As reported at Libertarian Republican,
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.
P) I did not find this press release posted at http://kristindavis2010.com/ or http://manhattanmadam.com/, the sole source to date is Dondero’s blog.
Wikipedia on the history…
The Libertarian Party of New York was founded as an unregistered political party in 1970 by Paul and Michael Gilson who became its first people in public office the next year on election to a zoning board in Upstate New York. It helped drive the creation of a national party, and was re-organized in 1972 by a group now centered around Ed Clark, later the Libertarian Party presidential candidate. Its name was changed to the “Free Libertarian Party” when the New York Board of Elections ruled that the name Libertarian Party would confuse voters with the Liberal Party of New York. However, the Board of Elections eventually allowed the name “Libertarian Party” to be used. The Statue of Liberty is their ballot symbol, and they now appear on the ballot as the Libertarian Party.
Starting in 1974, the Libertarian Party of New York has had a candidate for Governor of New York on the ballot every four years except for 1986, the only party in New York State without official ballot status to do so. Most other minor parties in New York have achieved ballot status simply by endorsing one of the major candidates.
Previously, Ms. Davis has alternatively said that she would qualify a new party to be known as the Personal Freedom Party (which her website http://kristindavis2010.com/ still says as of this time), or would run as an independent, if the NYLP did not nominate her.
For his part, Mr. Redlich writes at Libertarian Party nominates Warren Redlich for Governor
The Libertarian Party today nominated Warren Redlich as its candidate for Governor of New York.
Redlich was chosen over Sam Sloan of New York City by a margin of 27 to 17 in a vote at the LP state convention. Kristin Davis (the Manhattan Madam) had previously expressed interest. She did not attend the convention and her name was not placed in nomination.
Statewide candidates will be presented tonight at a dinner at the Hilton Garden Inn in Albany. Those chosen for the fall election include:
Governor: Warren Redlich
Lt. Governor: Alden Link
Comptroller: John Gaetani
Attorney General: Carl Person
Senate (Schumer): Randy Credico
Senate (Gillibrand): John CliftonThe LP also elected party officers including Mark Axinn who was named State Chair.
And:
Warren Redlich for New York Governor
Welcome to the Stop Wasting Money campaign for New York State. Warren Redlich is running for NY Governor, seeking both the Republican and Libertarian lines. Warren is a successful small business owner who makes a payroll every two weeks. He created a Traffic Court directory that helps nearly 200,000 people a month.
Warren and the team will deliver real change by cutting spending, eliminating unnecessary programs, and capping public sector pay and pensions. Read the issues to find out more.
New York needs your help! Join the Facebook group; volunteer to help the campaign; contribute money so we can spread the message; and contact us with ideas!
For embedded links, see original at http://wredlich.com/ny/2010/02/warren-redlich-for-ny-governor/
In IPR comments, Redlich defended calling Davis a “whore”:
Paulie,
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.”
Why are they suddenly offended?
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
Try this blog post for an example:
http://fisherwy.blogspot.com/2008/03/kristin-billie-davis-pictures.html
She’s described as a prostitute. Strangely there are no comments objecting.
See also: Davis Revives Free Libertarian Party of NY, Roger Stone Comments on Redlich
And for further background:
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/?s=kristin+davis
and
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/?s=warren+redlich
Warren Redlich has sued Carl Paladino and Kristin Davis, as well as Roger Stone, for defamation.
Roger Stone responds by saying you should keep Redlich away from your pets and small farm animals.
Full Story at:
http://drtomstevens.blogspot.com/2011/08/warren-redlich-nylps-2010-gubernatorial.html
And here’s a response for the army of “service providers” (that’s what the whores try to call themselves) who respond with the “We Are So Much Cleaner Than Regular Women” and “We Practice The Safest Sex Ever”. Stop lying to the public and impressionable young girls who read your drivel! We all know that the Ashley Madison like site’s that hook up men and women for FREE affairs are killing your soul destroying business! So you just keep trying to exalt your lowly hides over the average women. The gig is up! Condoms only provide 50 – 70% protection over herpes or cancer causing HPV! HPV is so common that your users are practically awash with it! You spread it from guy to guy that you do back to back with ease. No symptoms needed to spread it, no symptoms visible to wreak it’s damage. No condom covers the skin spreading HPV, herpes or even fertility destroying (again, no symptoms needed!) chamydia. Simple math, medical facts and logic should tell any man to stay the hell away from these high risk low class last resorts! And teach your children when they are young enough to be imprinted and protected for life from these feeders on human weakness and willing destroyers of marriages and families. (Oh yeah, I’m well aware of the “service provider” campaign that claims that you save marriages too. How laughable!)
The Libertarian party needs to abandon loons like Davis. Not only is she, yes a WHORE, she also showed no loyalty to her own clients – Beckham or Spitzer. No political party should deal with this piece of “human trafficking” trash. And no newspapers should be giving columns to lowlifes like Ashley Dupree. Whores are hated because they make their living doing hateful things that hurt women and children in general. Whores are the biggest advertisers for pedophiles and child abuse on the planet. They and society are just too stupid to understand that. The sex industry does and has always rested on the backs of children, pedophiles, human traffickers and women young and stupid enough to trade money (be it $50 or $1,000) for a chance with a stranger to contract HIV, herpes, HPV (rampant! causes cancer in unlucky wives who’s husband dares those infested waters), chamydia, hepatitis, ect. No sane or mature person would do this. No sane person or political party would involve themselves with women who do this.
At least it’s entertaining.
Ian, answered on another thread.
Just what the LP needs — a three-ring circus. Way to go, Roger Stone.
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.
When the Post called her a “Ho” it was a huge headline. The Post has far more readers than the Times Union, and my TU comment appeared on a blog post, not in the paper.
My use of the term “whore” was an opinion, not a statement of fact. It was also said in jest. My real target was Stone, not Davis, as should be obvious from the context.
And then there’s the old dictionary:
1 : a woman who engages in sexual acts for money : prostitute; also : a promiscuous or immoral woman
2 : a male who engages in sexual acts for money
3 : a venal or unscrupulous person
We can probably rule out #2, but for #1 and #3, there’s at least an argument.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and I specifically urge anyone who reads my opinion below to NOT treat it as legal advice.
Davis’s defamation lawsuit threat is ridiculous.
She is clearly a “public figure” as contemplated in New York Times v. Sullivan. This means that she would have to prove “actual malice” (i.e. that he “knew the statement to be false, or issued the statement with reckless disregard as to its truth”) on Redlich’s part.
Davis’s status as a public figure is primarily based on her association with an infamous prostitution-related scandal. She was reportedly the proprietor of a high-dollar escort service.
I can understand why a chef de cuisine might be offended if someone mistakenly referred to him or her as a sous-chef or even a chef de partie, but being offended is not the same as being defamed.
And my response to Kimberly Wilder on the previous thread,
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.
My original response:
Warren,
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…
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.
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,
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.
Sue for slander?
To slander is to disparage a person’s reputation.
So how is calling a whore monger, which is a pimp or madame, a whore disparaging?
There is a difference in the level of involvement in the act of prostitution but which person is of lower character? The prostitute or the pimp? At worst they are about the same in character.
There is no grounds for a lawsuit as his statement, while maybe technically inaccurate, does nothing that lowers her character.