IPR has received reports from reliable sources that Libertarian Party Chairman Bill Redpath is “highly upset” with Sean Haugh over the Massachusetts petition burning scandal, and has taken “appropriate steps” to ensure something of that nature won’t happen again. Well, according to a well-known petition gatherer — who admittedly has bad blood with Mr. Haugh — Haugh is continuing to “waste Libertarian donors’ money” in pursuit of his vendetta against several of the movement’s most respected petition circulators.
Breaking story just in: I heard that Sean Haugh plans to waste a lot of donorsâ€™ money on the Libertarian Party ballot access drive in Rhode Island. There are currently petitioners who just finished up working Massachusetts (which borders Rhode Island), but Sean is not allowing any of them to work the petition in Rhode Island. Instead, he is planning to fly in Scott Kohlhaas all the way from Alaska and pay him top dollor for his signatures as well as paying for his motel and rental car (note that the petitioners in Massachusetts have their own vehicles so if they did the job thereâ€™d be no need for rental cars).
Kohlhass himself has been accused of embezzling thousands of dollars during ballot access drives. One story says that Bill Redpath and other LNC members covered up for Kohlhass’s embezzlement when confronted by unpaid petition circulators at an LNC meeting by paying the circulators out of their own pockets.
Update: Sean Haugh is unable to speak in his own defense since, as an LPHQ employee, he’s forbidden to post on blogs. An unlikely source of support, however, comes from frequent LPHQ critic, Angela Keaton:
My days as an apologist for the LPHQ and the LNC are behind me so please give me due consideration.
1.) Fincher has a criminal history with regard to violence against woman.Â The statement shall stand alone.
2.) As a former staffer for the LPC, it is essential that the staff be allowed to choose its own vendors.Â If Redpath is unsatisfied with Haugh’s work, Haugh can be fired. If Haugh blackballs too many petitioners, he will find his choices limited and change his policy.
3.) Based on past experiences with Fincher, including a stalking incident, Haugh blurted out something he shouldn’t have said (e.g. “burn the signatures.”)Â Â Fincher essentially turned Haugh into the police state based on hyperbole, however sincere he may have been in that request.Â As an anarchist, I cannot condone using the police to resolve our internal conflicts.
3.) In June, Kraus forbade LPHQ staff to comment on public blogs. Fincher is given several fora in which to make his case.Â Haugh is not allowed to respond.Â This makes a fair judgment of the situation impossible unless one has done as I have attempted, however clumsily, to make phone calls to the witnesses.
4.) In July of 2007, I witnessed as Fincher and Jacob tried to manipulate facts to extort personal money (not LNC money) from Starr, Redpath, Sullentrup and several other donors in Pittsburgh.Â I cannot trust Fincher to relay facts correctly.Â Fincher has already made comments which suggest he is not satisfied with his LPMA pay. Professor Phillies has made it very clear that Fincher has been paid in full.
5.) We need to be selective in our grievances.Â Whether or not Fincher’s behavior is problem is not a radical or reform issue. I refuse to sacrifice credibility by allowing Fincher’s behavior to be protected by those of us who have been critical of this administration, ticket and former LPHQ staff.
6.) If we wish to indict via public opinion, note that highly respected radicals such as our former Vice Chair Lee Wrights and New Hampshire activist Joseph Knight have sided with Haugh based on specific and documented experiences. Further, the fact that Tom Knapp has repeatedly taken a point by point approach to Fincher’s arguments and found them lacking and that Susan Hogarth has implored Fincher not to further involve the LPNC in this matter should be strongly considered. Knapp and Hogarth are not ones to blindly side with Haugh or the LNC. Theirs are not considerations are ones I would ever dismiss out of hand.
7.) The public record is being shaped in such a way that Fincher and Jacob are put in the same category as an outstanding family man like Chris Bennett or a dedicated much beloved activist like Paulie Cannolli.Â I won’t have any part of that.