Wayne Root – Top Ten Conservatives in Nevada

Thursday, December 31, 2009, 6:00 PM
Nevada News and Views
by Chuck Muth
 
http://nevadanewsandviews.com/2009/12/31/the-2009- top-10-conservatives-in-nevada/
 
“#9 – Wayne Allyn Root
I know, W.A.R. isn’t technically a conservative. He’s a libertarian and a Libertarian. Which makes him a Goldwater-type conservative. Indeed, Root wrote a limited-government book this year aptly titled, “Conscience of a Libertarian.” And as Ronald Reagan once said, “the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism.”
 
Anyway, this articulate and principled Las Vegan was the Libertarian Party’s vice presidential nominee in 2008, now has his own radio show, is a regular featured guest on numerous television talking heads shows, pens regular conservative/ libertarian columns, is a home-schooling dad and might well be a U.S. Senate candidate in Nevada next year or possibly the next National Chairman of the Libertarian Party.” 

49 thoughts on “Wayne Root – Top Ten Conservatives in Nevada

  1. YES HE SHOULD

    For everything Wayne has done, we stand a better chance with him in office for his good background and record. He has proven himself. So if ever we stand a chance he is it.

  2. paulie

    Welcome on board, Bruce.

    He’s a libertarian and a Libertarian. Which makes him a Goldwater-type conservative.

    Those are two different things.

  3. paulie

    And as Ronald Reagan once said, ?the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism.?

    Yeah, he said that, but he didn’t mean it and it isn’t true. The heart of conservatism is authoritarian – blind obedience to tradition and authority, based on faith and inertia. To the limited extent that the American tradition is one one of rebellion and classical liberalism, American conservatism has a libertarian streak, but it also has a strong streak of red state fascism. Root should stop confusing himself and/or others that libertarianism is conservatism or vice versa.

    Reagan is a case in point.

    https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/12/bill-redpath-don%E2%80%99t-waste-your-vote-vote-democratic/

    “I just read the recently published Recarving Rushmore, written by Ivan Eland of the small-l libertarian Independent Institute, in which he ranks forty presidents (too early in Obama?s presidency/Cleveland served twice/Garfield and William Henry Harrison both served less than a year) on a ?PP&L (Peace, Prosperity & Liberty) scale.?

    “Dr. Eland?s goal is to judge presidents on the extent to which their actual policy decisions contributed to Peace, Prosperity & Liberty for the United States.”

    “But, what really struck me, as I reviewed Dr. Eland?s presidential rankings, was how low recent Republican presidents were on his PP&L scale. I know some people will dispute this, but Eland ranks Ronald Reagan as #34 (landing him in Eland?s ?Bad President? category), and he has sensible reasons. Eland claims that the Iran/Contra scandal was worse than Watergate, Reagan did not reduce big government, started ?surreptitiously? raising taxes soon after his 1981 tax cuts were enacted, and helped keep Social Security limping along in 1983 (with tax increases, of course) when he could have worked to privatize it. Dr. Eland also thinks Reagan?s role in ending the Cold War was overblown, and that the Soviet Union failed largely on its own. Other low recent Republican president rankings (W. at #36, H. W. at #33 and Nixon at #30) are no surprise.

    What is somewhat surprising is that Dr. Eland ranks Jimmy Carter as ?The Best Modern President? at #8 (restrained foreign policy/evenhanded Middle East policy/deregulated industries/appointed Paul Volcker to the Fed, who then slayed inflation). Eland even ranked Bill Clinton as the 11th best president on his PP&L scale, so he thinks that over the last forty years, Democratic presidents have actually been more libertarian than Republican presidents.

    According to Dr. Eland, to find a Republican president who ranks higher in his PP&L rankings than Jimmy Carter, one must go all the way back to Warren Harding. ”

    In my comments on that post:

    Reagan: Great speaker, terrible president.

    I generally agree with Eland?s rankings, and am very glad that Redpath is using LP News and LP.org to help set the record straight.

    I would rank the presidents, especially the recent ones, about where he does.

    Of three broad policy areas (in order of importance: peace, civil liberties and economic issues), Reagan was very good compared to most mainstream major party politicians ON PAPER ONLY on economic issues, although not good at all in practice (budgets grew drastically, left lots of debt, raised taxes on poor and blue collar folks, allowed a massive S&L ripoff).

    Om peace and civil liberties, he never even pretended to be libertarian – quite the opposite.

    Eland is also correct about Reagan getting credit he does not deserve on the cold war.

    See also the Freedom Democrats scorecard of the US House:

    http://freedomdemocrats.org/node/812

    Today, less than eighty days before Election Day, I am pleased to release the 2006 Freedom Democrats House Scorecard. This scorecard builds on the findings of our 2005 Scorecard, but makes significant changes in order to more accurately judge the House of Representatives. Before discussing the results, I would like to present the findings as displayed on the quintessential Nolan Chart.

    The two red dots in the libertarian quadrant are Ron Paul of Texas and Jeff Flake of Arizona. Democrat Melissa Bean of Illinois is just along the edge of the libertarian quadrant. Other notable members are Republicans Walter Jones of North Carolina and John Duncan of Tennessee, occupying the corner where Centrists, Libertarians, and Conservatives meet, and Democrat Jim Cooper of Tennessee, who is just south of the line between Centrists and Libertarians. The green dot is Independent Bernie Sanders of Vermont. The dark blue square is the average for the Democratic Party and the dark red square is the average for the Republican Party.
    A detailed discussion of the social and economic aspects of the scorecards, including votes, can be found elsewhere on the site. The focus here will be on the scorecard overall. In brief, key changes were made to the economic scorecard to find better votes on spending restraint. This explains the significant drop in economic scores for the Democratic Party.

    The graphic helps to illustrate that the Republican Party has largely become an authoritarian party, despite the fact that the two libertarian members still affiliate with the GOP. Only a small wing of the party remains true to conservative principles of fiscal restraint and economic freedom. In contrast, the Democratic Party is largely a liberal party with a more populist wing that includes many members who are not consistent in supporting civil liberties and social rights.
    Polling information from the Pew reveals that this parallels the situation among voters. Democratic activists tend to be united on economic issues but divided by social issues. The reverse is true of Republicans; the Pew notes the recent rise of so-called “big government conservatives.” With both parties attempting to appeal to “populists” or “authoritarians,” it is significant that the Republican Party was able to win both “populists” and “libertarians” by the same 60-40 margin in the 2004 election. It is the belief of Freedom Democrats that the Democratic Party would have greater success if it focused its attentions to libertarian voters.

    This scorecard is both good news and bad news for libertarian Democrats. The good news is that the Democratic Party as a whole is “more” libertarian than the Republican Party. There is a significant gap between the two parties on issues of personal liberty. The new scorecard shows both parties failing on economic issues, but with the Republicans slightly ahead. This is the bad news for libertarian Democrats, that much needs to be done to encourage greater fiscal responsibility within the party. The focus of libertarians within the Democratic Party should be on promoting fiscally responsible candidates.
    The two high scoring Democrats may show the way. Melissa Bean of Illinois is still in her first term; she defeated long time incumbent Phil Crane in 2004. Although more to the right on social issues than ideal, she has shown herself to be a staunch fiscal conservative (according to the old, traditional definition of the phrase). She has received a rare endorsement from the Chamber of Commerce, an organization that typically supports Republicans, in her reelection bid.
    Jim Cooper of Tennessee is also a deficit hawk and an opponent of wasteful spending. He has received media attention recently for pushing to publish the “Financial Report of the United States.” This report, which more accurately tracks the budget and future financial obligations like Social Security than traditional budget methods, will hopefully help inform voters about the reality of our country’s coming fiscal crisis.

    A file showing the social, economic, and average scores for each member of the House can be found here. A detailed discussion of the votes can be found on the pages for the social scorecard and the economic scorecard.

    And as Tom Blanton pointed out: (Reagan) eliminat[ed] tax deductions for the middle class, (left us with) large deficits, escalat[ed] the drug war, covert military ops in other nations, and increas[ed] FICA taxes.

    I would also add the massive S&L scandal.

    The historical roots of libertarianism are on the left.

    As Long concludes that piece, quoting Spangler:

    Genuine libertarianism is very much left wing. It’s revolutionary. The long and tragic alliance of libertarians with the right against the spectre of state socialism is coming to a close, as it served no purpose after the fall of the Soviet Union and so-called “conservatives” have subsequently taken to letting their true big-government-on-steroids colors fly?. [I]n the period since the demise of the Soviet Union, both the radicals and moderates among the left have been subconsciously seeking a new radical creed to orient themselves upon to replace Marxism?. I believe that radical libertarians ? will be most effective when they overcome any lingering right wing cultural contamination of their libertarian views and embrace their inherent radicalism ? which is most at home on the left. For as the radicals go, so do the moderates grudgingly follow in small steps?. It’s time for libertarians to stop fighting the left and take up the challenge of leading the left.

  4. paulie

    now has his own radio show, is a regular featured guest on numerous television talking heads shows, pens regular conservative/ libertarian columns, is a home-schooling dad and might well be a U.S. Senate candidate in Nevada next year

    I have to give Wayne a lot of credit for all that.

    We need more libertarians doing that kind of stuff.

    It’s only the “conservative/libertarian” thing I have a problem with.

  5. paulie

    or possibly the next National Chairman of the Libertarian Party.

    Honestly – I have a hard time seeing Wayne sit still through all those long, boring meetings and deal with all the administrative minutia of being party chair. He strikes me as being the kind of guy who is much better as a spokesman than as a committee member. It would IMO distract him from his media schedule and bog him down in Robert’s rules of order, points of information, squabbling among LNC members, etc.

    Also, as far as I know he is still running for president. I would prefer a chair who is at least publicly neutral between the pre-nomination candidates and does not make it appear that we have made our nomination before the delegates get to vote on it.

    If you want an official LP presidential nominee earlier in the campaign season, move the convention earlier.

  6. LibertarianGirl

    Wayne is the best guy on Muth’s list . Chuck is a good ally to have , he endorsed our candidate for Congress , Joe Silvestri , with a GOP candidate in the race.Silvestri won us ballot access , and I think Muths endorsement helped. He was also our guest speaker for our candidate training meeting back in Sept. He is a powerful political operative in NV .

  7. Solomon Drek

    I believe Wayne Root named his dog, or even one of his kids, “Reagan”.

    Root is just another Reagan wannabee and he’s using the LP as a marketing tool to fulfill his ego and promote his own personal agenda

  8. libertarianblue

    Does Root even try to at least promote the party? I do like him but if this is supposedly our time he needs to promote the party as well. From my view point it’s becoming 2000 again and all small government types are just flocking to the GOP for help.

  9. ARE YOU KIDDING ME

    Because of Wayne Root, he has been promoting the party by being a Libertarian. DUH. He has opened a lot of doors and making more awarness for the Libertarian party.

  10. Ayn R. Key

    So Bruce is going around promoting Wayne as this great thing because he’s one of the top ten CONSERVATIVES in Nevada.

    It’s horribly ironic. It’s even more ironic if Bruce isn’t aware of the irony.

  11. Ralph Swanson

    As chairing meetings mentor of the LP, Dr. Lark was pretty good I hear, very polite, very inclusive. But I’ll nominate MG, father of so many things in our party.

    Given his love of lengthy disquisitions, party shuttle diplomacy, and his let-a-1000-flowers-bloom approach as LPF Secretary, when I moved to Pinellas I expected a real encounter group or philosophy club. (As an MBA I thought I’d show him a trick or two.) And they have a club. But not in the LP. There I was amazed at his brutally short yet productive meetings as affiliate chair.

    His secret is as part of the LIO project they adopted a long term plan (20 years) and set platform, so meetings are about whether we’re on plan (we always are) and not what’s the plan, any opportunities in office, followed by his effusive congratulations of our people in office, period. These meetings take 1 minute. Everything else is left to training, phone or informal communication meetings, usually at some board meeting where we can testify and influence policy. It’s very motivating, and separates the worker bees from the rest.

    I forgot that for years he was a hotshot consultant whose job was to fire Fortune 500 corporate boards, accounting departments, and manufacturing heads without a clue and get things profitable. Maybe a lot like Clooney in that movie I guess. They called him MG the Merciless.

    Then again. If you like the Crafty Ol’ Sou’n Gemmun approach, I’ll volunteer. I even look like Col. Sanders. As an old man it may improve the LNC to have a Chair who snores openly at the meetings and wakes up yelling, “Get to work!”

  12. Tom Blanton

    Karl Hess, a bona fide libertarian and confidant of Barry Goldwater, wrote an article entitled “The Death Of Politics” which was published in the March 1969 issue of Playboy Magazine. He wrote:

    “Believe it or not, there were strong possibilities of such a development in the 1964 campaign of Barry Goldwater. Underneath the scary headlines, Goldwater hammered away at such purely political structures as the draft, general taxation, censorship, nationalism, legislated conformity, political establishment of social norms, and war as an instrument of international policy.

    “It is true that, in a common political paradox, Goldwater (a major general in the Air Force Reserve) has spoken of reducing state power while at the same time advocating the increase of state power to fight the Cold War. He is not a pacifist. He believes that war remains an acceptable state action. He does not see the Cold War as involving US imperialism. He sees it as a result only of Soviet imperialism. Time after time, however, he has said that economic pressure, diplomatic negotiation, and the persuasions of propaganda (or “cultural warfare”) are absolutely preferable to violence. He has also said that antagonistic ideologies can “never be beaten by bullets, but only by better ideas.”

    “A defense of Goldwater cannot be carried too far, however. His domestic libertarian tendencies simply do not carry over into his view of foreign policy. ”

    Reagan, on the other hand, talked like a libertarian on occasion, but certainly didn’t rule as one. While giving tax cuts to the wealthy, he eliminated interest deductions (except mortgage interest) and increased FICA taxes for the middle class. Under Reagan, the national debt grew, the drug war expanded, he engaged in overt and covert interventions, and government grew.

    Endless prattle about tax cuts and gun rights doesn’t make one a libertarian. Adding God and gambling to the list is no improvement. If the goal is to move society toward libertarianism, Root doesn’t fit the bill. If the goal is to move the LP toward conservatism, Root is the ticket.

    If this is the route the LP wants to take, then why not recruit a real powerhouse like Glenn Beck? This is a point I’ve tried to make over and over here.

  13. Brad

    then the conservatives should join the Constitution Party or put the Conservative Party on all the state ballots.

    Libertarianism and conservativism are two different things.

  14. Bruce Cohen

    Folks, read the article.
    The Author clearly states Wayne is not a Conservative, and that’s the point.

    As well, for those of you that pretend
    Wayne is trying to put G-d back into
    politics, well that’s untrue too, and
    you need to read more of his book
    COaL than just the subtitle.

  15. paulie

    Ralph @ 11

    MG’s last term (I don’t know if/when he was on the committee before) he did not show up to any meetings. He never attended other state conventions in his region, as far as I know. To my knowledge, he did not contact the state parties.

    I don’t know if it was health related or what, but I don’t see him as LNC chair.

    haven’t heard of Dr. Lark being interested in running again.

  16. paulie

    Thanks!

    But I’m not running for anything.

    I do want to kick it with you if I end up taking the Vegas job. If you got any hookups at that hotel over by you that can get us a real good weekly rate let me know 🙂

  17. Rev. James W. Clifton

    Solomon Drek is correct. And, as far as Root being “principled” as Muth stated, I saw him at the LP convention trying to make deals with other candidates to be the VP. He even tried to strike a deal with Mike Gravel, who is about as libertarian as George McGovern.

    Yes, I know politicians strike deals at conventions but the LP says it’s the “Party of Principle” which implies it’s unlike the Dems and the GOP, at least to me.

  18. Rev. James W. Clifton

    “Are you assuming the LP would turn away Glenn Beck if he was interested?”

    Oh, no, not that nut!

    Neal Boortz is a much better choice and may actually be the LP’s best candidate. The only problem with Boortz is that he is too free with sexual jargon.

  19. libertariangirl

    the hotel by me is the santa fe , and its way too expensive not really a weekly thing.

    But there are a ton of weekly motel/hotels most of which are downtown ( drugs hookers gambling police etc. all pretty cheap like $120 a week or slightly more .
    But not all of them are. Budget suites is a 5 min bus ride or drive from me .
    http://www.budgetsuites.com/

  20. paulie

    Yeah, I’ve been to those downtown motels. No thz 🙂

    The casinos do have good deals but only if you know people or get some kind of group or negotiated discount. I don’t really have the hookups, you gotta know people.

    Budget suites might work, that’s the kind of place we stayed it last time I worked in Vegas. I can’t remember what it was called but it was out on Boulder Highway.

  21. paulie

    I have to agree with Brad at 15. Libertarians are more socially liberal than conservatives, but the two can only be comparable fiscal-wise

    Most libertarians tend to disagree with most conservatives on foreign policy/military spending too.

    So, out of three broad areas – peace, civil liberties/social issues, and economics – we tend to agree with liberals/leftists more than with conservatives.

    I also think the issues where we agree with liberals are the more important ones.

    I look at it this way: of the bad things someone can do to you, killing you is the worst. Taking away your freedom is second worst, robbing you of your possessions is least bad of the three.

    When we apply those to government, war is the worst. Social repression/destruction of civil liberties is second worst. Economic repression is least bad of the three.

  22. paulie

    So ideally the candidate I want would get just as much media as Root, but would emphasize our peace and civil liberties positions and would explain economic liberty issues in bottom-up, populist terms, not in terms of self-interest for the haves.

  23. paulie

    Neal Boortz is a much better choice and may actually be the LP’s best candidate. The only problem with Boortz is that he is too free with sexual jargon.

    Hell no. Not only is he a warmonger, he is on record saying we need more FBI spying on the antiwar movement, which includes many of us libertarians. He started out as a speechwriter for a famous segregationist and still is big on the racial and other prejudice innuendo.

  24. Solomon Drek

    “Are you assuming the LP would turn away Glenn Beck if he was interested?”

    The Barr/Root campaign in 2008, and the “Joe Kennedy” campaign in Massachusetts, proves the LP has gone from being “The Party of Principle” to “The Party of Prostituting Itself to Whoever Can Get Publicity”.

    These guys would nominate neo-nazis and klansmen as long as they say they are for “limited government” and can generate some cheap headlines.

  25. paulie

    Um, Drek, what you said is drek.

    Why is Joe Kennedy in quotes? He has just as much right to the name as any relative of Ted’s. And he is not just “someone who can get publicity” but a libertarian and Libertarian.

  26. Tom Blanton

    “Are you assuming the LP would turn away Glenn Beck if he was interested?”

    In the dystopian “reality show” of American politics, all assumptions are off the table.

  27. Don Lake .......... More Libs Lacking a Lib Perspective

    History’s First Formal Libertarian ????????

    “6th century B.C. : Who says that liberalism is just another word for euro-centrism?

    There are good reason to believe, that the very first liberal thinker of all times was a Chinese, the Taoist philosopher Lao Tsu. His work „Tao Te Ching“ is one of the greatest classics of Chinese literature. In this book Lao Tsu develops a cosmology in which the harmony of two opposites („ying“ and „yang“) is postulated.

    Today this cosmology seems to attract rather the sectarian esoteric kind of people, and not liberals of the more rationalistic kind.

    Therefore it is often overlooked that this pluralistic cosmology leads to an equally pluralistic political philosophy with strong liberal undertones. Lao Tsu was extremely sceptical about governmental power and those who exercised it.

    Not brutal power, but freedom does secure peace, he says: “The people are difficult to keep in order, because of those above them interfere.” Or: “I dig the well for water; I plow the field for food: What use do I have for the emperor’s power!”

    What Adam Smith and others only found out more two millennia later, Lao Tsu already knew, viz. that interventionism stifles the economy: “The more prohibitions there are, the poorer the people will be.”

    And, of course, he knew that high taxes produce misery and endanger prosperity: “The people starve because those above them eat to much tax-grain. That is the only reason why they starve.” All this is as true as it was more than 2500 years ago.”

  28. paulie

    Interventionism is bad for the economy, bad for morality and bad for world peace. We should seek non-interventionist government policy across the board and at all levels of government.

  29. paulie

    Linn and Ari Armstrong write in the Grand Junctio Free Press:

    Conservatives are a strange bunch. They support free trade, except when they want to outlaw or restrict select medicinal plants or forcibly stop employers from hiring willing workers of their choice.

    Conservatives support freedom of conscience, except when they want to censor what they declare to be obscene works, punish the mishandling of the flag, or force people to fund religious programs with which they disagree.

    Conservatives advocate strong national defense, except when they support a war the president declares unwinnable, along with years of “nation building” at the expense of American lives.

    Conservatives endorse federalism, except when they want the national government to tell states how to handle marriage.

    Conservatives uphold independence, except when they call on politicians to imprison women for getting an abortion.

    Conservatives tout the dignity of the individual, unless that individual happens to be gay or a brown-skinned laborer from Mexico.

  30. Ralph Swanson

    Paulie @16 Thanks.

    My thought was people with contrasting styles such as Lark vs MG would be good mentors. I said nothing about either being LNC Chairs. Right now USLP often seems to send talent like past Chairs and movement creators to Siberia. But now I see you have other things on your mind.

    Re MG, sorry, you sound so misleading/off-base to me… What do I make of allegations you then say you don’t “know” are true? Who told you all this? Specifics, facts and sources if you can.

    Re Lark, he stated he would do certain things in one term and one term only, did them, said he wouldn’t run again. Maybe we could use a few people like that. He’s very respectful of women when it seems some on LNC apparently aren’t. So why the claim he’s not running when no one says he is? Not sure I get this either.

    As to the conclusion of my post: How can I, snoring in a Col. Sanders suit do worse then some of the shenanigans e.g. alleged at IPR? At least I’m willing to make snoring a promise.

    I also think that given the very modest things LNC is actually supposed to or in practice can do, we can ask are they really doing a bad job overall? Despite some bad apples or systems?

  31. Don Lake .......... More Liars with Dems and GOP

    JUST ANOTHER REASON FOR DOING BETTER THAN THE DEMS AND GOP!

    BALTIMORE – Mayor Sheila Dixon fought back tears as she announced her resignation and thanked her staff for its loyalty and hard work. She acknowledged that she made poor choices and that she “disappointed” herself and her constituents.

    What she didn’t do was apologize or explain the actions that led to her downfall — her guilty plea on a perjury charge and her earlier conviction on a misdemeanor embezzlement charge.

    Dixon’s resignation Wednesday ended a three-year tenure that began with promise but unraveled amid embarrassing allegations that she stole from the poor.

    Her attorney characterized the plea deal as favorable — she will receive probation before judgment at her sentencing Feb. 4, the same day her resignation takes effect.

    After she satisfies the terms of her probation — including a $45,000 charitable contribution and 500 hours of community service — the convictions will be wiped off her record and she’ll be free to run for public office again. The probation will last a minimum of two years, meaning she will be barred from running in the next citywide election in 2011.

    Dixon, a 56-year-old Democrat, also gets to keep her city pension, which she would have had to forfeit with a conviction on her record.

  32. paulie

    Re MG, sorry, you sound so misleading/off-base to me… What do I make of allegations you then say you don’t “know” are true? Who told you all this? Specifics, facts and sources if you can.

    Sorry, not the sort of thing I memorize.

    I do know we never heard from MG in Alabama, and I believe the LNC meeting minutes point out that he never attended.

    If you have any evidence that he went to LNC meetings, attended state conventions and kept in touch with state chairs and activists in other states in the region, please let me know.

    No, I don’t have any agenda here.

  33. Ralph Swanson

    Paulie, you’ve lost me.These are pretty wild accusations years after the fact. They’re worse in that you don’t make them specific. They don’t make you look good.Your waffly response makes it look much worse. Your demand that I do your work makes it much, much worse.

    C’mon, what is this, Russia, you accuse just and guilty until proven innocent? People tell you stuff that you repeat and you don’t remember them because you don’t memorize? And you don’t verify?

    So I assume you’re saying you’re backing your assertions with your personal reputation, and if it’s false, you lie. So better back them up, not palm it off on me or qualifying it with “as far as I know” or “I believe”. I believe Paulie beats little girls, and as far as I know there’s no evidence to the contrary, please send me evidence he doesn’t. Now why would I post something like that unless I had an agenda? See how it looks?

    Your claim is he never attended LNC meetings from 2004-2006 , and never attended any convention or communicated with state leaders, and this is relevant because whatever or worse than whoever. And no one heard from him in Alabama. Correct? Can any of these nobodies come forward? Back it up. Be specific. Or modify your claim. Or recognize you’re posting trash.

    Paulie, I don’t want to be harsh. I’m just sick of these under-the-radar innuendo snark attacks and smear campaigns on David Nolan, MG, Rothbard, myself, the LP record, and how they lead to attacks on many other unsung but hard-working LP activists. These posts usually come from the right-wing moles. So I’m surprised to read anything like them from you. Your site suggests you’re a responsible activist.

    I repeat: I suggest that you give and verify specifics, facts, sources. Or agree you’re making it up and relying on innuendo so you can shift your claim when people question it, agenda or no.

    At this point I think I’m putting more work into this then you. Put up or shut up. OK?

    I believe.

  34. paulie

    Ralph, it’s not “my work” to do. During the time that MG was on the LNC, we never knew we had an LNC rep in any functional way in Alabama.

    If you doubt what I say, please produce people who were contacted by MG in his official capacity while he was region rep from the committees of other state parties in the region.

    Please produce any evidence that he attended any state convention other than Florida in his region during that time.

    The LNC meeting minutes are still online, and if you show me that he was at the meetings (other than at the national convention), I’ll stand corrected.

    Until and unless you do, I’ll go by what I remember myself and what multiple other people have told me, regardless of whether I remember who they are or not.

    So, as much time as you have spent on this, it should be easy for you to produce evidence that MG attended LNC meetings and/or state conventions in other states in the region – if it actually happened.

    Since you haven’t, no amount of pointing the finger and claiming it is up to me to prove a negative will help your case.

    I stand by what I wrote, unless and until you want to present evidence to the contrary.

  35. paulie

    So I assume you’re saying you’re backing your assertions with your personal reputation, and if it’s false, you lie.

    Nope, I haven’t made any statements of fact.

    If you or anyone can present me with concrete evidence that MG attended LNC meetings, state conventions of other states in his region, or was in regular official communications with state chairs and activists of other states in his region, I’ll correct my statements.

    So far I have not seen any evidence to refute what I remember or what I have heard.

    If he did those things, it should be easy enough to prove. The LNC minutes are online, for example. They have roll calls of votes and records of attendance.

    You seem to have a strong desire to prove that I have been misinformed; have at it, show me some facts.

    I believe Paulie beats little girls, and as far as I know there’s no evidence to the contrary, please send me evidence he doesn’t.

    Nice try, but that’s a positive statement that I did and/or do something. Disproving that would require proving a negative.

    Whereas you want me to prove a negative, while I’m asking you to provide evidence of actions – something which can easily be proven if true.

  36. Ralph Swanson

    Oh, boy.

    I’m asking you to prove a negative? You created the negative, that is the unjustified, assertion in the first place. Suddenly I’m wrong for pointing it out? Nice try. I’m not contesting a darn thing until you pin yourself down. That you won’t is the problem.

    On that basis alone, I doubt what you say. You won’t specify your ” …what I remember myself ” making it easy to shift allegations around, and don’t produce or specify the now growing “… multiple other people” ( except they were apparently everybody) you can’t remember or specify what they “…have told me, regardless of whether I remember who they are or not.” That’s not “misinformed” is it? You won’t even share where you were in all this, so that there is any credibility to your claims.

    So, yeah, this really sounds more and more like your personal snark and smear campaign to me unless its simple ego. Is IPR behind you on this? You should be able to back it up like any normal article. Maybe you’d have a hell of a story. Why don’t you? Maybe the real story is what’s behind the rumor you’re supposedly quoting.

    And you’re still refusing to specify your statements so they’re easy to shift around. Now it’s gone from no conventions to just any not in Florida. What next, he attended conventions, just not all of them? And this matters why?

    Calling on disproving a negative is exactly what you’re doing, along with new vague accusations (“We” never knew? Who’s that? Functional? What’s that? And when?). It’s still up to you to prove and specify your statements. Why should I check or contest a damn thing since you’ve left the door open to just shift around as you just did?

    Oh wait. I’m sorry. You say they’re not “any statements of facts” now? Well. So why are you posting this trash to begin with?

    You win Paulie. They’re not facts. You have no story. That’s the story.

    Or maybe you do. If so, let’s see it.

    I believe.

  37. paulie

    You’re right, I have no story.

    No story about MG being at any LNC meetings after the convention.

    No story about MG visiting any other state conventions or meetings in his region while he was the regional representative.

    No story about MG officially communicating with state chairs and activists in other states in his region while he was the representative.

    If you have such a story, please post some verifiable facts from LNC minutes – they say who all was at each meeting – or testimony from non-Florida activists in the region, or convention minutes from any state in teh region besides Florida, news reports, state newsletter reports – something, anything.

    You seem to have a big interest in keeping this one alive. so provide some facts.

    I’m not asking you to prove a negative. Claims of positive actions should be easy to prove; if, for instance, you want to claim that I have not done something I was elected to do, I can easily provide evidence that I did.

    If such evidence exists, during the time you have spent repeatedly trying to assert that it is my responsibility to prove a negative (that it does not exist), you could have simply produced some such evidence.

    So, if you have such a story, please post it here.

    Until then, I have no story that MG did any of those things.

  38. paulie

    Now it’s gone from no conventions to just any not in Florida.

    I don’t consider attending your own state convention to be regional rep work.


    What next, he attended conventions, just not all of them?

    Name any outside of Florida in any year while he was on the LNC which he attended.


    And this matters why?

    Because it is one of the things LNC region reps do to represent their region, along with staying in touch with state chairs and activists and attending LNC meetings.

  39. Ralph Swanson

    So again, your story is you have none except your attacks, plus NOW your arbitrary and shifting standards? Now any evidence counts except anything from Florida? What’s going on?

    Facts, sources, specifics. If IPR has a story, tell it.

    While you’re at it, do the same on all Region Reps. Things LNC Region Reps do? Where does it say that? What planet are you on?

  40. Ralph Swanson

    Hmm. And what’s “keeping this alive” is your having no facts…and trying to dance around that.

    But as you said, you have no statements of fact.

    You win. I believe.

  41. paulie

    Ralph, this is getting boring.

    This is not an IPR story, I’m on an equal basis with you in the comments.

    My standards are not shifting.

    So far you have not provided evidence that MG

    …attended LNC meetings as region rep

    …attended any state conventions for states in his region while serving as region rep, other than his own state convention

    …communicated in an official capacity with state chairs and activists.

    If such evidence exists, it should be easy to produce.

    I’m not claiming as an absolute fact that it does not exist.

    If and when I see it, I’ll believe it.

    “If IPR has a story…”

    Nope, I have zero interest in writing an IPR story about this. It’s old news. I only brought it up because you were floating the idea of MG being LNC chair.

    If you didn’t keep responding, I would have left this one alone a long time ago.

    It does strike me that it is rather odd that you have spent so much time claiming I’m wrong, yet have not produced any bit of evidence that I am wrong – and yet it should be really easy to produce if he did any of those things.

    For example, you say “And which convention?”
    When I clearly said: any state convention other than his own state in his region while he was region rep.

  42. Ralph Swanson

    I didn’t say you were wrong. Nor was I floating the idea of MG being Chair.

    I asked you to provide back-up for some pretty wild but vague assertions that you were “floating.” I pointed out that its hardly up to me to make your case. Now you’re claiming IPR won’t write a story that’s “old news” but can’t say to or from whom or what it is exactly. If it was old news to my mind you would provide what I asked: Specifics, facts, sources.

    This just sounds to me like more of the off-hand character assassination, intended or not, going on: Keaton, Wright, Haugh, Ruwart, Nolan, Browne, plus a lot of stuff I’ve seen over the years. Some of it is innocent gossip, much of it is not. Still, I appreciate that you’re taking some time and effort to try and explain yourself to an old man. Let me know when you have something more. Thanks.

  43. Brad

    It appears that the case against MG was exagerated.

    http://chuckmoulton.org/libertarian/2006/documents/voting/lnc_roll_call_2006.pdf

    MG did participate in a couple of meetings that terms, and voted on some (but not all) of the issues at those meetings.

    Maybe he *was* openly snoring some of the rest of the time (I heard the rep from that region right after him did), and then quit going to meetings after that. Maybe he had a legitimate health issue, or some other issue why he could not make some of the meetings or vote on the remaining issues at the meetings he did attend.

    Unless I knew what those reasons were and whether they would still hold true, I would not vote to put him back on the LNC in any capacity.

    But, at the same time it is unfair to say he NEVER showed up, because some of the time he did.

    As to whether he attended state conventions of other states in his region, like Barr and later Flood have been doing, or stayed in touch with state party chairs and activists, as Flood and possible challenger for his seat, Scott Williamson, have been doing, I don’t believe either side presented any evidence here yet as to whether he did or did not.

    Does anyone actually know and care to say?

Leave a Reply

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