LNC (some of it, anyway) to sue for removal of Phillies from NH ballot

According to Last Free Voice:

The Libertarian Party (Libertarian National Committee, Incorporated) is apparently preparing to file suit against the New Hampshire Secretary of State. The lawsuit will demand that the state place Bob Barr on the ballot, and remove George Phillies from the ballot.

This suit is separate and distinct from the ACLU lawsuit in Massachusetts to substitute Bob Barr in place of George Phillies on the Massachusetts ballot.

According to the article, Dr. Phillies will not support the effort to remove him from the New Hampshire ballot, citing an ethical obligation to petition signers that placed him there. The Libertarian vs. Libertarian conflict does not appear to be limited to it’s presidential contenders however, as it seems the suit has been organized without the full knowledge of all Libertarian National Committee members:

Strangely, many who should have been informed of this action seem to have not been informed at all. The list of those who were not informed appears to include LNC members Angela Keaton, Lee Wrights, Mary Ruwart, Rachel Hawkridge, and even LNC Vice-Chair Michael Jingozian.

Even more strangely, it appears that the LNC’s retained attorney, Bill Hall, was not apprised that the LNC is taking this action through another attorney.

Commenting on the matter, LNC member Angela Keaton remarked: “It’s time for Redpath, Sullentrup and Starr to step down. They are toxic not only to the party but to the larger movement.”

Other questions posed by LFV’s ElfNinosMom include why litigation so unlikely to succeed is being brought up in the first place, and how the party intends to fund the suit considering its anemic fund-raising as of late.

38 thoughts on “LNC (some of it, anyway) to sue for removal of Phillies from NH ballot

  1. G.E.

    Who was it that said they wanted to ask me why I thought Redpath was a criminal?

    How much evidence does one need to see that this gun-grabbing Nazi bastard is a power-drunk POS?

  2. Hugh Jass

    Why not simply keep Phillies on the ballot, to do an experiment as to which LP nominee gets the most votes/population?

  3. G.E.

    Because the Barr/Root criminals failed in NH, like they did everywhere, because the real point of the Redpath regime is to despoil membership and pay out criminals like Sean Haugh and Scott Kolhause, etc. They are thieves and crooks and should be sent to prison-labor camps to pay restitution. Letting them resign and going away quietly to never be heard from again would be very Christian.

  4. sunshinebatman

    Ninnying, petty bitches on all sides here. It’s no wonder the LP os perpetually in a ditch.

  5. G.E.

    sunshine – The Redpath camarillo is using party funds illegally. I don’t think it’s petty for people to be pissed about it.

  6. svf

    How much evidence does one need to see that this gun-grabbing Nazi bastard is a power-drunk POS?

    I don’t need to tell you that every time you spew absurd rhetoric like this it further discredits any “news” items you post here… right?

    Perhaps YOU are ALSO part of the nefarious vast right-wing LP-takeover conspiracy, G.E….??!!!

  7. mscrib

    Redpath is a Nazi criminal?

    G.E., you’re helping keep the “crazy” in the Crazy Party.

  8. Thomas L. Knapp

    This sounds like it may be part of the ongoing supremacy game the LNC has been playing with the state parties since at least as far back as the Arizona fiasco in 2000.

    For some reason, the LNC seems to suffer from the collective delusion that the name “Libertarian Party” belongs to it (it even filed a frivolous and indefensible trademark on it a few years back) and not to the state parties. The reverse, of course, is the case.

    It’s probably going to take ten or fifteen state parties de facto or de jure disaffiliating from the LNC and either operating independently or choosing/creating a new umbrella, and ten or fifteen failed frivolous lawsuits against them, before the LNC learns the limits of its authoritah.

  9. sunshinebatman

    GE, I meant the petty megalomaniac Phillies who won’t take his name off the ballot… as the other “side” vs the petty LNC idiots who think spending money to torpedo the ninnying loser Phillies is a wise thing to do.

    Typical idoicy all around, regardless of what faction/label (“reform” “radical” etc) these people are giving themselves, or each other. (Not to mention the ones blogging here.)

  10. Carl M

    Doing the will of the LP Convention == criminal.

    Yeah, roight.

    The implicit contract of a party or Caucus: a subgroup of the overall voting population that agrees to back whomever that party/caucus chooses.

    It appears that “principled” Libertarians cannot abide by contract. Unsurprising. Heinlein wrote the same about reform politicians. This is why the corrupt rule. They keep their word.

  11. hogarth

    It appears that “principled” Libertarians cannot abide by contract.

    Whoa, there, buddy. I’m not sure what you mean by “principled”, but if you mean a self-professed radical libertarian, that is NOT George Phillies.

    Ask him yourself!

    And even if he was, that’s a pretty outrageous bit of collectivism there.

    And, somewhat incongruously but with real warmth, congrats on the new baby! I sent you an email, but it bounced.

    “Oh, Don’t let yer babies groooow up to be Georgists!”

    😉

  12. G.E.

    sunshine – I don’t necessarily disagree with your assessment of Phillies. However, he has EARNED THE RIGHT to be on the ballot, and the LP is now trying to steal that right he worked for… And they’re doing it WITHOUT authorization.

    Anyone who thinks this is a legitimate action — for a rouge element within the LP to steal and act without authority — is not a libertarian.

    My comments about Redpath stand. He’s a gun grabber and that alone is enough for me to consider him a “Nazi.” He’s an embarassment to the Libertarian Party — which is virtually shameless, now — and a disgrace to libertarianism and humanity.

    Only an arch-statist/Death Merchant could consider a hardcore statist libertine like George Phillies to be a “radical” libertarian.

  13. G.E.

    Doing the will of the LP Convention == criminal.

    Acting without due authority = criminal.

    Go back to murdering babies, Carl.

  14. G.E.

    It’s probably going to take ten or fifteen state parties de facto or de jure disaffiliating from the LNC and either operating independently or choosing/creating a new umbrella, and ten or fifteen failed frivolous lawsuits against them, before the LNC learns the limits of its authoritah.

    Unfortunately, most state party members are in the dark and blindly follow the nationalists. Eventually, things will come to a head, I guess.

  15. George Donnelly

    The implicit contract of a party or Caucus: a subgroup of the overall voting population that agrees to back whomever that party/caucus chooses.

    I would say they should give him the benefit of the doubt that is it. A lot of people have given Barr the benefit of the doubt and he quickly corrected them with his comments on Helms, the latest bailout and now social security.

  16. sunshinebatman

    Yeah, from last month when Barr called for a Bush impeachment inquiry… I forget if that was important enough to be reported on IPR.

  17. darolew

    “Who was it that said they wanted to ask me why I thought Redpath was a criminal?”

    ‘Twas I.

    That Redpath might be acting inappropriately or poorly is obvious. However, I have not (yet) seen any evidence of anything I’d consider “criminal”.

  18. G.E.

    darolew – Do not you know that hyperbole is my forte? Redpath’s actions might not be criminal in the eyes of the state, but in the eyes of any justice-loving libertarian, Redpath’s regime is unquestionably cretinous and, yes, criminal, in the way that it wastes LP funds and operates as a spoils system with little fiefdoms managed by Haugh, Kohlhause, etc.

  19. JustinG

    From :http://lastfreevoice.wordpress.com/2008/08/19/lfv-exclusive-lnc-filing-ballot-access-suit-without-informing-lnc-members-or-lnc-attorney/#comments

    49 Aaron Starr

    This might be interesting if it were accurate.

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

    No lawsuit has been filed yet.

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

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

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

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

    Aaron Starr
    Treasurer
    Libertarian National Committee

  20. Thomas M. Sipos

    Aaron, if you don’t want to divulge the LNC’s talk with Bill Hall, okay. But I don’t think attorney client privilege prevents you from doing so.

    As I understand it, attorney client privilege prevents the attorney from talking. The client (the LNC, in this case) is free to talk all it wants.

    There may be other good reasons why you, the treasurer, won’t divulge info regarding Bill Hall’s talk. But it wouldn’t be attorney client privilege.

  21. MarcMontoni

    Doing the will of the LP Convention == criminal.

    Yeah, roight.

    The implicit contract of a party or Caucus: a subgroup of the overall voting population that agrees to back whomever that party/caucus chooses.

    I agree with Carl. I fervently disagree with Tom Knapp.

    I said this on another forum in 2007: “If Libertarians don’t start acknowleding that the parent organization has the right to dictate some basic terms to its affiliates, we are going to continue to have asinine debacles like Arizona 2000 in future races. Anyone who defends the balkanization of the LP in 2000 will also excuse balkanization in the future. That indicates the LP has a serious, serious problem.”

    And here we are… Phillies, an open supporter of the 2000 balkanization, committing it himself in 2008.

    It appears that “principled” Libertarians cannot abide by contract. Unsurprising. Heinlein wrote the same about reform politicians. This is why the corrupt rule. They keep their word.

    Sigh. There he goes again, straight into la-la land with a gratuitous, uninformed, stupid, and just plain asinine insult.

  22. MarcMontoni

    G.E. said:

    Acting without due authority = criminal.

    G.E. while I understand the fact that you don’t trust these folks and loathe the direction the Party is being driven, this sort of language doesn’t really help anyone.

    I don’t particularly care for the direction the LP is headed, either, and I’ve been a member for twenty-eight years. I also don’t particlarly care for Bill Redpath’s management nor for many of the decisions the LNC has made since about 2001. But there is a big difference between these folks being wrong about things vs. being evil or criminal.

    The fact that the LP’s membership has tanked for the past eight years, the fact that the number of candidates being off by two-thirds, the fact that revenue is off by half or more, and so on — these are all things that should make people think twice about the decisions they make, and to start making better ones. But I don’t believe these folks are evil for refusing to correct their mistakes; I just believe they’re wrong.

    G.E. then said:

    Go back to murdering babies, Carl.

    That doesn’t help, either.

    Milsted lives his life as peaceful as the next person. Yes, he advocates “some force”, and yes, when we speak of government that “some force” eventually ends up involving innocent deaths, and yes I agree that innocent deaths are unacceptable. Carl simply thinks sometimes that “some force” must be used to prevent “more force”. I think he’s wrong, but G.E., vilifying one’s opponents with language like that doesn’t really add any enlightenment to the debate.

    I would appreciate it if you and everyone else could hold the vitriol in abeyance. I’ve been on the receiving end of vitriol like that from the other side, and in other situations, and it ain’t fun.

  23. George Donnelly

    Balkanization? Sounds like a 50-cent word for secession. And I see nothing wrong with secession.

    I don’t understand what Phillies is doing to cause the “balkanization” of the LP. It’s the state of MA that won’t allow substitution. As for NH, isn’t it the case that _LP-NH_ paid for the ballot access and decided to put Phillies on the ballot?

    And if they hadn’t started their petitioning so early, they might not have gotten on the ballot at all, like in 2004. So I fail to see the harm.

    I don’t like the LP having different presidential candidates in different states but calling the situation in NH balkanization is a kind of hyperbole GE is usually known for.

    I’m surprised you think the LNC should be able to dictate certain things to the state LPs at the same time that you agree that the national leadership is way down the wrong track. That seems slightly contradictory.

  24. Thomas L. Knapp

    Marc,

    You write:

    “I agree with Carl. I fervently disagree with Tom Knapp.”

    Maybe not as much as you think.

    I support the idea of suing versus substitution in New Hampshire.

    I wish that the LPNH would sign on to such a suit.

    If the Barr campaign makes it onto the ballot in New Hampshire, I hope that George Phillies will withdraw so that there’s only one LP presidential candidate on the ballot there.

    HOWEVER:

    The LNC is is not a “parent organization” and the affiliates are not its “children.” Precisely the opposite: The LNC is an “umbrella organization” created by and composed of the state parties, which can choose to stand under it, not stand under it, or fold it.

    I’d rather the LNC got its shit together than that it lost affiliates … but at some point it has to be one or the other. If it’s going to be the latter, better now than later. The LP is still a miniscule factor on the presidential level; better for any reorganization to take place while that’s still true than for the wheels to come off after it becomes more influential (if it even can become more influential with a dysfunctional LNC coordinating it).

    In the instant Canossa, Bill Redpath should very much be playing Henry IV to the LPNH’s Gregory VII — if the goal is to get the LPNH and the LNC on the same side. If that’s not the goal, then it’s time for the LNC to be replaced by some alternative umbrella. The obvious existing choice for such an alternative is the LSLA.

  25. hogarth

    I would appreciate it if you and everyone else could hold the vitriol in abeyance. I’ve been on the receiving end of vitriol like that from the other side, and in other situations, and it ain’t fun.

    I’ve been on both sides, and if you’ve only been on the receiving end you’ve done pretty well. It’s not pleasant to remember having heard such things directed at you, but it’s downright awful to remember having been stupid enough to have said them.

    No offense intended, G.E. Just trying to save you from some future cringing. I tried to think of a kinder and more productive word than ‘stupid’, but one just isn’t coming to mind just now.

  26. VTV

    Honestly I find the whole situation funny. If George was on the ballot here, I might actually vote for my own party’s candidate. Instead it’s looking like Chuck Baldwin because the BTP won’t have access here sadly.

  27. JimDavidson

    This comment, “My comments about Redpath stand. He’s a gun grabber …” seems to be a very trenchant criticism of Bill Redpath.

    How can such a person be regarded by anyone as a libertarian?

    GE, is there a thread somewhere you would be so kind as to point me at which establishes Redpath’s gun grabber credentials? I would be indebted if you would send me the link. Thanks.

  28. G.E.

    Jim – See here:

    http://www.pinkpistols.org/answers2001/redpath.html

    Highlights:

    “I favor repealing most gun control laws, although I would propose retention and even creation of a few that, according to research by Florida State University criminologist Gary Kleck, who has written at least two pro-gun books, have likely reduced crime.”

  29. G.E.

    Liberty is not a value of the criminal “Libertarian” chair, Bill Redpath. “Efficiency” and “reducing crime” before it happens — those are paramount.

    Words cannot express the utter contempt I have for that miserable miscreant and his gaggle of cronies.

Leave a Reply

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