Press "Enter" to skip to content

2012 Libertarian Presidential candidates Wayne Root and Tom Knapp on the MIAC report

The following post at Knappster was sent to contact.ipr@gmail.com by Tom Knapp, an announced candidate for the 2012 Libertarian Party Presidential nomination. Knapp is from Missouri, the home of MIAC. He criticizes statements made by Wayne Root about the MIAC report. Root is also seeking the LP Presidential nomination, after coming in third in the 2008 presidential nomination balloting and accepting the VP candidate spot on the ticket with Bob Barr.


The Missouri LP did fine job on the MIAC report (in particular, Mike Ferguson, who ran point on the matter). After rescuing the issue from the Alex Jones fever swamp, we got quite a bit of media — and reasonably good media at that — on it. With the help of Bob Barr, Ron Paul and Chuck Baldwin we also got an apology and retraction out of the Department of Public Safety. And a number of Missouri legislators are apparently outraged and preparing for a showdown over, or at least a damn hard look at, MIAC’s budget and purview as well.

Naturally, Wayne Allyn Root was nowhere to be seen when the work was being done and the risks were being taken. Now that the sweaty and dangerous part is over, however, he’s running like hell for the front of the parade to “lead” it. Even worse, he’s waving around exactly the kind of bullshit claims that we worked so hard to get out of the equation in the first place for the perfectly good reason that lying about the MIAC report hurts us, not MIAC.

From the latest Root hyper-ventilation:

As the 2008 Libertarian Vice Presidential nominee, as well as 2012 Libertarian Presidential hopeful Wayne Allyn Root, has been on the record in more than a thousand media interviews as concerned that our government has grown too big, too powerful, too corrupt, too controlling over the people. Now comes the strongest proof yet that Root’s concerns are valid: a report prepared by a Department of Homeland Security-related organization that has warned law enforcement that anyone supporting third party candidates such as Wayne Root’s Libertarian Party, the Bob Barr/Wayne Root Presidential ticket, or Ron Paul’s Republican candidacy could be a terrorist, militia member or involved in criminal activities.

As discussed elsewhere here at KN@PPSTER, the MIAC report gives no such “warning.” Nor, despite Root’s multiple attempts to insert his name into the discussion at this late date, does that name appear anywhere in the report.

The MIAC report — the actual report, not the false and hyperbolic characterizations of it — was a real issue. And it was an issue we made real political hay with. Now Root’s trying to hijack it, and doing so in such ham-handed a way that he could conceivably cost us every hard-earned crumb of credibility we won on it.

File under “the LP can — must — do better than Root in 2012.”


Root’s entire post, also mailed to IPR:

Is Government Labeling Libertarians and Conservatives as Terrorists?
Tuesday, March 24, 2009, 08:31 AM
2012 Libertarian Presidential Hopeful ROOT Charges “Government Gone Wild!”

Will police pull over drivers in America for “Driving while Libertarian or Conservative?”

Las Vegas, NV–March 24, 2009-As the 2008 Libertarian Vice Presidential nominee, as well as 2012 Libertarian Presidential hopeful Wayne Allyn Root, has been on the record in more than a thousand media interviews as concerned that our government has grown too big, too powerful, too corrupt, too controlling over the people. Now comes the strongest proof yet that Root’s concerns are valid: a report prepared by a Department of Homeland Security-related organization that has warned law enforcement that anyone supporting third party candidates such as Wayne Root’s Libertarian Party, the Bob Barr/Wayne Root Presidential ticket, or Ron Paul’s Republican candidacy could be a terrorist, militia member or involved in criminal activities. The report also included anti-abortion activists on that warning list. This warning was issued to Missouri law enforcement officials by the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC), one of 58 so-called “fusion centers” created by the Department of Homeland Security.

Root responded to this ridiculous, absurd and dangerous claim, “Government officials are already backtracking and running for cover on this idiotic, ignorant and dangerous warning to law enforcement. Ironically, it is more proof that we have given far too much power to government. You mean we’ve actually gotten to the point where if any political party challenges the powerful 2-party system (of Democrats and Republicans), government bureaucrats to protect their power, jobs, patronage, and bloated pensions, are now willing to label that group as criminals or terrorists? This is truly proof of Big Brother and the Nanny State gone wild. What’s next? Government run re-education camps?”

Root, the author of the soon-to-be-released new book, “The Conscience of a Libertarian” points out that in many national political polls as much as 20% of Americans identify themselves as libertarian, while over 40% of voters agree that they are fiscally conservative and socially tolerant, otherwise known as libertarian. “Does government now consider those millions of voters all criminals or terrorists?” asks Root. “Is any form of dissent or disagreement with government policy now labeled as ‘terrorist activity.’ Is this America or the Soviet gulag? Are police now going to pull over drivers in America for the crime of ‘driving while Libertarian or Conservative?’ I think that all good Americans will agree that our government and law enforcement has gone too far with this warning.”

Root points out his own record, “Last I checked, I was a true-blue, All-American patriot. I’m the son of a butcher, a self-made small business owner, home-school dad and Citizen Politician in the image of our founding fathers. I’m even married to a descendent of Benjamin Franklin and Richard Warren (who arrived in America on the Mayflower). I’ve never been in trouble a day in my life- I haven’t gotten even a parking or speeding ticket in the past decade or two. I support law enforcement and our men and women in the armed services. And somehow I don’t think I’d be allowed in the militia movement- since I’m a proud Jewish American.”

Root continued, “Last I checked, to fight for smaller government, lower taxes, less government spending, more rights for the individual, and more freedom is as All-American as apple pie and motherhood. More importantly, those principles are what America was founded on…those principles are the reasons we fought the America Revolution…those principles are the reason our founding fathers created our Constitution. Somehow today our politicians, government bureaucrats and even some law enforcement leaders have obviously lost their way and forgotten what America is all about. I will continue to fight to remind them.”


Posted by Paulie.

About Post Author

74 Comments

  1. Nate Nate March 24, 2009

    Do militias exclude jews? I’ve never tried to join one, so I really don’t know.

  2. Thomas M. Sipos Thomas M. Sipos March 24, 2009

    Nate, militias are private. Some are racist, some not (i.e., they are multi-racial). I’ve heard the Jewish Defense League runs gun-training summer camps; they might be considered a Jewish militia.

    Thomas Knapp, according to the minutes of the meeting, Root showed up at the California LP Executive Committee meeting in December, requesting that he be made a “spokesman” for the LPC.

    Root is eager for media face time. I’ve said since before the election, Root is using the LP to boost his own media celebrity. I think he’s hoping for a radio or cable TV show job. He’s already gotten a book deal out of his run.

    But until he gets a radio/TV host job, he’ll grab every excuse/opportunity to get his face in the media.

    Root will also be a speaker at the California LP convention in April. Like a bad cold, he’s hard to shake.

  3. paulie paulie March 24, 2009

    There’s no uniform rule for all militias. Some probably do, but definitely not all.

  4. libertariangirl libertariangirl March 24, 2009

    I hope Wayne does get his own radio or t.v show , and i hope its helps increase the LP’s membership , treasury etc etc.

    incidentally he is the guest speaker at many LP conventions so obviously people want to hear what he’s got to say

  5. libertariangirl libertariangirl March 24, 2009

    and since when is getting your face in the media as a Libertarian a bad thing .
    We need WAY, WAY , WAY more of it .

  6. Nate Nate March 24, 2009

    Thanks Paulie and Thomas. It was a semi-rhetorical question, although I really did not and do not know if any militias have actual rules against jews joining. It is however nice to know that there are some which most certainly do not. I wouldn’t join any militia whatsoever as I’m not a big fan of guns, but Root seems to be lumping all militias, or at least “the militia movement,” into an anti-semitic group. The militias are getting attacked from all sides thanks to the MIAC report. Perhaps the ACLU should get involved in the militias defense.

  7. Nate Nate March 24, 2009

    “and since when is getting your face in the media as a Libertarian a bad thing”

    I don’t know, “Libertarian butchers wife with axe” might not help the cause. 🙂

  8. paulie paulie March 24, 2009

    There are definitely some jew-haters who join and/or form militias.

    There are also some in political parties, websites, etc.

    Asking if militias allow Jews is like asking whether political websites or parties allow Jews.

  9. libertariangirl libertariangirl March 24, 2009

    JPFO is the favorite of all gun-rights groups for every patriot I know .

  10. Nate Nate March 24, 2009

    Yes, but there is a difference between jew-hating militias and militias which deny jews from joining. I’m not saying Root should or would want to join either, but he doesn’t say he wouldn’t be welcome, he says he wouldn’t be allowed to join.

  11. libertariangirl libertariangirl March 24, 2009

    but Root seems to be lumping all militias, or at least “the militia movement,” into an anti-semitic group

    i didnt like that part of his post either.

  12. paulie paulie March 24, 2009

    Yes, but there is a difference between jew-hating militias and militias which deny jews from joining.

    Not really. Why would anyone want to join a group that hates them on the basis of ethnicity or religion?

    And why would any group that hates people on such a basis want them to join?

  13. CHUCKtheFED CHUCKtheFED March 24, 2009

    I don’t sense ‘a’ militia movement, so ‘not being allowed’ to join, might be my Mom talkin’. There are many militia type movements, and in time, they may find each other as spirited opponents. What they have in common, is guns, ]
    and ‘them’,
    and there is also no single ‘them’ movement.

  14. Steven R Linnabary Steven R Linnabary March 24, 2009

    Do militias exclude jews? I’ve never tried to join one, so I really don’t know.

    The LP’s 1992 VP candidate Nancy Lord is Jewish. She is married to JJ Johnson, a black man who co-founded the “Ohio Unorganized Militia”. He was one of the “militia” folks to be subpoenaed to testify to Congress.

    I am not aware of any militia types that were anti-semitic or racist, though many may have been anti-immigrant.

    IMHO, the militia movement DID feed the so-called “republican revolution” of 1994.

    PEACE

  15. paulie paulie March 24, 2009

    I am not aware of any militia types that were anti-semitic or racist

    Racist groups certainly have some armed wings. Would you consider those militias or something else?

  16. CHUCKtheFED CHUCKtheFED March 24, 2009

    lol
    no, I meant my mama

  17. Nate Nate March 24, 2009

    Paulie, I believe I explained the difference in my very next sentence. I agree with the rest of your post however, and for that matter would like to raise you a: Why would anyone want to join a group that hates *anyone* on the basis of ethnicity or religion?

  18. paulie paulie March 24, 2009

    Why would anyone want to join a group that hates *anyone* on the basis of ethnicity or religion?

    Because they are of that mindset themselves?

  19. Nate Nate March 24, 2009

    The above was in reference to #12

  20. paulie paulie March 24, 2009

    lol
    no, I meant my mama

  21. paulie paulie March 24, 2009

    Paulie, I believe I explained the difference in my very next sentence.

    Your next sentence was:

    I’m not saying Root should or would want to join either, but he doesn’t say he wouldn’t be welcome, he says he wouldn’t be allowed to join.

  22. Nate Nate March 24, 2009

    Well, ok, then I guess I could counter with: Some people hate their heritage and/or religion. Most often they would change their religion if that were the case, it’s a bit harder rubbing your face until it’s no longer black.

  23. Nate Nate March 24, 2009

    Yes, and that would be the difference between a group that does not allow someone to join, and a group that does, albeit perhaps noone in his right mind would wish to join.

  24. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp March 24, 2009

    Most of the militia bubbas I knew in the mid-1990s were good guys. Some weren’t. At that time, the racists and anti-semites appeared to be steadily infiltrating the militia movement.

    I pretty much began to write the group I was thinking of becoming more actively involved with off when one of its members handed me a copy of The Spotlight, Willis Carto’s anti-semitic rag. He didn’t necessarily represent the organization itself, but he seemed well-regarded within it and the plausible assumption was that even if the rest of them didn’t share his beliefs, they were highly tolerant of his proselytization for those beliefs.

    Others’ mileage, and other organizations, may vary.

  25. Steven R Linnabary Steven R Linnabary March 24, 2009

    Racist groups certainly have some armed wings. Would you consider those militias or something else?

    Something else, losers perhaps.

    Some peace activists are Communists. Are all peace activists therefore Communists?

    It might be easier for a media personality to paint all militia types as crazy racists, just as it might be easier for the armchair political analyst to refer to all peace activists as Communists. But for both it is just laziness.

    PEACE

  26. paulie paulie March 24, 2009

    Some peace activists are Communists. Are all peace activists therefore Communists?

    I clearly said not all militias are racist.

  27. Thomas M. Sipos Thomas M. Sipos March 24, 2009

    libertarian girl: [Root] is the guest speaker at many LP conventions so obviously people want to hear what he’s got to say

    Another interpretation is that some state LP officers support Root, and they’re pushing him for 2012, hoping the rank & file will want to hear what he says.

    and since when is getting your face in the media as a Libertarian a bad thing .

    It depends on the face. Root ran a sleazy business:

    http://forum.sbrforum.com/players-talk/2303-i-worked-wayne-root-let-me-tell-you-about.html

    http://forum.sbrforum.com/players-talk/23380-question-about-wayne-allyn-root.html

    http://therxforum.com/showthread.php?t=164179
    and his face creeps me out.

    I’m sure some TV viewers like Root, and others are creeped out by him. Whether his face is more good or bad for the LP is debatable.

    If Root ever did win elective office on the LP ticket, the LP should issue an apology the next day.

  28. Eric Dondero Eric Dondero March 24, 2009

    Wayne’s comments are now up on Libertarian Republican blog. Let’s just all agree that what’s going on in Missouri, is absolutely horrendouse, and should be opposed BY ALL LIBERTARIANS!

  29. paulie paulie March 24, 2009

    libertarian girl: [Root] is the guest speaker at many LP conventions so obviously people want to hear what he’s got to say

    Sipos: Another interpretation is that some state LP officers support Root, and they’re pushing him for 2012, hoping the rank & file will want to hear what he says.

    Paulie: I don’t think either is necessarily true based simply on the fact that he is speaking at state conventions, although – for other reasons – I do think both of these are true.

    Realistically, if any former VP or 2012 candidate was willing to go around the country, pay his/her own way and speak at a bunch of state conventions, I don’t think a lot of states would turn him or her down.

  30. Thomas M. Sipos Thomas M. Sipos March 24, 2009

    Paulie, is Root paying his own way? Or is he getting a speaking fee, or per diem, or whatever.

    I don’t know. Do you?

  31. paulie paulie March 24, 2009

    I doubt many state parties can afford speaking fees, or would want to.

  32. paulie paulie March 24, 2009

    Somewhat surprised.

    Well, I guess he’s something of a draw.

  33. libertariangirl libertariangirl March 24, 2009

    Sipos__It depends on the face. Root ran a sleazy business:

    http://forum.sbrforum.com/players-talk/2303-i-worked-wayne-root-let-me-tell-you-about.html

    http://forum.sbrforum.com/players-talk/23380-question-about-wayne-allyn-root.html

    http://therxforum.com/showthread.php?t=164179
    and his face creeps me out.

    those same links everyone passes around about him .
    Disgruntled ex-employees and angry losing-gamblers are nothing of a surprise to me .

    If Wayne had done anything illegal , there would be an investigation of some kind , by someone at sometime .
    There is nothing , its pure character assasination .

    again …

  34. libertariangirl libertariangirl March 24, 2009

    it says my comment is awaiting moderation

  35. paulie paulie March 24, 2009

    CP:

    http://www.constitutionparty.com/news.php?aid=900
    Response to MIAC Report

    http://www.constitutionparty.com/news.php?aid=899
    Fusion Centers Expand Criteria to Identify Militia Members

    http://www.constitutionparty.com/news.php?aid=898
    Missouri Governor Defends MIAC Smear Report

    http://www.constitutionparty.com/news.php?aid=897
    Outraged Americans Take Action:

    http://www.constitutionparty.com/news.php?aid=895
    Secret Report Targets Americans

    http://www.constitutionparty.com/news.php?aid=883
    MISSOURI STATE POLICE LABEL HONEST AMERICANS TERRORISTS

  36. paulie paulie March 24, 2009

    it says my comment is awaiting moderation

    Got it.

  37. paulie paulie March 24, 2009

    http://www.ballot-access.org/2009/03/24/missouri-dept-of-public-safety-apologizes-to-3rd-parties-and-candidates/

    Missouri Dept. of Public Safety Apologizes to 3rd Parties and Candidates

    Following the uproar around the report by the Statistical Analysis Center of the Missouri State Highway Patrol on “The Modern Mililtia Movement,” the Missouri Dept. of Public Safety has issued an official letter of apology to Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, and Bob Barr.

    Here is the text of the letter:

    STATE OF MISSOURI
    DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR
    March 23, 2009

    Rep, Ron Paul
    203 Cannon House Office Building
    Washington, D.C. 20515

    Mr. Rob Barr (sic)
    900 Circle 75 Parkway, Suite 1280
    Atlanta, Georgia 30339

    Mr. Chuck Baldwin
    6800 Mobile Highway
    Pensacola, Florida 32526

    Dear Rep. Paul, Mr. Barr and Mr. Baldwin:

    As head of the stale agency responsible for oversight of the Missouri information Analysis Center (MIAC), I want to respond to your letter of March 20, 2009, regarding a report by the MIAC on the militia movement. Portions of that report may be easily construed by readers as offensive to supporters of certain political candidates or to those candidates themselves. I regret that those components were ultimately included in the final report issued by the MIAC.

    The Missouri Department of Public Safety places the utmost value on the safety and well being of Missouri’s law enforcement officers –a value I am certain we share with you and your supporters. Officers of the law do the most dangerous job of anyone in our society and regularly put themselves in the path of great danger, bodily harm and death in order to protect innocent citizens. As such, it is our regular practice to provide as much information as we can to law enforcement agencies and their officers so they are fully cognizant of any situational hazard which they may encounter.

    Unfortunately, in the course of preparing this report, some regrettable information was included in the report on militia groups in Missouri. While the intent of the report was only to identify certain traits that are sometimes shared by members of militia organizations, this report is too easily misinterpreted as suggesting that militia members may be identified by no other indicator than support for a particular candidate or political organization. That is an undesired and unwarranted outcome. Upon review and reflections, it is the judgment of the Department of Public Safety that the report should have made no reference to supporters of Ron Paul, Bob Barr, Chuck Baldwin or of any other third-party political organization or candidate.

    In recognition of the mistaken inclusion of this information by the MIAC in its February 20, 2009, report on the militia movement, I have ordered that the offending report be edited so as to excise all reference to Ron Paul, Bob Barr or Chuck Baldwin and to any third-party political organizations. Additionally, you nay rest assured that the report is not posted on any web site maintained by the State of Missouri.

    The Missouri Department of Public Safety regrets any inconvenient or issues caused inadvertently by the unnecessary inclusion of certain components by MIAC in its militia report.

    Respectfully,

    John M. Britt
    Director
    Missouri Dept. of Public Safety

  38. paulie paulie March 24, 2009
  39. sunshinebatman sunshinebatman March 25, 2009

    Knapp and Root sound like they’re competing for the anti-radical vote.

  40. Thomas M. Sipos Thomas M. Sipos March 25, 2009

    You’re right. Root is seeking the radical vote, because he already has the reformer/Republican Lite vote locked up.

    Look at who supports Root. Pro-war Eric Dondero and Bruce Cohen (although they may insist that they’re really “pro-defense”).

    Pro-war “libertarians” know that Root is really still one of them. Root courts radicals, while winking at the war party.

    LibertarianGirl, I said that Root’s business was sleazy, not illegal.

    The federal bailouts are also not illegal. Does this make them all right?

    Many things that are legal are scuzzy. And many things that are illegal are noble (e.g., saving lives through medical marijuana).

    As best I know, Root ran a sleazy but legal operation.

  41. Andy Andy March 25, 2009

    “The federal bailouts are also not illegal. Does this make them all right?”

    The bailouts are not authorized by the Constitution so therefore they are illegal.

  42. libertariangirl libertariangirl March 25, 2009

    As best I know, Root ran a sleazy but legal operation.

    Las Vegas is sleazy but legal . It wasnt built on winners.

    try an stick to opposing his political beliefs and refrain from the unfounded personal attacks.

    i wont hold my breath

    I am a Radical and I support Root.

    You just dont like him because you dont like his friends , most notably Aaron Starr.

    BTW I like AAron too.

    principles before personalitys

  43. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp March 25, 2009

    libertariangirl,

    Political beliefs aren’t the only relevant factor in a candidate for office or in someone who wants to represent a political party to the public.

    Root’s approach to politics — to life in general — is summed up in his 2007 statements to Pat Jordan for a New York Times story:

    “For me, it’s all about the money …. I want high rollers who can afford to lose. … Guilt? I don’t have any guilt. I think zero about why things are. I just accept what they are and find a way to take advantage of them.”

    The MIAC thing is a great demonstration of the ethos he lays out above. Root doesn’t show up when it’s time to place the bets or make the effort — he leaves that stuff to us “high rollers who can afford to lose.” The only time you see Root is after the game when he thinks he has a shot at skimming off some of the payout.

  44. CHUCKtheFED CHUCKtheFED March 25, 2009

    “For me, it’s all about the money …. I want high rollers who can afford to lose. … Guilt? I don’t have any guilt. I think zero about why things are. I just accept what they are and find a way to take advantage of them.”

    the above could have easily been said by Lee Atwater, Karl Roves mentor….

  45. libertariangirl libertariangirl March 25, 2009

    His statement bothers me not at all , thats probably because I live in Las Vegas.

    when you run a gaming organization , and being a gambler you understand that PEOPLE WILL LOSE . that is because gambling is a GAME OF CHANCE.

    in the gambling lifestyle , if you intend to make it your job , you better be prepared to lose some of the time , and that is what Root was referring to . He wants high rollers who can afford to lose and not people who are gambling away their rent.

    why should he have any guilt over it if someone loses , ITS A GAME OF CHANCE. do you think the casinos feel guilty at all? stop being so naive

    I know noone is suggesting he intentionally made his followers lose because thats ludicrous , he would have made more money when they won.

    for gods sake people its gambling

  46. libertariangirl libertariangirl March 25, 2009

    TK__The MIAC thing is a great demonstration of the ethos he lays out above. Root doesn’t show up when it’s time to place the bets or make the effort — he leaves that stuff to us “high rollers who can afford to lose.” The only time you see Root is after the game when he thinks he has a shot at skimming off some of the payout.

    are you suggesting that unless as Libs we werent involved in the beginning then speaking about it is ‘skimming’ off your hard work?

    that makes no sense at all , we need everyone we can to speak out about every injustice we encounter

  47. robert capozzi robert capozzi March 25, 2009

    it strains credibility that a person would seek financial gain by running for office as a L. talk about long odds!

  48. CHUCKtheFED CHUCKtheFED March 25, 2009

    “I think zero about why things are. I just accept what they are and find a way to take advantage of them.”

    …okay…with the zoom on…

    Lee Atwater

  49. libertariangirl libertariangirl March 25, 2009

    LOL , ive said that all along.

  50. robert capozzi robert capozzi March 25, 2009

    while I’m not a Root supporter, I like his “it is what is/make the sad song better” approach.

    paranoid attempts at mind reading seems dysfunctional and contra-indicated. think Mel Gibson in CONSPIRACY THEORY…excellent ex. of how NOT to walk the world.

  51. libertariangirl libertariangirl March 25, 2009

    to clarify
    robert capozzi // Mar 25, 2009 at 11:27 am

    it strains credibility that a person would seek financial gain by running for office as a L. talk about long odds

    me
    LOL , ive said that all along.

  52. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp March 25, 2009

    libertariangirl,

    You write:

    “are you suggesting that unless as Libs we werent involved in the beginning then speaking about it is ’skimming’ off your hard work?”

    Not at all. For one thing, it’s not just “my” hard work. As a matter of fact, I was a relatively minor player on this one.

    Any accolades to be handed out should almost certainly go to Mike Ferguson (whom I’ve been at odds with for far longer, and on much harsher terms, than I have been with Wayne Root, by the way). Mike’s the one who, more than any other, busted his ass and stuck his neck out on the MIAC issue.

    Now the ass-busting and risk-taking phase of the thing appears to be over. Do I have a problem with libertarians who, for whatever reason, weren’t involved earlier attempting to extend and build on the positive outcome? Absolutely not.

    That’s not what Root is doing, though. Root’s just trying to hog the spotlight — a spotlight that others busted ass and risked neck to get turned on — for himself. And he’s doing so in a way that tears down, rather than extends or builds on, the positive result. He’s reverting to the Alex Jones template and he’s taking it to the Michael Savage show. Neither of those things will benefit the LP or the libertarian movement in the least; at most, if they don’t blow up in his face, they’ll benefit him at the LP’s expense.

  53. libertariangirl libertariangirl March 25, 2009

    tom , all accolades to those who busted ass on this .seriously , great job guys!

    but when you say

    That’s not what Root is doing, though. Root’s just trying to hog the spotlight — a spotlight that others busted ass and risked neck to get turned on

    it sounds very childish to me saying ‘he stole my idea’.
    who cares who turned the spotlight on , let us all co-opt it and shine it everywhere we can.
    if he can get the story heard places others cant , then good . if you and others and me and whoever can get it heard a myriad of other places then good.

    dont cut off your nose to spite your face..

  54. Jim Davidson Jim Davidson March 25, 2009

    It isn’t an apology, it is crap. It expresses regret, while insisting on the necessity of the report’s content.

    The term militia, as it is used in the Second Amendment, refers to “The whole body of physically fit civilians eligible by law for military service.” It is the entire body politic, especially those who keep and bear arms, so on the order of 200 million persons.

    Yes, some people who train with militia groups are racist. Most that I’ve met in such contexts were not, and made no bones about disliking, vehemently, racism, including anti-Semitism. To characterise all militia members as violent, as the MIAC report repeatedly does, is to characterise the entire body politic as violent.

    The statistics I’ve seen suggest that only about 1.8% of the population ever engages in any violent criminal behavior. The MIAC report clearly went too far, and all the milquetoasts who have objected to those of us who promptly objected to the MIAC report have done us a disservice by making the MIAC and Missouri DPS think they could get away with this hostile encroachment on our freedom of expression.

  55. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp March 25, 2009

    libertariangirl,

    Root has already made it quite clear that he doesn’t want to get “the story” heard. He’s already modified it back to the hype-filled, error-ridden Alex Jones version. That doesn’t get the truth out, it just gets Wayne Allyn Root noticed at the expense of the truth.

    The logical outcome of your approach is that the LP should nominate a Bernie Madoff/Charles Manson ticket in 2012. After all, that would get us far more publicity than nominating Root would.

  56. libertariangirl libertariangirl March 25, 2009

    The logical outcome of your approach is that the LP should nominate a Bernie Madoff/Charles Manson ticket in 2012.

    ROFL , come on now , that doesnt logically follow from anything I said

  57. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp March 25, 2009

    libertariangirl,

    You wrote:

    “who cares who turned the spotlight on , let us all co-opt it and shine it everywhere we can. if he can get the story heard places others cant , then good .”

    Are you suggesting that Bernie Madoff and Charles Manson wouldn’t get more attention if they wanted to talk about the story?

    You’ve already made it clear that you don’t care whether the version of the story that’s told is true or not, just whether or not it gets attention.

    We could have Bernie offer to return huge profits on a book he’s planning to write about it, and Chuck could go all “inner man, let’s go murder some pigs,” while wearing LP t-shirts, and all kinds of people would notice us.

  58. libertariangirl libertariangirl March 25, 2009

    Are you suggesting that Bernie Madoff and Charles Manson wouldn’t get more attention if they wanted to talk about the story?

    nice try , not biting
    your the only one talking about bernie and charlie.
    .

  59. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp March 25, 2009

    libertariangirl,

    Well, make up your damn mind.

    Is it important for our spokespersons — whether officially- or self-designated — to be credible, or isn’t it?

    Is it important for our spokespersons — whether officially- or self-designated — to tell the truth, or isn’t it?

    Should our spokespersons — whether officially- or self-designated — be promoting our movement objectives, or should they just be promoting themselves?

  60. Gene Trosper Gene Trosper March 25, 2009

    Charlie don’t run.

  61. libertariangirl libertariangirl March 25, 2009

    your comparing Waynes credibility running to Charles Manson a serial killer and Bernie Madoff a convicted super-thief is the sort of inflammatory rhetoric Id expect from Jim Davidson but not you.

  62. Thomas M. Sipos Thomas M. Sipos March 25, 2009

    it strains credibility that a person would seek financial gain by running for office as a L. talk about long odds!

    Not at all. It depends on their starting point.

    It would be ridiculous for Rush Limbaugh to cash in by running on the LP.

    But all Root had was a gambling business, and that closed. He was known in Vegas, and in the gambling scene, and nowhere else.

    If Root wants to remake himself as a paid political pundit/broadcaster, he needs political creds. Why would anyone listen to what a gambler says about politics?

    By running on the LP, he’s building a political resume that he can use to segue himself into a political broadcaster job. Suddenly, he’s no longer “gambler Root” but former LP candidate Root.

    BTW, at the December California LP Executive Committee meeting, Root asked to be made an official spokesperson for the LPC.

    Is he still ignoring the Nevada LP? Why? Is it because the LPC has a larger delegation, and larger spotlight, and because Hollywood is located in the LPC’s state, and thus the LPC is more useful to Root’s prospective media career than the Nevada LP?

    Root is a user. He’s using the LP for his own personal career. Rush wouldn’t, because the LP is small potatoes for Rush, but Root’s small potatoes too, so he has use for the LP.

  63. sunshinebatman sunshinebatman March 25, 2009

    Sipos — anyone too gullible to grok what you say here has no business in real-world politics.

    Sadly, that includes much of the LP.

  64. sunshinebatman sunshinebatman March 25, 2009

    Back to the original post; I find it interesting that when the LP is attacked by the Gestapo for extremism… the two perpetual LP candidates decide to follow the Gestapo’s lead by themselves leveling accusations of extremism at others (Alex Jones, militia).

  65. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp March 25, 2009

    sunshinebatman,

    I’m not sure which to “perpetual LP candidates” you’re referring to, but if I’m one of them, I’d like to know where you think I leveled an accusation of “extremism” at anyone. I don’t consider “extremism” to be a bad thing per se.

    The allegation I leveled at Alex Jones was that he lied about the content of the MIAC report in order to make the story more sensational. That allegation was true when I made it and it remains true.

    I don’t think I said anything about the militia movement that could plausibly be labeled an “accusation” of anything, either.

    I support the idea of citizen militias. In my experience circa the mid-1990s, those who attempted to self-organize as militia units had a problem with infiltration by racists and anti-semites, some of whom probably had criminal/terrorist inclinations. That was a problem with which they were afflicted, not an intentional evil of which I accuse them.

  66. libertariangirl libertariangirl March 26, 2009

    Sipos — anyone too gullible to grok what you say here has no business in real-world politics.

    were all water brothers here …
    just thought id throw in my own Heinlein reference since you did.

    stranger in a strange land is one of my favorites

  67. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi March 26, 2009

    TS: By running on the LP, he’s building a political resume that he can use to segue himself into a political broadcaster job. Suddenly, he’s no longer “gambler Root” but former LP candidate Root.

    ME: Are you a mind reader? If so, I have a list of other people I’d like you to read their minds, too.

  68. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi March 26, 2009

    Further thought: Let’s say Sipos CAN read Root’s mind. Would that be such a bad thing? Strikes me that would represent mutual alignment. If Root wants to be “famous,” and in the process he promotes the LP, tell me how that’s a bad thing.

    I’m not a Root supporter, though I might be. Some of where he’s coming from I’m not enthralled with. I am of course grateful to him that he’s putting himself out there as he does. I’d suggest he tone his delivery down a bit, as he sometimes gets hysterical sounding, e.g., the infamous Reason interview.

    My ideal candidate has the substance, credentials and credibility of Barr; the enthusiasm and drive of Root; and is a TAAAList. Oh, well, we can’t have it all! Making do seems to be our trip through this “insubstantial pageant.”

  69. libertariangirl libertariangirl March 26, 2009

    TS_Is he still ignoring the Nevada LP? Why?

    No he isnt , thanks for asking .
    He has done everything we have asked of him and Wayne Root and the Nevada LP ( Clark County LP too ) are way past the shaky footing we got started on .
    We both look forward to working together.

    Having said that , if i was running for pres id probably concentrate on Cali too , close to home , lots of delegates . it makes sense from a candidates standpoint.

  70. NOW IS NOT THE TIME NOW IS NOT THE TIME May 13, 2009

    THIS IS NOT THE TIME TO BE INSULTING PEOPLE WITHIN A 3RD PARTY WHO IS RUNNING ESPECIALLY WHEN WE REALLY NEED A 3RD PARTY. 3RD PARTY IS GOING TO HAVE TO WORK HARDER AND INNER FIGHTING AND INSULTS IS NOT BY FAR GOING TO HELP. BY DOING THIS IS ONLY GOING TO BRING DOWN THE 3RD PARTY AND WE ARE NOT EVEN IN THE DOOR.

  71. libertariangirl libertariangirl May 13, 2009

    you just had to drag up this old thread huh? lOL

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.