$3,000, but this is actually a low estimate. I can’t get this time or money back.

    Wrights also had the GALL to LIE about me and then pretend that nothing was wrong when I saw him at the Convention because he did not know that I knew what he had done behind my back. What a FUCKING WEASEL!

    I didn’t do a damn thing to Lee Wrights. He INITIATED FRAUD against me and I did NOT recieve a fair trial, justice, or even so much as an apology.

    I’ll tell you what, I’ll support a trial for him the day that I get one, and I want a public apology along with financial compensation (which should include interest) for having my time WASTED.

    Wrights OUGHT TO BE kicked off of the LNC for what he did to me. Some people out there may not give a shit about me, but they SHOULD care about how their donation money gets spent, and Lee Wrights caused DONOR MONEY to get WASTED in North Carolina by pulling that backstabbing shit on me (remember, the party paid $300-$350 per week for a motel room for Paul who was working without a car and was having a hard time getting even 500 signatures per week, whereas if I had been there I could have shared that motel room with him and since I have a car that motel room could have easily generated 1,500-2,000 plus signatures per week which would have made more efficient use of LP donor’s money). Even if you don’t give a rat’s behind about me, donors should also be concerned about ballot access, and Wrights’ actions caused the ballot drive in North Carolina to drag on longer than necessary which held up ballot access in other states which set the stage for the ballot FAILURES that happened in 2008. That drive in North Carolina COULD HAVE and SHOULD HAVE been wrapped up months before it was.

    Wrights PROVED that he is NOT a responsible steward of donor’s money (and since he barely donates anything himself party donors should consider this to be especially disturbing).

    Where was my fair trial? Where’s my justice?

    I’ve busted my ass for this party both as an unpaid volunteer and and in as a paid (on a 100% commission basis) contractor. I know damn well that I’ve done more than Lee Wrights, inspite of the fact that I don’t have a title next to my name.

    The double standard here makes me want to puke.

  137. Thomas L. Knapp

    Andy,

    If you think that Lee should be kicked off the LNC for what he did to you, you’re free to talk to LNC members and ask them to support a motion to kick Lee off the LNC for what he did to you.

    The issue right now is whether or not Aaron Starr and/or Bob Sullentrup and/or Bill Redpath get to kick members off the LNC without such a motion, supported by 2/3 of the LNC, because they think they can get away with it.

    Until you come to grips with the fact that this is not about you personally, you’re going to continue to make it personal … and it’s going to continue to cost you.

  138. Andy

    “That said, I’m not sure I know anyone more competent than R. Lee Wrights, and I’m damn sure I don’t know anyone with more integrity than R. Lee Wrights.”

    LOL!!!! Lee Wrights allowed Sean Haugh to post an article on his website that was full of LIES and distortions about myself, Gary, and Paul (to a lesser extent), and then Wrights would not allow any rebuttals to Haugh’s LIES and distortions to be posted. Jake Witmer tried to post there to set the record straight as did Gary and I yet Wrights took our posts down. Richard Winger and Steve Dasbach attempted to set the record straight as well and in fact, both of them wrote him emails about posts being taken down yet Wrights continued with his YELLOW JOURNALISM by not allowing rebuttals to be posted. This illustrates that Wrights has LOW INTEGRITY. I have the emails saved and can either post them here or send them out to anyone who wants to see them.

    Notice how Sean Haugh was TOO CHICKENSHIT to debate in a forum where his buddy Lee Wrights couldn’t take posts down. Jake, Gary, and I all challenged Haugh to a public debate, either on a forum where posts did not get taken down or in person at an LP Convention, and the CHICKENSHIT Haugh would only post where his buddy Wrights would take down any posts that refuted what he said.

    Tom, just because Wrights hasn’t fucked you over it doesn’t automatically mean that he hasn’t fucked anyone else over. People like Wrights tend to screw over people that they don’t think are important. Wrights thought that I was just some petitioner who is expendable, so therefore he felt that he could fuck me over and there’d be no repracussions on him. He sees you as the guy who started Rational Review so of course he’s going to be less likely to fuck you over.

  139. Andy

    Here’s an article about students protesting the “free speech zones” (which are actually meant to RESTRICT speech) at the University of North Carolina in Greensboro. This article is from 2005.

    Now keep in mind that I petitioned at the University of North Carolina Greensboro in January of 2001 and while I was there I got told that I had to stand in the “free speech zone” which was far away from where most of the people on the campus walked and was near where some construction was going on at the time. I was told this by some guy who worked at in the Student Union/Center. When I saw what a lousy location the “free speech zone” would be for petitioning I went to the campus library instead, and after being there for a few days somebody who didn’t like the Libertarian Party or free speech called the cops on me. The cops said that they didn’t think that I was doing anything wrong but since they got called they said they had to escort me off the campus. This hindered my signature production.

    I called up Lee Wrights about this because I had ASSUMED that he’d want to help. When I spoke to him after this incident happened he acted supportive and claimed that he’d work with me to try to “set the campus right on free speech”. I ended up being sent to Raleigh and never made it back to Greensboro to work, but according to this article, the campus officials at UNC Greensboro obviously continued their anti-free speech “free speech zone” policy and a few years later some students protested it.

    Remember, UNC Greensboro is a STATE school and they recieve TAX PAYER FUNDING, so there is no private property arguement here. Also, the ballot access petition requirement is MANDATED by the state government. It should be blatantly obvious that the campus officials who prevented me from petitioning there were in the wrong.

    Lee Wrights TWISTING this incident around to make it sound like I did something wrong is just plain SICK, especially since at the time he acted like he was on my side, and especially since HE WAS NOT EVEN THERE AS HE NEVER CAME OUT TO COLLECT SIGNATURES WITH ME.

    Anyone who’d take a story like this and twist it around like Wrights did has LOW INTEGRITY.

    UNC Greensboro Persecutes Students for Demanding Freedom of Speech
    Protestors Face Charges for Protesting Unconstitutional ‘Free Speech Zones’
    December 15, 2005

    FIRE Press Release

    GREENSBORO, N.C., December 15, 2005—The University of North Carolina–Greensboro (UNCG) is attempting to discipline two students for peacefully protesting outside two small “free speech zones” on campus. Ironically, the students were actually protesting the existence of those zones, which unconstitutionally restrict free speech. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) has intervened on the students’ behalf.

    “These students chose a very effective way to draw attention to UNCG’s unjust and unnecessary restrictions on freedom of speech,” remarked FIRE Director of Legal and Public Advocacy Greg Lukianoff. “It is shameful that they are now threatened with punishment for their peaceful protest of a repressive policy.”

    UNCG College Libertarians Allison Jaynes and Robert Sinnott helped organize a quiet, 40-person rally for free speech on November 16 on a lawn in front of the campus library. When an administrator approached Jaynes and demanded that she move the protest to the “free speech zone,” she refused, citing the First Amendment. The protest continued, but a few days later Jaynes and Sinnott were charged with a “violation of Respect” for refusing to move.

    “Students cannot be required to ‘respect’ an unconstitutional order stemming from an unconstitutional policy,” stated Lukianoff. “Allison, Robert, and the other students involved should be commended for standing up for their First Amendment rights, not treated as campus criminals.”

    UNCG’s policies specify two small areas of campus as “free speech and assembly areas,” with 48 hours’ notice required for demonstrations even in those areas. Any protests outside those zones require a written request 48 hours before the event, which the university can deny.

    FIRE wrote UNCG Chancellor Patricia Sullivan on December 5, requesting that she dismiss any disciplinary charges and revoke UNCG’s unconstitutional policy and citing FIRE’s victories against similar speech zones at Texas Tech and other public universities. FIRE also reminded Sullivan that while reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions may be acceptable, “[t]here is nothing ‘reasonable’…about transforming the vast majority of the university’s property—indeed, public property—into a ‘censorship area.’”

    University Counsel Lucien Capone responded on December 9, citing a Fourth Circuit case called ACLU v. Mote that determined that “free speech zones” may be acceptable when applied to strangers from off campus—not students. Capone acknowledged that this case may not apply to students and said that a committee formed by Chancellor Sullivan was already revisiting the policy, but that it would take more time to come to a conclusion. Capone also said that UNCG did not review requests for protests outside the zones for content, but pointed to no policy language supporting this assertion.

    “While we are glad that UNCG is ‘revisiting’ its unjust policy, Mote simply does not apply to this situation. There is no reason for UNCG to err on the side of repression while it considers whether free speech is too much for its adult students to handle,” noted Lukianoff. “Freedom of speech must not be made to wait on the dithering of a university committee.”

    In the meantime, hearings for students Jaynes and Sinnott are set for January.

    “UNCG must get the message that if quarantining free speech is unjust, threatening to punish students for defying that quarantine is doubly unjust,” Lukianoff concluded. “UNCG must drop any threat of discipline against these students and recognize that universities in a free society must serve as the ultimate ‘free speech zones’—not as places where freedom of expression is mistrusted and feared.”

    FIRE is a nonprofit educational foundation that unites civil rights and civil liberties leaders, scholars, journalists, and public intellectuals from across the political and ideological spectrum on behalf of individual rights, due process, freedom of expression, academic freedom, and rights of conscience at our nation’s colleges and universities. FIRE’s efforts to preserve liberty at the University of North Carolina–Greensboro can be viewed at thefire.org/uncg.

  140. Andy

    According to Wrights, these students at UNC Greensboro who protested that school’s anti-free speech “free speech zones” should not have had the charges against them dropped, and they should have been blacklisted from the Libertarian Party and from petitioning for “harrassing” people.

    UNC Greensboro Drops All Charges Against Free Speech Protestors
    January 17, 2006

    FIRE Press Release

    GREENSBORO, N.C., January 17, 2006—Bowing to public pressure, the University of North Carolina at Greensboro (UNCG) has dropped charges against two students who led a peaceful protest against the university’s policy of quarantining free speech to small areas of campus. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) brought UNCG’s repression to light in December.

    “It’s about time that UNCG realized the error of its ways,” declared Greg Lukianoff, FIRE’s interim president. “Punishing students for having the courage to protest the university’s unconstitutional rules would have been an exercise in tyranny.”

    This resounding victory for free speech came just days after FIRE and the Pope Center for Higher Education Policy released a report documenting dozens of policies from across the University of North Carolina System—including UNCG—that violate the U.S. Constitution. UNCG had been on the defensive since FIRE revealed in December that students Allison Jaynes and Robert Sinnott were to be punished for violating the school’s “free speech zone” policy by protesting outside the school’s two small free speech zones.

    “When a university establishes a ‘free speech zone,’ it turns the rest of its campus into a censorship zone,” remarked Lukianoff. “Nothing could be further from the ‘marketplace of ideas’ that a university is supposed to represent.”

    Jaynes and Sinnott led a November 16, 2005, protest against the school’s free speech zone policy on a grassy area outside the library. During the protest, an administrator ordered them to move to a free speech zone. Jaynes and Sinnott refused, citing the First Amendment. Administrators and police did nothing further to stop the peaceful protest, but a few days later Jaynes and Sinnott were charged with a “violation of Respect” for refusing an order to stop their protest.

    The students contacted FIRE, which wrote to UNCG Chancellor Patricia Sullivan and then to UNC System General Counsel Leslie Winner, explaining that UNCG’s blanket restrictions on free speech outside of the “free speech zones” are contrary to the First Amendment. FIRE also reminded UNCG that it has defeated similar policies at Texas Tech University, West Virginia University, and Citrus College in California.

    Late last Friday, Jaynes and Sinnott received notice from the university that the charges against them had been completely dropped. FIRE has also learned that UNCG’s chancellor has established a committee to reexamine the university’s “free speech zone” policy.

    “We are gratified that UNCG dismissed its charges against the students, but UNCG still has a lot of work to do before it is in line with the Constitution,” commented Lukianoff. “Until the university finally eliminates its speech restrictions, FIRE’s job will not be done.”

    FIRE is a nonprofit educational foundation that unites civil rights and civil liberties leaders, scholars, journalists, and public intellectuals from across the political and ideological spectrum on behalf of individual rights, due process, freedom of expression, academic freedom, and rights of conscience at our nation’s colleges and universities. FIRE’s efforts to preserve liberty at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro can be viewed at thefire.org/uncg.

  141. Andy

    Below is a link to the text of a court case where the mercenary petitioner to whom Sean Haugh and Lee Wrights handed most of the ballot access petition drive in North Carolina . In the court case, the petitioner in question is ACC– USED of harrassing people, even threatening one person with violence.

    NOW, LET ME STATE FOR THE RECORD THAT I DO NOT THINK THAT THE CHARGES AGAINST THIS PETITIONER WERE TRUE, NOR SHOULD THIS BE — USED AS AN EXC– USE TO PREVENT THIS INDIVIDUAL FROM WORKING. THESE ATTACKS ARE ALMOST ALWAYS POLITICALLY MOTIVATED, AS IN THEY ARE TRUMPED UP CHARGES WHICH ARE MEANT TO PREVENT A PETITION FROM QUALIFYING FOR THE BALLOT OR THEY ARE GENERAL ATTACKS ON FREE SPEECH.

    The reason that I’m posting this is to point out the HYPOCRACY of Haugh and Wrights. The mercenary petitioner whom Haugh shows favoritism too and who was pretty much handed North Carolina as his own playground (which is UNHEARD of on a drive the size of the LP drive in North Carolina where they needed like 69,000 valid signatures; one of the reasons that it dragged on for so long is because Haugh wanted this one guy to be able to make most of the money) was ACC– USED of “harrassing” people in this court case from Oregon (which the petitioner side LOST), yet this person was handed most of the LP petition drive in North Carolina, and then the HYPOCRITE and LIAR Lee Wrights TWISTED a story about me getting my rights violated by an anti-free speech policy at UNC Greensboro as an EX– USE for blocking me from working in North Carolina.

    Click the link and read on….

    http://74.125.113.132/search?q=cache:ACMIG5nfDR4J:www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A101975.htm+darryl+bonner+oregon&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

    So why was I blacklisted from working in North Carolina for allegedly “harrassing” people (NEVERMIND that this did not happen and that Wrights is LYING to cover up for Sean Haugh) when the petitioner whom Haugh and Wrights handed the bulk of that petition drive to was OFFICIALLY ACC– USED of “harrassing” people in a court case where the side he was on lost?

    Man, talk about a double standard.

    Wrights has LOW INTEGRITY. Just because he shows up at Libertarian circle jerks and polishes some people’s knobs and therefore managed to get a title next to his name doesn’t mean that I’m not correct.

  142. Andy

    Here’s an article about a couple of petitioners being arrested for petitioning at a public transportation center in Nevada. According to the STATIST Lee Wrights they must have been “harrassing” people and should therefore be blacklisted from petitioning in North Carolina.

    Sent: Friday, May 07, 2004 10:07 AM
    Subject: Grandma Arrested in Reno for Gathering Signatures

    Liberty Watch is Nevada’s only conservative voice and insider’s look at
    Nevada Politics, Business and Technology. If you have any suggestions or
    comments, feel free to e-mail us at gopgeorge@cox.com.

    Just when you thought it was safe to practice democracy, the government gets in the way. Stories abound about Nevadans for Sound Government (NSG) signature gatherers being harassed and thrown off of public property by government employees and security guards. But to this point the government had stopped short of arresting any NSG personnel.

    That changed last night when NSG northern Nevada Director Janine Hansen and her son Zack were hauled off to the Reno jail for gathering signatures at Reno’s Regional Transportation Center. Building officials told Ms. Hansen last evening that she must leave the building or they threatened her with arrest for trespassing. Hansen provided the officials with a letter from Secretary of State Dean Heller indicating that petition signatures may be gathered at public facilities without giving notice. Hansen also provided a letter from the transportation center acknowledging that she would be gathering signatures on the premises last evening.

    These building officials would have none of it, and called the Reno police. No doubt, Reno’s finest were careful as they approached the 55-year old Ms. Hansen who was armed to the teeth with.two clipboards with petitions and a couple of ball-point pens.

    Ms. Hansen is as strong-willed and passionate as anyone you are likely to encounter, but should the sight of her toting a couple clipboards give building managers cause for concern for the safety of other patrons of this public facility? Of course not.

    Ms. Hansen’s arrest comes on the heels of a complaint filed Monday against unidentified state and local government workers accused of preventing circulators of petitions from collecting signatures. Hansen’s brother, Christopher Hansen, filed the complaints with Las Vegas police and Secretary of State Dean Heller.

    In his complaints, Mr. Hansen asked Metro and the Secretary of State to charge the government workers with gross misdemeanor crimes and to fine them $20,000 as allowed by sections of Nevada law. The complaints were filed against two Nevada Highway Patrol officers, several Department of Motor Vehicles employees, officials with UNLV and others. Ms. Hansen’s other brother, Attorney Joel Hansen is asking the Supreme Court for a 60-day extension to complete signature gathering.

    NSG is falling short of collecting enough signatures due to the constant harassment by government workers. Secretary of State Heller told the R-J Monday, “he has not reviewed the complaint, but he called it bogus.”

    Bogus, really? Government officials will blatantly disregard documentation provided by Heller’s own office and have a 55-year old woman arrested and held for hours in jail–but Hansen’s complaint is bogus?

    According to the Governor’s office nobody is standing in the way of NSG gathering signatures. “Nobody is going to do anything to interfere with George’s efforts,” Greg Bortolin, Governor Guinn’s spokesman told the Review-Journal last week referring to NSG chairman George Harris. “He has every right to do what he is doing.”

    Mr. Bortolin should tell that to the building officials who had Ms. Hansen and her son locked up until one in the morning sharing a community cell with some of Reno’s more colorful characters.

    The Review-Journal reported last week that Tom Jacobs, a spokesman for the state Department of Motor Vehicles, admitted that a DMV supervisor in Reno mistakenly prevented NSG gatherers from collecting tax repeal signatures.

    The DMV supervisor was unaware of an attorney general’s ruling last fall that the petitions can be collected at DMV offices without notice, according to Jacobs. Jacobs told the R-J’s Ed Vogel that the agency again has told all supervisors that people may gather petition signatures.

    Interestingly, the unnamed DMV supervisor did not mistakenly eject signature gathers for the education initiative.

    It seems unlikely that there are dozens of rouge government employees in various locations throughout the state individually deciding to disregard the election laws and choosing to risk $20,000 fines and being charged with gross misdemeanors for impeding the election process. Government employees aren’t exactly the risk-taking type. These building managers must have orders to harass NSG gathers on sight.

    But, what would be the motive? Perhaps it is because NSG’s petitions call for a repeal of $833 million in taxes and a ban on government employee legislators. State government is circling its wagons to prevent Nevada voters from having a voice. It will stop at nothing, including holding an innocent woman and her son in jail.

  143. Thomas L. Knapp

    Trent,

    Nobody has to “get Andy started.” Everything is always all about him, who he likes or doesn’t like, and why.

    Would I rather it wasn’t that way? Sure. But it is that way, and will remain that way until he decides to change it.

  144. John Famularo

    Tom,
    I’m sure you noticed by now that Sullentrop, Starr, and Redpath have signed your petition. Is that not an admission that their actions were illicit?

  145. George Phillies

    John,

    It will depends whether the signatures are attached to their legitimate email addresses, and whether they respond affirmatively to the test message.

    I would not put a great deal of money on the certainty that every signature is legitimate, not before it is validated.

  146. George Phillies

    @165

    You should have received a confirmatory email to the email address you listed, which will almost certainly be in a long list of address books.

    Confirmation will be no more difficult than confirming handwritten individual signatures.

  147. Thomas L. Knapp

    Chuck,

    The validation isn’t that tedious. I just sent you a personal email to authenticate your sig.

    There are only about 100 signatures at this time. A number of them were personally known to me as intending to sign before they did. Any I’m not reasonably sure about, I’m contacting personally. If they don’t respond with an affirmation of their intent to sign within 24 hours, I’ll delete their signatures.

    The petition will be kept as “clean” as humanly possible.

    It is my true belief that there are at this point well in excess of 66 valid signatures on it, the number needed to exceed 10% of the largest number of delegates reported by the credentials committee in Denver (652). Additional delegate signatures are welcome to boost the number and increase the validity percentage, of course, but we’ve already met the appeal burden.

  148. Lidia Seebeck

    Let me make this formal as well. I absolutely intended to sign, and let this be the validation.

  149. Susan Hogarth

    A post here is — USELESS as validation of a sig elsewhere. Spoofing is too easy here.

    Speaking of spoofing, I removed the comment above purporting to be from Bill Redpath. I unapproved the comment, because it came from an anonymizer and seemed so stupidly silly. I have a call in to Bill (way to waste the grownups’ time, children!) to make trebly certain, but personally I am convinced
    it’s stupid horseplay.

    Knock it off, kids!

  150. Thomas L. Knapp

    Michael and Lidia,

    I considered your signatures invalidated since I had discussed the petition with you before it went up, and since we’re still discussing it via email 😉

    Jill, you should get an authentication request in your email some time today. I’ve been working backward from the end of the list, while catching new ones as they come in. If memory serves, your sig was somewhere in the 30s.

    Regards,
    Tom Knapp

  151. Michael Seebeck

    LOL.

    Trust me, the spoof wasn’t me. If it were, it’d be a lot more verbose and kissing Lee’s boots in tearful apology to the point of nausea!

    Besides, that could be construed as intitiating a fraud.

  152. Thomas L. Knapp

    Eternaverse,

    Correction: Aaron Starr, Bill Redpath and Bob Sullentrup appear to have signed the delegate petition.

    I’ve sent an email to each of them, at their email addresses listed on the lp.org page, asking them to confirm or deny the authenticity of those signatures. Unless they confirm the authenticity within about 24 hours, I’ll delete the signatures.

    The number of valid signatures required for the delegate appeal is 66. My personal count for “certainly or nearly certainly authentic” signatures so far is in excess of 80. I’ll continue to try to verify additional signatures, but I believe the petition will withstand scrutiny for validity.

  153. Thomas L. Knapp

    Lidia,

    Sorry, I meant “validated,” not “invalidated.”

    I hadn’t sent you and Mike individual “did you mean to sign?” emails, because I already KNEW you meant to sign, because we had discussed the petition before it even went up. So your signatures were reasonably “pre-validated.”

    In other news:

    While the largest number of delegates credentialed at the 2008 convention (as reported in LNC minuts) was 652, that was for a single session.

    My understanding is that the consensus of the Judicial Committee is that as many as “about 850” individual delegates may have been credentialed at one point or another.

    This means that instead of 66 valid delegate signatures, the burden for the appeal is 86 delegate signatures.

    At present, I’m confident that the petition has received valid, authentic endorsements from 101 delegates, but I’m still working on final verification and authentication. I intend to formally submit the appeal in the next 24-48 hours.

    The petition remains available for new signatures, but because most of the recent signatures seem to be spurious, I’ve changed the petition to require approval for signatures. Henceforth, I will verify/authenticate BEFORE a new signature is appended to the list.

    Best regards,
    Tom Knapp

  154. Susan Hogarth

    Hmm. I thought I had ‘unapproved’ the comment pending a call from Redpath, but either I misunderstand WordPress or someone else re-approved it. At any rate, I altered it so that the number is still there, but the comment is gone.

  155. Geoffrey

    Good day folks,

    This is great fun! Several days ago, just to cheer me up (one of my little puppies has been ill — hopefully not with that dread full sickness you all have over there), I signed both petitions too and they were validated despite the fact I have not stepped on your side of the pond in over a decade, am a citizen of Great Briton, and have never joined nor provided funds to the LPUS.

    Here at the UKLP for any voting done outside of a meeting, we have a system in place that requires you to use your UKLP provided identification number along with a pin number to participate in a secured on line system. I guess for once we here are ahead of you technology wise because as I proved, anyone can vote and be counted.

    Thus, your system is highly flawed and that means none of the votes should count.

    So thanks for the good cheer, I look forward to participating in USLP votes in the future!

    Geoffrey

  156. Pingback: Libertarian National Committee to meet this weekend in St. Louis | Independent Political Report

  157. Pingback: George Phillies reviews recent Libertarian National Committee meeting in St. Louis | Independent Political Report

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *