Haugh, Wrights, Hawkridge continue to cover Libertarian Party sexual harassment claims at Liberty For All

Following up on Sean Haugh’s article, Sexual Harassment at National? (discussed at IPR: Libertarian Party employee Sean Haugh: ‘Open season on women’ as long as Bill Redpath is LP national chair; Libertarian Party Transparency Caucus debate), Liberty For All has been publishing a number of followup articles.

In Sexual harassment at National: What to do about it, Haugh writes:

… the one question I really wanted asked has not been addressed at all. How can women safely and fairly exercise leadership at the national level of our party?

My reaction was so severe because the juxtaposition of events brought into focus a problem within our party of which we do not speak. If the clumsy hearing of the Resolution of Discipline against Angela Keaton had happened in isolation, I would still be upset but not moved enough to write so publicly about it. If M Carling had been named our party’s Parliamentarian with no other context, I might not have been upset at all. The fact that they both happened at the same meeting is the cause of my outrage.

Haugh continues,

Carling has a simple path out of this. All he has to do is openly admit what he did. If he does so, I would support public forgiveness of him.

Redpath’s way out is even simpler. All he has to do is rescind his appointment of Carling as Parliamentarian of the Libertarian Party.

The LNC’s way to resolve the immediate issue is also easy. They must not allow Carling a seat at their table until truth and reconciliation have taken place.

In another article co-written with LNC member Lee Wrights, Haugh goes on to say

Our silence has even damaged Carling more than if we had done the right thing and spoken out at the time. Three and a half years is time enough for someone in his position to atone for what he did and return to the good graces of the membership. Instead of serving that time, and restoring his good name through reformed behavior, something he did years ago has come back to haunt him.

And now that two of the co-conspirators have broken their silence, the damage is greater than it would have been if the truth had been revealed at the time. Some involved have risen to more prominent roles within the party and stand to lose more than they could have if we had done the right thing at the proper time. Once again, we find our “sin of silence” haunting us.

By not speaking up when these events occurred, we have lost three and a half years to address the underlying problems. If we had brought these problems to light then, maybe we would have a much healthier party today. We realize now if we had done the right thing almost four years ago, we could have avoided the shame of our sin.

The most recent installment in the series, LNC region 7 rep Rachel Hawkridge writes, Women make good leaders too!:

My first contact with the LNC occurred at the costume party in Denver, where one member of the LNC walked past me, fixated on my cleavage, leered and said “Va-va-voom!” When I attempted to engage my esteemed colleague in conversation, he was so enamored with said cleavage that he couldn’t focus on my face, and directed a few mono-syllabic words at my chest.

In dealing with State Chairs for region formation, I spoke to several (I need to point out here that none of them are my current State Chairs!) who appeared to have an attitude of superiority, and adopted a “just a woman” attitude. Several women at Denver gave me input about various State Chairs and other officers. “He hits on all of us”, “he makes me uncomfortable”, “he leers”, “he drools.” And even more troubling “Women don’t go to LP events in (our state or city) because they get hit on, or nobody listens . . . ”

On at least two occasions, our Presidential candidate leered at me, and then when he realized I was a party member, he proceeded to ignore me.

An internationally known female author, and blogger for Newsweek, came to our convention in Denver and was treated rather disdainfully. One of those who didn’t pay much mind to her questions was an LNC member.

Later, the same blogger came to a Presidential fundraiser. The candidate treated her like she was not worthy of his time or attention.

That blogger is a Jungian scholar, internationally known author and psychotherapist. She’s been published in (IIRC) 32 languages and 35 countries. Who knows whether Bob Barr treated her poorly because she’s just a blog, or because she’s a woman? We might have gotten a really great story out of it. We were lucky that she didn’t publish anything else on him. “After all,” she said, “he’s not interesting, and no one will vote for him anyway!”

I have found it particularly telling that in the last few days, as we have dealt with nothing *but* issues of sexual harassment, one member of this committee [LNC] has made references to pornography, and another has sent me off-color humor. And when informed that I found these to be inappropriate, one argued with me. The other pointed out that Mary Ruwart liked the joke.

Hawkridge recommends confronting the problem with “Absolute Honesty,” applying principles such as “The Worst Truth Beats the Best Lie,” “Don’t Kill the Messenger,” “Use Constructive Confrontation,” and more. She concludes,

My husband, longtime member and party stalwart, Gene says-

I know we all hate “political correctness” – but this isn’t about that. This is about polite, respectful, and gentlemanly behavior. It is about treating your sisters as the equals that they are.

And Rachel replies that it is *not* “political correctness” – it is, at a fundamental level, how we feel about, and as a result, how we treat, women.

And it’s a long way from treating women as intelligent, reasoning and capable adults.

As far as the fallout from the articles:

There was some speculation in IPR reactions to the initial article by Haugh that he had either already been told he would be fired at the San Diego LNC meeting, or would be fired as a result of his article. However, this past weekend, a former LPHQ staffer told me that in fact the chair can not fire HQ staff, other than the executive director, and that only the executive director can fire other HQ staff. He was not sure how these rules apply at present, since Kraus is not Executive Director, only Acting Executive Director. IPR has not yet found out whether Haugh has been reprimanded for violating an LPHQ policy forbidding staff from commenting on party controversies on blogs, or whether the policy has been rescinded.

In further fallout from the publication of the articles, there is some speculation that there could be unspecified repercussions for LNC members involved, especially At Large Rep Lee Wrights, who is the
editor of Liberty For All and co-author with Haugh of one of the articles. Some anonymous sources have claimed that the Keaton charges and resignation were just the first in a series of attacks by the dominant faction on the LNC to “clean house” and remove opposing votes on the committee.

Stay tuned to IPR for further installments of “As the LNC turns” and “Days of our LPHQ employees.”

133 thoughts on “Haugh, Wrights, Hawkridge continue to cover Libertarian Party sexual harassment claims at Liberty For All

  1. G.E.

    Lee Wrights was positive on Haugh in Denver. I think he thought Haugh supported Ruwart. Now that it’s know that Haugh participated in the LNC’s virtual gang rape of her, I’m surprised that he and Wrights are still chums.

  2. paulie cannoli Post author

    To complicate things further, an anonymous commenter at LFV has repeatedly claimed that Wrights and Ruwarts are having (or had) an affair. However, this commenter has not identified himself or herself or produced any evidence.

    Kate O’Brien, Aaron Starr’s long time ex-girlfriend, did however publicly and repeatedly identify herself, as she claimed she caught Starr having an affair with Angela Keaton. She seemed to be placing all the blame on Starr; I asked her if she was still friends with Keaton and she said that was a good question, and seemed open to it if Keaton was, but on the other hand seemed to be very bitter towards Starr, using terms such as “kosher pork” to describe him, and implying that he might be having a homosexual affair with Carling.

  3. Catholic Trotskyist

    GE, I thought you didn’t believe in mental illness?

    Just look at this important site
    http://www.universalis.com

    STOP WEXFORD CAROL CANDLELIGHT VIGILE EYE OF THE NEEDLE RICHARD DAWKINS COMMAND-AND-CONTROL CENTER, LORD’S PRAYER. The Libertarian Party could benefit from my impecable knowledge of not only Catholic theology, of Augustine, of Hildegarde von Gingen, of Aquinas, of Rahner, but also my wisdom from the heathens and heretics like Lev Davidovich Bronstein (aka Leon Trotsky), of Admiral Miklos Horthy, of Paramahansa Yogananda, of Jalal ad-Din Rumi, of the Dahlai Lama, of CS Lewis, etc, etc, etc, but they would have to abandon libertarianism.

  4. TheOriginalAndy

    LOL! It sure is funny that they will talk about this nonsense over a Liberty for All but they take down any posts that are critical of Sean Haugh. Haugh’s offenses are far greater than this alleged “sexual harrassment,” and since Haugh has a history of making false accusations against people (including false accusations on this very subject) I’m inclined to think that it is much to do about nothing. That site ought to be called Liberty for All Except for Those Who Post Anything that is Critical of Sean Haugh.

    Haugh is a drama queen and he just wants to create a distraction to draw people’s attention away from the far more serious offenses that were committed by him, such as his unprofessional conduct in slandering certain Libertarian Party candidates, his history of emotional childish outbursts, the fact that he was paid $1,200 per month for a few years before he got handed the Political Director job do VERY LITTLE as the “Candidate Tracker” for the National LP website (sometimes there were only 6 candidtes on Candidate Tracker yet Haugh was still paid $1,200, which comes out to a whopping $200 per candidate to “track”), his failure to grow the NCLP while he was its Executive Director (he was so ineffective at that job that they couldn’t afford to pay him so that’s why that job ended and he went straght from that to Candidate Tracker and then straight to Political Director), his criminal order to “burn (quite literally)” 2,000 high validity Libertarian Party ballot access petition signatures in Masssachusetts whether they had been paid for or not, his handing out “sweetheart” deals to mercenary petitioners who did shoddy work and bilked the donors for money (this was a contributing factor to the ballot access failures that occurred this year/more failures would likely have happened had signatures been challenged in a few states), his total mismanagement of the ballot access drives which caused the party to not achieve ballot status in places where the party SHOULD HAVE and COULD HAVE made it, making up and spreading lies about people, renegging on agreements, acting as a cover-up artist for Scott Kohlhaas, etc…

    Haugh is a coward and lying weasel. Notice how he’s too chickenshit to debate me. Notice how he was too chickenshit to confront Gary. Gary tried to speak to Haugh in a civil manner during the National Convention in Denver and Haugh’s responded by saying, “I don’t want to talk to you.” and then turning his back. A few weeks later the chickenshit Haugh tried to burn 2,000 high validity ballot access petition signatures that Gary had collected in Massachusetts. I confronted him at the National Convention in Denver and the chickenshit ran away. When I started asking him questions about Candidate Tracker and why he got paid $1,200 to “track” 6 candidates he would not anwser. I confronted Haugh at the LNC meeting in Denver and I asked him about the ballot access failures and he ran away. I posted about this stuff on Liberty for All and the posts got taken down. Suprise, suprise.

    Everyone who donated money to the Libertarian Party within the past year (at least) should be pissed as hell at Sean Haugh because he is responsible for THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of your dollars of donors money being squandered with nothing to show for it. This guy should be run out of office on a rail.

  5. chuckmoulton

    The rumors Paulie alluded to may be directly applicable to the story depending on the time line of the alleged incidents. Was Angela a California LP Executive Director working for Starr as CA LP Chair at the time their relationship is alleged to have occurred? Was Wrights working for Ruwart as presidential campaign manager when their relationship was alleged to have occurred?

    Of course people who work together can date — and do quite often — without harassment being involved. There is a fundamental distinction between welcome advances and unwelcome advances.

    That fine line of course makes entering a relationship a dangerous needle to thread. First, an interested person must determine whether advances are welcome or not without triggering harassment charges. Second, those involved could always change their minds afterward about whether advances were welcome if the relationship sours.

    These difficulties have made many boards react harshly to even mutual, consensual relationships — especially when there is the perception that one of the parties could get favorable treatment as a result of the relationship.

    But returning to the main point, the standard to which Angela was held in Stewart’s resolution may have been quite different from the standard to which others were held — including perhaps Starr on the other side of a possible board/staff alleged interaction with Angela. This juxtaposition would have made Starr’s reaction to Angela’s alleged harassment of staff members quite hypocritical.

    That said, we need to be careful here not to commit libel… come on, Paulie: Jack Nicholson a Libertarian?!

  6. paulie cannoli Post author

    since Haugh has a history of making false accusations against people (including false accusations on this very subject) I’m inclined to think that it is much to do about nothing.

    I would not jump to that conclusion necessarily. Several people have told me the rumors about Carling. One claimed he was doing it to her, although I no longer consider her to always be a reliable source. But, I have several other separate sources, separate from Haugh’s article. Of course, it may also be true that several people with an agenda have made up and circulated a rumor about Carling – but I wouldn’t just assume that to be the case because we have had problems with Haugh.

    I have no reason to doubt Rachel Hawkridge at present.

    “Citizen Kate” Soglin, who covered the LP and GP coventions, told me one of her impressions from the LP convention at the GP convention – Barr recognized her the next day after the costume party, where her face was disguised – she wondered if he “memorized her ass.”

    I think it may have been you, or Jake, who related a story about an Alabama student who had claimed to have been a congressional staffer and had a story about Barr.

    I don’t know which of these stories are true, if any – but there’s a lot of smoke, so there may well be fire.

  7. paulie cannoli Post author

    Jack Nicholson a Libertarian?!

    I know very little about his political views. I know he had some libertarian friends, including Aaron Russo and Tim Leary. But then, I have socialist friends.

    The picture, as you probably know, is from the film One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest, an adaptation of Ken Kesey’s novel starring Nicholson, and revolving around events taking place in a mental asylum. It was posted as a humorous reaction to GE’s question about sane people in the LP.

    You probably knew all that. But in case anyone reading didn’t, and may have wanted to know, there you are.

  8. TheOriginalAndy

    “1 G.E. // Dec 16, 2008 at 6:10 pm

    Lee Wrights was positive on Haugh in Denver. I think he thought Haugh supported Ruwart. Now that it’s know that Haugh participated in the LNC’s virtual gang rape of her, I’m surprised that he and Wrights are still chums.”

    Considering that my problems with Lee Wrights are because of Sean Haugh I’m not suprised.

    My “offense” to Wrights back in 2001 (which he lies about now) was that I asked him if Sean Haugh’s crazy behavior (after Haugh – whom I had never met in person and only had spoken to on the phone a few times – called me up in the morning and started screaming and cursing like a maniac while making false accusations against me and then not giving me a chance to respond and then hanging up on me) was due to drug use. I had gotten along fine with Lee Wrights up until that moment and then for “daring” to ask if Sean Haugh’s crazy behavior was drug related he started screaming and yelling like a maniac and then hung up on me. I spoke to Wrights two times after that, once later that day and the 2nd time a week later, and in those conversations he had calmed down and acted like he was my buddy again. In fact, the last thing that Wrights said to me was that he did not think that I had done anything wrong but that Sean was the Executive Director and that he made an executive decision and there was nothing he could do about it. Now fastforward to 2007 and Wrights stabbed me in the back (at the behest of Sean Haugh) by urging the ballot access committee in NC to vote to prohibit me from working there, even though Bill Redpath wanted me to be there and even though most of the more the drive came from LP National, and even though that meant that Paul had to work there without a car which generated a lot less signatures for the motel room that they were paying for him, and even though this SLOWED DOWN ballot access in North Carolina and set the seeds the ballot access failures this year. When Bill Redpath called up Lee Wrights and told him that he wanted me there, Wrights would not back down and he lied and trash talked me to Bill Redpath. Then fastforward to 2008 where I confronted Lee Wrights at the National Convention in Denver. I pretended like I didn’t know what he did behind my back in 2007 and Wrights acted friendly at first, but of course that ended as soon as I brought up the way that he had betrayed me in 2007 and then Wrights went ballistic and started yelling and then ran away. GE caught the end of this confrontation and the snake-in-the-grass Lee Wrights had the nerve to concoct a phony story about me to make himself look good and slander me.

    Haugh and Wrights are both assholes who should not hold any positions within the party.

  9. TheOriginalAndy

    “I would not jump to that conclusion necessarily. Several people have told me the rumors about Carling. One claimed he was doing it to her, although I no longer consider her to always be a reliable source. But, I have several other separate sources, separate from Haugh’s article. Of course, it may also be true that several people with an agenda have made up and circulated a rumor about Carling – but I wouldn’t just assume that to be the case because we have had problems with Haugh.”

    IF any “sexual harrassment” went on it is probably just a case of M. Carling attempting to pick up a woman and the woman not being interested, and since she’s not interested his failed pick up attempt morphed into “sexual harrassment”.

    Considering that Sean Haugh is a known liar with a history of making false accusations against people I would be skeptical of anything that he says.

  10. TheOriginalAndy

    For an example of Sean Haugh’s lying, Haugh told Mark that nobody was getting more than $1.50 per signature, and he told him this while at the same time he was paying other people (who were doing a worse job) $2.50 per signature. In Sean Haugh’s own ballot access report from the LNC meeting in Denver he talked about paying petitioners rates of $2.50-$3 per signature. I wouldn’t believe anything that this guy said.

    Heck, the first time that I talked to Sean Haugh he lied to me. I asked him about getting my travel expense reimbursed – or even just a part of reimbursed -for my trip to North Carolin and he told me that they weren’t doing that for anybody, so I paid for 100% of my travel out of my own pocket. I worked in North Carolina for a month and gathered over 4,000 signatures. Over 4,000 signatures in a month is good, and it is especially good when one factors in that I did this during cold weather without a car (I flew in) and had trouble getting locations. I later found out that they paid travel expenses for 2 mercenary petitioners who were there while I was there (one of whom they had paid for his flight) and that they later paid out more money to bring in more mercenary petitioners after I left. So Sean Haugh blatantly lied to me the first time I spoke to him.

    Sean Haugh also told another lie in that same conversation as he claimed that there were these great spots that I could go to for signature gathering and when I got there I found out that the information that he had give me was not true.

  11. TheOriginalAndy

    “Libertarian Joseph // Dec 16, 2008 at 8:00 pm

    4k signatures a month is good? um.. just walk up to random people and get them to sign. How hard is that?”

    It is actually a lot more difficult than most people who have never tried it think that it is. This is why most of the people who try it end up flopping at it and quitting.

    Also, I did not make $4,000 during that month. The pay rate was on a sliding scale where I had to get 1,200 signatures in a week to get paid $1, 950 signatures in a week to get paid .75 cents, 850 signatures in a week to get paid .65 cents, and anything below that was .50. I got paid at the .65 cent rate the first week, the $1 rate the 2nd week, and the .75 cent rate the 3rd & 4th weeks. I also paid $327 out of my own pocket to fly to North Carolina, an then I paid for a Greyhound bus ticket to leave.

    I’ve worked in 25 states (several on multiple occassions) and I can say that North Carolina was one of my worst expierences and that Sean Haugh is the worst person whom I’ve ever had to deal with on a petition drive.

  12. paulie cannoli Post author

    IF any “sexual harrassment” went on it is probably just a case of M. Carling attempting to pick up a woman and the woman not being interested, and since she’s not interested his failed pick up attempt morphed into “sexual harrassment”.

    The allegations I have heard have involved multiple women, repeated advances after being told they were unwelcome, and at least one woman quitting her job as a result. And I have heard them from more than one person. That does not make them true, but it also does not make them something to be dismissed in a casual manner as you are doing just because we have had problems with one of the accusers.

  13. TheOriginalAndy

    “The allegations I have heard have involved multiple women, repeated advances after being told they were unwelcome, and at least one woman quitting her job as a result. And I have heard them from more than one person. That does not make them true, but it also does not make them something to be dismissed in a casual manner as you are doing just because we have had problems with one of the accusers.”

    It still sounds like something that is being blown out of proportion, espeically when one considers the fact that Sean Haugh is involved. Blowing things out of proportion and lying are right up his alley.

  14. TheOriginalAndy

    “Libertarian Joseph // Dec 16, 2008 at 8:18 pm

    How is it tougher than most people think? Just go to the mall and hit the jackpot”

    In the majority of places you’ll be kicked out of the mall really quick, and even if you get to stay malls are really not that good for signature gathering.

  15. TheOriginalAndy

    “even if you get to stay malls are really not that good for signature gathering.”

    I should have said “malls are usually not that good for signature gathering.” since there are exceptions.

    Malls have a lot of exits/entrances so you’ll miss a lot of people, plus there is a lot of background noise and in addition to this, a lot of people think that you are trying to sign people up for credit cards or cell phones or are conducting a survey so they’ll try to avoid you.

  16. paulie cannoli Post author

    “The allegations I have heard have involved multiple women, repeated advances after being told they were unwelcome, and at least one woman quitting her job as a result. And I have heard them from more than one person. That does not make them true, but it also does not make them something to be dismissed in a casual manner as you are doing just because we have had problems with one of the accusers.”

    It still sounds like something that is being blown out of proportion, espeically when one considers the fact that Sean Haugh is involved.

    Sean’s involvement is not the issue. He is just one of several people I have heard this from. If the charges I have heard are true, they are in fact serious, and nothing like your characterization as one failed pick-up attempt.

    Again, I don’t know if they are true. But dismissing them in the way you are doing is not doing our case against Haugh on petitioning issues any favors. It just makes you sound really bad to assume you know so much about something of which you know so little, just because Haugh is peripherally involved.

    Kind of like the troll you are engaging in conversation he does not deserve makes himself sound when discussing petitioning, as if he knows anything about our business.

  17. TheOriginalAndy

    “Again, I don’t know if they are true. But dismissing them in the way you are doing is not doing our case against Haugh on petitioning issues any favors. It just makes you sound really bad to assume you know so much about something of which you know so little, just because Haugh is peripherally involved.”

    Haugh is like the boy who cried wolf. He has lied and made false accusations on so many occassions that he no longer has any credibility.

    You are making it sound like M. Carling showed up at the National Office, grabbed a woman’s breasts and said something like, “Hey baby, sleep with me if you want to keep your job.” For some reason I doubt that anything like this happened.

  18. TheOriginalAndy

    “Libertarian Joseph // Dec 16, 2008 at 8:29 pm

    ok. If you ever need a sig guy, I can get 4,000 sigs a day, no prob :p”

    Wow, Libertarian Josesph can get 4,000 signatures per day. The Libertarian Party’s ballot access problems are over! Whoohoo!

  19. LibertarianGirl

    since when did a simple unwanted advance , a unsuccessful hitting on become sexual harassment?
    I thought sexual harassment was things like ‘suck this or lose your job’ , unwanted touching ,consistent advances resulting in emotional trauma.

    I dont mean to minimize anyones feelings but for gods sake every time a guy says something vulgur isnt sexual harassment . its just a guy being a dog:) .
    to me the other end of the spectrum i.e a man NEVER looking at you like a sex object would be far worse:)

    as for being marginalized I have never felt that from my guys in Nevada . I feel very lucky that as an excomm member of both my county and state party I have never felt less than .

  20. TheOriginalAndy

    “LibertarianGirl // Dec 16, 2008 at 8:53 pm

    since when did a simple unwanted advance , a unsuccessful hitting on become sexual harassment?
    I thought sexual harassment was things like ’suck this or lose your job’ , unwanted touching ,consistent advances resulting in emotional trauma.

    I dont mean to minimize anyones feelings but for gods sake every time a guy says something vulgur isnt sexual harassment . its just a guy being a dog:) .
    to me the other end of the spectrum i.e a man NEVER looking at you like a sex object would be far worse:)”

    LibertarianGirl nails it! Opps, I said “nails it” which could be considered to be sexual innuendo. Now I’ll pobably get accused of sexual harrassment.

  21. Gary Fincher

    libertarian girl wrote: “to me the other end of the spectrum i.e a man NEVER looking at you like a sex object would be far worse:)”

    Libertariangirl, can you do me a favor and email me a photo of yourself?

  22. Gary Fincher

    Andy wrote: “Haugh is like the boy who cried wolf. He has lied and made false accusations on so many occassions that he no longer has any credibility. ”

    I agree with Andy here (where he actually paraphrases me on the crying wolf thing).

    Someone who continues to cry wolf doesn’t have any credibility and therefore should NEVER be taken seriously. So I disagree strongly with Paulie.

  23. paulie cannoli Post author

    You are making it sound like M. Carling showed up at the National Office, grabbed a woman’s breasts and said something like, “Hey baby, sleep with me if you want to keep your job.” For some reason I doubt that anything like this happened.

    And what reason would that be? Because we know Carling socially and have not personally seen him do anything like this? I grant that we do, and haven’t. Well, guess what – most guys who do this stuff control their behavior in most social settings.

    How many women do you know who quit their job just because they got asked out by someone they did not like? From what I have heard it sounds a lot more like “unwanted touching, consistent advances resulting in emotional trauma. ”

    Think for a minute, and consider that there is a chance this is about something more than our squabbles with Haugh on entirely different issues. I don’t think it will do our case any good whatsoever if you are jumping to conclusions that a matter about which you obviously know very little must have nothing to it just because Haugh says it has something to it, if it turns out that in this instance he is correct.

    As for me, I am not jumping to any conclusions, one way or the other. I have heard serious charges involving a pattern of clearly unwelcome and repeated behavior toward multiple women, from multiple sources. They could all be wrong, but this is about more than just Carling (and certainly about more than Haugh).

    It is about a problem which a lot of women say they have in the LP. Different women have different perspectives – Debra has hers, Rachel has hers. I suggest we listen to all of them with an open mind, rather than one set by an agenda of who we like and who we don’t like.

  24. paulie cannoli Post author

    So I disagree strongly with Paulie.

    On what? I don’t have an opinion as to whether the allegations are true. I do know I have heard them from several people, not just Haugh.

    Speaking from ignorance discredits you.

  25. Gary Fincher

    Haugh is the one speaking from ignorance; he always does. That’s not me.

    I disagree that Sean should be a credible witness in this case.

  26. paulie cannoli Post author

    Haugh is the one speaking from ignorance; he always does. That’s not me.

    Right. Please regale us with your expert knowledge of the events in question.

  27. TheOriginalAndy

    “And what reason would that be? Because we know Carling socially and have not personally seen him do anything like this? I grant that we do, and haven’t. Well, guess what – most guys who do this stuff control their behavior in most social settings.”

    I don’t know Carling that well. I’ve only spoken to him on 3 occassions.

    I’m skeptical of the story for two reasons, #1) The sexaul harrassment scenario that I presented above does not sound plausible in this case; and #2) The credibility of the accusers is lacking.

    “How many women do you know who quit their job just because they got asked out by someone they did not like? From what I have heard it sounds a lot more like “unwanted touching, consistent advances resulting in emotional trauma. ”

    The National Office is in Washington DC. Doesn’t Carling live in California? Did Carling rent a room in DC and hang out at the National Office every day sexually harrassing the women there? How often was Carling there to cause somebody to quit their job?

  28. TheOriginalAndy

    “Libertariangirl, can you do me a favor and email me a photo of yourself?”

    Uh oh, that’s sexual harrassment! (sarcasm)

  29. Gary Fincher

    I’ve heard enough things filtering back out of Haugh (as well as his own words in the email to Mark) to know not to take anything he says seriously. I have not read any accounts written by anyone else; only Sean.

    Until I do, and as long as there is only one source I’ve personally seen written, I attach no credence to it.

  30. TheOriginalAndy

    “I don’t think it will do our case any good whatsoever if you are jumping to conclusions that a matter about which you obviously know very little must have nothing to it just because Haugh says it has something to it, if it turns out that in this instance he is correct.”

    Jumping to conclusions about matters that one knows little about, Sean Haugh has turned this into an art form.

    Haugh being right about anything is like a broken clock being right twice a day. Still, considering the source I’m skeptical.

  31. paulie cannoli Post author

    #1) The sexaul harrassment scenario that I presented above does not sound plausible in this case;

    In what way does it not sound credible?


    and #2) The credibility of the accusers is lacking.

    Since you know so much, who are the other accusers who have told me this about Carling? I haven’t told you the names, so let’s see if you guess correctly. There are at least three names you and your fellow expert Gary should be able to name, since you know so much about this.

    The National Office is in Washington DC. Doesn’t Carling live in California?

    He is a state party officer – sometimes simultaneously – in New York and California, but I heard he lives in Lithuania for the most part. I’ve seen him all over the country.


    Did Carling rent a room in DC and hang out at the National Office every day sexually harrassing the women there?

    I have no idea. Maybe he did. But you and Gary are the experts, so maybe you can tell me.


    How often was Carling there to cause somebody to quit their job?

    Don’t ask me. You and Gary are the experts, so you should have the answers, right?

  32. Gary Fincher

    Before my inbox gets inundated with testimonial emails, I should add something…

    I, more than anyone else, know all about having the same allegations emanating from multiple sources, and have not a single one of them be true.

  33. Catholic Trotskyist

    I bet Joseph couldn’t even get one signature. Here’s how the exchange would go. Joseph goes to the mall and runs into a guy named Paul.

    Joseph: Hi, can you sign this petition for ballot access?
    Paul: What party are you from?
    Joseph: I’m a Libertarian. And if anyone else comes to you asking them for your petitions, don’t sign them. There’s the Baldwin party which is protectionism, and then there’s the Greens who are socialist bastards.
    Paul: I actually think I might be a libertarian. Aren’t they the people who want marijuana legalization? But don’t you think anyone deserves to get on the ballot, whether you agree with them or not?
    Joseph: (Yelling) Then you’re not a libertarian, you’re probably an anarcho-syndicalist, meaning you’re a fascist socialist parasite.

    Paul gets the attention of security, who drags Joseph away. Joseph tries to pull out his gun. Policeman: You’re unstable. You need to give us that gun.
    Joseph: I’m not going to hurt anyone, I just want to have it because it’s my right to have it.
    Police arrest Joseph, and take him to jail.

  34. Gary Fincher

    Paulie, Andy actually went on to answer your question that you asked anyway. You wrote “I have no idea. Maybe he did” but there is such a thing as being too farfetched as to not have any plausibility. Kind of like Roger’s cornfield that got frozen over in June in Indiana (ok, it’s POSSIBLE, but…) or his accusation that I left North Dakota in the winter time, without using my cell phone or VISA card, and made a thousand mile trip to Texas on my own expense to kill his dog, which was almost 80 years old in dog years anyway at the time.

  35. paulie cannoli Post author

    CT: ROFL.

    Gary,

    Paulie, Andy actually went on to answer your question that you asked anyway.

    Which question? Where?

    You wrote “I have no idea. Maybe he did” but there is such a thing as being too farfetched as to not have any plausibility.

    Which part is implausible? That a man who travels constantly spent an extended period of time in the DC area, or was there repeatedly?

  36. TheOriginalAndy

    “In what way does it not sound credible?”

    I don’t think that Carling had the power to fire anybody. He was just one LNC member.

    “Since you know so much, who are the other accusers who have told me this about Carling? I haven’t told you the names, so let’s see if you guess correctly. There are at least three names you and your fellow expert Gary should be able to name, since you know so much about this.”

    If one of them is Angela Keaton I do not consider her to be a credible source either since she has a record of spreading lies.

    “He is a state party officer – sometimes simultaneously – in New York and California, but I heard he lives in Lithuania for the most part. I’ve seen him all over the country.”

    New York, California, and especially Lithuania are not exactly a close commute to DC.

    “Don’t ask me. You and Gary are the experts, so you should have the answers, right?”

    The burden of proof should be on the accusers. Sean Haugh being an accuser does not help their case because I don’t consider him to be a credible source of information since he’s got a history of lying.

    So if anyone wants me to buy this story you are going to have to come up with a lot more evidence than “Sean Haugh said….”

  37. TheOriginalAndy

    “and made a thousand mile trip to Texas on my own expense to kill his dog, which was almost 80 years old in dog years anyway at the time.”

    You forgot to mention that the time of the alleged “doggie murder” kept changing. First it happened in August, then it moved to September, then it moved to November, then it moved to December, then it moved to January, then the story became, “Well, it happened sometime during football season.” LOL!

  38. Gary Fincher

    Why is Rachel Hawkridge weighing in on this issue, yet REF– USED to discuss the Massachusetts burning issue (an open and shut crime – no investigation needed) with me, and has refused to answer any of my emails after giving her AMPLE time to reflect (and to seek discipline for Haugh)?

    She makes it sound as if, as a member of the LNC, she’s not free to discuss live issues – but the contradiction here kind of blows that out of the water and I later discover that she is VERY outspoken and prone to be loquatious.

    Had I not discovered that last fact, it would not have aroused any suspicions. However, since I did, it leaves a lot of unanswered questions. Is she trying to cover for Sean Haugh’s commission of a crime? Is she too cowardly to discuss the matter openly and candidly with me? Did she dictate her email to someone else and that typist got it worded incorrectly, and now she lost my email address (every time I’ve sent an email)? I mean, what?

  39. Gary Fincher

    Paulie, the part that he answered (that you just asked again) was how it’s implausible for someone who never works out of the national office to sexually harass someone in the national office, repeatedly.

    Do I HAVE to spell it out?

  40. paulie cannoli Post author

    Paulie, the part that he answered (that you just asked again) was how it’s implausible for someone who never works out of the national office to sexually harass someone in the national office, repeatedly.

    You are clearly confused. I did not ask any such questions, nor did Andy answer them.

    He asked me whether Carling had rented a place in DC, and I said I don’t know. Do you, or Andy, know that he did not?

    Do I HAVE to spell it out?

    You have already spelled out the vast extent of your expertise on these matters. Nothing I say will have any impact on you spelling it out further.

  41. paulie cannoli Post author

    You are losing this argument to Andy, Paulie.

    I’m not having one. I said I have an open mind about the issues being discussed, and don’t claim to know any more than what I know. What I know is not enough to pass any judgments.

    I have yet to see any evidence that you or Andy know more than I do, but maybe you’re just holding back.

  42. G.E.

    Barr recognized her the next day after the costume party, where her face was disguised – she wondered if he “memorized her ass.”

    And what if he did? There’s nothing aggressive about that. Should he have pretended he didn’t know who she was?

  43. TheOriginalAndy

    “yet REF– USED to discuss the Massachusetts burning issue (an open and shut crime – no investigation needed)”

    This is a good point. Sexual harrassment gets into grey areas as it is a “he said/she said” type of thing where it is difficult to prove, whereas Sean Haugh blatantly attempted to carry out a crime by trying to get LP ballot access petition signatures that you had gathered “burned (quite literally)” whether they had been paid for or not. This was a CLEAR attempt at violating Massachusetts election law as well as an attempt to defraud you, Libertarian Party donors, and the candidates on the petition.

    I think that what Sean Haugh did is a far more serious offense than this alleged “sexual harrassment” from M. Carling, and this is only one of the charges against Sean Haugh.

  44. paulie cannoli Post author

    And what if he did? There’s nothing aggressive about that. Should he have pretended he didn’t know who she was?

    LOL. Did I say it was aggressive?

    She did think it was weird. No one has alleged any crimes in this particular case to my knowledge.

  45. G.E.

    “Aggressive” is the wrong word. Did he say, “Hey, I recognize you from your ass!” That would be ungentlemanly at best. But if all he did was recognize her, and SHE has the ego to think it was based on her ass, then to think ill of him for that reason is pretty bogus… There are plenty of good reasons to think ill of Barr. How about the fact that he paid to have his unborn child butchered in his wife’s womb while he was committing adultery with a harlot he later married? That’s all good in the eyes of Greens, though.

  46. chuckmoulton

    LibertarianGirl wrote:

    since when did a simple unwanted advance , a unsuccessful hitting on become sexual harassment?

    You’re right, I was probably simplifying too much. The LNC Policy’s definition qualifies that by requiring that a hostile work environment be created (or other possible aggravating factors).

    The LNC’s policy is reprinted in Sean Haugh’s story about midway through:
    http://www.libertyforall.net/?p=1679#more-1679

    That policy says, in part:

    To prevent such inappropriate behavior, the following standards must be observed:

    a. All collective deprecation, whether alluding to sex, race, color, national origin, disability, age, religion, or any other protected category, must be avoided. Every person is a unique individual, and as the Libertarian Party is the Party of Individual Liberty, this injunction should doubly apply.

    b. Sexual harassment, like other forms of harassment, is prohibited. Sexual harassment includes unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors or any other conduct of a sexual nature when: (1) submission to the conduct is made either implicitly or explicitly a condition of employment; (2) submission to or rejection of the conduct is used as the basis of an employment decision affecting the harassed employee; or (3) the harassment has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with the employee’s work performance or creating an environment that is intimidating, hostile or offensive to the employee.

    c. Any behavior, whether verbal or physical, that clearly offends a reasonable person “libertarian or not” must be avoided. Libertarianism is a philosophy of respect for the individual, and must not be presented as being in harmony with behavior generally regarded as offensive.

    d. Any interaction which might be interpreted as abusing the apparent employer-employee relationship must be avoided. This applies to interactions of LNC members with staff, and is to be extended to interactions with any consultant hired by the LNC.

    You must exercise your own good judgment to avoid any conduct that may have been perceived by others as harassment. The following conduct could constitute harassment:
    * unwanted physical contact
    * racial or sexual epithets
    * derogatory slurs
    * off-color jokes
    * sexual innuendo
    * unwelcome comments about a person’s body
    * propositions
    * leering
    * unwanted prying into a person’s private life
    * graphic discussions about sexual matters
    * suggestive behavior, sounds, gestures or objects
    * threats
    * derogatory posters, pictures, cartoons or drawings

    As a rule of thumb, if you think it might be offensive, it probably is.

    The policy is broader than sexual harassment and includes harassment and offensive speech in general.

  47. paulie cannoli Post author

    But if all he did was recognize her, and SHE has the ego to think it was based on her ass, then to think ill of him for that reason is pretty bogus…

    Well, he didn’t recognize her from her face, since it had been concealed. What he recognized her from is anyone’s guess. And I don’t know that it means anyone should think ill of him – but Kate clearly indicated she was creeped out. That was just one anecdote, peripherally relating to the larger issue Rachel was talking about many different women, including her, having in dealing with libertarians. I don’t think it signifies too much by itself.

    That’s all good in the eyes of Greens, though.

    Not to clear on why you brought up the Greens. Kate was reporting on the two conventions, as she did on other parties. I don’t know that she is a libertarian or green.

  48. langa

    “Libertarianism is a philosophy of respect for the individual, and must not be presented as being in harmony with behavior generally regarded as offensive.”

    What a load of bullshit. No one has the right to demand that someone not do something because they find it “offensive”. I can hardly think of a less libertarian principle.

  49. TheOriginalAndy

    “What a load of bullshit. No one has the right to demand that someone not do something because they find it “offensive”. I can hardly think of a less libertarian principle.”

    Agreed.

  50. G.E.

    No one has the right to demand that someone not do something because they find it “offensive”.

    Sure they do. By contract.

  51. G.E.

    But I agree with you, in general. This is just another example of why the LP is a pathetic joke. “Libertarianism is… [insert unlibertarian B.S. here]” — NO, libertarianism is ANTI-STATE, period. There’s no more to it than that. You do not even have to be an individualist to be a libertarian, and in fact, I’m beginning to view Randian-style hyper-individualism as childish.

  52. G.E.

    No one has the right to demand that someone not do something because they find it “offensive”. I can hardly think of a less libertarian principle.”

    Agreed.

    Except when it comes to someone saying something unflattering (and untrue) about you.

  53. TheOriginalAndy

    I know that this was not sexual in nature, but I would say that what Sean Haugh did to Gary – attemtping to burn 2,000 LP ballot access petition signatures that he had worked really hard to gather – to be a form of harrassment. Gary was up there in Massachusetts minding his own business, working hard to secure ballot status for the Libertarian Party, and then Sean Haugh stuck his nose into it and attempted to burn the fruits of his labor and to defraud him and the donors out of money. So I find Haugh’s actions in this case to be quite hypocritical.

  54. TheOriginalAndy

    “Except when it comes to someone saying something unflattering (and untrue) about you.”

    I KNEW that you were going to say this and ONCE AGAIN YOU MISSED THE POINT. People can SAY whatever they want, however, you don’t have the right to make up that somebody committed a crime when they did not because it can lead to that person being arrested. That is making false report which can end up in the hands of the police and end up with a person in jail under false charges, or at the very least harrassed and detained by the police. I’ve had people falsely accuse me of crimes before and I’ve been hassled and detained by the police because of it, and trust me, it is no fun.

    If somebody wants to call me a jerk or whatever I could care less. I’ve been called all kinds of names over the years.

  55. TheOriginalAndy

    Also, Sean Haugh and Lee Wrights both told lies about me. I never called for them to be arrested for it (although I do think that Haugh committed a criminal act with the petition burning). I think that they are both assholes who are ineffective in politics and should not hold any positions within the Libertarian Party, but I haven’t called for them to be arrested for their trash talking.

  56. TheOriginalAndy

    Here’s a statute on false reporting of crimes.

    Section 9.03.040 False reporting of crimes.

    No person shall report to any peace officer or public officer that a felony, gross misdemeanor or misdemeanor has been committed, knowing such report to be false. (Ord. 1467 § 1, 1984: Ord. 1128 § 1, 1977.)

  57. TheOriginalAndy

    I don’t know what M. Carling did (if anything). Maybe he did something really bad, maybe he didn’t, I don’t know.

    What I do know is that I have not seen any evidence to support these claims, and I also know that at least some of the people making these claims have serious credibility problems.

  58. G.E.

    Andy – I’m busting chops. But I don’t want to get into again. To summarize, I don’t care what the statist laws on the books are, though I do agree that “false reporting of a crime” can be the initiation of force, but doesn’t have to be, and in this case, it wasn’t.

  59. Catholic Trotskyist

    Joseph, I see you didn’t respond to the beginning of my magnum opus, the screenplay for the upcoming movie “Joseph in Paradise.” I consider myself to be inspired by the likes of Shakespeare, Oscar Wilde, Eugene O’Neill, Arthur Miller, etc. All moral degenerates, but still geniouses and will get to heaven eventually.

  60. JimDavidson

    I’ve met both Mary Ruwart and Ray Carr, and I find the suggestion that she’s having an affair to be bizarre, as well as nobody’s business.

    The soap opera name that best describes the LNC might be “As the stomach churns.”

  61. JimDavidson

    @62 You sound as though you are offended that anyone describe behavior as offensive. -grin-

  62. G.E.

    I know that this was not sexual in nature, but I would say that what Sean Haugh did to Gary

    Best introductory clause EVER!!!

  63. karl

    Mr. Davidson @79—
    Take Mary off of the pedestal that you have her on. She had an affair with Lee Wrights during her campaign–period. Ask Lee Wrights if he’s still married–he’s not. Think about it.

  64. Gene Trosper

    It would be nice to see some discussion of substance beyond unsubstantiated rumors of affairs.

  65. paulie cannoli Post author

    Good point, Gene. It seems to me that some substance is involved in the general discussion of whether libertarians present a hostile environment to women, and if so what can and/or should be done about it.

    Do you have any thoughts on that, or any other issues of substance this discussion might involve?

  66. LibertarianGirl

    I dont find the environment hostile . It does become overwhelming sometimes because as women in the LP we are greatly outnumbered . With half the men having never seen a women , its only natural that they have no idea how to act normally around women .
    Thats only half a joke , the other half is true .

  67. LibertarianGirl

    thats the half thats a joke, however i find LP men to be the least ‘smooth’ with women out of any group ive ever met .

  68. Gary Fincher

    “Except when it comes to someone saying something unflattering (and untrue) about you.”

    ROFL at G.E.’s lack of understanding at libertarian principles…

    …and who apparently doesn’t know how to read earlier texts….

    ROFL

    The statement should be amended to read, “except when someone knowingly turns an innocent person over to the police to be incarcerated for a crime he didn’t commit.”

  69. Gary Fincher

    “Except when it comes to someone saying something unflattering (and untrue) about you.”

    ROFL at G.E.’s lack of understanding at libertarian principles…

    …and who apparently doesn’t know how to read earlier texts….

    ROFL

    The statement should be amended to read, “except when someone knowingly turns an innocent person over to the police to be incarcerated for a crime he didn’t commit.”

  70. G.E.

    Fincher – When someone knowingly turns you over to the police for a crime you didn’t commit, they are clearly committing aggression against you and/or the police department, IF the police think the charges are credible enough to act on them. The accuser is employing the police as an agent of force (“retaliatory” if you actually did something, or initiative if you didn’t). The only debate is whether your claim would be against the police, the accuser, or both; and whether the police have a claim against the accuser, etc.

    I wasn’t aware anyone “turned you over” to the police. People have just been making relatively baseless claims against you that others choose to believe either because they’re gullible or have some other sort of problem with you — which is not surprising!!!

  71. LibertarianGirl

    In her memo to the LNC three days after her resignation, [employee’s name and title redacted] acknowledged these events took place but denied that it was a factor in her quitting and stated that they did not meet her own definition of sexual harassment

    so the woman didnt quit because M harassed her nor did she think it was sexual harassment

  72. Gene Trosper

    LibertarianGirl // Dec 17, 2008 at 12:48 pm

    awkward would best describe LP men in my book

    ROTFLMAO

    My wife has been saying that since 1990!

  73. Michael H. Wilson

    I have heard the word dolt used to describe them, but I won’t mention any names.

    However part of the problem from my perspective is that while the LP has taken a stand for gun rights it has done little that would appeal to women. That is not to suggest that women are put off by gun rights.

    Where is the literature that speaks to women about issues they believe are important, or might be important to them? Example in many states women still find it difficult to get access to a midwife if they should want one because it has been difficult for midwives to re-enter the birthing business thanks to numerous laws and regulations. Our party makes little or no mention of midwives in any of its literature. And in the U.S. less than 10% of children are born with midwives. In Europe the number is about 75% and the survival rate is just a good, if not better than for doctors and less expensive as well.

    When the LP decides to appeal to women the demographics of the LP might just changes as well along with the attitudes of some of the males.

  74. JimDavidson

    @82 Do you have some sort of evidence that this affair took place, or are you just making it up?

    Personally, I don’t care who she screws. That’s her business, not mine.

  75. LibertarianGirl

    guys I find it more than distasteful and rude to speak of others personal liasons in this fashion .
    Tacky tacky tacky

  76. JimDavidson

    @101 Agreed. But, we actually don’t know of any personal liaison. What we have here is mere innuendo, that has been repeated to the point that some seem to believe it. There are no photographs, no video, no eyewitness testimony, no recorded phone conversations, no evidence of any sort.

    I’ve known Mary and Ray since 2000. She and I both spoke at the same convention for ISIL. I saw Mary with Lee in Denver. There was nothing in her behavior to even vaguely suggest something “going on.”

    I’m calling shenanigans on the whole rumor.

    But I really want to know, LibertarianGirl, is whether you tried the brownie recipe I supplied on that other thread.

  77. LibertarianGirl

    ok maybe thats my problem , ive always sauteed the bud in the butter first then used butter for whatever recipe . they always turn out weak . im gonna try yours , ill let you know

  78. JimDavidson

    @105 Sauteed bud? That’s insanium in the cranium, dawg.

    Okay, lemme know.

    The great thing about feasting on pot brownies is, they make you hungry.

  79. LibertarianGirl

    ypou’ve never heard of weed-butter for use in recipes , what planet are you from? 🙂
    back me up somebody

  80. paulie cannoli Post author

    However part of the problem from my perspective is that while the LP has taken a stand for gun rights it has done little that would appeal to women. That is not to suggest that women are put off by gun rights.

    Where is the literature that speaks to women about issues they believe are important, or might be important to them? Example in many states women still find it difficult to get access to a midwife if they should want one because it has been difficult for midwives to re-enter the birthing business thanks to numerous laws and regulations. Our party makes little or no mention of midwives in any of its literature. And in the U.S. less than 10% of children are born with midwives. In Europe the number is about 75% and the survival rate is just a good, if not better than for doctors and less expensive as well.

    When the LP decides to appeal to women the demographics of the LP might just changes as well along with the attitudes of some of the males.

    Good point.

    There’s also a way to sell gun rights that is very much a women’s issue.

  81. G.E.

    However part of the problem from my perspective is that while the LP has taken a stand for gun rights it has done little that would appeal to women.

    What, you mean like Gun-Grabber Bill Redpath’s call for more federal legislation?

    The LP shouldn’t be trying to “appeal” to collectivist groupings, anyway… at least not if it were an actual libertarian party, which it clearly is not.

  82. Gene Trosper

    @ 109

    Back during my days as a “head”, we indeed used a special kind of butter that we called “puna butter”.

    Did that stuff ever work! : )

  83. Gene Trosper

    @ 84

    I have never considered the question as to whether libertarians presented a hostile environment to women. Just about every libertarian woman I have known has been rather strong willed.

    Frankly, I think it’s just an extension of the lack of respect libertarians tend to have for each other. Not in all cases, mind you, but it’s definitely something I have noticed on many occasions.

  84. Gary Fincher

    Does anyone have a link to the video of the LNC meeting where Andy demonstrated where Sean Haugh admitted (by laughing) that he likes to deliberately destroy critical ballot access instruments?

    Thanks in advance.

  85. Gary Fincher

    “I wasn’t aware anyone “turned you over” to the police. People have just been making relatively baseless claims against you that others choose to believe either because they’re gullible or have some other sort of problem with you — which is not surprising!!!”

    No, it’s not surprising that people are guillable; but when it gets to the level where Angela Keaton is helping to facilitate Roger Pope’s threat (I have this on recording, BTW) to turn me over to the police, it indeed falls into what you are NOW admitting is aggression. It’s totally naive to think that “criminal history” talk can’t get back to the police, and, if nothing else, bias them against me or even get the shit beat out of me at a routine traffic stop. You can’t take actions that that you know will lead to some sort of aggression, which is why I never “bear false witness” against anyone (I’ve been around more years than you and I know the potential consequences.)

  86. G.E.

    Your “potential consequences” argument is B.S. The potential consequence of a kid taking his first sip of a wine cooler is that he will become a heroin addict who commits home invasions, winds up in jail, converts to Nazism, and then lynches a Panamanian transvestite upon his release. “Bearing false witness” may be a “crime” against (non-existent) God, but it isn’t an act of aggression. The aggressive element isn’t the lie, its the “contracting” of the police to initiate force against you.

    Let’s say Robert Milnes says you have a history of cannibalism. The cops are not going to take him seriously because he’s a fucking nutjob. Therefore, no aggression has taken place.

    If a “normal” person knowingly lied to the police, and the police were convinced of the truth, and the police then initiated force against you, then and only then would you have a legitimate claim against the accuser and/or the police.

    That something “might get back” to the cops is totally bogus. If the cops hear made-up rumors about you and act without cause, then it is the cops who have aggressed against you, not the person who made the claims. There has to be intent in order for their to be a crime.

  87. paulie cannoli Post author

    I think it’s just an extension of the lack of respect libertarians tend to have for each other. Not in all cases, mind you, but it’s definitely something I have noticed on many occasions.

    That’s a real shame. It drives a lot of good people away.

  88. Gary Fincher

    G.E., I am NOT referring to simple slander, or just lying about someone. I AM talking about malicious intent to get me in trouble.

    I have laid out my case very carefully and thoroughly, on another post and another thread, and apparently it sailed right over your head. What Angela said wasn’t just said between a couple of friends “off the record” – it was said in a public forum, basically SHOUTED, like a modern-day Town Crier. You might as well be directing the police to “go get him!”. THAT is what makes it egregious, and THAT is what you are not grasping. There is no way that anyone should be able to contend that the innocent person accused of crimes should shoulder all the consequences while the mischievous one shouting the false charges escapes all consequences. No friggin’ way.

    Not to mention that she should have been removed from the LNC for such unprofessional behavior. But it IS actionable, albeit a civil matter, and damages CAN be arrived at. Just ask any attorney – libertarian or otherwise.

    G.E., I’m really getting tired of your statist/socialistic babble and you’re starting to get REALLY annoying. You’re no friend of those who want to be left alone and not be badgered, which is all I ever really wnated to do. I don’t see how anyone can get along with you – you keep badgering someone even after an issue was beaten like a dead horse and over with for everyone else on the thread. Troublemakers (and those who thrive on trouble) can just stay the hell out of my life!

    I’m only interested in minding my own business and living my aggression-free life, not hurting anyone, petitioning for my party and for other entities who need good, quality signatures. Initiating trouble for me is NOT welcome in Gary Fincher’s life.

    Now do me a favor and STOP badgering me over this…I have enough of that with Angela, Roger, Sean, et al.

  89. LibertarianGirl

    Frankly, I think it’s just an extension of the lack of respect libertarians tend to have for each other. Not in all cases, mind you, but it’s definitely something I have noticed on many occasions.

    i agree. most libs do it with eachother , other people and newcomers . highly arrogant , super intelligent , poor poor social skills . theyd rather slam dunk you in a debate , show you how stupid you are etc . rather then just make a good impression , be nice and begin the road to ally.

  90. TheOriginalAndy

    “LibertarianGirl // Dec 17, 2008 at 2:23 pm

    In her memo to the LNC three days after her resignation, [employee’s name and title redacted] acknowledged these events took place but denied that it was a factor in her quitting and stated that they did not meet her own definition of sexual harassment

    so the woman didnt quit because M harassed her nor did she think it was sexual harassment”

    Well, well, well, holes in this story are already starting to appear. Surpise, suprise…..NOT!

    I suspected that with Sean Haugh being the source of this story that it probably had big holes in it and it appears that I was right.

    The record clearly indicates that Haugh has a penchant for embellishing, distorting, and even outright fabricating stories, so that’s why I was skeptical of this.

  91. TheOriginalAndy

    “However part of the problem from my perspective is that while the LP has taken a stand for gun rights it has done little that would appeal to women. That is not to suggest that women are put off by gun rights.”

    I remember in a 2002 debate between the candidates for Governor of Pennsylvania (which was carried on C-SPAN and also included the Democrat, Republican, and Green Party candidates), Libertarian Party candidate Ken Krawchuck got big applauds from the audience for the line, “Hand guns are a girls best friend.” This comment struck such a chord that it was repeated in newspaper articles about the debate.

  92. TheOriginalAndy

    “81 G.E. // Dec 17, 2008 at 4:26 am

    I know that this was not sexual in nature, but I would say that what Sean Haugh did to Gary

    Best introductory clause EVER!!!”

    LOL!

  93. TheOriginalAndy

    “chuckmoulton // Dec 17, 2008 at 12:03 am

    Will someone please employ these petitioners so they don’t have so much free time to troll here?!!”

    LOL!

  94. paulie cannoli Post author

    I know that this was not sexual in nature, but I would say that what Sean Haugh did to Gary

    Best introductory clause EVER!!!”

    LOL!

    Yep, that was funny.

    Will someone please employ these petitioners so they don’t have so much free time to troll here?!!”

    LOL!

    What’s funny about that? Some actual paying employment so I would have less time on here
    would be a real win-win.

  95. Gary Fincher

    “I know that this was not sexual in nature, but I would say that what Sean Haugh did to Gary

    Best introductory clause EVER!!!”

    LOL!

    Yep, that was funny. ”

    What’s funny about that? Like you in the subsequent post, I just want to be left alone to petition and make money, when I need money and feel like working.

  96. TheOriginalAndy

    I think Gary and Paul need to lighten up if they can’t see the humor in those two posts.

    Yes, there were most certainly valid points (ie-wanting to get back to work and wanting to be able to work without being harrassed by deranged Political Directors), but there were also humorous ways to look at those statements.

  97. paulie cannoli Post author

    Well, I do think that the statement that “I know that this was not sexual in nature, …” was funny – that does not make what Sean did/is doing to Gary funny.

    As for Chuck’s statement, it’s not that it can’t be funny – it’s just that it also happens to be absolutely true in a literal sense. People really should send money to Freedom Ballot Access and/or Alabama LP and get us off this damn internet!

  98. G.E.

    I’m really getting tired of your statist/socialistic babble and you’re starting to get REALLY annoying.

    I guess the blockquotes weren’t necessary.

    If I believed in mental illness, I’d say Fincher fit the bill. How the hell is he saying that I’m “statist” or “socialistic”? That’s hilarious.

    The real reason you’ve been blackballed is because you’re an asshole. The weasels at LPHQ are too timid to say that, so they make up bogus reasons and say you’re a criminal, etc. But in truth, you’re an asshole. Take a survey. Yeah, I know, I am too, but I’m not trying to get hired by the LP.

  99. JimDavidson

    @109 Just messin’ wit’ ya.

    Here’s a technique for making herbal infusions which has wide application. It can be used with rose petals or any other herb you like.

    You must start with clean and herbicide/pesticide free herb. If you use sprays on your rose bushes, for example, then you don’t want to use their petals in this activity.

    Take a turkey basting pot with lid. A very, very large dutch oven with a convex lid will do. Place a clean fire proof brick in the center of the pot. Now place water to cover the brick in the pot. Place a baking dish on top of the brick. Put rose petals or other herbs in the water all around the baking dish.

    Place over high heat on your stove until the water just begins to boil, then reduce the flame until the water stays just boiling. Now put the lid on, upside down, so the top can be filled with ice.

    You’ve just created a very primitive distillation system. The rose petals infuse the water, which boils, carrying essence of rose water as steam up to the lid. The ice in the lid condenses the steam. The convex (from underneath) shape of the lid causes the condensation to move to the center of the lid and drop off into the baking dish.

    When all the ice is melted, turn off the heat. Remove the lid carefully so as not to spill the melted ice (water). Lift out the baking dish. That fluid in it is concentrated essence of the herb. Rose water if you used roses.

  100. JimDavidson

    @131 If nobody who were an asshole could be hired by the LP, then nobody would work there. QED

  101. Gary Fincher

    “If I believed in mental illness, I’d say Fincher fit the bill. ”

    Well, at least I’m not a clueless MORON like G.E.

  102. Gary Fincher

    “If I believed in mental illness, I’d say Fincher fit the bill. ”

    Well, at least I’m not a clueless MORON like G.E.

  103. Gary Fincher

    “But in truth, you’re an asshole. Take a survey. Yeah, I know, I am too, but I’m not trying to get hired by the LP.”

    And no, I’m not an asshole. At least I mkae an ATTEMPT to get along with people…albeit I do stop when they PISS ME OFF with constant insults, badgering and maltreatment. IN FACT, the #1 complaint about me that I keep hearing is that I’m “too nice”.

    I’ve got just as much right to do work for the LP as any member does. And no, I’m not trying to get a paid position.

    But the reason I was blacklisted – if we’re going to be honest here – can be traced back to my Sept 2007 resignation letter, received by people who have the “you can’t quit – you’re fired!” mentality. Can we be honest for a minute?

Leave a Reply

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