Press "Enter" to skip to content

Stewart Flood: Supporting evidence for LNC resolution of discipline for Angela Keaton

By paulie on December 5, 2008 1:25 AM

Emailed by Stewart Flood.

—– Original Message —– From: “Stewart Flood”
To: “‘LNC Discussion'”
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 11:49 PM
Subject: Revised Resolution of Discipline

Attached you will find a revised resolution of discipline, along with a companion document containing evidence to support the resolution. It will be further supported by the presentation on Saturday. I have also included the portion of the policy manual covering harassment.

The evidence focuses on the actual writings of Angela Keaton.

In the interest of saving time, the items in the original resolution that are supported by evidence only contained in audio form are no longer included in this resolution.

The resolution does not contain any new issues. Printed copies will be provided in San Diego.

I wanted to send this out sooner, but I had to replace my laptop computer.

This e-mail and the attached files may be freely distributed.

Thank you for your patience.

Stewart Flood

resolution-of-discipline-for-angela-keaton_11

resolution_evidence_1

lnc-policy-manual-harassment-policy

56 Comments

  2. JimDavidson December 7, 2008

    Da, tovarisch.

  3. paulie cannoli Post author | December 7, 2008

    Oh, “if the party can survive Marrou”? Yeah, I read that before.

  4. JimDavidson December 7, 2008

    @51 If you would read the g’dmned evidence from Flood, you’ll find Marrou’s name mentioned. Angela said something about him, not entirely favorable. Geez.

  5. paulie cannoli Post author | December 6, 2008

    I have a lot to say about questions addressed in 37 and 49, and don’t want to get carpal tunnel. Very briefly, on ballot access, start as early as possible everywhere you can. In general, and *especially* when up against tight deadlines, do NOT rely on finding inexperienced locals and getting production out of them when you can bring in experienced professionals. Cooperate between parties as much as possible. Those are some basics.

    http://freedomballotaccess.org

    for anyone who wants to donate to getting an early start on ballot access.

  6. paulie cannoli Post author | December 6, 2008

    @36 Alaska statehouse, 85-87. LP presidential candidate 1992. In 1988, as the VP candidate, he and Ron Paul placed third with about half a percent of the popular vote. No electoral votes. (Say, that’s something that puts Barr-Root behind John Hospers.)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andre_Marrou

    Yes, I know, but I don’t see how it relates to 36.

    36 was in response to

    “I am glad that Stewie-baby resents it, and I like the thought that Carling, Root, Marrou, and Mattson resent it.”

    What does Marrou have to do with the above list? Has he weighed in on this issue somewhere that I missed?

    For that matter, I have not see Root or Mattson comment on the issue, and the comments I have seen from Carling that touched on it have been about parliamentary procedure issues, bylaws, and other stuff that makes my eyes glaze over.

    On the other hand, I just know looked at it from a different angle…you like the thought that the above named people resent it, much as you might like the thought that Pope Benedict and Hugo Chavez resent it.

  7. JimDavidson December 6, 2008

    @41 Thank you for your kind words.

  8. JimDavidson December 6, 2008

    @37 Good questions. Let me try.

    1) What have we learned this year that will serve us in getting on 50 states plus DC in 2010 and 2012?

    It takes planning and effort to get on all 50 state ballots. Many states have to be started early, and some, like New Hampshire can evidently be knocked off at the last minute, so even though they don’t do substitution, not to worry. The Boston Tea Party is already planning our 50 state strategy for 2010.

    2) How can we raise the max funds to have the max impact in the next election cycles?

    Apparently having a candidate who is actually libertarian makes a difference to many libertarian contributors. Go figure.

    3) How can we educate our candidates to present the best possible messages in earned media coverage?

    I think the best spokespeople this year have included Charles Jay, Tom Knapp, and George Donnelly, just judging from the stuff I’ve seen. Admittedly, my focus is BTP.

    It is very good that this year many candidates, including quite a few LP candidates endorsed by BTP, were the difference in their races between the incumbent winning or losing. So that point can be mentioned in upcoming elections. Also, guys like Jeff Hunt in Duval County who won their races can share their winning strategies, tactics, and operations ideas. These winners ought to be paid to come around and share their insights with other campaigns.

    4) How can we best work to end these unjust wars as quickly as possible?

    Well, rioting the streets and burning the recruitment centers and ROTC buildings was the big thing in 1968-71 or so. Is that best practice, though?

    A lot of men who were in the military at the time believe that it was the unwillingness of the troops to continue serving, as documented in films like “Sir, No Sir!” which ended the Vietnam war. Iraq Veterans Against the War promotes this type of disobedience to some people, I gather. IVAW.org might be a good place to look for other ideas.

    5) How can we best work to stop the government from owning all business activity in the USA?

    Don’t buy their bonds, to start. If you own any government securities, sell them.

    Much of the consolidation of industry began at the end of the 19th Century with, ironically, anti-trust legislation. Also things like the Interstate Commerce Commission which allegedly regulated the railroads were instrumental in consolidating that industry and other agencies did the same in other industries.

    The Federal Reserve system is probably the keystone in the consolidation of the banking industry.

    Obviously with a policy of economic fascism it becomes significant which companies get the inside track. Eliminating the income tax would go a long way toward reducing the size and scope of government. A less powerful government is less useful when corrupted, so it attracts less corruption, I think.

  9. JimDavidson December 6, 2008

    @36 Alaska statehouse, 85-87. LP presidential candidate 1992. In 1988, as the VP candidate, he and Ron Paul placed third with about half a percent of the popular vote. No electoral votes. (Say, that’s something that puts Barr-Root behind John Hospers.)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andre_Marrou

  10. Former LP Life Member December 6, 2008

    Policy manuals are meant to govern employees, not elected leaders of a membership organization.

  12. BrianHoltz December 5, 2008

    The comment about a “possible indictment” of Wayne Root had just enough of a caveat in it that it can’t really be declared an deliberate falsehood. That shouldn’t necessarily excuse any campaign of public criticism by an LNC member of the LP presidential ticket, but this kind of criticism doesn’t quite warrant suspension from LNC.

    The charge of sabotaging LP fund-raising is serious, but there is not quite enough evidence here to confirm that sabotage happened. LNC will have to decide if it thinks Angela was trying to sabotage fund-raising, as opposed to just clearing her conscience by correcting any mis-perceptions she thinks she may have helped give those donors. Without testimony from any of the donors, the evidence here wouldn’t appear to an LNC outsider to warrant suspension from LNC.

    Criticism of the LNC’s litigation choices should not warrant suspension. LNC will have to decide whether Angela went beyond good-faith criticism with this message to LPNH Chair Brendan Kelly asking him to not join an LNC lawsuit. The charges don’t say enough about the lawsuit for an otherwise uninformed LP member to agree that Angela’s message warrants suspension.

    Somebody reported that LNC’s counsel Bill Hall thinks Angela was within her rights to publicly divulge a defamatory claim about her that was reported in executive session. That sounds reasonable to me, but I can’t rule out that there are arguments that would make me think she should apologize and desist. For the disclosure about Shotgun Willie’s to be actionable in the eyes of an LNC outsider, the charges would need to explain why that subject was a proper matter for executive session.

    Flood’s report of a verbal threat by Angela is very disturbing, but even without hearing Angela’s defense it’s hard to see how even this facially credible report can overcome the benefit of the doubt that Angela deserves.

    Below is the minimum apology that Angela should be asked for:

    ——-

    I apologize to any LP member who misinterpreted a couple of my most satirical and exasperated recent statements expressing my concern over the state of the party — viz., “friends don’t let friends join the LP” and “the LP is hopeless”. If I really thought the LP is not worth joining or improving, then I would have already resigned from the LNC. I will refrain from such statements for the remainder of my service on LNC.

    I apologize to the LP for the collective deprecation (per LNC Policy Manual 8.A.) that can be inferred from me calling an LP member from the South a “hillbilly” and further saying “All those Christian types married to their uncle cousins look the same to me.” I will refrain from such statements for the remainder of my service on LNC.

    I apologize to any LP member who interpreted my compliments to LP staff as sexual advances (per LNC Policy Manual 8.B.) and thus worried about theoretical LP exposure to sexual harassment accusations. I will refrain from such statements for the remainder of my service on LNC.

  13. George Donnelly December 5, 2008

    Sundwall says:

    If we cannot function with a general transparency and proceed to render verdict or judgment without reasonable due process, I would consider such resolutions as necessary for potential secession of affiliates as reasonable and with proper cause.

    That’s where I got that from.

    Thanks again.

  14. paulie cannoli Post author | December 5, 2008

    George D.,

    Awesome coverage. I’m impressed. And at the same time, once again saddened I can’t get you to group blog.

    Anyway, one thing….I read Sundwall’s piece and did not see anything about disaffiliating, but you did say it was oblique. What did I miss?

  16. pdsa December 5, 2008

    Mr. Davidson , a fine analysis of the specious and hypocritical “supporting evidence for LNC resolution of discipline for Angela Keaton”. I became incensed, unable to control my outrage upon just the first skimming read of it. I was labouring under the assumption that the claim of Ms. Keaton’s sexual harassment of an LP staffer revolved around words she had spoken directly to him, not some humourous one sentence reflection in a blog post. I do not believe that even if she had said this directly to the staffer, it was sexual harassment. There is not even a minuscule doubt in my mind that this short muse posted to a personal blog comes close. Again, very level-headed and appropriate analysis.

    Mr. Sipos, thank-you very much for that NY Times link. I grew-up in Las Vegas, and have considered it home, even in the times my nomadic urges had caused me to reside elsewhere. I am living there again, possibly to stay. The part of the article about Root was not surprising, or even a better part of it. I have had the pleasure of meeting both Lem Banker, and Jimmy Vaccaro, although just in casual circumstances. They both give off the aura of Old Las Vegas. It is a sad statement about Corporate Vegas’ present state of affairs, when I wax nostalgic about good times past, when mafia frontmen and thugs ran the show.

    Mr. Buchman , I believe you are not fully aware of what exactly is at stake here. I readily admit that I have never been a big LP activist, yet my association with the party dates back well over two decades now. I manned petition tables many times to help secure ballot access for the party, have generally been a staunch and vocal proponent of it , have convinced many to vote for libertarian candidates, and a smaller number to register as LP members. I consider myself to be a True Friend of Liberty. I am in my own small way, partly responsible for the LP being. I firmly believe in accepting personal responsibility for the effects which flow as cause from past actions. If the LP has irreconcilably become tainted with equivocators and compromisers; is being controlled by poseur reconstructionists and fainéant conservatives who care naught of liberty excepting their being at liberty to enrich themselves off the product of other people’s labours, then the party has become a monster, and personal honour dictates that I cannot simply walk-away in disgust; must instead work to assure that this Frankenstein I helped create never matures into a position of political primacy. With great amusement I willfully embrace the “Anarchist Wing” of the LP, but the irrational fantasies that many have when contemplating the term is a cardboard tiger compared to the reality of a nihilist insurgency.

  17. coming on the back of the LP December 5, 2008

    Seriously, this is some funny shit.

    When I asked the LNC to commit committee suicide, I was not expecting they would actually listen to me, LOL.

  18. coming on the back of the LP December 5, 2008

    Mr. Buchman, clearly you don’t realize what party you have joined.

    What? You expect them to act like a real political party?

  19. morey December 5, 2008

    The only comments I’ve heard regarding this resolution from LPNH EC are ones of disdain for the prosecution. The LPNH is not seeking any apology for offering her personal opinions.

  20. Joe Buchman December 5, 2008

    Ref # 20 above:

    “I challenge anyone with a sense of humor to read through the allegations against her without laughing at least once.”

    Always LOVE Starchild’s insightful comments. Right to the point, and unlike most others here, far more light than heat generated by them.

    I’ll offer two more challenges for LIBERTY LOVING Americans/Humans

    2) Read through the charges without crying/feeling deep sadness for the state of the LP.

    3) Read through all the posts related to this issue here and in other threads without falling asleep.

    It’s time to focus (past time actually) on activities that advance the cause of Liberty on the planet, else the LP will quickly become irrelevant to that cause.

    Whatever Angela has done that’s truly out of line (and some of it does concern me) appears to have been more than compensated for with these charges being posted online. IMO she’s already been amply chastised.

    Replace her “discipline” on the agenda with questions like:

    1) What have we learned this year that will serve us in getting on 50 states plus DC in 2010 and 2012?

    2) How can we raise the max funds to have the max impact in the next election cycles?

    3) How can we educate our candidates to present the best possible messages in earned media coverage?

    4) How can we best work to end these unjust wars as quickly as possible?

    5) How can we best work to stop the government from owning all business activity in the USA?

    AFTER those questions (and others like them) are fully answered, if someone wants to raise the discipline of Angela (especially if it involves handcuffs and spanking) I might be willing to listen, or support it. (Sad to see my level of interest in porn has dropped to such a low state.)

    In the meantime, if that’s the LP’s number one (or even number 10) priority, I’d rather find some other way to work to advance the cause of Liberty.

    At least that’s the business I thought we were all in here.

    Joe
    http://www.buchmanforcongress.com

  21. paulie cannoli Post author | December 5, 2008

    I am glad that Stewie-baby resents it, and I like the thought that Carling, Root, Marrou, and Mattson resent it.

    Marrou?

  22. JimDavidson December 5, 2008

    Here are my detailed thoughts on the so-called evidence. Every single part of it seems to be evidence that Stewie-baby and the others pursuing this witch hunt ought to review the LP platform, especially at 1.1 and 1.2.

    Page 2 of 23 Angela Keaton in her role as an at-large member of the LNC says she will attend to all inquiries. She admits to not knowing everything, and offers to be diligent in finding someone more qualified to attend to any given question if she cannot. The LP platform states at 1.1 “We support full freedom of expression and oppose government censorship, regulation or control of communications media and technology. We favor the freedom to engage in or abstain from any religious activities that do not violate the rights of others.” Clearly, Angela does not agree to Stewie’s religious persecution of Angela, and is exercising her freedom to abstain from religious activities, such as obeisance to the LP leadership.

    Page 3 of 23 Angela points out that the LNC meeting in September got all up in her face about asking important questions about matters of policy and finance. In other words, doing her job. She was also persecuted for providing timely information to her constituents. Given the unfriendly way she was treated, she mocks the anti-drunk-driving crusade of the neo-prohibitionists by writing, “Friends don’t let friends join the LP.” If Stewart Flood and the other filth who are pursuing this asinine behavior want Angela and others to extol the virtues of the LP, it would be appropriate for Flood to display some of those virtues. The LP platform states at 1.1 “We support full freedom of expression and oppose government censorship, regulation or control of communications media and technology. We favor the freedom to engage in or abstain from any religious activities that do not violate the rights of others.” Clearly, Angela does not agree to Stewie’s religious persecution of Angela, and is exercising her freedom to abstain from religious activities, such as obeisance to the LP leadership.

    Page 4 of 23 Angela makes critical assessment of an LP booth and display. She points up some good things about it, and some difficulties. She then notes a feeling of perceived hostility from jerks like Flood has created an enduring hopelessness. Flood does not recognise any responsibility for encouraging the hopeless. However, he does appear to assert a criminal act of despair has occurred. Making this thought crime a matter for LNC deliberations appears to violate the LP platform. The LP platform states at 1.1 “We support full freedom of expression and oppose government censorship, regulation or control of communications media and technology. We favor the freedom to engage in or abstain from any religious activities that do not violate the rights of others.” Clearly, Angela does not agree to Stewie’s religious persecution of Angela, and is exercising her freedom to abstain from religious activities, such as obeisance to the LP leadership.

    Page 5 of 23 The Boston Tea Party logo is used without permission of its author. The Boston Tea Party main Facebook group is displayed here in its “public mode.” The Angela indicated on the list of “officers” of the group is only identified as an Antiwar.com activist. As part of her work promoting the cause of Antiwar.com – her regular day job which the LNC cannot complain of her having since she isn’t paid to work full time for the LNC – she joined a social networking group. I would be willing to guess she has joined many dozens of such groups in her search for more money. Since I was in charge of that page at the time (and still am, to some extent) it was my view that people like Lew Rockwell and Angela Keaton should be given recognition on that page for their important work within the movement. I don’t know if Lew even manages his own Facebook profile. Given that any given profile owner can join up to 200 groups, I would be curious how this participation is any indication of anything. I should note that I never gave Stewie a title in the group, and never will. Titles are meaningless, including the title I held of chair. The title of “Antiwar.com activist” was my way of promoting Scott Horton and Justin Raimundo’s work. I hope that the members of the LP, especially of its national committee, and most especially its national officers and headquarters staff, are deeply, personally, and continuously offended by my action. Since the act of making Angela an “officer” of the Facebook group was done on my own whim, and with no authority from the Boston Tea Party, and since it was my act without the consent of Lew in his case or Angela in her case, I take full responsibility for the action. And since the LP Platform makes a mocking claim at 1.1 that the LP supports full freedom of expression, I am baffled how anyone can complain of it. I assert a right to abstain from paying obeisance to the LP “leaders” as feeble and as inexcusably daft as they are. I assume that a few of the member losses we’ve experienced in recent days are other members of the LNC seeking to cover their tracks by leaving our group. Of course, I have no obligation to share the member list with anyone.

    Page 6 of 23. The Boston Tea Party of California logo is used without permission of its author. Our BTP California group is displayed. Again, here, I did my best to promote the work of Antiwar.com by identifying its activist promoter. Again, this officer assignment has no meaning, was done without external authority, was entirely my whim. And, again, I stand on my freedom of expression, and abstain from bowing to the LNC and praying at it five times a day, because the LNC sucks.

    Page 7 of 23. Angela Keaton has a Facebook profile. Obviously, she has one at least in part to promote her work for Antiwar.com. She also has freedom of expression which Stewie does not respect, because Stewie doesn’t believe in the party’s platform.

    Page 8 of 23. Who is Brendan and what affiliate does he represent? How is her expression here evidence of anything? It appears to be sincere and respectful.

    Page 9 of 23. Angela expresses a thoughtful policy position. It appears that she is not allowed to have policy differences with Stewie-baby. How childish. How intolerant. How in utter contrast to the freedom of expression statement in the platform.

    Page 10 of 23. Angela has an e-mail address and a phone number. This is evidence of her willingness to be contacted by the members of the party she represents. Perhaps Stewie-baby doesn’t think she ought to have a phone? I don’t get it. How is this evidence of anything but a contemporary woman using 19th and 20th Century technologies (phone and e-mail) to communicate?

    Page 11 of 23. Angela makes frank comments using her freedom of expression. None of these appear false nor defamatory. The inability of Root to pay on his company’s debt obligations while drawing down high six figures salary does seem to be thoroughly covered in other comments on this site. I would be very surprised to learn that no agencies were investigating Root at the time of this statement. Angela characterises it as possible, not certain. Given his behavior in his business, the possibility does seem to arise. I find the sundry redactions of e-mail addresses to be amusing. As if anyone were being protected – and clearly Stewie-baby cannot extend the same courtesy to Angela’s e-mail and phone numbers. I cite LP platform 1.1 in support of Angela’s freedom to express with candor things about Carling, Root, Marrou, Mattson, and others those things she feels ought to be said. She was elected to the LNC to express her views and act in her capacity as an at large representative to represent the sundry members of the LP, especially those who voted for her. From the large number of resolutions of various state committees which have managed to meet in the scant time between the (bylaws un-compliant) announcement of the agenda and the actual meeting, it seems that many of those sundry members of the LP like the way Angela expresses herself. I am glad that Stewie-baby resents it, and I like the thought that Carling, Root, Marrou, and Mattson resent it. I rather like the idea that they might each choke to death on the rage they feel.

    Page 12 of 23. This statement is not from Angela and is evidence of nothing. It attempts to be exculpatory evidence of Root not facing any possibility of an indictment. Since there is no way to know what agency could possibly seek to indict Root (though many candidate agencies are available from which to choose) there is no way to ascertain that there was never any possibility of an indictment. It clearly indicates Angela was willing to speak directly with Root, which does seem like evidence she was taking anti-nausea medicine at the time. Root saying that there is no pending investigation is not evidence that there are no pending investigations. (Whew, more than half way through this dreck.)

    Page 13 of 23. Angela expresses herself. LP Platform 1.1, freedom of expression. Angela does not bow and pray in respect to Mattson, Root, Paulie, or others. She indicates that her views on possible indictment were modified by Root’s information, and notes that she modified her blog to reflect this new and better understanding – but, of course, Stewie-baby cannot be bothered to include these expressions by Angela.

    Page 14 of 23. Angela expresses herself. Platform 1.1, freedom of expression. Angela notes that she is responsive to member inquiries. Angela notes that actions by Flood and others have made members angry. Angela notes that expectations by prospective donors and actual donors were the result of being misled by Starr. Angela says she is engaged in her fiduciary obligation to contact donors who were misled to attempt to provide them with factual information, as is her obligation, both morally and legally. Rude behavior by Cory and Barr in Polk County, Florida is identified, and no statement by the LNC chastising either Cory or Barr is on record.

    Page 15 of 23. Evidence of Angela communicating with her constituents. Platform 1.1, freedom of expression. Evidence that an anti-Angela and platform-non-compliant memo on “electronic communications decorum” has been circulated, clearly an attempt to chill freedom of expression. No one on the LNC has been punished for attempting to violate the freedom of expression platform plank with this “communications decorum” nonsense. In the context of smart assery and cynicism, Angela makes a comment about a member of staff. She identifies herself as an older woman or cougar. She identifies people present at the meeting, including a stunning blonde. She makes gossip about someone named Ferguson. She promises to wear clothing at the next meeting. In other words, she expresses her sexuality. How Victorian of Stewie-baby to complain. She thinks Austin is sexy, which would seem to be important given that politics includes public appearance, and many people focus on attire, hair style, and physical appeal rather than content of ideas. (It is clearly one of the roles of the LNC members to evaluate whether staff are qualified to represent the LP. Sexiness is a valid qualification. Since sex sells, it should also help with fund raising.) She notes that Austin belongs to various social networking sites, presumably to include Meet-up groups and Facebook. Oddly, there is a double standard here, since Angela being a member of a Facebook group or 200 is “evidence” of wrongdoing in Stewie-baby’s mind.

    Page 16 of 23. It is clearly established that Casey was not offended. I believe he has elsewhere said he was flattered by her comments. Since he was not offended, he is not a complainant in the alleged workplace sexual harassment. Without a victim, there can be no crime. LP Platform at 1.2 “Only actions that infringe on the rights of others can properly be termed crimes. We favor the repeal of all laws creating “crimes” without victims….” So, the application of a sexual harassment charge without a victim is in violation of libertarian principles and express LP policy. Note that Austin was also flattered. None of these people appears to be reporting in as victim. The term “right” in quotation marks refers to mala prohibitum wrongdoing, “crime” without a victim. Kraus is obviously not a libertarian. See LP platform 1.2. Being pleasant, sarcastic, cynical, playful, or fun-loving does not in any way indicate a lack of respect – although there are clearly members of the LNC who deserve no respect, should be treated by no one with any respect, should be insulted continuously, and should be dishonored because they are without honor – Stewie-baby comes to mind. Free expression should not offend a reasonable person. Non-libertarians are by definition not reasonable persons. A smart ass and cynical comment should not be interpreted. It should be laughed at, or ignored. It is unclear from his job title that Kraus has any standing to render a legal opinion. He appears to claim legal liability arises from free expression, which is nonsense. He also appears to be practicing law in California, I have no information on whether he is currently licensed to do so. Angela, by way of contrast, is trained in legal matters and said nothing to create any legal liability. Moreover, criticising her funny comments is a way of draining all the joy out of the LP. What a fun party you guys are building!

    Kraus is personally offended that any member of staff is the subject of comments in an LNC member’s blog. I am personally offended that anyone who works for liberty is offended by free expression. That is particularly true of the free expression of anyone who has an obligation to tell the members of her party about what she has learned about the people who serve them. Kraus does not wish to serve the members of the LP, because he is a stinker who thinks he works for the insider clique. So he is offended by anyone examining his staff and reporting on what they find. Since appearance is an important thing in politics, it is clearly right for Angela to report on how staff members representing the party look. She did so.

    Kraus ought to be fired. He makes an argument for mala prohibitum wrongdoing without a victim. He clearly repudiates the LP platform at 1.2 and 1.1. He is therefore not a libertarian and should never be permitted to work for libertarian business entities, parties, nor activist organisations.

    Page 17 of 23. A very funny picture. I personally would have added blood on Starr’s chin and perhaps the body of a baby in his mouth, since he is such a war mongering hate filled anti-freedom pro-authority goon. Freedom of expression is recognised in LP platform 1.1.

    Page 18 of 23. This page appears at the top to be a repeat of page 15. On further examination, page 15 appears to be a cut and paste job, done poorly. You’d really like these guys who fabricate evidence to be a bit more careful in their work. Slobs.

    Page 18 continues with a review of Starr’s lies and distortions in the financial reports. His claim of $100K in the black appears to be completely at odds with other financial info on the LP currently available on IPR. I believe he was either lying or deliberately misleading when he reported this $100K in the black. Angela reports a question by Dixon that does not seem to have been answered properly. Kraus apparently is incompetent at staying within budget and should be fired. Kraus asserts that he has plenary power to spend on whatever he pleases without regard to authorisation from the LNC. He should be fired. Angela makes a funny and gratuitous comment about Jill. Freedom of expression, LP platform 1.1. No answers about rent are reported. Kraus should be fired. Angela makes a pro-Redpath comment, presumably out of professionalism and respect. Kraus ignores this comment and many others in his page 16 nasty gram. Kraus should be fired and black listed.

    Page 19 of 23. This page appears to be a repeat of page 12, but lacking the comments from Deran, Trosper, and Knapp. Not sure what it is in evidence of, except that Stewie-baby can’t keep track of what he’s included, or isn’t very serious about this “indictment” stuff.

    Page 20 of 23. Angela reports to her constituents. Among other things, she reports a violation of executive session. Among other things, she reports that the Barr campaign lies and attempts to use her as a scape goat to get away with not having a contract with the LP. Obviously, the Barr campaign was abusive toward the LP, issued many papers and statements without mentioning the LP, and attempted to make an improper conversion of LP resources, such as donor lists, to Barr resources. The LP got shafted by the Barr campaign, but it was reported in executive session, even though the executive session was invalid. The LP continues to operate under a cloak of secrecy because it is afraid of the members learning what the LNC does in executive session. Exposing their weaknesses, cowardice, and betrayals was the job of each and every LNC member. Sadly, only one had the guts to do so. Freedom of expression, platform 1.1. Refusing to display religious fervor toward and mindless allegiance to the LNC, also protected under platform 1.1. If there is any crime here, where is the victim? Victimless crimes, platform 1.2.

    Page 21 of 23. Angela reports to her constituents. She points out the religious aspects of the situation. She reports her unwillingness to practice a religion. She reports on the absence of value in the LNC actions of late. She reports on her bisexual preferences. She reports on Barr’s contempt for people who do not share his particularly bigoted views on sexual preference. For some reason her comments on gay liberation are highlighted in bold face type.

    Page 22 of 23. Angela continues. Aaron Starr and Steve Gordon stand accused of being bigoted and unwilling to tolerate dissent. They should be rejected by all libertarian organisations, forever.

    Starr, Cory, and Carling abused executive session to make comments critical of Bette Rose Ryan, who had a right to know what was being said against her and to confront her accusers. Starr, Cory, and Carling should be blacklisted and rejected by all libertarians, forever.

    Starr is ashamed of human sexuality and alcohol consumption, or has other bizarre views that deny freedom of expression and attempt to subjugate others to his bigoted views. He sux.

    The Watergate is a wholly inappropriate place for freedom enthusiasts. It represents the abuses of Republican president and traitor Nixon, who repeatedly violated his oath of office, made war on the United States, and engaged in repeated war crimes abroad. It is, of course, for this very reason that the neo-conservative Republicans in the LP want the LP to be in the Watergate.

    Page 23 or 23. Finally, an end. Flood reports a phone call in which he is threatened with legal action. Apparently, Stewie-baby has engaged in conduct, including what appear to be slander and libel, which might engender legal action. Oddly, on page 16, conduct that does not honor members of Kraus’s staff is regarded as reason for castigating Angela, in the context that professionalism is expected in honoring other members of the LNC and of the HQ staff. Here we see evidence that Stewie-baby has not been professional in honoring Angela. So, Stewie-baby is basically saying that he has incurred legal liability for his actions and for the LP, by behaving in a way that was so unprofessional and dishonorable that it upset Angela.

    Stewie-baby admits that he has done things to Angela. Angela regards some of them as sufficiently criminal that Flood may be charged with a crime, thus the handcuffs reference. Having things done to him could include having gifts sent, having someone speak nice words at his funeral, so it is unclear how having things done to him amounts to a threat of force.

    Stewie-baby admits that he did not fully understand the content of Angela’s statements. He therefore is a poor witness in this matter.

    Stewie-baby admits that he did not feel threatened. He admits that he felt no danger of physical force. Therefore he was not assaulted. No victim, no crime. Note that if an actual claim of assault had merit, Stewie-baby (being a neo-conservative anti-liberty scum) would have called the police or taken other action in defense. That he made no police report after receiving this call indicates further that he did not feel threatened.

    I personally think Stewie-baby deserves anything that happens to him. If God sees fit to have Stewie killed in an auto accident, perhaps seven or eight days of excruciating pain, mitigated by, say, starvation, I think that would be fitting.

    Stewie-baby then contradicts his earlier statement saying that he did not feel threatened, and does not regard Angela as threatening. He is lying on this page in one of the statements which contradicts the other, possibly several.

    I believe Stewie-baby is not only a Republican, but a neo-conservative, Nixon enthusiast. I suspect Stewie-baby of lying when he denies such things.

    Stewie-baby admits that he has been threatened with harm. Perhaps, then, his conduct is not honoring other members of the LP, other members of the LNC, members of staff, or anyone else. Perhaps Stewie-baby deserves to be threatened with harm. Time will tell.

  23. Eternaverse December 5, 2008

    I looked at the bylaws and I can’t find anything saying that she could not both run for President and be on the LNC, though I also can’t find it saying that a member of the LNC cannot support a LP Presidential candidate before their nomination.

  24. paulie cannoli Post author | December 5, 2008

    If Angela Keaton is running for President can she still serve on the LNC? Bob Barr had to leave when he said he was.

    Good question. I don’t know.

    She has said this is her last term, so she won’t be on the LNC when the bulk of the campaign takes place, but I don’t know if that’s the determining factor.

  26. Eternaverse December 5, 2008

    If Angela Keaton is running for President can she still serve on the LNC? Bob Barr had to leave when he said he was.

  28. LibertarianGirl December 5, 2008

    Man , this is going to be one helluva weekend! Im bringing my discipline gear as well as writing on my ass “discipline this fuckers” .

  29. TheOriginalAndy December 5, 2008

    “You have just blown a great deal of personal credibility with me for engaging in the same sort of behviour that you accuse Angela Keaton to have done to you. Worse, you did it with third-party hearsay. You defame someone using a third-party opinion from an anonymous source.”

    I did NOT accuse Angela Keaton of any crimes, nor did I accuse her of anything. All I repeated is that she turned on a person whom she was friends with for no apparent reason (just like she did to Paul, Gary, and I). I’m not sure if this person whom I spoke to wants their name mentioned so that’s why I didn’t say their name. Mentioning a simple falling out is NOT the same thing as spreading lies/falsely accusing people of crime which is what Angela did to us.

    “I do not know Angela Keaton, and I do not know you, but I have never seen her publicly posting specious claims about you on the web,”

    Well then you must have missed the threads on this forum where she did this. Check the archives as it is on here.

    “and anybody who would use the pseudo ‘Anarchist Bitch’ gets a few extra style points from from me, unseen.”

    Angela should drop the Anarchist part of her screen name and just go by the 2nd part as it suits her personality perfectly.

  30. pdsa December 5, 2008

    TheOriginalAndy – This person said…that they suspect

    You have just blown a great deal of personal credibility with me for engaging in the same sort of behviour that you accuse Angela Keaton to have done to you. Worse, you did it with third-party hearsay. You defame someone using a third-party opinion from an anonymous source.

    I do not know Angela Keaton, and I do not know you, but I have never seen her publicly posting specious claims about you on the web, and anybody who would use the pseudo “Anarchist Bitch” gets a few extra style points from from me, unseen.

  31. TheOriginalAndy December 5, 2008

    “Thomas L. Knapp // Dec 5, 2008 at 12:02 pm

    Andy,

    Wow, now you’ve gone from a plausible claim (that Haugh said something that he had no authority to make anyone act on) to an obvious falsehood (that Haugh said something that he DID have the authority to make others act on) to completely bizarre falsehood (that Haugh, from another state, attempted to reach through the phone line with a Zippo and commit arson).”

    I’ve already debunked your ascertation that whether or not Haugh had any authority in the matter has anything to do with the fact that he is guilty. The fact is blatantly evident that Haugh INTENDED to have 2,000 (high validity) Libertarian Party ballot access signatures “BURNED (quite literally)” whether they had been paid for or not. Fortunately, Carol McMahon and George Phillies of the Massachusetts LP had the good sense to not carry out this order, but the fact remains that Haugh abused his position and had criminal intent.

    Going by your “logic” a President who gives an unconstitutional command should be absolved of guilt because the President has not authority to violate the Constitution. Going by your “logic” a person who attempts to hire a hitman to committ a murder is absolved of guilt ifr the murder does not get carried out. Your “logic” is clearly faulty.

    “It’s impossible to say for certain that Keaton isn’t a whackjob and a liar (although I suspect she’s neither),”

    It is possible to say for certain that Keaton is a whackjob and a liar (and a backstabber). Go look at the accusations that she made against us and then try to prove that they are true. Nobody has been able to do this (Paul and I are still waiting to see that phantom police report, Tom.). Then look at how she turned on Paul for simply posting things that he knew to be true and refuted Angela’s accusations. For this, she turned on him and threatened to (ab)use he position to blackball him from working. This is NOT the behavior of a rational, decent human being.

    “but you seem to have an obsession with continually demonstrating that you yourself are both.”

    I have an obsession with getting people who are incompetent, unstable, and/or corrupt out of positions of influence in the Libertarian Party.

    “Keaton is indubitably a radical libertarian. Are you either?”

    Keaton may mouth the right libertarian rehtoric, but she does NOT uphold libertarian principles in the way that she conducts her life.

    I talked to somebody in the Libertarian Party of California a few days ago (and this person is a RADICAL Libertarian who a lot of people here would know who they are) who was friendly with Angela Keaton at one time, that is until she turned on them for no apparent reason. This person said that Angela burns bridges and that they suspect that she’s either got mental problems or is on drugs, or both.

  32. Thomas L. Knapp December 5, 2008

    Andy,

    Wow, now you’ve gone from a plausible claim (that Haugh said something that he had no authority to make anyone act on) to an obvious falsehood (that Haugh said something that he DID have the authority to make others act on) to completely bizarre falsehood (that Haugh, from another state, attempted to reach through the phone line with a Zippo and commit arson).

    What’s next? Video showing Haugh sneaking into WTC 7 with an armload of Gary Fincher signatures? Or audio of him telling LPHQ staff to “pull it?”

    It’s impossible to say for certain that Keaton isn’t a whackjob and a liar (although I suspect she’s neither), but you seem to have an obsession with continually demonstrating that you yourself are both. Keaton is indubitably a radical libertarian. Are you either?

  33. TheOriginalAndy December 5, 2008

    “Bill Redpath and Sean Haugh regularly talk with people in other parties to coordinate ballot access efforts (lawsuits, initiative petitions, lobbying, etc.).”

    Yeah, and when Sean Haugh talked to somebody from the Ralph Nader campaign he trashed talked Gary and told them not to hire him, in spite of the fact that Gary is one of the best petitioners in the country. Haugh did this because he’s a vidictive whackjob who creates conflicts with people. How is it any of Sean Haugh’s fucking business if Gary works on a petition for some other organization? Fortunately, the people at the Nader campaign were not as irrational as Sean Haugh and they laughed his trash talking of Gary off and hired him anyone, and they were really glad that they did because during the time that Gary worked on Ralph Nader ballot access petitions he was one of their top producers.

    Also, it should once again be noted that the Libertarian Party FAILED to get on the ballot in 5 places this year where they SHOULD have made it, and the main reason that they FAILED is due to Sean Haugh’s incompetence and corruption. I’d love to see a full accounting of the money that was spent on failed ballot access drives, law suits to try to make up for failed ballot access drives, and over-payments made to mercenary petitioners that Sean Haugh hired. I’d be willing to bet that over $100,000 was squandered. Anyone who has donated money to the Libertarian Party over the past year should be really pissed off about this.

  34. TheOriginalAndy December 5, 2008

    “It seems to me that most of what Angela is accused of amounts to little more than blowing off steam and indulging a warped sense of humor on her blog. ”

    So Angela was just “blowing off steam” when she launched an unprovoked attack against myself and Gary by posting a bunch of lies about us on-line – including falsely accusing us of crimes. She did this to cover-up for the corrupt Political Director Sean Haugh (the person who is the primary cause of the LP failing to make it on the ballot in 5 places this year and who is also the co-author of the “kiddie porn” press release smear against Mary Ruwart). I suppose you’ll say that Sean Haugh was “just blowing off steam” when he tried to illegally burn 2,000 high validity LP ballot access signatures whether they had been paid for or not. These people have really got warped ways of “blowing off steam”.

    How about replace Angela Keaton with a radical Libertarian who is not a whackjob and a liar, and who is someone that actually upholds Libertarian principles in the way they conduct their lives?

  35. kiddleddee December 5, 2008

    Chuck @#14, re: tired gripe. I’ll give you this one, Chuck. I still consider it a deliberate act on Flood’s part to grease the skids for Barr to be installed on the LNC (and to position him as the LP’s 2008 potus candidate!); but I won’t bring it up again.

    As for Flood’s “evidence”, even a cursory reading of the “documents” he posts which are in Angela’s hand would convince one that Angela is passionate about the LP. Does she feel betrayed by it – not personally, but politically? Of course she does, a lot of us do; that’s why she was elected to the LNC.

    Should she express her frustration and exasperation? Well, that seems to be the issue, doesn’t it? I, for one, am glad she does – and I appreciate the AK style in doing so. She certainly speaks with my voice in a lot of what Flood finds to be an impeachable “offense”.

  36. Thomas M. Sipos December 5, 2008

    pdsa, don’t forget this inside look at Root’s boiler room operation: http://forum.sbrforum.com/players-talk/2303-i-worked-wayne-root-let-me-tell-you-about.html

    Or how Root’s Obama neurosis made the LP look like fools: http://gawker.com/5078266/columbia-remembers-obama-even-if-libertarian-loser-vp-candidate-cant

    If you scroll down, there are some interesting insights on Root in this piece too: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/21/magazine/21Gambling.t.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print

    He’s a self-promoter who wanted the LP nomination so he could leverage that into a paid radio or cable TV show, or whatever sort of paid celebrity gig he could squeeze out of it. I’m certain of it.

    Meanwhile, Orange County liberventionist Bruce Cohen is praising Root for “being the face of the LP on Fox News,” as if it’s a contribution Root is making to the cause, rather than using the LP for his own ends.

    The more Root is publicly linked to the LP, the sadder for the LP.

  37. starchild December 5, 2008

    Are the charges against Angela Keaton as serious as the charges against Bob Barr, who did not face so much as a censure from the LNC, let alone removal? Barr’s political action committee, some of you may recall, gave thousands of dollars of donations to Republican candidates who had Libertarian Party opponents, while Barr sat on the LNC as a regional representative (see http://lastfreevoice.wordpress.com/2008/05/09/bob-barr-an-enemy-of-libertarians/). If that isn’t “providing material support to a competing political party while serving on the board of the Libertarian Party,” I don’t know what is.

    It seems to me that most of what Angela is accused of amounts to little more than blowing off steam and indulging a warped sense of humor on her blog. (I challenge anyone with a sense of humor to read through the allegations against her without laughing at least once.) I mean, posting a cartoon of Aaron Starr in a Darth Vader outfit with a Hitler mustache is supposed to be some kind of actionable impropriety? Is a seasoned operator like Treasurer Starr really so thin-skinned that he can’t take that kind of ribbing? And have we become so politically correct as a party that we feel compelled to bring up charges of sexual harassment when the staffers supposedly “harrassed” (a.k.a. complimented, in this case) have not even filed complaints themselves? Give me a break!

    When Angela once made an unsolicited post about doing blow off my ass, I found it amusing not offensive, even though I consider cocaine to be a generally deleterious substance which I don’t indulge in myself. Lighten up, people! Or if you’re going to mount the moral high horse to mete out discipline over dubious improprieties, make sure the lash falls equally on those in your own political faction.

    Oh, and the unidentified “competing political party” referred to in the allegations is obviously the libertarian-oriented Boston Tea Party. I don’t know about you, but I consider supporting the BTP of a far different nature than supporting the GOP (“Ron Paul” Republicans excepted). One organization is clearly part of the libertarian movement; the other just as clearly is not. After the LNC has finished “disciplining” anti-radical Bob Barr, then let them get back to us about the supposed offenses of radical Angela Keaton.

  38. pdsa December 5, 2008

    An apology to the members of the Libertarian Party for seeking to undermine the success of and attempting to injure the Libertarian Party and its public image by posting on her blog in July 2008, “Friends don’t let friends join the LP” and on September 5, 2008, “The LP is hopeless”

    The LP, “the party of principle”, which gave comfort and aid to a known enemy of freedom, Richard Viguerie, had an employee sabotage the presidential LP nomination candidacy a long-term party activist with a despicable innuendo slandering her character, with the intent of securing Bob Barr, whose history as a Congressman was not even mappable on a libertarian scalar. The “principled” LP, which in its motto states an unequivocal support for less government, and more freedom, yet during the 2006 midterm election cycle, forgot all about those two principles, and simply ignored the Bush Administration’s tyrannical assault upon personal freedoms, enabled by conservatives, which the LP’s leadership absurdly claim are closely aligned with libertarian ideals. The same LP leadership, which arrogantly refuses to allow commenting on the LP website’s blog; offering a lame rationale: that policing spam was too time consuming. Commenting is still disabled on the LP website blog, even though they have contracted with Terra Eclipse for a major site overhaul .

    An apology to the members of the Libertarian Party for violating the fiduciary duty of a board member by joining and providing material support to a competing political party while serving on the board of the Libertarian Party

    Has Bob Barr been threatened with LP sanctions for providing material support to Republican asswipes like Saxby Chambliss, Paul C. Broun, who proposed a bill to ban Playboys from being sold at Military base PXs, and the Principled Patrician In The Party of Public Potty Peepers, Larry Craig?

    An apology to LP staff member Casey Hansen for violating the LNC Policy Manual Article 1, Section 8.D and risking sexual harassment accusations by blogging on September 6, 2008, “Nice staff piece of ass, Casey. Dark, young and easy prey for a cougar like myself.”

    What kind of fucking girliebois are LP staffers, and why is the LP leadership using a standard for “sexual harassment”, which far exceeds even what is allowed in the Federal Courts?

    Simple sexual flirtation in the workplace, has never been considered to meet sexual harassment standards. There must be a quid pro quo attempt to coerce, or a workplace environment which a normal person would consider to be hostile. Neither of these two conditions were met in this laughable call for an apology.

    As we emphasized in Meritor and Harris, the statute does not reach genuine but innocuous differences in the ways men and women routinely interact with members of the same sex and of the opposite sex. The prohibition of harassment on the basis of sex requires neither asexuality nor androgyny in the workplace; it forbids only behavior so objectively offensive as to alter the “conditions” of the victim’s employment. “Conduct that is not severe or pervasive enough to create an objectively hostile or abusive work environment-an environment that a reasonable person would find hostile or abusive-is beyond Title VII’s purview.” Harris, 510 U.S., at 21, citing Meritor, 477 U.S. at 67. We have always regarded that requirement as crucial, and as sufficient to ensure that courts and juries do not mistake ordinary socializing in the workplace-such as male-on-male horseplay or intersexual flirtation-for discriminatory “conditions of employment.”

    Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services 96-568

    Additionally, since Angela Keaton had publicly admitted her bisexuality, she can make an affirmative defense to this any claim of sexual harassment, because sexual harassment need have as an element for it to be a crime, gender discrimination.

    In the case of the bisexual superior, the insistence upon sexual favors would not constitute gender discrimination because it would apply to male and female employees alike

    Barnes v. Costle 561 F.2d 983 Footnote 55

  39. Gene Trosper December 5, 2008

    One more point: I know a few people who have “joined” the BTP simply as a protest vehicle to try an persuade the LNC and the Barr campaign to get their acts together. I honestly don’t think many who have joined really take the BTP all that serious anyway.

    And need we talk about the many LP members/activists who are members of the Republican Liberty Caucus?

    There is a very long history of LP members either being registered to vote with another party or belonging to non-LP partisan organizations (mostly Republican).

  40. Gene Trosper December 5, 2008

    Chuck: I have no issue with a Libertarian joining a Ron Paul Meetup group. Hell, I organized one where I live! The only reason I posted that is because he wants to play the guilt by association card. You see, there are some very partisan LPers out there who believe associating with Republicans is a cardinal sin. If Stewart Flood can associate with Republicans, then Keaton can associate with BTP folk.

  41. pdsa December 5, 2008

    An apology to Wayne Allyn Root and the Libertarian Party for attempting to injure their public images by knowingly publishing on June 13, 2008 false assertions that an indictment on charges of fraud was pending against Mr. Root

    Root is an ‘effin sports tout, therefore, he has no public image capable of being injured. Yeah, I believe in personal liberty, but I also believe in personal honour. A business model of fleecing those who just disembarked off of the turnip truck is wrong. Here’s a decent write-up about how the scam works. Free as in you’re paying for my lunch Rube…

    Check out the latest 10-K filing from W Technologies, Inc., filed 7/31/08 of which Wayne Allen Root is Director, Chief Executive Officer, and Principal Accounting Officer.

    In September 2007, the Company completed the sale of all of the Company’s operating assets, including the business of Global Sports Edge, Inc. to Betbrokers. Management of the Company had determined it was unable to fund operations and pay debts as they became due. Management determined the Company would have to either cease operations or sell assets to a third party. Management was able to locate a buyer for the Company’s assets and operations and completed the sale on September 26, 2007. As consideration for the sale of the operating assets, the Company received 64,356,435 shares of Betbrokers stock; Betbrokers stock formerly traded on the London Stock Exchange Alternative Investment Market known as the “AIM.” On October 20, 2007 the Company changed its name to W Technologies, Inc. as part of the agreement reached with Betbrokers. The Company currently has no means to pay existing debts or fund ongoing obligations.
    [. . .]
    On August 22, 2008 Betbrokers LTD was placed into administration and trading of its shares has been temporarily suspended. This would mean that Betbrokers stock being held by the Company could have no value. This would also mean that the Company will not be able to settle debts through the liquidation of this stock. Therefore, the Company may be forced to cease all activity and seek bankruptcy protection or lose control of the Company to debt holders.

    In FY 2007, W Technologies, Inc. had an accumulated deficit of $29,905,138. In FY 2008 (ended July 31), the accumulated deficit was pared down a bit to $27,675,787, but that was due entirely to sales of the Corporation’s operations. It’s operating deficit for 2008 was $2,229,351. In FY 2007 and FY 2008, W Technologies, Inc. compensated Wayne Allan Root a total of $509,628.

    Obviously, WAR has worked hard at becoming a millionaire in the Republican way…

  42. Thomas M. Sipos December 5, 2008

    rdupuy: “If the worst thing he did, was accurately describe a conversation where he was threatened…”

    I essentially accused him of spinning the conversation for political motive, i.e., for inaccurately describing the conversation. Not for accurately describing it.

  43. chuckmoulton December 5, 2008

    Gene Trosper wrote:

    If Stewart Flood is really so upset that an LNC member dare associate with a party separate of the LP, then why is he part of the Charleston Ron Paul Meetup group?

    A lot of Libertarians joined Ron Paul Meetup groups to reach out to Ron Paul activists. It’s easier to convert an activist into a Libertarian than to convert a Libertarian into an activist.

    Other Libertarians just wanted to stay current with what was going on in their area to lookout for opportunities to do LP outreach.

    Feel free to string me up too. I am figurehead of the Philly Ron Paul Meetup — i.e., I pay the Meetup fee, then get out of the way letting others run it… which lets me occasionally promote LP events there without having to ask anyone permission.

    http://ronpaul.meetup.com/25/

    I don’t see anything wrong with joining a Meetup group. Of course, I don’t see anything wrong with joining a Facebook group either.

    I joined the Boston Tea Party Facebook group a long time ago to keep up with what was going on there. Keeping tabs on fellow travelers in the libertarian movement is just common sense. I am not a member of the Boston Tea Party and I have no intention of joining. The BTP Chair emeritus regularly points out that there are far more people in the Facebook group than members of the BTP.

    Bill Redpath and Sean Haugh regularly talk with people in other parties to coordinate ballot access efforts (lawsuits, initiative petitions, lobbying, etc.). That association doesn’t mean they are forsaking the Libertarian Party.

    kiddleddee wrote:

    this is the same Flood, btw, that refused to carry out his responsiblity as an LNC alternate during the last LNC term, greasing the wheels for Bob Barr to be installed on the LNC

    Not this tired gripe again…

    Alternates have no “responsibility” to be elected Representative when the Rep resigns. They have a responsibility to fill in for that duty until the state chairs in the region hold an election. Just because often state chairs elect the Alternate to fill the Representative vacancy doesn’t mean those state chairs are required to do that and doesn’t mean the Alternate is required to run.

    Many Alts choose that position because they lack the time or money to make every meeting or otherwise fully participate, yet they can spare enough to be a backup. And many want to get acclimated to the LNC in a backup capacity for a full term before they step into a role at the table.

  45. Michael Seebeck December 5, 2008

    22 pages of complaints about how someone writes or associates. Guess what, it’s a free country.

    1 page of one side of a conversation that portrays Flood as living up to his namesake in his pants because he was told to knock it off.

    IOW, he’s got nothing.

  46. rdupuy December 5, 2008

    Guys, as you know by now, I don’t spend a lot of time in tit-for-tat discussion, so….let me give my parting thoughts, until next time.

    In my opinion, when you make an argument, especially when you don’t have a lot of time…go with your best argument.

    Given that I’m just plain not going to read 23 pages about some character I don’t know and don’t care about…if you want to defend her, just what was the worst thing this Mr. Flood–another person I don’t know or care about did.

    If the worst thing he did, was accurately describe a conversation where he was threatened…and you are basically calling him a wuss for doing it.

    WEAK ARGUMENT FRIEND

  47. rdupuy December 5, 2008

    My thoughts are wrong.

    That it was 23 page long document.
    That you read the 23 pages of documents.
    That you found something to object to on the 23rd page.

    Or that they are my thoughts?

    My thoughts are wrong?

    OK friend, I’m telling you how you can be perceived, and were perceived.

    Gotcha, last page is the freshest.

  48. Thomas M. Sipos December 5, 2008

    Well, your thoughts are wrong.

    I did go through 23 pages, and I found much to object to in the other pages. But I don’t have time to object to everything.

    Page 23 was the last page, and so it was freshest in my mind. So I objected to it.

  49. rdupuy December 5, 2008

    Thomas Sipos, you make a pseudo legal argument.

    The problem is when you said you read someting on page 23, well, how can I creatively put my argument….here were my thoughts in the following order:

    OMG that documents is 23 pages long.

    OMG that dude read through 23 pages.t!

    OMG, he didn’t find anything to object with until he got to page 23, and he’s trying to support this woman, by making a pseudo-legal argument about one thing he found to object with on the 23rd page of evidence.

  50. kiddleddee December 5, 2008

    Damn, after reading Flood’s (this is the same Flood, btw, that refused to carry out his responsiblity as an LNC alternate during the last LNC term, greasing the wheels for Bob Barr to be installed on the LNC) “resolution evidence”, much of which I am seeing for the first time, I have more respect for Angela Keaton than ever.

  51. Thomas M. Sipos December 5, 2008

    Stewart Flood’s letter on page 23 looks like fabricated evidence. The one in which he claims Angela “threatened” him.

    I say this because:

    1. It’s a subjective interpretation from one side of a phone call.

    2. He had motivation to spin the interpretation in the worst possible light.

    It’s as if A and B are in a pending lawsuit. A phones B and says, as an aside, “You’re an asshole.”

    So B puts out a letter saying, “On Dec 2, A phoned me for 38 seconds. A engaged in strong and abusive language, which put me in fear of my life, yada, yada.”

    Thus does B spin a paper trail out of a nothing remark.

    In the 2 1/2 years I’ve known Angela, I’ve known her to use colorful language. I’ve never known her to be dangerous or physically threatening.

    She speaks her mind, using colorful language. Which makes her easy prey for calculating, manipulative people who know how to get a rise out of her, then put the worst possible spin on it.

  52. Fred Church Ortiz December 5, 2008

    I always knew my name would live forever. I gotta say, I didn’t expect it to be pasted into the latest installment of the Acts of Pilate.

  53. paulie cannoli Post author | December 5, 2008

    Nah. Completely random.

  54. kiddleddee December 5, 2008

    paulie (hey, I got it right that time! 😉 ), should we watch these in any particular order? Top to bottom, bottom to top?

  56. Gene Trosper December 5, 2008

    This is absolutely laughable.

    If Stewart Flood is really so upset that an LNC member dare associate with a party separate of the LP, then why is he part of the Charleston Ron Paul Meetup group? Let’s go ahead and play partisan politics for a moment here. He joined the Ron Paul Meetup group in August of 2008. Guilt by association!

    http://ronpaul.meetup.com/1920/members/241613/

Comments are closed.