Davis Revives Free Libertarian Party of NY, Roger Stone Comments on Redlich

The Free Libertarian Party was the name of the U.S. Libertarian Party’s affiliate in New York for the first few years of its existence. Now Kristin Davis, a gubernatorial hopeful in New York, intends to revive the name of the state party after losing, or not contesting, the nomination for the Libertarian Party of New York. Libertarian Republican has the story here.

Davis’ campaign manager, the infamous political consultant Roger Stone, let loose a flurry of insults towards Warren Redlich, the winner of the NYLP nomination for Governor.

“Redlich is the biggest asshole Ive met in 35 years and 8 Presidential campaign. A leaping, bounding screaming asshole. A self important turd. A short bald ugly little man. No wonder he can’t get elected to anything. Who would vote for this swine?”

It remains to be seen whether Davis can make good on her promise to petition herself onto the ballot. There will likely be litigation over the issue of two parties using the name “Libertarian”. There are also rumors that Davis may be able to convince other famous New Yorkers to join her ticket.

68 thoughts on “Davis Revives Free Libertarian Party of NY, Roger Stone Comments on Redlich

  1. Thomas L. Knapp

    This could get interesting!

    LPNY is in violation of the national party’s bylaws (Article 6, section 4 — “No affiliate party shall endorse any candidate who is a member of another party for public office in any partisan election”).

    LNC can’t act to disaffiliate LPNY until after the national convention (see Article 6, section 6), but that doesn’t mean Davis can’t go ahead and start making the case now for recognition of the new party she’s forming as the new New York affiliate.

    Even if LNC chooses not to enforce the bylaws versus LPNY (I don’t think it’s ever enforced that section before), we might at least finally get the LNC’s frivolous claim to ownership of the name “Libertarian Party” properly contested and disposed of.

  2. Robert Capozzi

    tk, do we know whether Redlich is a member of the GOP?

    Has Davis weakened any case she might have by violating Article 6, Section 1: “1. No person, group or organization may use the name “Libertarian Party” or any confusingly similar designation except the Party or an organization to which the Party grants affiliate party status or as otherwise provided in these bylaws.”

    I missed the source of Stone’s hyperbolic quote. What is the source of this most unfortunate vitriol?

  3. lex paradox

    Bi-laws,laws pffft no one pays attention to laws. Why should the LPNY be any different?

  4. Kimberly Wilder

    Suggestions –

    Okay, I believe in a lot of Libertarian principles. And, I care about third party folk. So, I am going to give the Libertarians in NY some free strategizing…

    Roger Stone doesn’t give a crap about Libertarians or third parties. Actually, he is probably trying to destroy both.

    Roger Stone is like a big kid, watching the little kids fight in the playground. He doesn’t care about them, feels aloof, and figures he can toy with everyone.

    Hmmm…he thinks to himself…they like to fight over candy. Let’s throw some candy in the sandbox, and while they beat each other up, I will steal all their bicycles.

    Think about it this way for a moment, and see if you come up with solutions.

    Realize that the candy is “delicious rules, history, and old names” that third parties like to bicker about. And, the bikes to be stolen are not just “the ballot line for Kristin Davis”, because he probably could care less. Roger Stone is a duopoly strategist, he wants to use this opportunity to demolish the whole, darn Libertarian party in New York.

    Here are beginning ideas. But, really, everyone should just think about it, being realistic, and trying not to be so predictable that you fall right into the evil strategists plan…

    –Have Warren Redlich offer Kristin Davis the Lt. Governorship (is there still time for that)? She probably won’t take it, but it will make it harder for her to rant against Redlich and the party.

    –The state Libertarians should focus on the fact that Kristin skipped the convention. Don’t let her get away with looking like she is reaching out to the grassroots. She skipped the whole process.

    (This could be done in pleasant ways, by making sure you explain she was not at the convention. Or, even sickeningly pleasant ways, like offering to hold another, official meeting with the statewide to air grievances. Or, even reconsider the convention [drastic, but maybe could be done if Redlich and an executive committee agreed, and maybe should be offered to put Davis and Stone on the spot.]

    –What about strategies with the petitions and the names? What if Redlich truly forces the ballot line/name issue by having him and the regular Libertarians collect signatures under the “Free Libertarian” name? [Of course, this is tricky and potentially dangerous, just a start to thinking of a strategy…]

    –Explain to the Libertarian core that if the name changes to “Free Libertarian” they may lose their current rights under the BOE (ie: that people can register as “Libertarian”) And, that having a rogue group or split effort will destroy chances to get the 50,000 votes and be a ballot-status-party.

    –Someone should study the court agreement that gave parties the right to have enrollees if petitions were filed. People should very carefully examine all the rights that bestowed.

    –Oh! And, careful. Even if Kristin Davis and Roger Stone only file 10 signatures, if they are not challenged and get on the line, they will have the right to enrollees. That is what happened with the “Rent Is Too Damned High” Party. Even if the real Libertarians win on the surface, Stone could be creating a splinter group/ballot name for the future.

    I am sure that if Stone wants everyone fighting, then the answer is to unite. Everyone has to think of ways to get the old troops, old friends from Free Libertarian affiliates, etc. to rally around the core, party, who has some powers under NY law to be a party.

    And, make sure you are careful about the duopoly, and understanding how much Roger Stone could be a tool of the wider duopoly.

  5. Brian Holtz

    The right answer is to repeal Bylaw 6.4. I don’t care if our freedom comes from a donkey, an elephant, a torch lady, a porcupine, a penguin, or any other mascot. I just want us to be free.

  6. Thomas L. Knapp

    Bob,

    You write:

    “do we know whether Redlich is a member of the GOP?”

    I guess that depends on how “member” is defined. Redlich clearly considers himself a member of the GOP:

    —–
    Empire Page: You have announced that you are seeking the Republican and Libertarian nominations for the Governor of New York. Some might view that as an odd combination. The Libertarian Party also does not traditionally cross-endorse candidates from other parties and no Republican since Nelson Rockefeller has won statewide office without the Conservative Party endorsement. Which are you a Republican or a Libertarian?

    Redlich: Both. Since the LP is not a “ballot-line” party in NY, you can be a member of both parties. I see myself as a libertarian Republican or perhaps a “Ron Paul Republican.” In practice the GOP doesn’t really have much in the way of ideology, as the Scozzfava debacle showed all too well.
    —–

    You also write:

    ‘Has Davis weakened any case she might have by violating Article 6, Section 1: ‘1. No person, group or organization may use the name ‘Libertarian Party’ or any confusingly similar designation except the Party or an organization to which the Party grants affiliate party status or as otherwise provided in these bylaws.'”

    I’m not sure what you mean by “case she may have.” If the party she’s forming applies to become the New York LP affiliate, it won’t be just Kristin Davis doing the filing — it will be at least ten members of the LNC’s “national party membership” program.

    Furthermore, that bylaws provision is based on the LNC’s baseless and frivolous claim to own the name “Libertarian Party.”

  7. Thomas L. Knapp

    Brian,

    You write:

    “The right answer is to repeal Bylaw 6.4.”

    That’s one possible right answer. I’d at least like to see it modified to allow for “fusion” candidacies in states where those are allowed.

    On the other hand, 6.4 is a fairly straight implementation of one of the party’s stated purposes — “functioning as a libertarian political entity separate and distinct from all other
    political parties or movements …”

    “Not caring about where our freedom comes from” is all good and well, but an argument can be made that winning our freedom requires “a libertarian political entity separate and distinct from all other political parties or movements,” and that allowing the LP to become non-separate/indistinct from those other parties damages its ability to be what it has to be to succeed either on its own or by forcing the donkeys, elephants, etc. to move in the right direction.

  8. Richard Winger

    New York law would permit two different petitioning parties to both use one particular word in their names. For instance, there were years in New York in which the Socialist Party, the Socialist Labor Party, and the Socialist Workers Party, were all on the ballot (1948 was one such year).

  9. Chuck Moulton

    Tom Knapp wrote (@5):

    LPNY is in violation of the national party’s bylaws (Article 6, section 4 — “No affiliate party shall endorse any candidate who is a member of another party for public office in any partisan election”).

    No it isn’t. The LPNY did not endorse Warren Redlich. It nominated him. There’s a big difference.

    Endorsing him would mean he isn’t the Libertarian candidate, but the Libertarian Party lent its support and approval anyway. Nominating means he is the Libertarian candidate.

  10. paul

    Also at the LR article:

    Kristin Davis issued a press release before the convention stating her strong desire to run with the endorsement of the NYLP but also expressing her intention to run for Governor under the Free Libertarian Party label if that would not be forthcoming. From the release:

    My campaign manager Roger Stone is a longtime Libertarian and has written in favor of gay marriage, supply-side tax cuts, legalization of drugs, and abortion rights. He is hardly the toast of New York elitist RINOs. He knows how to win 50,000 votes for my campaign. I am the candidate. I have no other agenda other than winning 50,000 votes to send a shockwave through Albany.

    Now, obscure attorney Warren Redlich, who is seeking the Republican nomination for Governor and also wants to be the NYLP nominee, has publicly called me a ‘whore.’ I ran an escort service. I never worked as a prostitute. I was a business women engaged in an illegal business. I paid a penalty for my offense but I do not need to be slandered by Mr. Redlich.

    Because Mr. Redlich’s attacks on me appeared in the Albany Times Union, I have instructed my attorney to file suit against Mr. Redlich for defamation. Name calling has no place in public political discourse between candidates.

    As an attorney, Mr. Redlich knows this slander is actionable. I really believe he owes me and every Libertarian an apology for his boorish and offensive behavior. I would be honored to be the NYLP candidate for Governor. I am prepared to finance the petition drive for myself and the entire NYLP ticket. I believe I can raise and spend up to $1 million to communicate our Libertarian agenda and win 50,000 votes.

    I will petition an entire slate on to the ballot as the FREE LIBERTARIAN PARTY which was the name of the NYLP but was abandoned after 1972.

    Note – the Sec. of State of New York, required the Libertarian Party to list itself on the ballot as the “Free Libertarian Party,” for the first years of its existence, so as not to create confusion with the States’ longstanding Liberal Party. Both were abbreviated as “LIB”.

  11. Kimberly Wilder

    Richard Winger at #13 –

    Okay. But, there are rules and policies suggesting that two parties cannot use the same line.

    So, the way it would probably be decided, if both parties filed, is the BOE or the courts. So, that would be leaving it in the hands of the duopoly to decide.

    That is why it is nearly impossible to build a third party in this system. At every turn, the duopoly control the system and make the final rules. So, they can get one infiltrator, or one co-opter to fake a faction, and the whole thing gets finished off and sold down the river at the gentlemen’s club courts.

  12. Kimberly Wilder

    I just have to laugh.

    Kristin Davis is quoted as saying…

    QUOTE …has publicly called me a ‘whore.’ I ran an escort service. I never worked as a prostitute… END QUOTE

    Since I am a progressive, constantly fighting for the rights of the weak and oppressed, I have to say that I find a Madam much more insidious than a whore (or sex worker, or whatever the poor woman should be called who gets caught in the trap between greedy folks like Kristin Davis and filthy folks like Eliot Spitzer.)

  13. Robert Capozzi

    cm: Endorsing him would mean he isn’t the Libertarian candidate, but the Libertarian Party lent its support and approval anyway. Nominating means he is the Libertarian candidate.

    me: Ya gotta love lawyers! I think this is the same interpretation that was used to nominate (for a time) Weld. As I recall, the argument was that if Weld had secured the GOP nomination FIRST, the LP couldn’t “nominate” him, they’d merely be “endorsing” him.

    Presumably this interpretation holds for Redlich as well.

    I’ve no problem with experimenting with fusion candidacies, and it’s relatively easy in NY, so, good luck to Redlich.

    I’m still unclear on what Davis and Stone’s motivation is. I get her sense of injustice; I don’t doubt her sincerity about L-ism, even. But this candidacy — under an FLP banner?

    I know Long Island schools in the 60-70s were beginning their decline, but I’m not sure this explains my inability to suss out the Davis/Stone agenda.

    Any help much appreciated!

  14. Kimberly Wilder

    By the way – I do not admire any of the characters in this situation.

    But, to say that Roger Stone “comments” on Warren Redlich is kind of misleading and giving Roger Stone way too much credit.

    I would say that Roger Stone “vents” about Redlich, or “spouts off” about, or “personally attacks”. That would make the reader understand the story more.

    I was amazed that in Roger Stone’s quote there was absolutely no substance. Only the “ego” stuff and “personal characteristic” stuff that any person could say about any other person. Truly trite.

    I am thinking that Roger Stone is just the B-Movie Version of Karl Rove.

  15. Thomas L. Knapp

    Chuck,

    You write:

    “No it isn’t. The LPNY did not endorse Warren Redlich. It nominated him. There’s a big difference.”

    There’s a difference insofar as it’s possible to endorse without nominating. That difference is irrelevant, since it’s not possible to nominate without endorsing.

  16. David F. Nolan

    Holtz @10 – I tend to agree, but I think it’s reasonable to have a rule against endorsing other parties’ candidates in races where there is a Libertarian in the contest. If there’s no L candidate, why not?

  17. paulie

    but that doesn’t mean Davis can’t go ahead and start making the case now for recognition of the new party she’s forming as the new New York affiliate.

    Any indication at all that Davis/Stone and co. have any interest in pursuing that route?

  18. paulie

    tk, do we know whether Redlich is a member of the GOP?

    He’s an elected Republican local officeholder, Ron Paul supporter, and Ron Paul delegate at the 2008 Republican convention, from what I have read.

    He’s also seeking the Republican nomination for Governor, although his chances are probably quite slim there.

  19. paulie

    KW,

    Roger Stone doesn’t give a crap about Libertarians or third parties. Actually, he is probably trying to destroy both.

    Doesn’t give a crap? Likely. Trying to destroy? Probably not.

    As I see it, his mission here is maximum embarrassment for Spitzer and whatever damage he can do to Democrats as a result.

    He probably considers non-duopoly parties to be basically a joke, and not especially worth paying attention to, except when they can be used to some short-term advantage. Positive or negative long term consequences to those parties are probably not especially important to him one way or the other.

  20. paulie

    Have Warren Redlich offer Kristin Davis the Lt. Governorship (is there still time for that)? She probably won’t take it, but it will make it harder for her to rant against Redlich and the party.

    No, the delegates have already chosen the candidates, including Lt. Gov.

  21. paulie

    The state Libertarians should focus on the fact that Kristin skipped the convention. Don’t let her get away with looking like she is reaching out to the grassroots. She skipped the whole process.

    Stone and Davis are claiming that the convention was “illegal” because only dues paying LP members could vote, which they are saying amounts to an illegal $25 poll tax. I guess what they are suggesting instead is that anyone who showed up should have been allowed to vote.

  22. paulie

    Oh! And, careful. Even if Kristin Davis and Roger Stone only file 10 signatures, if they are not challenged and get on the line, they will have the right to enrollees.

    Unless I’m mistaken, in NY the petition is automatically disqualified if it does not at least have the minimum raw number required. As far as I know. only Illinois has the scenario you suggest above as a possibility. Am I wrong?

  23. paulie

    KW,

    Richard Winger at #13 –

    Okay. But, there are rules and policies suggesting that two parties cannot use the same line.

    They wouldn’t be using the same line. One would be the Libertarian Party, the other would be the Free Libertarian Party. If I understand Mr. Winger correctly, both can be on the ballot at the same time.

  24. paulie

    KW,

    Kristin Davis is quoted as saying?

    QUOTE ?has publicly called me a ?whore.? I ran an escort service. I never worked as a prostitute? END QUOTE

    Since I am a progressive, constantly fighting for the rights of the weak and oppressed, I have to say that I find a Madam much more insidious than a whore (or sex worker, or whatever the poor woman should be called who gets caught in the trap between greedy folks like Kristin Davis and filthy folks like Eliot Spitzer.)

    As a libertarian, I don’t have a problem with what madams do. Managers are just as valuable to the success of an eneterprise as are workers, and there are logical reasons why “talent” (think athletes, performers of all sorts, etc) would want managers/promoters/booking agents, etc. Of course, it’s perfectly true that some madams/pimps are abusive and manipulative. Not all. And to the extent that some are, the illegality of sex work is a large part of the reason why they can get away with it.

    Related, I wrote in response to Warren Redlich at https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2010/04/warren-redlich-carl-paladino-and-roger-stone-stone-calls-on-redlich-to-apologize-for-calling-davis-a-whore/ #37,


    WR:

    She?s been called a whore by Wonkette, the NY Post (?Ho?) and many more.
    E.g.: http://wonkette.com/413606/one-of-eliot-spitzers-whores-by-proxy-the-kristin-one-would-like-to-be-governor-of-new-york-now-please
    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/regional/item_CyqHd4xiytfzXFCMSGCo5J
    ? A source said Davis personally serviced Spitzer.
    ?She personally interfaced with Spitzer a number of times? since 2003 before she became a madam, a source close to Davis said.?

    P: There?s a qualitative difference between what press says and what you, as a candidate running against her, say. Wonkette is an opinion blog(ger), and doesn?t pretend to be anything else. The Post cites an anonymous source. She/Stone would get nowhere trying to sue them, although I suppose they can claim media bias, and have?

    The DC: Any disappointments so far in your campaign?

    KD: Yes, the New York Post.

    The Daily News has been fair and reported my announcement as did Fox, CBS, AP, UPI, Reuters, the Philadephia News, Chicago Tribune, Reason.com, High Times ? but not the New York Post. The editors constantly spike stories on my campaign. I have e-mail from reporters to prove it.

    Even Andrea Peyser scheduled an interview and canceled it. I was disappointed. I like her writing and her willingness to take on the politically correct.

    I guess they are invested financially with Ashley Dupree ? their new ?relationship advice? columnist. Too bad the b**** can?t write ? or talk.

    Or is Rupert just anti-woman? Do I need to organize 20 Penthouse Pets to picket Murdoch?s apartment to protest the Stalinist-like refusal of the Post to acknowledge my existence. Do I need to chain myself in Col Allan?s office and call the TV stations? Stay tuned.

    I was on the [New York Post?s] Fred Dicker radio show in Albany. He was very sweet. Sounds kinda cute. He invited me to visit the studio and do the show live when I visit Albany. Hasn?t written my name once. But if Andrew Cuomo burped ?

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/03/09/spitzer-madam-kristin-davis-busts-into-new-york-governors-race/3/

    P: Not that I think they?ll actually sue you either, or that they would win if they do, but I?m not surprised to see them try to make something of it. That?s politics.

    WR:

    As for the use of the term as applied to her, ask regular people. How many think the word ?whore? is inappropriate as applied to someone who advertises herself as a madam.

    As part of the discussion, show them some of the images she?s put out of herself on the web:
    http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=kristin davis madam

    P: I suspect that if you would have called the owner of a cotton-producing plantation a ?cotton picker? he may have taken offense. Especially so if, at some point in his life, he had in fact had to make his living by getting his hands dirty picking cotton. I suspect that, as a recent madam/pimp who made millions, Davis may see herself as socially and/or intellectually superior to women who have to get their various body parts dirty by working as prostitutes, whether or not she was ever one herself. As Davis says in the same interview quoted above,

    The Daily Caller: So you?re running for governor of New York. How is this different than the stripper Stormy Daniels running for the Senate in Louisiana or Mary Carey running for governor of California?

    Kristin Davis: Those girls are porn stars and I am a businesswoman. They ran as a publicity stunts and I am running to make an important point and to further a reform, Libertarian-based agenda that is common sense and in which I think any New Yorkers privately agree.

    P: I?m not sure what the images are supposed to prove here. They show that she uses her sexuality to get attention, as do many women who are not actually sex workers.

  25. paulie

    I’m still unclear on what Davis and Stone’s motivation is. I get her sense of injustice; I don’t doubt her sincerity about L-ism, even. But this candidacy — under an FLP banner?

    I know Long Island schools in the 60-70s were beginning their decline, but I’m not sure this explains my inability to suss out the Davis/Stone agenda.

    Any help much appreciated!

    I think it’s quite simple, really. Davis and Stone want to embarrass the hell out of Spitzer and the Democrats and promote libertarian ideas through a Davis candidacy. They don’t really care if the party they qualify is called “Libertarian” or “Free Libertarian.” They would have accepted the LP nomination, but didn’t want to spend time and money to go to the convention unless they could count on winning there. They may try to keep the Redlich-endorsing LP off the ballot, but if they have to, they will run against Redlich and all the rest of the candidates in November.

    Does that make sense?

  26. Robert Capozzi

    pc: Does that make sense?

    me: No. Spitzer is old news, long gone. Patterson has had his scandals, too.

    Davis doesn’t embarrass Cuomo that I can see. Sex scandals are equal opportunity embarrassments affecting both Rs and Ds.

  27. Richard Winger

    Tom Knapp’s comment #21 says it is not possible to nominate without endorsing. I don’t agree with that sentence. There are many instances in states that allow fusion in which parties nominated someone who was a member of another party, but that first party certainly didn’t endorse that person. Pennsylvania once had unrestricted fusion and various Republican congressmen used to delight in winning the Socialist Party nomination, just to irritate the Socialists. New York Congressman Vito Marcantonio in 1946 was so popular he was able to get the nomination of the Democratic Party, even though the party vehemently opposed him and certainly did not endorse him. In California in 1952, Joseph Knowland won the Democratic nomination for US Senate (along with the Republican nomination) in California, but the California Democrats certainly didn’t endorse Knowland and were his bitter enemies.

  28. paulie

    No. Spitzer is old news, long gone.

    Not exactly. He’s been publicly mulling a comeback. many commenters have taken this seriously. I suspect Davis and Stone each have their own beefs with Spitzer, and want to make sure his name is stained permanently.

    Patterson has had his scandals, too.

    Yes, and many of them are sex-related. Keeping the focus on Democratic Governor sex scandals leads people to write, talk and think about other Democratic Governor sex scandals. As well as Democratic Governor scandals in general. That can’t be good for the Democrats.


    Davis doesn’t embarrass Cuomo that I can see. Sex scandals are equal opportunity embarrassments affecting both Rs and Ds

    Public perception is notoriously short-term and narrowly focused. Got nothing on Cuomo? Go after Spitzer, and, by way of collateral damage, Patterson. Cuomo is second-order collateral damage, but it’s the best they have. And, yes, there are Republican sex scandals aplenty, but the rule in big league politics is “what have you (they) done for (or to) me lately.”

    Mud will splatter on Democrats from this. It will help kill the chances of a Spitzer comeback, and it may hurt Cuomo, though probably not enough. If things get close come November, a little bit may make a lot of difference, though.

  29. Brian Holtz

    David, I agree with the general principle that no LP should endorse a candidate of another party over a Libertarian endorsed by the LP affiliate most relevant to the race. However, I do worry about LINO’s hijacking the Libertarian nomination through the government’s nominating process (e.g. an open primary). I’d prefer an exception to the exception in such a case. 🙂

  30. paulie

    RC, put another way:

    Let’s say Cuomo vs. Lazio gets close come November.

    Davis’ presence in the race will then

    1) Help focus attention on the fact that the last two Democratic Governors were marred by scandal, which will give at least some people pause about electing another Democrat as Governor.

    2) Since her focus is primarily on social issues – prostitution, marijuana, gambling, gay marriage, etc. – she’s likely to win more votes that might otherwise have gone to Democrats than votes that might otherwise have gone to Republicans.

    So, putting yourself in Stone’s shoes, are you motivated yet?

  31. Thomas L. Knapp

    Richard,

    When a party nominates a candidate, it is telling the public “we endorse this candidate for election to the office in question.” That’s what a party’s nomination is.

    When you say that Party X nominated, but did not endorse, Candidate Y, what you’re actually saying is that some organ of Party X objected to the actions of Party X proper.

    For example:

    “New York Congressman Vito Marcantonio in 1946 was so popular he was able to get the nomination of the Democratic Party, even though the party vehemently opposed him and certainly did not endorse him.”

    When you refer to “the party” here, you’re apparently referring to the Democratic Central Committee of the jurisdiction in question. The central committee is not the party — the party nominated, and therefore endorsed, Marcantonio.

    In Missouri, the Libertarian Party is composed of those who vote a Libertarian primary ballot. The state committee can hate like hell the fact that the Libertarian Party nominated John Swenson for governor in 2000 and 2004, but it did in fact do that, and that nomination constituted the party’s endorsement.

    Ditto for David Duke in Louisiana. The GOP organizations that disavowed Duke were not the GOP. They were dissident (for good reasons) organs of the GOP.

  32. Richard Winger

    Political scientists who study political parties have long used the concept that “political party” really means 3 distinct entities…(1) the registered voters or the voters who choose to vote in that party’s primary, which they call “the party in the electorate”; (2) the officers of the organization, such as chairs and committee members, which they call “the party in the organization”; and (3) the members of that party who are elected to public office, which they call “the party in the government”. As with so much else in the real world, it is ambiguous what a political party actually is; it can be any one of those three. It just doesn’t compute to single out one of the 3 and said that one of those 3 “IS” the party.

    But in lawsuits, courts always recognize the party officers as the only group that can sue or speak in court for the “party.”

  33. Trent Hill Post author

    “I would say that Roger Stone “vents” about Redlich, or “spouts off” about, or “personally attacks”. That would make the reader understand the story more.”

    “comments” is a neutral word, I’m sticking with it. Readers will understand the “comments” just fine when they read them–they can determine whether the comments are pleasant, neutral, or disparaging. I trust they’ll arrive at the right answer.

  34. Trent Hill Post author

    Also, Ron Paul got 40,000+ votes in NY in 2008. This could be a big factor in whether Redlich gets over the 50k mark.

  35. Pingback: Kristin Davis says she will sue Warren Redlich for calling her a “whore”; Redlich defends statement | Independent Political Report

  36. AroundtheblockAFT

    Real scandal here is that the LP of NY had only 44 delegates at a state covention. This was (maybe still is?) the LP’s second largest party at one time, with far more than 1,000 members.

    Not even treading water, folks. St. Louis better produce an LNC ready, willing and able to rescue
    the Party.

  37. Gene Berkman

    So Kristin Davis is trying to embarrass Elliott Spitzer, by publicizing the fact that Spitzer was a customer of the business Ms Davis runs.

    If it is embarrassing to be a customer, is it not embarrassing to be the service provider?

  38. Richard Cooper

    LPNY is not in violation. Redlich is an LP member.

    Stone’s threat is empty. The election law explicitly forbids names or emblems that resemble those of other parties.

    The whole reason we used the name Free Libertarian Party was that the State Board of Elections back then believed that we would be confused with the Liberal Party which is now defunct. I do not know if this was litigated or
    not.

    But Board of Elections should not accept a line that shares the name of another. If it does, we will contest in court and we will win.

  39. Kimberly Wilder

    Some finer points of NY law:

    Paulie, I believe you are correct that a petition in New York CAN BE disqualified by the BOE if it is not near enough signatures on its face. But, sometimes they neglect to make that ruling. Everyone knew that the Rent Is Too Damned High Party did not have enough signatures, but no one – not even the BOE – was interested enough/brave enough to throw the guy off the ballot.

    So, if Kristin Davis (and Roger Stone, as the Kingmaker) file some petitions, there is a chance they could be on the ballot and/or become a party with enrollees.

    Also, I tend to disagree with Richard Winger about the dual names on ballot lines. And, I do know he is an expert. Maybe there were two names with “socialist” in the title in the past, but that was probably because the socialists allowed it and did not challenge each other, and/or because the groups were not parties with enrollees.

    When a group in New York is a party and has enrollees (which the Libertarians have in NY), their State Committee has certain rights to that name. (Which rights, they can only assert if they are running a candidate in the election cycle.)

    I know that groups have not been allowed to use “Independent” in their name, because of the Independence Party. And, I know that the Green Party has said that they have some ownership of the name “Green” since they have enrollees.

  40. Kimberly Wilder

    Paulie:

    I am not sure how I feel politically about making prostitution legal or not. But, there is no way that I could say prostitution was “good”, or fair to the women who do it.

    But, if I was trying to accept some aloof, attitude of someone saying that women have a right to be sex-workers, then…

    If a woman was truly empowered enough to make the decision to sell her body for money, would she really need a middle man or middle woman to skim money from the top?

    It is ridiculous to value the job or services of a “madam” or “pimp”. It is just over-thinking things, and not being in tune with obvious realities. There are no nice madams or pimps.

    Whether or not prostitution is legal or illegal, if people want money for sex, they should have to do the deed themselves.

    And, whether or not people of goodwill think that prostitution should be legal or not, one would hope that people of good will would not support, admire, or encourage people in the business.

  41. Trent Hill Post author

    “Also, I tend to disagree with Richard Winger about the dual names on ballot lines. And, I do know he is an expert.”

    Feel free to disagree all you want, you are as wrong as the sun is hot. The Libertarian Party does not own the word Libertarian, in any way–the Free Libertarian Party’s 3-letter moniker will be FLP, a far cry from the LIB of the Libertarian Party.
    But by all means, feel free to disagree with the 35-year veteran of ballot access law.

  42. Thomas L. Knapp

    The Libertarian National Committee claims to own the term “Libertarian Party,” and filed a frivolous trademark claim on it in, if memory serves, 2003.

    The Libertarian National Committee did not originate the term.

    The Libertarian National Committee was not the first organization to use the term in commerce.

    The Libertarian National Committee has never defended its claim to the term by claiming infringement in court versus, e.g. the Arizona Libertarian Party in 2000.

    It’s possible that the New York election authority might refuse the FLP’s name as confusing or duplicative — but that same authority would laugh in the LNC’s face if it tried to exercise a claim to ownership of the name “Libertarian Party.”

  43. Robert Capozzi

    kw: If a woman was truly empowered enough to make the decision to sell her body for money, would she really need a middle man or middle woman to skim money from the top?

    me: Maybe. I’d suggest the closest thing to sex work is body work, from massage therapists to MDs. In these businesses, sometimes they work entirely independently, but often they work in a practice or studio. Sometimes the practice is a partnership, sometimes it’s owned by one of the therapists who hire other therapists.

  44. Kimberly Wilder

    Dear Robert Capozzi:

    Please, go tell your girlfriend/partner/wife that making love is the same as a massage.

    —–

    Note to men who have not noticed: If you are a woman and you have sex, it is a rather more physically and emotionally intrusive process than a massage.

    The attitude of putting sex in the same category as everything else is coming from men here, and in the world coming from people of both genders, I suppose, who over-think.

    Stop acting like legalizing prostitution is the same as legalizing drugs. They are on different plains entirely. Although I would say of both: While it might make sense in the world of the law and civic rights to make them “legal”, it is very foolish to wish for either as an economy, or to promote either one as a good option.

  45. Ralph K. Swanson

    @ 44 Richard Winger…Wonderful stuff.

    What were the 3 best Libertarian showings for:

    *Governor
    *US Senate
    *US Representaive
    *Other statewide office?

    Thanks.

  46. Robert Capozzi

    kw, I didn’t say sex and body work are the same. I suggested it was the “closest thing,” and I meant as a business, not as an act, although body and sex work both involve the body.

    I could have broadened the analogy even further to include personal services like house cleaning or handyman services. Some house cleaners and handyman/woman are sole proprietors, others are “pimped out” by corporate entities.

    I have no opinion of sex work other than I don’t personally use such a service. If your point is that it’s demeaning or some such, I certainly understand your perspective, but it’s not up to me to judge what is demeaning and what isn’t FOR OTHERS. I would say that, if I only had 2 job choices and I were desperate for income, I’d choose sex work before capital-punishment executioner, the latter being MORE demeaning FOR ME. I might even choose sex work over being IRS agent, as feeding the war machine and unduly disturbing the domestic tranquility strike me as highly contra-indicated. My girlfriend and I both find executioners and IRS agents as or more intrusive as sex work, which is at least mutually voluntary and peaceful.

    Others may choose differently.

    Peace.

  47. Kimberly Wilder

    To Trent at #53 –

    My husband researched this and posted it, but put it at a different, related thread.

    http://www.elections.state.ny.us/NYSBOE/download/law/Opinions12042009.pdf

    NEW YORK STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS
    1980 OPINION #3
    DATE: SEPTEMBER 4, 1980
    QUESTION PRESENTED:

    The National Unity Campaign for John Anderson requested that the name “Unity Coalition”, which has been selected by supporters of John Anderson as the name of the independent body which they seek to have placed on the ballot in New York State in November 1980 to indicate
    Anderson’s candidacy for President of the United States, “be utilized only by the Anderson
    campaign”. The letter states that Mr. Anderson has no intention of endorsing any candidate for
    any public office and he feels that it would be inappropriate to permit other candidates in New
    York to appear on the Unity Coalition line since there would be no assurance that any of these
    candidates share Mr. Anderson’s views on the issues. Is such a limitation on the use of the name of an independent body permissible?

    DISCUSSION:
    The New York statutes which govern the use of names by an independent body are Sections
    6-138(3) and 2-124 of the Election Law.
    Section 6-138(3) of the Election Law provides in pertinent part:
    “3. The name selected for the independent body making the nomination shall be in English
    characters and shall not include the name or part of the name or an abbreviation of the name or part of the name, nor shall the emblem or name be such a configuration as to create the
    possibility of confusion with the emblem or name of a then existing party, or a previously filed independent nominating petition . . . The name and emblem shown upon such petition or selected by an officer or board shall also conform to the requirements of this chapter with respect to names or emblems permitted to be selected by a party.”

    Section 2-124 of the Election Law provides in pertinent part that:
    “2. …The name and emblem chosen shall not be similar to or likely to create confusion with the
    name or emblem of any other existing party or independent body.”
    There is no authority provided in such section to permit the exclusion requested by the Anderson
    campaign. The name “Unity Coalition” has no historical preference since it will be used for the
    first time in the 1980 election.
    However, with regard to candidates who seek a position under the designation of a particular
    independent body, the courts of New York State have held that where there have been
    nominations by an independent body for some offices to be filled at a general election and where
    there are no nominations for other offices to be filled at the same general election, the name and
    emblem of the independent body may be adopted, without consent of the independent body, by
    the nominees for offices for which independent body has no candidates. Matter of Peel v. Cohen
    265 NY 312 (1934); Matter of Rossett v. Heffernan 187 Misc 598 affd 271 AppDiv 784; affd 296
    NY 695 (1946); Matter of Baranello v. Smith and McNab 35 AD2d 728, affd 27 NY2d 807. The
    rationale of these cases is that since the Legislature has not given the independent bodies
    statutory authority to limit the use of their names and emblems, any candidate who is seeking a
    position on their line may have the position unless it would result in conflicting petitions being
    filed for the same office.
    Based upon the New York statutes, as they have been interpreted by the courts of New York
    State, the Board is of the opinion that a candidate who files a petition under the Unity Coalition
    designation shall be permitted to have a position on that independent line. There is no legal
    authority under the New York statutes which would permit Mr. Anderson to limit the use of the
    name and emblem of the Unity Coalition for candidates who seek an office for which that
    independent body has no candidate. If two petitions are filed for the same office using the Unity
    Coalition designation, the Board shall grant the use of the name to the first filed.

  48. paulie

    Ian and Kimberly,

    If two petitions are filed for the same office using the Unity
    Coalition designation, the Board shall grant the use of the name to the first filed.

    But, I don’t think that’s an identical situation.

    The two groups are not planning to file with the same name, but with two different names which both contain the same word.

    I think Mr. Winger’s example of the Socialist Party, Socialist Workers Party and Socialist Labor Party is a closer fit than the case you cite.

  49. paulie

    I am not sure how I feel politically about making prostitution legal or not.

    What good does making it illegal do? It seems to me that it creates a lot of problems where women (and some male prostitutes) can’t go to law enforcement for help when they are abused, often shun medical care, etc. Also, they are then abused by law enforcement as well.

    But, there is no way that I could say prostitution was “good”, or fair to the women who do it.

    I think it is their individual decision. Some women in the business disagree with you. Some have written eloquently about it. It’s their body and their right. Saying it is illegal is in effect the state saying it own’s people bodies and/or their money.

    But, if I was trying to accept some aloof, attitude of someone saying that women have a right to be sex-workers, then…

    If a woman was truly empowered enough to make the decision to sell her body for money, would she really need a middle man or middle woman to skim money from the top?

    Again, I disagree with the characterization of “skim off the top,” as managers/booking agents/promoters/body guards/etc. all perform a valuable service in numerous fields, e.g., performers of various sorts, writers, publishers, etc., etc.

    For example, petitioners may frequently decide to work for a coordinator rather than always contract directly with proponents.

    I don’t think that I am anyone who should tell any person that they may not hire an agent.

    It is ridiculous to value the job or services of a “madam” or “pimp”.

    It seems to me that such a decision would be up to the person hiring them.

    It is just over-thinking things, and not being in tune with obvious realities. There are no nice madams or pimps.

    I don’t know that any such thing is obvious. How do you know?

    Whether or not prostitution is legal or illegal, if people want money for sex, they should have to do the deed themselves.

    Who gets to decide that for them, and why?

    And, whether or not people of goodwill think that prostitution should be legal or not, one would hope that people of good will would not support, admire, or encourage people in the business.

    I really see it differently, as someone who has had friends in the business in various capacities.

  50. paulie

    Note to men who have not noticed: If you are a woman and you have sex, it is a rather more physically and emotionally intrusive process than a massage.

    The attitude of putting sex in the same category as everything else is coming from men here, and in the world coming from people of both genders, I suppose, who over-think.

    No analogy is perfect.

    Stop acting like legalizing prostitution is the same as legalizing drugs. They are on different plains entirely. Although I would say of both: While it might make sense in the world of the law and civic rights to make them “legal”, it is very foolish to wish for either as an economy, or to promote either one as a good option.

    I’d say both should be legal. And both can either be done responsibly or abused, depending on the individuals and circumstances involved.

    Obviously sex is a deeply personal choice, which is one reason that government has no business intervening, except in the case of rape.

  51. Kimberly Wilder

    Paulie at 60:

    I checked with my colleague, Roger, who is a good study on election law.

    The point is that NY law alludes to “voter confusion” if there are two sets of petitions with similar names filed.

    And, the problem is that the BOE and/or the courts wind up ruling on if the two names are confusing.

    Despite what Trent Hill believes, I am correct on this topic. I admire our experts here. But, I have lived in New York, and survived many journeys through our ballot laws as a candidate and party bureaucrat.

  52. Pingback: Kristin Davis says Lawrence Taylor case illustrates the evils of illegal prostitution | Independent Political Report

  53. Pingback: Update on Kristin Davis for Governor | Independent Political Report

  54. Pingback: Dr. Tom Stevens reports on New York Governors and other statewide races | Independent Political Report

  55. Pingback: Kristen Davis To Run Under Reform Party Label | Independent Political Report

  56. Pingback: An Open Letter from Heather Redlich to Roger Stone | Independent Political Report

Leave a Reply

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