The verdict is in: Alan Keyes will remain on the California ballot as the presidential candidate of the American Independent Party. A lawsuit brought forward by Jim King, Chairman of the AIP faction that met in Los Angeles last month to nominate Chuck Baldwin for President and maintain the state party’s affiliation with the Constitution Party, has been thrown on out on the grounds that Alan Keyes and his vice-presidential candidate Wiley Drake should have been parties to the lawsuit, since as candidates they were the ones bearing the burden of being removed from the ballot in court:
The Court recognizes that dismissal of the petition for nonjoinder will mean that Mr. King’s proposed candidates will not appear on the ballot. However, Mr. King knew from at least prior to June 28, 2008 (the date of the Los Angeles convention) that divisions within the party might lead to disagreement over the presidential and vice-presidential candidates. Instead of taking legal action at that time to resolve the matter, Mr. King chose to wait over a month and attempt to resolve the matter through an election writ subject to substantial time constraints. Moreover, Mr. King knew from the hearing held on August 8, 2008 that the question of indispensable parties would be an issue in the case but made no attempt to have Mr. Keyes, Mr. Drake, or any of the other asserted indispensable parties joined to the action. Under these circumstances, the Court concludes that Mr. Keyes and Mr. Drake are indispensable parties. Because it will not be possible to join them and thereafter determine the merits of the case before the ballot’s finalization, the Court dismisses the petition without prejudice. (See Younger v. Jordan (1954) 42 Cal.2d 757 [denying petition seeking to remove candidate from ballot under § 13314’s predecessor statute because such candidate was indispensable party and not enough time existed for her service and a determination of the merits prior to the printing of the ballots].)
The decision explicitly sets aside the questions of who are the legitimate officers of the AIP, and it remains possible for a later lawsuit to settle that matter. Thanks to Ballot Access News for the update, and for instructions to find the text of the decision.
Lussenheide for congress ca-45 would fair better as a write in..in CA the republicans will in his district. Third parties are party spoilers..and with his extremist views and conspiracy tinged speeches he is better off just standing on corners with a sign around his neck…
DRL,
I’d be happy to correct you, if I could understand you.
This I did catch: Keyes is not on the TX ballot either.
The Orgamic Andy: Correct me if I am wrong [and I am sure you will] but Mister Baldwin is off of Texas [Keyes on] and Penn [Keyes no where to be seen…] That there is a lot of electorial votes added to Ed Noonans expert hype jacking of California.
John Blare of the Independence Party and hand held puppet of Frank MacKay, is also keeping the court monitored and court appointed NEW slate of Reform Party of California at bay via the Democratic Party controlled Secretary of State!
Ross – Read this: http://www.lewrockwell.com/katz-j/katz-j30.html
Mike: They attempt to deal with that. They refute a bunch of the myths about the word’s origin. They point out (and then subsequently ignore) that the word’s usage exploded in WWI and WWII, which did so much to destroy “traditional values” and the family. They make the obvious case that there should be free speech. But where they fail is in presenting on one side, the liberal “intellectuals” (idiot assholes) who are just soooooo cool in their unrestrained use of the word; and on the other side, complete Nazi fascist scumbags like Keyes, Pat Boone, and other similar tools — one guy says “I think censorship is a good word!”
I, too, hoped for a biography and history of the word — not a bunch of a-holes waxing philosophic. But if your stomach is not turned by the likes of Kevin Smith and Janine Garafolo, you might like the movie. They are NOT linguists. It reminds me of when ESPN had those SportsCentury shows that were ruined by having d-holes like Dennis Leary talk about Ted Williams — as if his opinion is worth anything on the subject!
Of course, having social commentary by someone who doesn’t have a vested side in the bogus culture war would undermine the entire point of the film. Imagine them asking Ron Paul, for example, or even Ralph Nader. They’d have virtually identical answers of “who the fuck cares?” minus the language.
I hate Drew Carey and he was the second most sensible person on the show. Hunter Thompson being the first.
I enjoyed the Adams mini.
That’s too bad about the documentary. I was hoping for more about the history and cultural impact of the word. Oh well.
Wasn’t intended as a zing. I was repulsed by the idiocy and self importance of Janine Garafolo, for example, but maybe Mike G likes her.
The stupidity of the movie is this: If you use the word “fuck” you’re cool and intelligent. If you don’t, then you’re a bigot of some kind. Nevermind the truth that overuse of the word, of which I’m certainly not abstinent, is a creation of the U.S. government’s global imperialism through war.
The movie sucked, Keyes sucks, and Janine Garafolo sucks too.
Get the John Adams miniseries instead, Mike G.
Zing….
Mike – I thought it sucked. A bunch of pretentious liberal idiots pretending they’re smart, and looking almost that way in comparison to the thuggishly ignorant conservatives. Then again, you might like it.
Well, Keyes opposed campus speech codes in 1990. His talk at Stanford was sponsored by the Federalist Society, and was later reprinted in The Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy.
I have that “Fuck” movie on my Netflix queue.
Is it any good?
TMS – Funny, cuz I just saw Keyes pompously moralizing FOR speech codes in a documentary about the word “Fuck.”
Silvarticus places Keyes below McKinney — a greater insult is not possible.
I saw Keyes speak at Stanford University in 1990. He gave a stirring talk denouncing PC campus speech codes. His speech was both intelligent, and emotionally gripping.
He used the N-word, and said that speech codes were insulting to blacks. Speech codes implied that blacks were mentally weak and inferior, unable to dismiss racist slurs as being ignorant, but rather. Speech codes implied that blacks must be kept in a safety bubble due to their own “inferiority.”
He also said colleges had a duty to prepare students for the real world, and thus protecting students from racist slurs was preventing them from gaining the intellectual strength to withstand racism in the real world.
I also saw Keyes on C-SPAN both times when he ran for president (in both 1996 and 2000, I think was).
Keyes gave a brilliant, principled attack on the income tax. Unlike many conservatives, who only focus on the trickle down/economic efficiency argument, Keyes attacked the income tax both as unconstitutional and an invasion of privacy.
I thought, this man “gets it.”
Keyes also did a great job in the 1980s spotting areas of federal government waste.
I don’t agree with Keyes’s social conservatism, and his neocon views are very disappointing. I can’t vote for Keyes for those reasons.
But the man had substance in the past. He could have been a worthy leader. It’s too bad he took some wrong turns.
You know Keyes was Obama’s opponent in his 2004 Senate race? And Obama won in a landslide. At least 75% of the vote, if I remember correctly.
Keyes is a fringe nut who isn’t of the same caliber as Baldwin, Barr, Nader, or even McKinney. Even though it will hurt them this time, the Constitution Party did themselves a favor by refusing to appease or otherwise compromise with this egotistical, neo-con sore loser.
All this Keyes/Baldwin business is just further proof that the third parties need to find a way to unify or else their divisions will maintain the status quo. Even people on this forum have to agree that they find it quite obnoxious when the major parties use the courts to keep third party candidates off of the ballot, and here we have a party where neither candidate is going to do much in November but they are fighting amongst themselves anyway… in court!
Eh, I don’t want to get into the argument about Kevorkian again.
Ross – I wasn’t criticizing Kucinich as much as I was criticizing you! (For discounting “unpopular” and anti-Establishment figures and then boosting Gravel and Kucinich, who are unpopular and anti-Establishment (or at least pretended to be)). I was a volunteer for Kucinich in 2003, don’t forget.
No way in Hell that Baldwin approaches Nader level write-in votes, and he will struggle to compete with Keyes. Nothing against Baldwin. If Ron Paul were an official write-in candidate, he could do it.
Isn’t interesting that none of decisions made by the powers that be had nothing to do with the case at hand but had everything to do with timing and official stationary?
I don’t think that’s the case here. I can’t disagree with the judge’s assertion that a candidate should be a part of a lawsuit that could throw him off the ballot. I’m not sure how much closer to common sense you can get. The fact that apparently they were aware of this but only wanted to take on Noonan leaves me pretty cool to the good AIP.
From what I’ve seen, Democrats stand more for socialist values than Republicans stand for libertarian values. And I know, GE, that you can’t tolerate anyone who disagrees with you in the slightest, but can’t you put that aside for one moment and appreciate a good speech? Or at least give your honest opinion of it, rather than just criticizing Kucinich?
Beaten by technicality yet again. Isn’t interesting that none of decisions made by the powers that be had nothing to do with the case at hand but had everything to do with timing and official stationary?
While this is a blow to Baldwin and the CP at least they have the knowledge they’ll be able to carry on into the future. When Keyes goes, so will his cult of personality.
California supporters of the Constitution Party celebrate the Baldwin/Castle ticket: “Chuck Baldwin is a fantastic candidate who stands for the greatest future for our nation and the solution of our greatest problems. Chuck Baldwin will solve the problems which Obama and McCain fear to address. He gives straight talk and will bring real change and hope.â€
Both Chuck Baldwin and Darrell Castle will be official write in candidates in California. This process is officially certified with the California Secretary of State, and includes a full slate of Electoral College electors. Details on how to cast your write in vote for Chuck Baldwin on your ballot, in an official fashion, will be on this webpage soon. http://www.aipcalif.blogspot.com
Ralph Nader actually drew 20,714 votes in California in 2004 as a WRITE IN , and we plan to surpass that amount with our own vigorous and active write in campaign.
I would not be surprised if Chuck Balwin receives more votes as a write in candidate than Keyes will.
Awful news. I may end up voting Nader now.
Yeah… I was first thinking: “See, this shows that the Democrats aren’t as evil as the Republicans, because Kucinich is like the Democratic Ron Paul.”
And then I thought: “No, this shows that Kucinich is NOT the Democratic Ron Paul, because if he were, they wouldn’t let him speak!”
Wow. Kucinich again bends over and endorses another pro-war corporatist with no regard for civil liberties. What a surprise.
At least Ron Paul has the stones to refuse to endorse his party’s nominee when they betray his values.
Yeah, but Ross: No one takes Kucinich serious and fewer people like him than Kevorkian. He doesn’t suck up to the Establishment, so by your criteria, he should be ignored.
I would have rather forfieted our ballot access to Cynthia McKinney–who is at least honest.
Keyes is a lying, warmongering, neocon who is going to line his pockets with more campaign donations.
Ugh, what a blow to Baldwin’s campaign. I suspect this is going to be a kiss of death on the scale Nader’s omission in California was for his campaign last time. There’s nothing worse than Keyes that could’ve taken his place too. Nothing. Keyes is a total loser and a nutjob.
This is really off topic, but didn’t anyone see Kucinich’s speech at the Democratic convention? It was incredible. Check it out on Youtube if you haven’t seen it.
Frankly—it wont matter. In two years the party will revert to the Baldwin faction. But, its still sad because it significantly hurts Chuck Baldwin’s presidential total, which probably would have pulled 30-35k in California.
Too too bad.
This is very very sad indeed. I suspect a future lawsuit will turn over the AIP to the Baldwin-faction,but Keyes is on the ballot.
Check out the King faction’s website. If they haven’t conceded control of the AIP yet, they’re sure making it seem like they did.
Jesus says to love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.
Tonight I will pray that the idiotic, egotistical, S.O.B, war-mongering, lunatic Alan Keyes sees the error of his ways.
Man, this sucks. Chuck Baldwin is a much better candidate than Alan Keyes. Not being on the California ballot could really tank Baldwin’s vote total in November.
What a bad break for Chuck Baldwin. Not appearing on the ballot in the 3 largest states takes 120 EVs off the table and really makes media attention less likely now. Perhaps it’s time for the CP to begin work to actually establish a CA affiliate rather than using the old George Wallace relic.
Too bad for Baldwin, but I kinda like it when certain experts are proven wrong, so I take at leas some joy in this outcome.